« November 2003 | Main | January 2004 »
I'm moving to a new apartment tomorrow and hopefully my DSL service will be up and running and ready to go. If not, I may be gone a few more days. Add extra time for unpacking and preparing to host a New Year's Eve party, and it may be until Jan 3rd or so before I get back to a normal schedule.
New readers, please visit the archives and recent posts and feel free to look around.
Deadly Earthquake Strikes Southeast Iran
A severe earthquake devastated the historic city of Bam in southeast Iran on Friday, and officials said many people were killed.Hasan Khoshrou, a legislator for Kerman province where the quake occurred, said he had been told the devastation in the city of 80,000 people was "beyond imagination."
"No death toll is available, but it looks to be very, very high," Khoshrou said.
Iranian television said the magnitude 6.3 quake leveled about 60 percent of the houses in Bam, 630 miles southeast of the capital, killing many people as they slept. Authorities put out a call for blood donations.
The U.S. Geological Survey reported the quake had a preliminary magnitude of 6.7, capable of causing severe damage, and hit at 5:27 a.m. local time.
"Many people have died," Kerman province Gov. Mohammad Ali Karimi told state media. "Many people are buried under the rubble."
Just a thought, one that I wish hadn't popped up while reading about a depressing news event, but one that has become routine after watching fundamentalist theists use disasters to promote their own kind of collective tyranny.
I've been away from the Net and the computer for a few days and don't expect that to change much for the next week or so. I've got family activities, planning for a move to a new apartment, and a New Year's Eve party to organize.
So to all my regular readers and anyone who happens to stop by the main page: have a safe and enjoyable holiday season.
2003 certainly was an eventful year...
I sit here wanting to blog something. I know there's a kernel of opinion or insight or wit or pedantic ranting that wants to escape my grey matter and become digital. But nothing is coming up.
I caught the last ten or so minutes of NOW with Bill Moyers Friday night. David Brancaccio (Mr. Moyers wasn't hosting due to other commitments) was interviewing former Governor of Maine Angus King. I really wish there was a transcript to read and quote because the interview would have provided perfect fodder for a post. Mr. King ran and was elected as an Independent and offered his thoughts and criticisms on a variety of issues that took aim at both the Left and the Right.
I saw Bad Boys II last night in place of Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. I expected it to be another over-the-top Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer flick but I was pleasantly surprised. The humor made me laugh more often than not and the beginning and ending car chases were absolutely jaw-dropping. The ending was lame and I wouldn't buy it on DVD, but it served as an effective weekend beer rental.
I also saw One Hour Photo a few days back. OHP was an odd watch. I enjoyed it even though I predicted the general direction the movie headed. The photography felt very Kubrick-ish due to the strong colors and general sterility of the sets. Williams often felt faintly creepy as the awkward photo tech guy, moreso than I expected. I was most pleased by the twist at the end when he gets to look at the pictures he took in the hotel room. Not at all what I expected and a nice karmic way to end the film.
I was slightly miffed during the scene when the child came up to Williams, showing him the Evangelion figure he wanted. The boy said something to the effect of, "He's a good guy." Now, I highly doubt these parents would let their young kid watch Neon Genesis Evangelion, let alone the movies. So I can forgive the kid for his statement, which I consider incorrect. He had one of the Mass Production Models, the white Evangelions with the Lance of Longinus clone weapons. Those things weren't portrayed as good guys at all. :)
According to Roll Call, there are 25,627 registered lobbyists in Washington, D.C. -- or 47.9 for every member of Congress. That's not counting unofficial, unregistered lobbyists.Now, how many of those lobbyists do you suppose are asking our government to spend less money? My guess is that you could count them on one hand, and still have at least one finger left over to express your disgust for the whole process.
Tapes Show Abuse of 9/11 Detainees
Hundreds of videotapes that federal prison officials had claimed were destroyed show that foreign nationals held at a New York detention facility after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were victims of physical and verbal abuse by guards, the Justice Department's inspector general said yesterday.An investigation by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine also found that officials at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, N.Y., which is run by the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, improperly taped meetings between detainees and their lawyers, and used excessive strip searches and restraints to punish those in confinement.
The report concluded that as many as 20 guards were involved in the abuse, which included slamming prisoners against walls and painfully twisting their arms and hands. Fine recommended discipline for 10 employees and counseling for two others who remain employed by the federal prison system. He also said the government should notify the employers of four former guards about their conduct.
"Some officers slammed and bounced detainees against the wall, twisted their arms and hands in painful ways, stepped on their leg restraint chains and punished them by keeping them restrained for long periods of time," the report said. "We determined that the way these MDC staff members handled some detainees was, in many respects, unprofessional, inappropriate and in violation of BOP policy."
A federal dragnet after the Sept. 11 attacks resulted in the detention of more than 1,200 foreign nationals, including 762 people who were the focus of Fine's original probe. Most were of Arab or South Asian descent and were held on immigration violations under a directive from Attorney General John D. Ashcroft while authorities attempted to determine whether they were connected to the attack or to terrorist groups. None was ever charged with terrorism-related crimes, however.
One focus of the report was an American flag T-shirt that hung from a wall at the MDC with the slogan, "These colors don't run." Four corrections employees told investigators that the shirt, which hung in a prisoner receiving area for months, was covered with bloodstains, including some that appeared to have come from detainees being slammed into the wall.
Many of the incidents of abuse were confirmed when investigators viewed more than 300 videotapes recorded from October to November 2001 that showed detainees being moved around the facility and within their cells, investigators said. Corrections officers who had been interviewed earlier had denied that many of the incidents occurred. MDC Warden Michael Zenk and other officials repeatedly told Fine's investigators that the videotapes had been destroyed as part of a recycling policy, the report said.The tapes eventually located in August had not been included on inventory sheets provided by the prison and were held in a storage room that also had not been disclosed to investigators, the report said. Many tapes from the period are still missing, and there are unexplained gaps the ones that were found, the report shows.
Many detainees also told investigators that, in the month before the installation of the camera system in October 2001, jail conditions and abuse had been much worse, the report noted. The cameras were installed in part to protect jail officers from unwarranted allegations, Fine said.
"If the camera wasn't on, I would have bashed your face," one detainee was allegedly told by a guard. "The camera is your best friend."
[...]
One lieutenant told another that "slamming detainees against the wall was all part of being in jail and not to worry about it," the report said.
Another MDC officer said in an affidavit that "there were some lieutenants . . . who would [rein] in an officer for bouncing a detainee against the wall, but there were probably other lieutenants who would let it slide."
During two incidents captured on videotape, the report said, "we observed officers escort detainees down a hall at a brisk pace and ram them into a wall without slowing down before impact." In the numerous "slamming" incidents recorded on tape, the report said, there was no evidence that the detainees had provoked or attacked the guards.
[...]
The report found two incidents in which inmates were locked in restraints for more than seven hours despite no signs of resistance.
This isn't what America is about and these assholes should be summarily fired and tried for assault. This lieutenant seems to have gotten the idea of incarcerated, sentenced prisoner mixed up with minor immigration violator detainee. Sure, life in jails is rough but that life is reserved for people who have been convicted of a crime and jailed. The label of "detainee" alone refutes the idea that these people should have tasted the jail life.
At this point, these of course remain "allegations" but that isn't any consolation. Given the breadth and length of the domestic anti-terrorism response, I don't doubt at all that incidents like this have ocurred.
On more than 40 occasions, the report found, MDC staff members recorded detainees' visits with their attorneys using video cameras set up on tripods outside visiting rooms. The tapes routinely captured "significant portions" of conversations between the detainees and legal counsel. In some cases, detainees were instructed not to speak in Arabic or to speak in English because they were being taped.Such taping is a violation of federal regulations, Fine's investigation found. Prisons rules permit videotaping, but not audiotaping, of attorney visits.
Zenk, the prison warden, told investigators that the cameras were moved farther from the visiting room after an attorney complained in November 2001. But the report says that "as late as February 2002, conversations between detainees and their attorneys are still audible on many of the tapes."
Although the taping "potentially stifled detainees' open and free communications with legal counsel," the report noted that some of the recordings include allegations of physical and verbal abuse that were consistent with the allegations being probed.
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
I have to echo the comments by Hoffmania!
Being an American is something I'm still proud of, despite all this embarrassing, deceitful, dishonest, monolithic, pre-emptive, crackheaded, abhorrent behavior that has become the trademark of the USA in the eyes of the rest of the world (and for that matter, about half of America). I just wanted to say that if I wake up tomorrow and it WAS a bad dream.
Additional reporting by Reuters:
"We did not find that the detainees were brutally beaten," the report said.
Survey Shows Freedom Up in 25 Countries
Political and personal freedom increased in 25 countries in 2003, including Argentina, Burundi, Kenya and Yemen, according to an annual survey of democracy and civil liberties released Thursday.The survey by Freedom House ranked 192 countries and 18 territories based on factors including free elections and media independence, designating each sovereign state "free," "partly free" or "not free."
