Monday, June 30, 2008

McCain's Military Experience Not As Good As Obama's Self-Assessment

McCain's time as POW meant a big zip when compared to Obama's vast record of stellar character and communication. Hey, I'm not an enthusiastic fan of McCain, but that's a tough sell even for me. I think the Obamatons might want to choose a different subject on which to attack McCain.

Michelle Malkin says:

And Barack Obama’s “executive responsibility” would be…what exactly? Oh, yeah. Conducting leadership training seminars for ACORN shakedown artists!
The Anchoress notes this (read the whole thing):
The current president has shown he can take many punches. Can Obama handle one?

Oh, here’s an idea - let’s suggest that John McCain’s war record is irrelevant. That won’t make you look too hypocritical, will it, after you spent 2004 suggesting John Kerry’s turn in Vietnam defined his worthiness to sit in the Oval Office? Nah, of course not.
Ann Althouse cites examples of Obama's leadership and wonders why Hillary didn't more effectively use this information. My short answer is that the campaigns were so non-stop and had a helter-skelter quality. And did Hillary fear that going after Obama's "experience" would expose her own stellar public service--health care pops to mind.

Don Surber notes Obama's leadership when it comes to women:
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama pays women staffers 87¢ for every $1 he pays his men.

I laughed when Obama said: “Women still earn only 77¢ for every dollar earned by men.”

Where, I wondered, would that be?

Little did I know he was talking about his own Senate office.
What about McCain's leadership? Well, the women on his staff make $1.04 for every $1.00 a man makes.

Tom McGuire ponders Obama's lack of "cowering." Obama the he-man. He will. Not. Break.

If you listen to Barack Obama and his surrogates, he's the man of steel while McCain is a lily-livered guy with no record of public or military service. It's quite a trick to try to turn this around.

New York Without Giuliani and With Stupid Priorities

Is New York returning to the bad old days pre-Giuliani? Maybe:

The NYPD's CompStat data indeed show upticks in violent crime since last year. The city has had 238 murders so far this year (as of last Sunday), up 7.6 percent from 221 last year, and 664 rapes, up 6.2 percent.

Should we be worried? Queens Councilmember Peter Vallone, chair of the council's Public Safety Committee, thinks so. "We're seeing the beginnings of a return to the bad old days," he says. "We should never forget that we're a thousand percent better off now than we were in 1991, when we had only 31,000 police officers on the street, and we made a decision, through the Safe Cities program, to increase that number by 10,000.
Over at Blue Crab Boulevard:
The new mayor, Michael Bloomberg is very, very concerned with trans fats and the harvesting of organs. Crime? Not so much, it would seem. Quality of life for the taxpaying citizens? Very little.
I remember reading The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference by Malcolm Gladwell, where he posits that the crime changes in New York had everything to do with population age distribution and nothing to do with Giuliani. Maybe.

It seems to reason that part of the reason that America has been spared more attacks during the Bush years, has not only been his policy but his emphasis and leadership. When criminals of any kind sense weakness they exploit it. If they think they can get a way with murder, they'll try to get away with murder. It might not be causation but certainly there's a correlation.

Allowing crime to increase would be bad news for New York. Security first, then economy. If people are afraid, they won't visit. Three summers ago, I was in New York, all over the city, with my kids and friends. I felt safe everywhere. The police presence was obvious but not obtrusive. With crime rising, Mayor Bloomberg might want to reevaluate his priorities or else families won't be visiting. Between taxes and everything else, New York won't seem so appealing to work in or visit.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

When A Woman Rapes A Man...

Dr. Helen has a must-read piece about female aggression and rape. I'm reminded of a friend's story of how he lost his virginity at the hands of a babysitter when he was 12 or 13. He was clearly distressed on the one hand but socialized to believe he should be okay with it, on the other. To me, it was clear that the woman had used her position of authority to abuse him. Even the other men at the table shifted uncomfortably upon hearing the story. Every twelve year old boy fantasizes about these things happening, but the consequences when it actually does can be devastating.

This part of the man's letter is especially horrifying:

After most of my drunken stupor wore off around 7 am or so, I awoke again to find her on top of me — this time with a more menacing attitude as she knew I was in a better position to respond physically this time. I had began to wiggle out from under her (taking care not to hurt her baby) when she sternly warned me to “be quiet” and “not be forceful” and made it clear that she would cry rape if I tried to stop it. I was stunned to say the least and not sure how to respond. I could easily have thrown her across the room and off of me, but was concerned for her child and took her threat very, very seriously. She said it so easily that I doubt I was her first.