Since 1972, Freedom House has published an annual assessment of state state of freedom by assigning each country and territory the status of "Free," "Partly Free," or "Not Free" by averaging their political rights and civil liberties ratings. Those whose ratings average 1-2.5 are generally considered "Free," 3-5.5 "Partly Free," and 5.5-7 "Not Free." The dividing line between "Partly Free" and "Not Free" usually falls within the group whose ratings numbers average 5.5. For example, countries that receive a rating of 6 for political rights and 5 for civil liberties, or a 5 for political rights and a 6 for civil liberties, could be either "Partly Free" or "Not Free." The total number of raw points is the definitive factor which determines the final status. Countries and territories with combined raw scores of 0-30 points are "Not Free," 31-59 points are "Partly Free," and 60-88 are "Free."
Back to the article:
The survey also found that liberties were curtailed in 13 countries, including the Central African Republic, Mauritania and Azerbaijan.The survey designated 46 percent of the world's countries "free" in 2003, compared with 29 percent 30 years ago, when Freedom House first started conducting the surveys. One-quarter of the surveyed nations were designated "not free," compared with 43 percent in 1973.
But I would be far more strict on my gradings and I'd be damn certain to include economic freedom in my rankings. Economic liberty is inseperable from personal liberty and I'd argue they are essentially synonymous. The US and other secular, mixed-economy Western nations are considerably more free than the rest of the world, but there is a lot of work to do to get them to the point where I'd confidently label them "free."
A government is not free when it tells people they can't ingest recreational drugs. A state is not free when it taxes people under threat of punishment in order to provide for others. Society is not free when firearm possession is regulated. A country is not free when people are prohibited from practicing medicine without a license. People are not free when it's a crime to tamper with mandated emissions equipment on vehicles. Humans are not free when others tell us where we can smoke. We are not at all free if a nation dictates how to conduct our business and our personal lives, regardless how that dictate is arrived at and decided upon.
I take a more serious approach to freedom, which is why I find it sadly laughable when children protest, "but it's a free country" when they get busted for doing something. Folks, it's better than other places, but America ain't free.
"like"
Two common uses for the term bother me.
The first is "I like this person" in the sense that the speaker has feelings for a person extending beyond mere friendship or acquaintance-ness but not approaching the hallowed ground of "I love this person." It occupies a precarious middle position that causes all sorts of trouble for people trying to express what they feel because it's such a leap from friendship. Ever get embarassed when someone finds out you "like" them? It's because the escalation from normal feelings to "like" is so abrupt. We need more refined language to fill in the gap.
The other is "and then he was like, 'yeah, I'll help you'" where "like" is used as a substitute for another word indicating action on the subject's part. I catch myself saying it all the time, mainly when telling a story. It feels right using it when I'm trying to convey body language and in that sense, it's marginally acceptable. But it's everywhere in the vocabulary of people under the age of 30, replacing more vivid and engaging speech. And then there's the dreaded "Valley Girl" usage, where the word can replace whole statements and body language becomes the primary method of communication and the word litters speech with interjections.
"So he was like slouches! And I was like annoyed stare, because it was so rude, like get-with-it exasperation. He didn't, like, at all care about my feelings. Like totally! I like him - not like him like him - but not, like I'm in love with him. It's just like, resigned sigh."
Don't wait until the 17th of December to mail a Christmas gift to your cousin in Canada if you don't want to pay $45.35 to get it there in time.
Jackass.
Since Saddam Hussein got caught, there has been some excitement in Fort Hood, the home of some of the soldiers who found him.
Soldier's wife Kim Parthmore said she feels relief over her husband's mission in Iraq."I feel calmer about the whole situation and I believe it will hopefully end sooner than we thought," she said.
Chief Warrant Officer David Williams, a former POW, was taken prisoner in March after his Apache helicopter was shot down.
He said he couldn't believe his eyes when he turned on the television Sunday morning.
[...]
Williams also said that Iraq needs a lot of work.
"I don't want the soldiers getting a false sense that it's going to die down completely. You've got to remember, al-Qaeda has infiltrated the country and I believe there will be some sporadic attacks," he said.
Despite the unknown, wife Laura Miller said her husband's battalion in Iraq wants to see their mission complete.
"The morale is unbelievable. They couldn't be happier," she said.
I've got a very good friend who lives in Killeen. Haven't talked to him in almost a year, mostly because I don't have his phone number. I'd really like to hear how things are going up there.
The ultimate irony: blogging about, among other things, how hard it is to find information on a subject...only to end up as the #1 Google hit for the subject you had trouble researching.
The Devil's whore is the reason here! So would Martin Luther say.
*cough*
Jesus Christ. My previous post contained some examples of stupid pro-war commentary after Saddam's capture. But Andrew Sullivan has lost it as well, listing this Juan Cole entry as part of his "Galloway Award Nominees" schtick this morning. He quotes this section:
My wife, Shahin Cole, suggested to me an ironic possibility with regard to the Shiites. She said that many Shiites in East Baghdad, Basra, and elsewhere may have been timid about opposing the US presence, because they feared the return of Saddam. Saddam was in their nightmares, and the reprisals of the Fedayee Saddam are still a factor in Iraqi politics. Now that it is perfectly clear that he is finished, she suggested, the Shiites may be emboldened. Those who dislike US policies or who are opposed to the idea of occupation no longer need be apprehensive that the US will suddenly leave and allow Saddam to come back to power. They may therefore now gradually throw off their political timidity, and come out more forcefully into the streets when they disagree with the US. As with many of her insights, this one seems to me likely correct.
This is outrageous. Mr. Sullivan owes Mr. Cole an apology. Here's the opening to his post:
Seeing a captive, disheveled Saddam on television this morning released a cascade of memories for me. I remembered the innocent Jews brutally hanged in downtown Baghdad when the Baath came to power in 1968; the fencing with the Shah and the Kurds in the early 1970s; the vicious repression of the Shiites of East Baghdad, Najaf and Karbala in 1977-1980; the internal Baath putsch of 1979, when perhaps a third of the party's high officials were taken out and shot, so that Saddam could become president; the bloody invasion of Iran in 1980 and the destruction of a whole generation of Iraqi and Iranian young men in the 1980s (at least 500,000 dead, perhaps even more); the Anfal poison gas campaign against the Kurds in 1987-88; Halabja, a city of 70,000 where 5,000 died where they stood, their blood boiling with toxic gases, little children lying in heaps in the street; the rape of Kuwait in 1990-91; the genocide against the Shiites that began in spring of 1991 and continued intermittently thereafter; the destruction of the Marsh Arabs; the assassinations, the black marias, the Fedayee Saddam. Yes, the United States was not innocent in some of this. Perhaps they cooperated in bringing the Baath to power in the first place, as an anti-Communist force. They certainly allied with Saddam against Iran in the 1980s, and authorized the purchase of chemical and biological precursors. But the Baath was an indigenous Iraqi phenomenon, and local forces kept Saddam in place, despite dozens of attempts to overthrow him.A nightmare has ended. He will be tried, and two nations' dirty laundry will be exposed, the only basis on which all can go forward towards a new Persian Gulf and a new relationship with the West.
How can this post, in any reasonable way, be construed to read that Mr. Cole revealed "thinly veiled disappointment at the capture of Saddam," as Mr. Sullivan defined it?
Judging from this post alone, it can be gleaned that Mr. Cole intensely disliked the Ba'ath Party and it's polices and leaders and viewed it's actions with contempt and disgust. He expressed his memories in a somewhat clinical fashion, but they seem to be intended to be taken as contempt and disgust. How could they not?
His ending section is passed-along speculation that seems entirely reasonable!! Why would the remaining Iraqi insurgents/terrorists who don't have a pathological attachment to Saddam not feel this way? The man is a living monster and getting rid of him is something any organization dedicated to taking Iraq back would want to do. The populace loathes the man; he's a bigger liability than a Hillary Clinton endorsement for George W. Bush!
Andrew Sullivan's zeal to expose the stupidity of some lefty anti-war comments has taken him over the edge.
B A G H D A D, Iraq, Dec. 13 ? Deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been captured near his home town of Tikrit, the U.S. military has confirmed.Saddam, who ruled Iraq for 23 years until his ouster in April, has been a fugitive since then with a $25 million bounty on his head.
In an address to the nation, President Bush gave the following message to Iraqis: "You do not have to fear the rule of Saddam Hussein ever again."
He said Saddam's capture will bring sovereignty and dignity to Iraq and the opportunity for a better life. "It is the end of the road for him," he said. "And for the Baathists, there will be no return to priviliege in Iraq."
"Iraqis who have chosen the side of freedom, now have won," said President Bush.
Confirmation of Saddam's capture came at a news conference in Baghdad after rumors swirled through the Iraqi capital.
The U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, opened the press conference with the words, "Ladies and gentlemen, we got him."
"This is a great day in Iraq's history," Bremer said. "The tyrant is a prisoner."
Copyright © 2003 ABCNEWS Internet Ventures
More links:
Ladies and gentlemen, we got him.
Saddam Hussein was captured Saturday 13 December at about 2030 local, in a cellar in the town of al-Dawr which is about 15 kilometres south of Tikrit.Before Dr Pachachi, who is the acting president of the governing council, and Lieutenant General Sanchez [the top US military commander in Iraq] speak, I want to say a few words to the people of Iraq.
This is a great day in Iraq's history.
For decades, hundreds of thousands of you suffered at the hands of this cruel man.
For decades, Saddam Hussein divided you citizens against each other.
For decades, he threatened an attack on your neighbours.
Those days are over forever.
Now it is time to look to the future, to your future of hope, to a future of reconciliation.
Iraq's future, your future, has never been more full of hope.
The tyrant is a prisoner.
The economy is moving forward. You have before you the prospect of a sovereign government in a few months.
With the arrest of Saddam Hussein, there is a new opportunity for the members of the former regime to end their bitter opposition.
Let them now come forward in a spirit of reconciliation and hope, lay down their arms, and join you, their fellow citizens, in the task of building the new Iraq.
Now is the time for all Iraqis - Arabs and Kurds, Sunnis, Shia, Christian and Turkmen - to build a prosperous, democratic Iraq, at peace with itself and with its neighbours.
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2003.
Iraqi journalists in the audience stood, pointed and shouted "Death to Saddam!" and "Down with Saddam!"In the capital, radio stations played celebratory music, residents fired small arms in the air in celebration, and others drove through the streets, shouting, "They got Saddam! They got Saddam!"
UPDATE(12:07pm)
I disagree with John J. Miller:
Three quick thoughts: 1) Between Hussein and Osama bin Laden, Hussein was the more desirable target
Similarly, I think Kathryn Jean Lopez's WAITING for the first anchor to say "Yeah, BUT Where's Osama?" is wrongly snide. It IS important to keep Osama in mind.
UPDATE(2:40pm)
The disconnect between reality and some in the Arab world is amazing.
Arabs share little of world joy over Saddam's capture
Eyes riveted to the television screen in a Cairo coffee shop, several Egyptians worried about this "American victory" and feared it would ensure the re-election of President George W. Bush next year. "It's not Saddam that they should arrest," blurted out Aziz al-Shaburi, a 34-year-old government employee when he saw television images showing an American medic inspecting a bearded Saddam's mouth."They would have been better to capture (Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon, the real war criminal," he said, eliciting applause from other patrons in the Awlad al-Hareth cafe.
[...]
"Everybody knows who the real murderers are, they are the murderers of the Palestinians," Abdel Hamid said. "Why did no Arab king offer 25 million dollars for Sharon's arrest?" he asked, referring to Washington's reward for the capture of Saddam.
Mustafa Bakri, the pro-Saddam editor in chief of the independent Egyptian weekly Al-Osbou, then appeared on the television saying: "It's a black day in the history of the Arabs. It's a humiliation. "It's Bush, Blair, Berlusconi, Aznar and Sharon who should be put on trial," said Bakri, who had organized several solidarity trips from Cairo to Bagdhad before US troops invaded in March.Copyright © 2003 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
UPDATE(12/15/2003 1:22am)
Billy Beck is thinking along the same lines. The intellectual development over there is truely stagnant. It's bad in the West and the United States, but DAMN does it suck in the Middle East.
UPDATE(1:40am)
I have more than a few ideological alliances with Tim Blair, but this is too far. Since he's trying to refine the analogy to a personal level, what he's complaining about is fundamentally no different than a lefitst bitching at a businessman over divulging his political contributions for the last five years or, more aptly, at a firearm owner for not submitting to mandatory home police inspections to see if he's storing his rifles and pistols safely.
The jubilation of catching Saddam is fraying minds.
UPDATE(3:25pm)
More in the next post. Andrew Sullivan has lost it.
UPDATED 11/6/2006 9:05am
Sic Semper Tyrannis; Saddam Gets the Death Penalty
Erik tackles the insanity defense over at Brainville. Key quotes:
Legal insanity is defined as the inability to distinguish right from wrong at the time of criminal actions. Two psychiatrists diagnosed Malvo with a dissociative disorder which led to distorted visions of reality. Problem is, Malvo felt conflicted about the shooting of a thirteen year-old boy, saying that killing children was wrong, yet he still did it. He was told by Muhammad that if his conscience was bothering him, he "should lock it up in a box and throw away the key."Is that what led to is failure to distinguish right from wrong? His voluntary choice to listen to Muhammad, and suppress his moral feelings about his actions? This sort of "learned insanity" shouldn’t be considered insanity at all. If a person willingly submits themself to moral confusion, then they’ve made a perfectly informed choice.
[...]
Legal insanity also established a dangerous principle; that mental content and feelings are more important than the actions you take.
Unfortunately, that means they'd be less liable to face the responsibility for their actions in the context of current law. Hmm...
[Note, this was supposed to have been posted on 12/13 but got lost in "draft" status after writing it. Reading this Hit & Run entry reminded me to get back to it.]
It comes as no surprise to me that even after the Supreme Court campaign finance case caused an uproar, politicians in Washington still can't fathom the meaning of "Congress shall make no law..."
Nasty Language on Live TV Renews Old Debate
Members of both parties in Congress are demanding that the FCC crack down harder on broadcasters, while some FCC members want to toughen the penalties the agency imposes. At the same time, lawmakers are grappling with the fact that the government's limited enforcement powers over the public airwaves do not apply to cable channels, which are grabbing more and more viewers.Parent groups and socially conservative organizations that monitor broadcasts agree that television and radio content is getting racier and raunchier. Members of the Parents Television Council, a group that monitors television broadcasts and whose celebrity advisers include Pat Boone and Jane Seymour, have filed more than 85,000 complaints about broadcast indecency and obscenity at the FCC this year.
Nicole Richie of the Fox reality show "The Simple Life," prepared to announce a category of nominees on the Billboard Music Awards on Wednesday night. Standing alongside was her co-star, hotel heiress Paris Hilton, who warned: "Now Nicole, remember, this a live show, watch the bad language."Richie paid no attention, using a vulgar substitute for the exclamation "shoot." The broadcast, which employed a five-second delay to catch obscenities, bleeped out the offending word. But Richie was one step ahead. Before Fox could hit the "dump" button again, she described her time on "The Simple Life," in which she and Hilton live with an Arkansas farm family. She repeated the word and then added one for good measure.
"Have you ever tried to get cow [expletive] out of a Prada purse?" Richie said. "It's not so [expletive] simple."
I'm offended! My children might have heard that!
This country sinks further into a moral wasteland.
But what's more wrong:
The FCC, charged with enforcing indecency and obscenity standards on the public airwaves, issued a ruling in October regarding the utterance of the "F-word" during a Fox broadcast in January.During the live Golden Globe Awards broadcast in January, Bono -- frontman for the Irish rock group U2 -- received an award and exulted, "This is really, really [expletive] brilliant!"
The FCC's enforcement bureau ruled that Bono's utterance was neither indecent nor obscene because it did not describe a sexual function.
Sens. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) and 11 Republicans, including Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), introduced a resolution last week blasting the FCC's ruling on Bono.
The resolution does not demand further FCC regulations against indecency but would direct the agency to consider revoking the broadcast licenses of television stations that repeatedly air indecent material. It also says the FCC should fine programs for each indecency during a show, not levy one fine for the entire show. In other words, if the FCC were to fine Fox for Richie's language, it should impose two fines, one for each curse word, a plan the FCC is likely to adopt.
Rep. Doug Ose (R-Calif.) wants more. He has proposed legislation to effectively overturn the FCC ruling, blasting the agency for relying on a "technicality."
"You want to split hairs? I'm going to shave your head," Ose said, referring to his legislative remedy.
As used in this section, the term 'profane', used with respect to language, includes the words 'shit', 'piss', 'fuck', 'cunt', 'asshole', and the phrases 'cock sucker', 'mother fucker', and 'ass hole', compound use (including hyphenated compounds) of such words and phrases with each other or with other words or phrases, and other grammatical forms of such words and phrases (including verb, adjective, gerund, participle, and infinitive forms).'.
I'd strike the entire contents of United States Code, Title 18, Chapter 71 from the record. In particular, Section 1464:
Whoever utters any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communication shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
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.
In a letter to the Parents Television Council after the enforcement bureau's ruling, FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell wrote: "Personally, I find the use of the 'F-word' on programming accessible to children reprehensible." The five FCC commissioners are reviewing the ruling by David H. Solomon, chief of the enforcement bureau.
You're an ass, Powell. You, your organization, and the government do not have the right to tell us what we can't say.
The FCC "is doing an indecent job of enforcing indecency," Commissioner Michael J. Copps said in an interview. "If we send one or two of the most egregious cases to license renewal hearings, we'll see it improved quite a bit," meaning that if broadcasters are threatened with losing their licenses, the airwaves would be cleaned up quickly.[...]
Radio is also under increasing scrutiny. This week, the FCC fined Detroit radio station WKRK-FM $27,500 for airing a listener discussion of sexual practices and techniques.
Copps, who dissented from the majority on the WKRK action, said the fine was insufficient and that the FCC should have started a hearing to revoke the station's license. Commissioner Kevin J. Martin said the station should have been fined $27,500 for each of the nine determined instances of indecency on the WKRK broadcast.
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
So fuck the Supreme Court and fuck the politicians who have eroded and continue to erode our fundamental right to free speech.
...kinda.