I weighed my options for a moment and came to the conclusion that a sober, 6 or 7-month pregnant college student of 24 was far more likely to be believed by the authorities than a drunk 19-year old Marine in the best shape of his life. I frequented that club a lot and I’m sure several people saw me leave with her. I was pretty much fucked — in more than one way — at that point.
Rape is about power first, and sex, second. This is rape.

Picking Perfect Babies

A British family chose IVF and screened embryos that had a breast cancer gene:

By screening out embryos carrying the gene, called BRCA-1, the couple, from London, will eliminate the hereditary disease from their lineage.

About 5% of the 44,000 cases of breast cancer diagnosed in Britain each year are estimated to be caused by the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes, both of which can be detected in embryos.

Doctors say thousands of cases of breast cancer could be avoided by screening embryos using the technique called preimplantation diagnosis (PGD).
Eleven embryos were created. Six had the bad gene. Six were destroyed. Two were implanted. One malfunctioned. Two were frozen for "future use".

As a doctor, I find the notion of avoiding the future pain of such a disastrous disease--55-85% of those with this gene end up with the cancer--exciting and hopeful. But I shudder, too, at the implications and the callous actions taken. Creating eleven lives, destroying six, so that one ostensibly healthy one is created..... It's the destruction that is so problematic. No one would dream of having eleven children, and then dumping six overboard because they had a 50-85% chance of suffering down the road.

Doctors and parents choosing this procedure view embryos as specimens not life. With time, genetic markers will identify everything from depression to homosexuality to heart disease. Given the rationale used in genetic selection, there will be no ethical reason to prevent its use for nearly any dysfunction.

Destroying embryos is okay in order to have a healthy baby:
Disagree free polls

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Teenage Girls And Their Mothers

I had kids late for a Southern woman (which I'm not, since I'm a transplant), so most of my friends around here have teenagers. And many of those teenagers are girls. Oh, the suffering! There are a couple things I've noticed:

  1. All the moms did a good job. They loved their children. They were involved. They made sure the child had a good moral foundation. They met the friends.
  2. All the mothers blame themselves for their daughter's misbehaviors.
  3. The daughters come back around--usually by age 25, but often before.
I've also seen some things that make life worse. Now, many mothers of teenage girls are traversing their own hormonal terrain. They are either perimenopausal or menopausal themselves. Depending on their heredity, diet, etc., this transition can be brutal. Like a girlfriend of mine told me about her own mom, "My mom curled up in the fetal position and cried for a year and us kids were all out of the house and grown. I'm menopausal with a 10 year old and working full time." It's a different world and so this life transition can be complicated. Many of the women I know are going through menopause while their daughters navigate the teen years. That makes for emotional agony--and I'm not even talking about the poor men in their lives.

Here are some of the things the moms do when things are going well. They have shown me a great example and I hope that I do as well when I cross this bridge:

  1. They control their emotions. When it descends into a screaming match, the relationship looks more like two peers than a parent-child relationship. Actually, someone is in charge. It's the kid. And while the daughter claims to want to be in charge, that's generally B.S. She wants freedom, yes, but she doesn't want too much responsibility. Mom has to stay in control, otherwise no one has it.
  2. They keep their humor. Drinking and drugs help. Actually, no they don't. Sometimes the mood just gets too heavy and most of it is just comedic, not tragic. The happy, centered moms find the humor.
  3. They keep perspective. When a child says they hate you and can't wait to leave and knows all the soft spots and exploits them, it's difficult to keep perspective. It seems like this will go on forever. But it won't. One way or another, this will be over. At the very least, the kid will move out in a huff.
  4. They seek support. This seems to be a time where friends and familial support is crucial. Most people wouldn't go on a wilderness trek alone. Going through the teenage wasteland alone seems foolish, too. I'm watching and learning and I know exactly who I'll call when the time comes. One bonus to having kids later is that my friends will be done with it and enjoying grandkids (if their daughters have started speaking to them again). They can laugh at me and give me advice.
  5. They trust themselves and their daughters (within reason). Fundamentally, parents are terrified because of what they did at that age and because they fear they screwed up their kids and their kids will repeat their own mistakes. That might happen, and really, if a kid is hell-bent to destruction, there isn't much a parent can do to stop it. Most of the time, though, the mom did a good job and the daughter is a good kid.
  6. They aren't idiots. A friend of mine said that she hid a baby monitor in her teenage daughter's room. Her daughter never could figure out how her mom knew everything. Another friend installed software on her daughter's computer so she knew where her daughter was and what she was doing. Is it sneaky? Yes. Did the mothers have the information they needed to head off disasters? Yes. You can't parent and be a moron. If it is in your house, it's not off limits. Now this must tempered with wisdom. There is a fine line between concern and complete psychopathology. I have seen more than my share of narcissistic, manipulative, crazy parents who violated boundaries, and just generally made their kids lives hell. I'm not talking about that. It's called sense, though and it means paying attention.
  7. They take care of themselves. They are exercising and eating right and indulging in interests and doing what they love, thereby setting an example for their daughter. Their daughter is paying attention. A tired, crabby, overwhelmed mother models tired, crabby, unthinking coping mechanisms. Children, even teens reflect back what they see. In fact, one of the amusing things (from the outside), is hearing moms complain about their daughters. I have yet to see behavior from the daughter that isn't a perfect, if exaggerated, reflection of the mom's behavior. Yes, this terrifies me.
Moms of teenage girls deserve the same sort of sympathy mothers of freaked out toddlers get. The teenage brain and hormone system is changing at the same pace as a toddlers, it's just that the "baby" is in a nearly grown-up body and it throws everyone off. It helps for parents to remember this, too. That's why a mom will see the child swing from rational to hissy fit to rational in a span of hours, sometimes, minutes. Good diet is helpful here. (Keep in mind that carbs make blood sugar go up and down and moods often follow the sugar. Make sure your daughter is getting enough protein.) And make sure to let the kid sleep enough, too.

If nothing else, a woman I know said this about parenting teenagers, "This too shall pass."

Sunday, June 29, 2008


Took the kiddos to Wall*E today. It is not a kid's movie and yet they loved it. My daughter announced as it was finished, "I want to see it again!" So, did I. I'm still mulling the meaning of it and pondering the imagery, which is so rich and visually stimulating, it deserves a second and third look. (Trailers here.)

Imagine Bladerunner meets E.T. meets The Sound of Music. I'm serious. The setting is a dystopian science fiction backdrop of a ruined world. The flashing neon signs felt straight out of the darkness of Bladerunner. The plucky main character, even his gravelly voice and big expressive eyes, his sympathy, his cheerful task-orientation reminded me of E.T. And the love story, for this is what the movie really is, is pure romance along the lines of The Sound of Music.

Here's the negative, and one reviewer finds it a horrible negative, but he's in the minority: The villain, superficially, is the evil corporation Buy-n-Large or BNL. I don't know if Disney-Pixar is being ironic. I mean, who, besides Disney creates better, huge, artificial, commercial environments? I can't think of one. So, this corporation took over the world, created a mess and earth ends up trashed. Actually, it ends up a literal trash heap. So, you've got the environmentalism crap too. Still, the real villains are the stupid people. Humans, or is it Americans, are dumbasses....or can be fat, lazy and stupid. The question: can humans redeem themselves?

Pixar's robots are human, some good, some evil, and the humans lost their humanity somewhere in the hundreds of years of their cruise-ship-like existence when they had to escape Earth. Earth is desolate and deserted and Wall-E is alone in the world until he receives his first visitor--Eve. And from there, things get more interesting. Saving the world, saving humanity and saving love all factor into the wee story arc.

The movie sticks with me now and I'll be contemplating the implications for a long time. There's so much more I could tell you, but I won't. Except this: Go see the movie. It's the best movie I've seen in a long, long time.

Four/four stars.

Are We In A Global Recession or Depression?

It's so weird, the quality of the economy seems to be strange. The Malls are full and busy, but they must be slow in some places. If the oil bubble bursts will the economy just be bad or will the burst bubble cause people to be able to reallocate resources and build their businesses again and start having disposable income? That's where people are feeling it, I think, the extras--and just about everything but food and shelter is an "extra". Maxed Out Mama says:

The UK is now in the stage at which credit card spending is going up as people try to maintain living standards in the face of declining real incomes. This is the last gasp for the UK, and will end in a pretty strong downturn, because UK household debt cannot keep increasing at these levels. Please see the link for a piece of excellent analysis by Alice Cook. Bottom line, this is an inflation signature.