I called in sick yesterday and stayed home from work. When I finally got up and started moving around, I went to the Net and began browsing. In short order, I came across Glenn Reynolds's response to Jonah Goldberg's complaint-by-proxy, saying the Instapundit hadn't made mention of the recent Supreme Court 1st Amendment weakening.
The previous day, I ran across the new Goldberg File and it complained:
By the way, where the hell is this much-vaunted blogosphere? If three freshman congressmen from Wisconsin hinted that they wanted to regulate the use of umlauts on the internet in honor of Leif Ericson's birthday, bloggers would be on the steps of Congress up-ending cans of gasoline on themselves in protest at such an infringement on free speech. But here we have all three branches of the government severely restricting independent speech outside of the dinosaurs of Old Media and the relative silence - minus a few noble exceptions (The Volokh conspiracy, Instapundit) - is deafening.
So I looked around and came up with a list.
Well, when I found Mr. Reynolds' response I e-mailed him a notice that the blogosphere had responded to the SC ruling. And I even I limited my blog browsing to right-leaning and libertarian sites; doubtless lefty blogs also posted on the topic. I closely watched my referral logs and waited.
Within five minutes, he had read the e-mail and checked my post out. Within ten minutes of that, he had an update on his post. First referral came through seconds later.
Unfortunately for the ambitions of my Total Post Count, the update wasn't on a post near the top. It was on his first post of the day at 7:54am and I didn't send him the e-mail until 2pm. So the traffic bump was only enough to make it my best Friday evar. The logs say about 85 people visited from Insty's page, which is about 1/3 a weekday's normal take and 1/2 a weekend's normal take.
An interesting experience.
Says keith over at Hit & run:
The tax code - the most important wargame ever devised. Your opponent writes the rules.
Jim Henley clarifies the absurdity:
Inventory is not inventory. And because it hasn't sold - which means it has earned Corner Comics no income - it must be taxed.
UPDATE(12/17/2003 12:52am)
The end? Power to tax is indeed the power to destroy and Jim Henley posts some thoughts and some links.
Via a comment by John Lopez at No Treason!, I find this interesting Russell Madden article:
The Iraqi people want to be free.What does that mean? At its simplest level, of course, this states that the goal sought by Iraqis is "freedom." Sounds good, no?
The crucial question then becomes: what is "freedom"?
[...]...most Americans say they want freedom. Indeed - even though I cringe every time I hear them say it - virtually every politician proclaims his devout devotion to the shining star of freedom.
Yet when presented with the gritty reality of what freedom is and what it implies, the American public runs shrieking in fright and terror into the strong and comforting arms of the Demicans and Republicrats...who are only too eager to calm their dread: "Hush, hush, there. Don't worry your little heads, dear voters. We don't actually mean it when we say we're pro-freedom." When 98% of Americans who vote consistently reject full freedom in favor of their preferred flavor of statism - mostly of the fascist variety - how seriously can the words of these ignorant folk be taken?
[...]
Tell an American that "to be free" means:
No Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, no welfare, no guaranteed loans...
No "gun" control laws...
No drug prohibition...
No restrictions on marriage or sex among adults...
No government mandates for occupational or food or drug "safety"...
No banning of pornography...
No State-issued fiat money or banking regulations...
No censorship...
No national identification cards...
No checks on private discrimination or verbal sexual harassment...
No "public" schools...
No "public" roads...
No taxation...
No antitrust laws...
No affirmative action...
No minimum wage...
No draft...
No State-run postal "service"...
No smoking bans...
No cellphone bans...
No art subsidies...
No NASA...
No United Nations...
No national or state or city parks...
No mandated recycling...
No State-run airports and security...
Yes. Inform the average American of what "freedom" means and he that he will have to live within its parameters forever and he will crawl into a fetal ball and weep in abject panic...
admired Sen. Paul Simon, who died today, mainly for his un-discouraged advocacy of a WPA-style guaranteed jobs program, which still seems like a good idea (if the wage is kept low enough!).That's Mickey Kaus on 12/9/2003 at 5:25pm.
He's written some good commentary on some subjects that right-wingers have enjoyed, but he drops hints like this every now and then that remind me to be wary.
The Works Progress Administration, Mr. Kaus? Egads. What a titanic waste.
Basic moral principles apply not only to Jews, in other words, but to all people, even those that don't follow Jewish dietary laws. If any country defies them, it will suffer a fate akin to the Canaanites'. The men and women of Canaan were not held responsible for not observing the Jewish Sabbath--to pick another example of a practice asked only of Jews; but they were held responsible for rejecting the fundamental moral tenet that marriage is between a man and a woman.[...]
Any Bible-believer must agree that it’s God’s will, not man’s intellect, which decides profound moral questions.
[...]
After all, we are talking about laws of nature as God made it. An ancient rabbinic teaching says that in creating the world, He first looked in the Torah, Scripture’s first five books and their explanatory traditions. In other words, the Bible is not a set of arbitrarily imposed rules. It’s a blueprint of how the world works.
That's David Klinghoffer on Beliefnet.
The very first questions anyone should ask someone who says this are
Then again, Mr. Klinghoffer goes on to say this elsewhere:
This doesn't mean we have to stone gays or carry out any of the other penalties for misbehavior outlined in the Hebrew Bible. These are meant to be applied only in a Jewish commonwealth, and then only under very special conditions. (There needs to be a Temple in Jerusalem with a high-court, or Sanhedrin, sitting in judgment there on capital trials. Look for these when the Messiah comes, ushering in a new world full of the knowledge of God where the need for harsh justice will thus be exceedingly rare.)[...]
We Americans don’t live in a society governed by Mosaic law. However, neither did the Canaanites. When the Bible speaks of their moral failings in very specific ethical areas, and the consequent downfall of their civilization, there is a lesson not just for a Jewish society but for everyone. The way God sets things up, a society that institutionalizes same-sex unions will ultimately suffer tragic consequences--“disgorgement” from its place in the world. What, in very concrete terms, would that mean? Let’s hope we don’t have to find out.
Well then *cough* it may be best to skip the questions and move on to someone else. Since it looks like I am for the downfall of human civilization, there probably isn't much point to talking with him anyway.
Via Andrew Sullivan, who, if he was consistent, would be agreeing with Mr. Klinghoffer rather than not.
As you've no doubt heard, the Supreme Court has just upheld the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, better known as McCain-Feingold. It regulates to whom, how, and when citizens - acting in concert or alone - can express their political opinions. The details have been hashed out a zillion times. But the gist is: Groups like the National Rifle Association, the Sierra Club, the ACLU, and the NAACP will have a much more difficult time expressing their political views or criticizing politicians during an election season.[...]
...political speech is what the First Amendment is about. The artistic types who think the first amendment protects every taxpayer-financed bit of sacrilege on every public museum's wall, may have every right to be angry about government censorship of art, but art wasn't what the First Amendment was primarily designed to protect. The First Amendment was first and foremost designed to protect the expression of overtly political speech, of criticism of the government and elected officials.
But for some unfathomable reason, we've turned this logic on its head in this country. Today, highly educated people hurl their salad forks in rage over the "censoring" of a performance artist when she doesn't get free money from the government. But they nod approvingly when the federal government tells the ACLU it can't say what it pleases, when it pleases, about George Bush. We used to protect core rights by protecting peripheral rights. We'd say, "Sure, you have the right to smear your naked body with chocolate in the middle of Main Street," because we figured, so long as that sort of asininity is protected, our most vital freedoms will surely be secured. But now our freedoms are rotting from the inside out. As Justice Scalia noted in his dissent, the court in the last four years alone has protected such "speech" as kiddy and cable porn, but it now finds direct criticism of politicians during an election to be deserving of regulation.
I'll ignore the glaring contradiction I see in Jonah Goldberg's stand that "the relevant question - which is invariably overlooked - isn't whether or not you are "for" or "against" censorship. The relevant question is, What do you want to censor? Or, how much censorship do you want?" for now. I respect him as a writer, though discussing this isn't the right time.
But he says something at the end that deserves comment:
By the way, where the hell is this much-vaunted blogosphere? If three freshman congressmen from Wisconsin hinted that they wanted to regulate the use of umlauts on the internet in honor of Leif Ericson's birthday, bloggers would be on the steps of Congress up-ending cans of gasoline on themselves in protest at such an infringement on free speech. But here we have all three branches of the government severely restricting independent speech outside of the dinosaurs of Old Media and the relative silence - minus a few noble exceptions (The Volokh conspiracy, Instapundit) - is deafening.
The Supreme Court doesn't care about freedoms of speech and association.
Robert Prather - "A Sad Day For Freedom Of Speech"
Bill Hobbs - "Memo to the NRA: Blog First, Air Ads Later"
John Hawkins - "Supreme Court Upholds Political Money Law (This Is A Blow To The First Amendment)" (on his news sidebar, no actual blog post)
Stephen Green, dittoing Volokh
Robert Clayton Dean - Yeah, no posts - so cut my pay and Is money speech?
yadda yadda
Mr. Goldberg, this makes it twice I've had to correct something you've posted. Don't make me come over there...
UPDATE(7:00pm)
Adding to the list...