So what now? We have global correlations. I guess we all watch as oil rises every time stock markets drop on realistic expectations. It appears that oil speculation is the last refuge of idiots.

The entire world cannot support global growth based on nothing but spending increases in oil-exporting countries, so the game is over. The only question is whether we get a pretty strong global recession, or whether we get a global depression type event.
So, what's the answer? A friend is stocking up--on food, ammo, guns, generators, fuel, etc. Glenn Beck was recommending the same thing on his radio program which I thought interesting--not that anyone is getting their economic advice from him. 

I'd like concrete advice for hedging against inflation.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

So She Had A Bad Day

Can we all commiserate with Hillary Clinton just for a moment and consider how utterly galling it must have been to stand by her man, once again?

She's used to dancing and gazing. She's taken it to an art form, really, but still, yesterday had to suck for her.


Thursday, June 26, 2008

Annie Git Yer Gun--Even In D.C.

Via the Scotusblog:

Answering a 127-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Although times have changed since 1791, Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority, “it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

Justice Scalia’s opinion stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on carrying a concealed gun or on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, on laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, and laws putting conditions on gun sales. [Opinion here.]
Well, the solution to yesterday's problem, seems to be this: Keep your child with you at all times, arm yourself and shoot the f__________. (John won't let me use swear words. Sometimes they just fit.)

The thing that seem unfathomable to me is that four justices voted against this obviousness. Anyone who reads the constitution, sees the right to own a gun. Only lawyers twisting themselves into self-righteous pretzels could see this any other way.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Supreme Arrogance and Common Sense

Even Barack Obama feels the Supreme Court overreached with their asinine ruling where they came to the conclusion that there is a "cultural consensus" against capital punishment for child rapists. It seems that there's a cultural consensus, alright, and it is exactly opposite to the court's. Here is what Obama said:

Democrat Barack Obama said Wednesday he disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision outlawing executions of people who rape children, a crime he said states have the right to consider for capital punishment.

"I have said repeatedly that I think that the death penalty should be applied in very narrow circumstances for the most egregious of crimes," Obama said at a news conference. "I think that the rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances the death penalty is at least potentially applicable, that that does not violate our Constitution."

Well, duh. The constitution is clear. The justices are pushing for a situation where the death penalty is never permissible. I mean, if men who rape five year olds don't qualify to get a one-way ticket to meet their Maker, who does?

And to address the fear of "murdering the witness" should the death penalty be allowed.. The court doesn't seem to follow their own logic. What will happen is this: People will take the law into their own hands. When justice isn't swift or just, people get frustrated. And who would blame the guy who goes after the child rapists? And these guys are not exactly treated well in prison. That's not cruel and unusual? So the justices essentially condone street justice for these freaks.

Here's the consensus, since the justices seem to be breathing the same elite rarefied air: Normal, average people have children. They watch the news and know that there are depraved people who are incapable of rehabilitation. A person who can do these things to a child ceases to demonstrate any ability to function in society. Period. For the safety of the community, they need to be dead. I don't want my tax dollars feeding this animal. I don't want my tax dollars spent protecting him in prison. I want him dead. And I'm not alone. Every person I know, liberal or conservative feels the same way. I call that a consensus.

Some truths are so self-evident they are call common sense. The Supreme Court's decision yesterday demonstrated a decided lack of this increasingly rare trait. They also demonstrated that they have no problem taking legislative power as their own.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Democrats: A Blood Sugar Crisis At The Convention

No, no! You musn't touch the greasy food!

Eight years ago, or so, I went to a week-long retreat/seminar where all the food was "healthy". No sugar. No meat. Everything was vegetarian. Well. Let me tell you, by day three, people were getting hostile. There were some internationals there, and unused to the US they didn't have vehicles, so were stuck, helplessly enslaved to health.

Meanwhile, I had brought a stash. Plus, we had a car so we could replenish our naughty supplies which included everything from salted peanuts to Cokes to Twix bars and other forms of chocolaty goodness. Can you say cool kids? Yeah, for once in my nerdified life, I was a cool kid and I promise you, it is much more fun than being an orchestra geek.

So, I'm laughing about the suckahs who are going to the Democratic convention. It's going to be healthy, ya'll, and those Lefties will be even more angry than usual. Delicious!