Hit & Run - "Free Speech Defeat"
Daily Pundit - "O'Connor Ignores the First Amendment" (yeah, it was posted during lunch, but Mr. Goldberg's mini-rant still deserves the slap anyway)
Pejman Yousefzadeh - "UGH . . ."
Rick Hasen - "McConnell v. FEC: The Big Picture"
I think you get the picture.
Misha I - "...the Supreme Whores just struck down the 1st Amendment."
Classical Values - "Whose blog is this?"
Charles Austin - "Is all of this just hyperbole or is the American experiment over?"
UPDATE{12/12/2003 2:20pm)
Thanks to Instapundit for the link. Mr. Reynolds also mentions Tom Maguire - "Jonah Goldberg Is An Idiot".
The other day I found myself in an antique/junk store staring at a huge old iron kettle, and I wondered out loud how many one could feed using that for soup. A man next to me, who looked to be in his 70s, said: that's not for soup; that's for rendering hog fat!
Just as I praised Dave Gross for his decision to actually stop funding the government by taking hardship upon himself, I feel obligated to applaud Arthur Bixby and his son Steven Bixby for taking a stand against property theft.
A father and son angered by a state plan to seize some of their land for a highway killed two officers who went to their home, setting off a 13-hour standoff and a "horrendous gunfight," authorities and neighbors said.The Bixby family had decided that they would defend their land to the death, authorities say.
[...]
The gunfight was so fierce that police at one point had to bring in extra ammunition, Stewart said. Agents found suicide notes, anti-American material and items that may relate to militias, Stewart said.
Arthur Bixby and his son, Steven Bixby, 36, were charged with murder in the deaths of the two officers, authorities said Tuesday. Steven Bixby was to be arraigned Tuesday; Arthur Bixby, was still being treated for gunshot wounds.
Arthur Bixby's wife, Rita, was charged with being an accessory to murder, and all three also are charged with conspiracy, officials said.
Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press
Copyright © Newsday, Inc.
However, as Billy Beck said:
Jeffrey, the AP'ster, cites "authorities" and says, "None of the family members tried to negotiate with officers during the standoff."Notably, no one offers a reason why the family might even consider that. What did they have to win, and when did they have it? A smaller bite of their property before the bulldozers rolled up? That sort of agreement with idlers who pen-stroke peoples' lives? Well, guess what: those people didn't see the percentage. And every now and then, the idlers -- and the types who take their coin to just do their jobs on the bulldozers -- are going to run into people who really are going to stand their lives, fortunes, and their sacred honor against them.
Man Cites N.H. Motto When Charged With Police Shooting
A former New Hampshire family involved a dramatic shootout in South Carolina Tuesday cited the state motto as defense for killing two police officers.
Police said the Bixby family engaged in a 13-hour standoff at their home Tuesday when two officers were shot and killed over an apparent land dispute."Why'd I do it?" Steven Bixby said in court. "We didn't do it. They started it."
Sources told News9 that the Bixby family was part of an extremist group when they live in Haverhill, N.H., about 20 years ago. South Carolina police said Steven Bixby and his parents had a grudge against the government that led to the standoff.
Prosecutors said Steven Bixby and his father, Arthur Bixby, were the shooters at their Abbville, S.C., home. During a courtroom rant to reporters, Steven Bixby cited New Hampshire's state motto as validation for his actions.
"If we can't be any freer than that in this country, I'd just as soon die," he said. "I'm originally from New Hampshire, where the motto is 'Live free or die.'"
Copyright 2003 by TheWMURChannel. All rights reserved.
Bixbys unnerved some neighbors; others remember kind gestures
In New Hampshire, Grafton County Sheriff's Capt. Paul Leavitt said Bixby was convicted in 1992 of driving with a revoked license and drunken driving. Two years later, an arrest warrant was issued after Bixby did not contact the state to open a probation case, and for not paying his fine.Leavitt said investigators who searched for him at the time believed he already had moved to South Carolina. The court renewed the warrant in October of this year, based on the probation violations.
Bixby appealed the revocation, saying in a handwritten affidavit: "I've never seen a state or heard of a state that is quite as crooked as this one. The motto, 'Live Free or Die' is one hell of a joke. The new motto ought to be, 'You'll die trying to live free in New Hampshire.' "
[...]
A former neighbor of the Bixbys, Ronnie Corley, said Arthur and Rita Bixby were kind people who even once offered to help him build a house without charge. And he said they would fiercely defend their son."Arthur and Rita Bixby, if they liked you, they'd do anything in the world for you," Corley said. "They just didn't want to be pushed around about their property rights."
TheState.com & Associated Press
Hmm. Got second on a Yahoo search for "how to kill someone who stole from you."
I don't really understand the purpose of the search. Unless the person is trying to find an article he or she read in the past and words to that effect were used, I see no point for a competent human to do this.
Is there some unspoken principle I'm not aware of that mandates special methods of murder when you've been robbed? What's wrong with plain old, well, anything? Poisonings, shootings, throw the sleeping thief off a cliff...any method of killing someone will work.
Now, if you want to be clever (and who wouldn't?), you could do something that involves stealing from the thief and in the process of the thief trying to recover his or her property, death greets'em...gently aided by your guiding mind.
Hmm.
I fucken 'ate robbas.
"Baer David" & "Distler Barb" & "Bellas Anita" & "Iturralde Lucilla"
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity, said one of them.
I certainly haven't. Welcome to Comment Ban Land.
UPDATE(12/11/2003 5:36pm)
Adkins diet is teh SUXXOR!
Cretin.
UPDATE(12/16/2003 8:25am)
Communist Laponians yadda yadda
I won't tolerate anti-Semetic and anti-capitalist bullshit.
UPDATE(12/18/2003 11:59pm)
vioxx
UPDATE(12/24/2003 10:20pm)
netfreework & eastoil & growth hormone
UPDATE(12/28/2003 3:55pm)
Naemi Schamansaver
UPDATE(1/10/2004 5:32pm)
Lee Jung
Cook Sioux
Jessica Lampros
UPDATE(1/15/2004 1:55pm)
Another free e-mail address for the slaughter! MUAHAHAHAHAH!!! I'll NEVER STOP!
vioxx, you suck!
UPDATE(1/20/2004)
One casino, two casino. Punks.
UPDATE(1/31/2004)
Mike Iroakazi or whatever the hell your name is. Just die.
UPDATE(2/13/2004)
Sucka my Dicka.
UPDATE(2/16/2004)
E-mail me
E-mail me
E-mail me
UPDATE(2/18/2004)
E-mail me too!
E-mail me too!
E-mail me too!
UPDATE(2/27/2004)
Poor Canada, suffering fools like this one.
UPDATE(4/1/2004)
Cialis sucks, I don't want any.
Ditto for South Beach.
UPDATED 7/23/2008 10:30am
More spammy-ness here.
Various news items, editorialized:
An incitement to censor.
An unhonorable honor code.
Nanny statism on a county scale.
Insanity has been cheapened.
Israel goes it alone; no one happy.
Kyoto sucks!
Assault or legitimate punishment through contract? I say assault.
He should have gotten 99 years.
Nationalist, protectionist, crony capitalist nonsense.
"Oops" doesn't quite cut it.
The Supreme Court doesn't care about freedoms of speech and association.
The State of California is a bad investment? No shit.
Arthur Silber tears into Bush's spineless decision to favor China over Taiwan.
Meanwhile, American Conservative writer Doug Bandow gives The Conservative Case Against George W. Bush.
AmCon link via Radley Balko.
UPDATE(6/18/2004 5:06pm)
Whom to Vote For?
I found out last night that Texas A&M "will establish no numerical quotas or targets" when it admits students in the future and "personal merit - individual achievement, leadership potential and personal strengths - is the only criterion for admission." I applaud these moves and statements by A&M President Robert M. Gates, though I feel it's a shame the Gawd of Diversity continues to push people in education rather than objective intellectual standards. At least he's got a decent principled stand to lean on. More on this later, but some people simply cannot give up affirmative action in state-run institutions of higher education.
Other interesting bits from Mr. Gates's speech:
In all of these initiatives, we have been guided by one fundamental philosophical premise: each and every student admitted to Texas A&M will be admitted on the basis of a competitive process focused on individual achievement, merit and leadership potential.
Currently, all students admitted to Texas A&M fall into three categories: 1) those admitted under the Texas top 10% law - this accounts for about half of our freshman class; 2) those receiving automatic academic admission, which requires scoring at least 1300 on the SAT and ranking in the top half of their high school class - about a quarter of the freshman class; 3) the remainder, those reviewed on an individual basis, with focus not only on academic achievement but also on extracurricular achievements, unusual experiences, special talents and skills, and leadership potential.
This week we will propose to the Board of Regents two changes in admission requirements. First, we will ask to raise the standard for automatic academic admission from the top half of the high school graduating class to the top one-quarter. While the combined SAT Math and SAT Verbal test score of 1300 would remain unchanged, we propose that the student must score at least 600 in each of the two components of the SAT. Corresponding scores would be required for applicants choosing to present ACT test results. Based on past experience, this will reduce the number of students receiving automatic academic admission from about 1700 to about 850. This will open up roughly another 850 places in the freshman class where applicants can be evaluated on the basis of the whole person - that is, individual merit based on academic achievement, extracurricular activities, unusual experiences, leadership potential, and special talents. This group being evaluated individually likely will comprise about a third of the freshman class.