Among them: No fried food. And, on the theory that nutritious food is more vibrant, each meal should include "at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white." (Garnishes don't count.) At least 70% of ingredients should be organic or grown locally, to minimize emissions from fuel burned during transportation. "One would think," says Mr. Burns, "that the Democrats in Denver have bigger fish to bake -- they have ruled out frying already -- than mandating color-coordinated pretzel platters."

Democrats say the point is to build habits that will endure long after the convention. To that end, the city has staged "greening workshops" attended by hundreds of caterers, restaurant owners and hotel managers. "It's the new patriotism," Mayor Hickenlooper says.
I'm giggling. I'm a chiropractor and I'm all for healthy food. But a bigger principle to me is that people can eat what they dang well please and attempts by self-righteous do-gooders to impose their utopian food fantasies is just plain annoying. Which is what I explained to my co-conspirators at the well-intentioned seminar of yore. Sure, I believe that eating healthy is great, but imposed rules grate on me like carrots on a shredder. It makes me want to eat a steak, guzzle a beer, have a potato chip and chase it with some chocolate cake while singing the Star Spangled Banner at a million decibles.

The Dem Convention is just amusing though. This is self-flaggelation of the highest order. Already Hillary's people will be hating Barack's gloating hoards. Take away their sugar and caffiene and make them eat three colors and it will be colorful alright! There will be fireworks. I can't wait!

Time For The Annual Pedicure

So I'm wondering what the tip should be considering my feet and toe nails haven't had TLC for over a year. It's almost impossible to be too generous, isn't it? The dastardly deed happens tonight. And I'm wondering about color choices, too. So indecisive. Actually, so really don't care, but I know since I'm a girl, I should care about the color, but I really don't so I end up with the same old red.

We won't even discuss the hair. That's a problem for another day.

Because A Child Rapist's Life Is Worth Saving

The Supreme Court issued another stellar ruling: It is "disproportionate" to take the life of a child rapist. That would be cruel and unusual punishment. As opposed to what the child endured, which falls into the category "lucky to be alive". Lucky, lucky child! Here is a sampling of the reasoning: (Opinion here.)

Part of the Court’s rationale for nullifying a death sentence for raping a child was that the child victim gets enlisted, perhaps repeatedly, to recount the crime, forcing on the child “a moral choice” that the youngster is not mature enough to make. “The way the death penalty here involves the child victim in its enforcement can compromise a decent legal system,” Justice Kennedy wrote.
More here. Ann Althouse notes Alito's dissent:
ADDED: In dissent, Justice Alito (joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia and Thomas) emphasizes the breadth of the decision:
The Court today holds that the Eighth Amendment categorically prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for the crime of raping a child. This is so, according to the Court, no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator’s prior criminal record may be. The Court provides two reasons for this sweeping conclusion: First, the Court claims to have identified “a national consensus” that the death penalty is never acceptable for the rape of a child; second, the Court concludes, based on its “independent judgment,” that imposing the death penalty for child rape is inconsistent with “ ‘the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.’ ”

Leaving aside that gem, the Court took more rights from the state to punish as they see fit. Taking away states rights has become a disturbing trend of the Supreme Court.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Summer Is Here And Let's Face It, We're Tired Of These Guys

This campaign season could not have been more fatiguing. As much fun as it was to watch the sissy fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, it's over now. As an aside, I've had to chuckle about the talk of the "brutal campaign season". What? The Democratic primary candidates hardly disagreed policy-wise and when things got to stressful, Hillary cried and Obama lamented the "distraction" and demanded an apology. What a bunch of weenies. It's not like we were watching Lincoln and Douglas or anything.

So now, we have what we have. Looking at the candidates, one can only sigh and ask, "Is this the best we could do?" Since the answer seems to be yes, and that in itself is depressing, might as well enjoy the lovely weather outside and ignore the bleak implications of either a McCain or Obama candidacy (and this post will make my friend mad who thinks everyone should be enthusiastically rallying to McCain's banner, to which I responded, "isn't it enough that I'm going to hold my nose and vote for this man?" Evidently not.).

I'm wondering about how you're spending your time these days.

Now that the Democratic primary is over, I'm spending .....
more time looking at political blogs
less time looking at politcal blogs
about the same amount of time looking at political blogs free polls
Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Climate Cultists

The world could end tomorrow....for you. Hell, it could end today. That's right, every moment you're living, you're avoiding the apocalypse and have escaped the inevitable doom all humans face. It's called death and it's appointed to all of us.