Second, since 1998, all applicants for public colleges and universities in Texas have been required to complete the Texas Common Application. There are four essay questions in the application. Question A asks students to "Describe a significant setback, challenge or opportunity in your life and the impact it has had on you"? Question B asks students to "Describe how you, as a student, are a good match with us as a learning community. How will your individual characteristics lead you to make a contribution to our campus? (Be sure to shape your essay to reflect the college major you have selected.)" Question C asks students for additional information "you wish to be considered in the decision to admit you" - for example, exceptional hardships or achievements, personal responsibilities, educational goals and ways in which the student has associated with the university. Question D asks the student to describe an aesthetic experience.Currently, completing any of these essays is optional in applying to Texas A&M. With the Regents' approval, we will require students to answer Questions A&B. In our effort to evaluate more students on the basis of the whole person, this will provide us with significantly more information on each applicant, particularly with respect to what each would contribute to Texas A&M.
[...]
If the Regents approve these changes in admission requirements, under state law, they would not go into effect until December 2004, or for the 2005 entering class.
Some will criticize our special efforts to reach out to students in Texas who are Hispanic, African-American, Asian-American, or economically disadvantaged. Some argue that promoting diversity itself is a mistake. I believe they are mistaken. Getting to know people from different cultures, from different economic circumstances, from different regions and countries, with different beliefs and backgrounds, significantly enriches learning. This, and the need to educate future leaders for the nation, were explicitly recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision, written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Exposure to a diverse learning environment also better prepares students for the real world beyond college.
I don't like things that are forced. I like things that develop naturally, through the voluntary actions of individuals. If some schools have a reputation for a ideological, religious, cultural, or ethnic slant, and that slant occured through the unhindered choices of a market, then those schools should be left alone. The common sets of beliefs we share, the disagreements we hold with others, and the personal circumstances surrounding each of us drive our decisions; it's our individual systems of valuation that make us unique. The shifting sands of free choice should be what make up our society, not the opinions of public officials being imposed from above.
Another problem I have is that this kind of statement gives credibility to the view that your race and your class define you. This is collectivization. I don't think it is fair, right, or logical to act one way towards one person and one way towards another simply on the basis of race or other characteristics we have no control over. Nor do I support any statements or actions that attempt to remove blame away from individual actions and towards groups.
Finally, I dislike it when people rely on Appeals to Authority to make their case. In this instance, the Supreme Court's admissions decision. I understand that it's a legal decision and there are repercussions if not followed, but a law or legal opinion can be wrong, along with the people who authored them.
I appreciate the benefits of experiencing a variety of cultures, beliefs, and ideas. Knowledge allows us to make better decisions. Ignorance hinders this. However, knowledge and experience should not be forced on anyone. The choice to participate or nor must remain.
Mr. Gates goes on to detail some of the other proposals A&M wants to use to increase it's diversity, most of which are extensions or typical college promotion activities such as campus vists, special event days, family question answering sessons, etc.
Of particular interest to the core issues surrounding the admissions policy, though, is this:
An area of special emphasis will be getting minority students who meet our standards and are admitted actually to enroll. Currently, only 44% of African-American, 48% of Hispanic, and 33% of Asian-American students we admit actually enroll as students here. This contrasts with 62% of white students who are admitted and then enroll. We must persuade more minority students who we admit and who we want to come here actually to do so - to see Texas A&M as their university of choice.
There can be many explanations for this. As I see it:
We will establish no numerical quotas or targets as we seek to increase the diversity of students who enroll. We only know that where we are is unacceptable, and that the future of Texas A&M depends on being more successful in attracting more minority students to join the Aggie family.
Don't pander to the anti-quota crowd (of which I am a part) by making silly statements like this. Think of it this way: when will the Texas A&M President decide to announce the program is a success? How will that be determined? And most importantly, how will you communicate that to the public...who will want NUMBERS to back up the assertions.
I am today announcing the Texas A&M "Regents Scholarships." Every student admitted to Texas A&M who is a first generation college student and whose family income is $40,000 or less, will be guaranteed in his or her admission letter a $5,000 per year scholarship for four years - with the ability to add other scholarships, for which many will be eligible, up to the cost of attendance. Last year, about 575 freshmen would have been eligible.
A lot of people will be eligible for that money. I hope A&M can afford it.
Overall, President Gates gave a great speech and I agree with it in a broad sense, even though the school is state-owned and -run.
Now, to the rest of the post.
It is unfortunate, but not unexpected, that the Democrat naysayers haven't exactly been gracious in disagreement.
Black lawmakers rip A&M decision
Black legislators from Texas threatened Thursday to ask for a federal civil rights investigation into the decision made by Texas A&M University's president to not use race preferences in admissions."I'm outraged," said state Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, about the plan announced Wednesday by A&M President Robert Gates.
"Race was used in Texas over a long period of time to keep people of color, especially African-Americans, out of the higher education system," Ellis said. "It only seems appropriate that race could be used as a factor, just as legacy is used."
[...]
Ellis said Houston hosted a national convention of black legislators Thursday, and he was "embarrassed" that Gates' decision was announced without the input of black legislators from Texas.
Ellis and and U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, said they will pursue legal action if they are not satisfied that Gates' proposal will increase diversity at A&M, which is 82 percent white, 2 percent black, 9 percent Hispanic and 3 percent Asian-American.
[...]
"This is an enormous insult and a smack in the face," said Jackson Lee. "What are we doing, going back to the 18th century?"
Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle
"What we are asking - no, what we are demanding - is that A&M show significant improvement in their diversity this fall as relates to admission of African-Americans and Hispanics, not only at the undergraduate level, but also at the graduate level," Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, said shortly after a Capitol meeting with Gates.[...]
West said Gates' promise isn't enough and threatened legislative retribution.
Citing appropriations and confirmations of appointments, West said that without improvement "there will in fact be issues that A&M will have to face during the legislative process."
Copyright 2003 Associated Press, All rights reserved.
Copyright ©2003Houston News Channel, L.L.C d.b.a. News 24 Houston
"Let's be clear about it - A&M does not have a good record as it relates to diversity," said state Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas. "And to set up a handicap to the institution as it relates to using race makes me wonder whether or not this administration is going to be successful in increasing the diversity at A&M."[...]
Texas A&M has been more heavily criticized - particularly by nonwhite legislators - for its efforts at reversing minority enrollment trends. A&M's decision to go with race-neutral admissions even after this summer's Supreme Court ruling is fueling the fire of increasingly frustrated lawmakers like West.
"I'd like to see it be more reflective of the diversity of the state - not 10 years from now, immediately," West said. "Not a project to say, 'We'll cure it with time,' because that's what we've said over the 10 years I've been in the Legislature."
© 2000 - 2003 The Bryan - College Station Eagle
Ify Ukpong, a black junior from Tyler, said she was disappointed."In a perfect world, race should not be a factor," she said while waiting in line to see a movie on campus. "But this is not a perfect world. Even if black students get in on their merits, people will think they got in because of race. I think it's kind of sad."
Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle
"As a result of our conference today, there will be specific performance measure criteria established because there were none," said Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo. " 'Trust me' just won't cut it, even from someone as nice and well-intentioned as President Gates."
I salute President Gates for his speech and policy change.
The last time I discussed Maggie Gallagher, I was deeply disappointed in her near-hysterical blathering over the damage legalized gay marriage would do to the United States. After witnessing this, I pretty much formed my opinion of her and left it at that.
Well, I was browsing National Review Online and came across her latest article on gay marriage. I shall sum it thusly:
Conventional wisdom says Democrats and Republicans are vulnerable over their stances on gay marriage.Conventional wisdom is wrong, cuz polls show slipping support for and rising resistence to gay marriage.
Silly Democrats.
My worldview and philosophy says gay marriage is bad. An increasing majority of Americans agree. Ha ha ha!
Marine Corps Rules for Gun Fighting
My favorites:
Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns.
Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is
expensive
Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
Dear "Daren Downs" and "Patrick Ventura":
Mr. Downs, when attempting to sell or promote a product, it is best advisable to present your product in a manner agreeable with the largest number of people in your intended audience. Your choice of the e-mail medium means that the subject line of your advertisement is of critical importance. In this day and age of rampant unsolicited bulk electronic spam, I know I speak for others when I say I manually filter my inbox largely according to the subject line of each e-mail.
So when I chanced upon your e-mail with the subject line, "THis will not involve conception of a child," you lost me as a customer.
This is not because I was offended by the suggestion that I am worried about fathering children. Nor did you lose my business because I was offended by the suggestion that you assumed I have been presented with offers to concieve with children. I took no offense in that manner.
No, what permanently lost me as a potential customer was the very dumbshit idea of someone picking that title in the first place. I spent the first few seconds internally amused at the stark stupidity of some stranger sending me an e-mail with that title. I spent the next few seconds annoyed with the miscapitalization. And I spent a few more seconds composing this post in response.
Furthermore, the text of the e-mail's body doesn't inspire me to believe you or whomever you work for has any concept of decent and effective marketing.
Attenzione!!Materiale pornografico. La verit�FFFFE1 su Paris Hilton e Rick Salomon!
Imparate anche l'inglese
Gratisxxxxxx!
click here
http://adweawen.biz/ph/index_mailer.html [please don't visit the link; they don't need the encouragement]rvrxdrc iukja mohvdyiczffqe aj fb
gibss i gunbdsvuyusp
Mr. Ventura, your message was a little bit better. The subject line of, "I'm sorry if you think this message is rude" actually worked on me, in the sense I thought it was a personal message written out to me for direct communicative interaction on some issue I may have commented upon.
I wasn't that surprised, however, when I discovered
Wank off while watching Paris Hilton's boyfriend
sucking on her tits and nipples.click here
http://adweawen.biz/ph/index_mailer.html [again, please don't visit the link]bxhhhoeogvdo skae f jj syi liyobe
Tsk tsk.
I've seen the Paris Hilton video. It ain't that great.
UPDATE 10/4/2004 8:23am
Beware of shock spam advertising.
UPDATED 7/23/2008 10:23am
More spammy-ness here.
Council OKs 'big-box' ban over aquifer
Austin City Council members early today unanimously approved banning so-called big-box stores in environmentally sensitive Southwest Austin.The ban prevents stores greater than 50,000 square feet from being built over the Edwards Aquifer, but allows grocery stores up to 100,000 square feet.
Copyright 2001-2003 Cox Texas Newspapers, L.P. All rights reserved.
There's more in the article (and the link will rot), but I don't care to discuss it.
UPDATE(12/12/2003 2:25pm)
City approves site for Wal-Mart, Lowe's
The Austin City Council approved the site at Ben White and Interstate 35 for a new Wal-Mart Supercenter.
The retailer promises that the new store will meet "the values and standards of the community" and follow strict environmental guidelines.
Thursday was the final vote on the ordinance that would allow Wal-Mart to move in.
The city of Austin reached a settlement with Lowe's Home Improvement Store.
The city was unable to stop construction of the large retail store in South Austin.
Lowe's has offered to meet some of the city's environmental building demands for a price.
Under the agreement, the city will receive $1 million in mitigation money.
Lowe's also will have to follow guidelines for its lighting and keep its arsenic-treated wood covered.
Copyright ©2003TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin
With the government whip not-so-subtlely kept in view, the two parties reach an agreement.
UPDATE(8/30/2004 9:56am)
Brewster McCracken's Jihad
A Tale of War: Iraqi Describes Battling G.I.'s
"We are not fighting for Saddam," [the former Iraqi soldier] said. "We are fighting for freedom and because the Americans are Jews. The Governing Council," he said, referring to the body of Iraqis appointed by the Americans, "is a bunch of looters and criminals and mercenaries. We cannot expect that stability in this country will ever come from them."Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
The immediate cause for renewed interest in the flat tax is an order by Paul Bremer, administrator of the Iraqi Provisional Authority, establishing a 15 percent flat-rate tax in that country. The order was signed on September 19 and takes effect on January 1. A November 2 report in the Washington Post said that Bremer's action was sparking a new drive among those like Forbes to revive the issue here.Actually, the Post didn't quite get the story right. Bremer's order merely says the following: "The highest individual and corporate tax rates for 2004 and subsequent years shall not exceed 15 percent." While the intent may have been to have a single 15 percent rate, the order does not preclude progressive rates up to 15 percent. Moreover, because the tax base is not specified, one could easily create effective tax rates well above the statutory maximum by allowing multiple taxation of the same income.
-Bruce Bartlett, National Revieeew Online
Via tacitus.
Via Brian Doss of Catallarchy, I hear of Steve Verdon's post highlighting some aspects of his proposed spending policies, something I should have addressed in my two posts against a libertarian vote for Howard Dean.
Mr. Verdon's analysis is pretty generous and makes a significant assumption in Mr. Dean's favor: repealing the Bush tax cuts will eliminate the deficit. He then dives into the policies Dean would enact and totals the cost.
The result, as Mr. Doss puts it:
Hogwash!Bush is a borrow-and-spend Corporatist statist. Dean is a tax-and-spend socialist. Bush is bad, yes, but I cannot see how to take more of our money and then spend some more on top of that is somehow a better solution. Seriously, when you look at the fine print for Dr. Dean, he's immediately spending the extra revenue from hiking taxes that supposedly would balance the budget while trying to maintain his pose of fiscal responsibility. Hiking taxes AND keeping a deficit is nonsense even to a Keynesian!
I don't want to get too down on libertarians for Dean; I have no doubt that the vast majority of them are sincere, but I also sincerely believe that Dean is absolutely incompatible with even a generous reading of libertarian principles.
UPDATE(6/3/2004 1:13pm)
Can't Cut the Budget; Politicians Will Eat Me!
Need a break from my lame rantyness? You should read hist post on pornified movie titles and think of creative ways to add to the pile of human reproductive goo.
Lawmakers considering how to revamp the state's school finance system on Thursday heard from tax ex-perts about firms that use loopholes to help them avoid paying state franchise taxes.During the regular session, the Legislature failed to adopt a fix to the so-called Delaware Sub loophole that allows corporations to avoid paying millions in taxes every year.
[...]
The state lost an estimated $163 million in revenue from some of the state's largest corporations that utilized the Del-ware Sub loophole in the 2003 fiscal year, said Deputy Comptroller Billy Hamilton. The lost revenue is a fraction of the $33.9 billion in state and federal funds allocated to public schools in the next biennium.
[...]
The loophole allows hundreds of businesses to avoid paying the franchise tax by incorporating on paper in a low-tax state like Delaware, and operating as a subsidiary in Texas.
© 2003 Texas Scripps Newspapers, L.P. A Scripps Howard newspaper. All Rights Reserved.
Texas lawmakers on Thursday began wading into the murky area of taxes, searching for about $8 billion it would take to cut school property taxes in half while reforming the state's public education system.An assortment of economists and tax experts will resume testimony today before the Joint Select Committee on Public School Finance, which wants to agree on a plan that legislators could debate during a special session next spring.
So far, commission members are not close to reaching a consensus.
Many legislators want to cut school property taxes in half."Every survey of taxpayers that's ever been done shows that the property tax is, by far, the most hated tax that anybody pays," said John Kennedy, senior analyst for the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, a business-supported group.
The state's sales tax rate of 6.25 percent is already the fifth-highest in the country, and attempts to broaden the base by taxing services, such as child care, car repair, media advertising, laundry, legal, architectural, engineering and accounting, would provoke noisy opposition.The state's main business tax is the franchise tax, which has been characterized as a "voluntary" tax because an ever-growing number of companies restructure their business to avoid the tax.
"The present system lacks balance. Ideally, a tax system would rely equally on property, sales and income," said Linda Dickens, state tax manager for Texas Instruments.
Texas could solve its public school finance problem by adding a personal income tax, which also would reduce school property taxes by 90 percent, said Dick Lavine, a senior analyst for the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities.An income tax would benefit 60 percent of Texans, and only families making more than $125,000 would pay additional taxes, Lavine said. An income tax would provide an $11.5 billion property tax cut while increasing school spending by $4 billion, he said.
But most lawmakers don't support the idea."It's an interesting subject, but it's sort of like tilting at windmills. It's not going to happen," said Rep. Fred Hill, R-Richardson.
Copyright © 2003 El Paso Times, a Gannett Co., Inc. newspaper
Overall tax picture examined in effort to fix school funding
After a decade of fighting over how the school finance law works, property-rich and property-poor schools can now agree that the system is broken. With time running out before districts must make drastic cuts, the select committee on school finance looks at all taxes - including the income tax - for a better way to pay for schools.[...]
The state pays for just 38 percent of the cost of running schools. L ocal property taxes cover the balance. But, there's little room left under current law for schools to raise the money they need.
[...]
No one wants more taxes, but school money problems won't go away.
©2003 Belo Interactive
Does Islam Need a Luther or a Pope?
"Faith alone" is for many a Protestant the ground, not only of salvation, but ultimately also of knowledge. "Reason is the devil's whore," Luther tells us, and it "must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed."
I did a Google search for "'Reason is the devil's whore' luther" and it looks like the quote checks out, at least in terms of minor popularity. The most complete contextual quotation I could find says this:
"And I sat in my heap of pain until the words emerged and opened out, 'The just shall live by faith. My pain vanished, my bowels flushed and I could get up. I could see the life I'd lost. No man is just because he does just works... This I know; reason is the devil's whore, born of one stinking goat called Aristotle, which believes that good works make a good man. But the truth is that the just shall live by faith alone. I need no more than my sweet redeemer and mediator, Jesus Christ."
If true, however, it is shocking. It's a brazen dismissal of rationality. It's a statement that is more open and honest in it's intentions than any I've seen from a subjectivist.