Christians though, believe that a catastrophic end is inevitable, and through the ages, different dates and times have been set. Currently, people are nervous because the Mayan calendar ends in 2012. The Dutch seem to be particularly concerned:

The Dutch-language de Volkskrant newspaper said it spoke to thousands of believers in the impending end of civilization, and while theories on the supposed catastrophe varied, most tied the 2012 date to the end of the Mayan calendar, Radio Netherlands reported Monday.

De Volkskrant said many of those interviewed are stocking up on emergency supplies, including life rafts and other equipment.

Some who spoke to the newspaper were optimistic about the end of civilization.

"You know, maybe it's really not that bad that the Netherlands will be destroyed," Petra Faile said. "I don't like it here anymore. Take immigration, for example. They keep letting people in. And then we have to build more houses, which makes the Netherlands even heavier. The country will sink even lower, which will make the flooding worse."
Earlier this year, some Russians holed up in caves and had to come out for health reasons. They'd be spared from the coming darkness while you suckers got torched. Last month, an American cult leader, convinced that he is one of the two witnesses (his wife is the other one, evidently) of Revelation fame, came back from Israel without embarrassment when the world didn't end according to his predictions.

At the one end of the spectrum, there's the manipulative cultists preparing for the world's end. Lead by a narcissistic and ego-driven (usually) man the one truth that can be counted on is this: his followers will make him very rich. Money seems to go hand-in-hand with the absolute power the disciples cede to the cult leader.

While I have a visceral dislike for cults generally, I figure the biggest harm is to the followers themselves. They usually turn on their families and give enormous amounts of cash to some idiot, but oh well. That's their choice and they are usually adhering to some fairly strict dogma which can make them decent citizens if they're following the Bible. As long as they aren't interested in imposing their skewed worldview on everyone else, they can worship how they want. It's a free country.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are secular cultists. Big sums of money, emotionalism, exclusionary status, gurus, saviors, and dogma define these guys as much as the "christianists" they like to mock. Maxed Out Mama says this:
Well, actually, I haven't seen the Pope demanding that those who are sure that God doesn't exist be put on trial. That's why I think this brand of climate science is a cult. It's not just a religion, it's a cult. And on DU, there are some true believers:
7. We're talking about CRIMES against humanity, the planet - billions of lives are at stake

Spreading doubt about climate change IS a crime, IMHO. Climate change is a PROVEN FACT, and unless we take immediate steps to rein it in, will kill BILLIONS of people over the next century. That doesn't even begin to take into account the countless species that will become EXTINCT.

This isn't about free speech. The time for debate is OVER, there is no more debate - how can you debate something that is a proven scientific fact? But unlike the "debate" over evolution, this one is going to have deadly consequences.
Darned if I know whether to laugh or cry. Hundreds of years of the Enlightenment dumped in one fell swoop.

Maybe there will be a transcript to which we can refer for the real story. I've explained as simply as possible why I believe the IPCC runaway CO2-forced warming theory is falsified, but I'd never claim that people who disagree with me should be tried for crimes against humanity!!!
Here's the problem with the global warming zealots: they don't believe in God or divine law or an overarching morality. They are god, they make the law and it is their morality that counts. In addition, not only do they want to adhere to their wacked out belief system they want to impose it on everyone.

The scary part: it's working.

In the absence of a cogent belief system, any old idea will march in take roost. Because so much is on the line and because no real Savior is coming, according to the secularists, they toss out reason to believe in a man, a myth, a legend. So Obama gets messianic status. Global warming is the religion of true believers. And socialism is the saving grace of humanity.

Christianity can be misused and abused and as the world gets more topsy-turvy, cults will abound. The absence of God has not been the presence of scientific enlightenment, unfortunately. Just the contrary. The Climate Cultists prove that.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Who Cares What Don Imus Says?

Does it matter that a talk radio host is racist? I'm serious. Howard Stern has made a good living, um, exploiting sex and weirdos and everything and everyone else. Now, Don Imus has supposedly waded into racist waters again, although it seems that his words were misinterpreted. But let's just say he did say something racist, does it matter?

Mike Nizza asks:

So what is at work here, folks? Have Americans all lost the ability to detect sarcasm (the subject of this excellent science story)? Is Don Imus guilty of racism? Was this episode the calculated controversy-stirring of a veteran shock jock, meant to split the debate in two? Or is his on-air transformation complete, from a voice that was outrageously racially insensitive to one that is quite sensitive indeed?
Bah! Who cares? Don Imus is free to spout his opinions and people are free to listen--or not. That Al Sharpton get's his boxers in a bundle or that Pacman Jones even responds at all gives the talk show host a bigger platform than he deserves.

The bigger concern is that Americans have lost their humor. Every moment in time has taken on the breath-taking gravity of a near-death experience. Life is all so serious. Between the economy, oil prices, race, sex, gender, age, fatness, whales, trees, birds in nests, abuse, flu, weather and all the rest, there is no topic that is safe to laugh at anymore. The lack of laughter demonstrates a distressing loss of perspective.

People can choose to see tragedy or comedy. It's more fun to laugh. If Don Imus makes you laugh, listen. If he gets on your nerves, turn the dial. In the meantime, it would be nice if the hysteria were taken down a notch. Life is pretty good. And even when it sucks, there is something to laugh at.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Nutters In Nests

My friend in Oakland insists that I don't have the big picture. Oh, I have it alright.

Monday, June 23, 2008

Bush Was Right

Liberals were wrong. History will be kind to George W. Bush.

Chinese Deal With Recalcitrant Muslims

The government gets peeved, they plow down the mosque. Ya gotta hand it to communists, they can be efficient when they want to be. Gateway Pundit muses, "Obviously, the Chinese could care less about the reaction from radical Islamists over the demolition."

I'm wondering how brave radical Islamists will be in going after the Chinese government. The Chinese seem pretty confident.

Big Breakfast, Lose Weight

Makes sense. The key my furry friends is good fat (a little) and protein. It fills you up and gives you long term energy. So, slow down and have some eggs for breakfast. You'll feel better all day and eat less too.

More Biased Reporting--UPDATED


The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a plea by environmental groups to rein in the Bush administration's power to waive laws and regulations to speed construction of a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.


James Lileks sums up the modern press:
It is amusing, really – after sticking people’s heads in the muck every day for years, promoting every faddish scare, fluffing the pillow beneath every yuppie worry, swapping the straight-forward adult approach to news with presenters who emote the copy with the sad face of a day-care worker telling the children that Barney is dead – in short, after decades of presenting the world through the peculiar prism that finds in every day more evidence of our rot and our failures, they wonder why people are depressed. Hang the banner, guys: Mission Accomplished.

Whales Lose Supreme Court Case and the NYT Laments and Gnashes Teeth

Check out the first paragraph of David Stout's opinion piece, I mean, hard-hitting New York Time's reportage:
The Supreme Court sided with the White House on Monday in two cases involving national security and worries about the environment, strengthening the Bush administration’s drive, at least for now, for sweeping executive powers in the post-9/11 world.
"At least for now..". Sounds ominous, David. When Democrats run things and put whale-loving justices on the Supreme Court, all will be good. Hold on, Mr. Stout, with Obama it will all be better soon. And here is what has got Mr. Stout so upset:

In the sonar case, the justices said they would review a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which on Feb. 27 upheld most of a lower court ruling that banned high-powered sonar within 12 miles of the coast. Environmental groups had sued to block the use of the sonar because they feared harm to whales and dolphins.

The Bush administration has argued that the sonar training exercises, used to practice tracking of hostile submarines, are vital to national defense, that the possible harm to marine life was being exaggerated and that, in any event, military need should take precedence over the welfare of water creatures.

“This is an issue that is essential to national security, and we welcome the Supreme Court’s decision to review this case,” Lt. Sean Robertson, a Navy spokesman, told The Associated Press.

Southern California’s coastal waters are home to dozens of species of whales, dolphins, seals and sea lions, including nine species that are federally listed as endangered or threatened. Marine biologists have said the sonar in question generates extreme pressure that can disorient and injure the creatures, disrupting their feeding and mating schedules and causing injuries. The Navy has insisted that it takes adequate protective measures, but the Natural Resources Defense Council disagreed, and sued to stop the tests.

The government and military hates children and animals. And the Supreme Court sided with the haters! It's just all too much. In addition, the Supremes said that the government doesn't have to do environmental studies for every portion of the desolate desert that separates the U.S. and Mexico. The administration has unfettered ability to put up that blankety-blank fence. Horrors!