I did find a Luther-Aristotle analysis that persuasively argues Luther's animosity towards Aristotle...if the quote is true:
When Luther spoke of "reason" he often meant Aristotle - & specifically, what he saw as the undue influence influence of Aristotle on medieval theology. He did not object to the use of "reason" in theology but insisted that it had to serve revelation & not be its master. Reason must have a ministerial, not a magisterial, role in theology. "He who wishes to
theologize with Aristotle must first become thoroughly a fool for Christ."
The rest of Edward Feser's essay is extremely interesting. I may post about it after spending some time pondering it.
UPDATE(12/16/2003 12:10am)
The ultimate irony: blogging about how hard it is to find information on a subject...only to end up as the #1 Google hit for the subject you had trouble researching.
I previously mentioned the server relocation my web host is about to conduct. My Aussie contact e-mailed to say it would happen tomorrow on the US's 12/5.
Shouldn't be more than a few hours.
President Bush on Thursday scrapped controversial steel tariffs 16 months ahead of schedule to avert the threat of retaliation from Europe and Asia, risking a political backlash in battleground states in next year's election.Bush offered little to cushion the blow to U.S. steel makers, but said he would keep in place a system to license and track steel imports "so that my administration can quickly respond to future import surges that could unfairly damage the industry."
"These safeguard measures have now achieved their purpose, and as a result of changed economic circumstances, it is time to lift them," the president said in a statement read by his spokesman.
The decision was a blow to struggling U.S. steel makers and the United Steelworkers of America, a union representing nearly 1 million active and retired steelworkers. The union accused Bush of abandoning the industry's workers and retirees, and said it would appeal to members of Congress for protection.
What do I mean by that?
Get a load of this shit:
U.N.: North Korea's Experiment Failing
U.N. Official: North Korea's Experiment in Capitalism Compounds Hunger, Poverty
Or the UN.
By dabbling with capitalism, North Korea is creating a new class of urban poor that is worsening its hunger problem, a top U.N. official said Wednesday.About 1 million urban workers have fallen victim as once centrally controlled industries have to cut costs and jobs amid free-market pressures, said Masood Hyder, the U.N. humanitarian coordinator in North Korea.
Hunger and health woes, traditionally a rural plight in North Korea, are an increasingly urban phenomenon that is likely to worsen, Hyder said.
A key cause of the new problem is corporate-belt tightening, common in industrialized countries, but largely unknown until now in the communist North, he said.
And that's the problem. The reason it's bleak is because there is so much market intervention. Governments doing what they can to stave off economic reality with regulations, dictates, and mandates. These actions may work in the short run, but eventually they fail and create unintended consequences that more than make up for any short term economic gains. The markets are artificially propped up and subsidized through this interference...and when that interference is lessened, we get what can be politely termed as a correction.
Prices re-assert themselves according to supply and demand. Employment changes as employers are free to make more choices on their own. People uproot themselves and move to lands of better opportunity. It's like removing Orwell's boot from humanity's face and watching the face's skin slowly revert back to normal. That readjustment can be painful.
The reforms were launched July 1, 2002, when Pyongyang boosted pay and loosened price controls seen as significant moves because they included elements of a market-based economy in one of the world's most tightly controlled countries.But the reforms have a darker side, said Hyder, who arrived in the isolated country a month after they began.
"Those industries, those factories that are no longer capable of standing on their own feet have had to cut back, have had to redeploy staff," he said, with managers under increased pressure to match supply with demand and trim expenses.
As a result, more workers are having their pay cut or hours slashed, making it harder to buy food as overall prices see a general increase, Hyder said.
"A million people fall into this new category of underemployed beneficiaries, underemployed urban workers who need assistance," he said citing World Food Program estimates.
As evidence of the reforms he has witnessed, Hyder cited a blossoming of small enterprises, new stores, mobile phone usage, consumers' markets and price increases.The advent of marketplaces where people are allowed to haggle and sell what they want has helped boost prices that were once held down by dictate. At a Pyongyang market Hyder visited, rice cost the equivalent of 44 cents a pound, compared with the official rationing price of 17 cents a pound.
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Via Den Beste.
Wall Street Journal Editor to Get Medal
Robert Bartley, editor emeritus of the Wall Street Journal, has been chosen to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civil honor.
Announced on Wednesday by the White House, the award cites Bartley, who ran the editorial page of the newspaper from 1972 to 2002, as one of the most influential journalists in American history. He started at the Journal as a reporter in 1962. Two years later, he joined the newspaper's editorial page staff."As a reporter, author, editorial page editor and columnist, he helped shape the times in which we live," the award citation says. "The United States honors him for his contributions to American journalism and to the intellectual and political life of our nation."
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Robert L. Bartley is one of the most influential journalists in American history. As a reporter, author, editorial page editor, and columnist, he helped shape the times in which we live. A champion of free markets, individual liberty, and the values necessary for a free society, his writings have been characterized by profound insights, passionate convictions, a commitment to democratic principles, and an unyielding optimism in America. The United States honors him for his contributions to American journalism and to the intellectual and political life of our Nation.
On the other hand, Mr. Noah does say this, which in the context of today looks pretty wrong:
The trouble with the Reagan-Dubya comparison is that Reagan was an ideologue, and Dubya is not. As a result, Bush is unlikely to be as responsive to Bartley and his fellow conservatives as Reagan was.©2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved
A list of recipients over the years is here.
UPDATE(12/10/2003)
Well, that didn't last long.
Bartley, 'WSJ' Editorial Page Editor, Dies
Robert L. Bartley, editor of The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial page for 30 years, had died of cancer, according to a report on WSJ.com. Bartley, 66, won a Pulitzer Prize for his editorials in 1980.
I was informed by my hosting company that there may be a period of several hours where my site will be offline as a server move is completed. This is supposed to happen on December 5th, but the person who informed me of this lives in Australia and I can't confirm if the downtime will occur on 12/5 of his side of the International Date Line or mine.
So, reader beware.
Via Hit & Run, I learned about The Sleeper's death in EverQuest.
This is an interesting story, but I liked this part the most.
They killed what Sony Online Entertainment intended to be unkillable. But rather than actually make it untargetable, Sony just gave it a ten billion hitpoints. For those non EQers out there a reference scale: a snake has about 10 hitpoints. A dragon has about 100,000. A god has 1-2million. This sleeper thing really does have about ten billion or more. It took close to 200 players almost 4 hours to beat the thing down into the ground.Why, you might ask, would anyone waste four hours of their life doing this? Because a game said it couldn't be done. This is like the Quake freaks that fire their rocket launchers at their own feet to propel themselvs up so they can jump straight to the exit and skip 90% of the level and finish in 2 seconds. Someone probably told them they couldn't finish in less than a minute.
Copyright 2003 Andrew Phelps. All rights reserved.
They choose to take on a task that if completed, would leave them with an unknown reward. It wasn't even known if The Sleeper could be killed, what would happen if it died, and what the players would get for their efforts. Using 175 characters working for 3 hours results in 525 man-hours of coordinated effort for an outcome that was far from certain. Pretty impressive and a shining display of the power the human spirit will front in order to "do the impossible." Imagine the outcome of unleashing that human potential without restraint, without the roadblocks of taxes, licenses, and paperwork in it's way.
It simply cannot be said that mankind will ever be "satisfied" with some current level of material progress and comfort. We can't remain in status forever, treading water at some point externally and arbitrarily defined in our lives. I'm sure a more educated Austrian could expand upon the importance of this, but I'll say that it is one of the fundamental driving forces of human action and a crucial thing that free market capitalism respects.
With thousands watching and waiting, the Sleepers health inched ever downward.Almost three hours into the fight, when victory looked possible, he disappeared, violating every rule in the world of Norrath on how a monster is supposed to behave. We thought [SonyOnline] understood us better. The fact you let it happen the next night means very little - the point is on that first magical evening when warriors rode off to battle the supreme, you meddled. They thought of something you didn't, something legal by the rules of the game you set forward, and you meddled. In the parlance of the world you created: "shame & ridicule".
I draw an analogy to this and the central planning that governments engage in on a daily basis. The most recent example would be the prescription drug benefit for seniors. Congressional bill authors simply cannot understand how people will change, what the economic impact of their laws will be, and how influences outside their jurisdiction will interplay with everything. The $400 billion price tag is an estimate based on incomplete data, an estimate that is subject to political meddling and obfuscation. It won't be worth a damn in one year. Well, that may not be true. It could be useful to use as a sharp reminder why the idea was terrible in the first place.
SoE, on the other hand, is a private entity that owns the system in question and it can meddle quite effectively and with complete discretion. But notice that when it did, when it decided the players were going places they shouldn't, it recieved rebuke and condemnation. The players used a legitimate way to beat an opponent and Sony freaked, worried about it's control over the system.
SoE owns EverQuest, so that's no big deal. But imagine that things are different and SoE is really the local zoning board and the players are really business proprietors who want to set up companies that otherwise jump successfully through all the regulatory hurdles. Imagine the irritation and anger at the announcement that no, you can't build here...you aren't "local" enough or you'd throw a neighborhood's "funky culture out of whack". It's authoritarian and disgusting and demonstrates a disrespect for individuals.
Congradulations to the people who took down The Sleeper. Let's hope that the current Leviathan government we face won't need such an effort to destroy.