So many things jump out at me from this stupid article. First, the writer doesn't even attempt neutrality. He makes no pretense whatsoever about his bias and just hangs it out there for all to see. This is the New York Times, people, the paper of record. Second, could the outrage be directed at anything sillier? I mean, come on. The Navy shouldn't be able to do sonar maneuvers that would be vital, I should think, should the West-coasters want a decent defense if they're ever attacked. And who would scream the loudest if a fleet of Chinamen stormed Malibu? Third, about the fence and environmental studies. Anyone who has been along the border of Mexico and the U.S. knows it ain't the loveliest terrain. What the hell is there to protect environmentally? Good grief. I get not wanting to hurt whales and dolphins and I'm guessing the Navy doesn't want to. But what is out there in the vast sandy emptiness that needs to be protected?

Soon, though, David Stout will be psyched. Obama will win, put up justices who love babies and animals and the world will be a less mean place. I get weepy thinking about it, but not for the reason Stout does.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

High Gas Prices Cause Parents To Murder Children

Murderous impulses abound these days. In Houston, children seem to be particularly vulnerable to their parent's frustration. It's a new phenomenon, really, child abuse, and the local government officials are grasping for reasons what has so recently gone horribly wrong. The Houston Chronicle's Dane Schiller reports:

With word Saturday that yet another parent was implicated in an attack on his children — police say he led them to the partially burned bodies — there was a feeling that something is horribly wrong with some families in the Greater Houston metropolitan area.

"Whether it is high gas prices or people not happy with their jobs or whatever, we have got a lot of anger and violence in our society, way too much, particularly family violence," Houston Councilman Peter Brown said.

Later, another expert gives his explanation:

Still, Klineberg said, they speak to growing stress for families, including the challenge of making ends meet.

"It is tough out there. People snap," he said. "And when you have 6 million people, one or two are going to snap in a bad way."

A few years ago, Andrea Yates drowned her kids in a bathtub. The gas prices were a moderate sub $2.00/gallon. Houston didn't want for violence in 2005 and gas prices were fantastic.

Houston's unemployment rate was higher in 2006 than it is now, so murders should be lower now. And maybe they are. You won't find this out from the local press, though, because it doesn't fit the narrative. And what is the narrative? The economy is horrible. Life is horrible. Gas prices are high, oil companies are bad and that's horrible.

Oh wait, when looking at the numbers, though, murders were up in 2006, but it wasn't unemployment, it was the fine folks from New Orleans. As those yahoos got put in the clink, the murder rate declined in 2007. And looky here:

HPD officials say that the City of Houston has recorded the fewest numbers of murders for the first quarter of this year since 2005.

The unofficial numbers show 78 murders were recorded through the first three months of this year.nThere were 88 murders for the same period in 2007. That’s an 11.3 percent decrease.

Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt said the decline shows that the department’s targeted crime initiatives and overtime programs throughout the city are paying off. “While murders are nearly impossible crimes to predict and prevent, we do feel our overtime programs in place, including those officers assigned to our Crime Reduction Unit, can impact crimes that could escalate to murder,” said Chief Hurtt.

Wow, those are dramatic numbers and not at all the impression one gets from reading something like Dan Schiller put together. The notion that there are always going to be nutso crazies killing their kids doesn't occur to these people. What occurs to them is that it's politically expedient to exploit a child's horrific death at the hands of a parent and blame......the latest trend.

Whether it be Twinkies (really depression) or oil or the economy or global warming or fill-in-the-blank excuse, according to Leftists no one is responsible for his murderous impulses and it's always worse Right Now! because it fits the latest trendy, alarmist call to action. It's stupid. I hope no one is paying attention to them.

Oh wait, they're not.

H/T Rorschach

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Obama's Grandiosity

I was watching a rerun of Saturday Night Live where the comedian playing Campbell Brown actually orgasms on camera during an Obama debate answer. I don't think it was parody. The press is beyond parody.

As sickening as the press' weepy adoration can be, though, it doesn't approach the emetic power of Obama's autophilia. Cassy Fiano went to the Obamassiah's website and found his interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. So, now, Obama has his own re-worked presidential seal which Mickey Kaus notes (via Glenn Reynolds):

Is Obama's new faux-presidential, alternative-reality seal his "Mission Accomplished"? If you wanted to emphasize to voters that the Democrats' nominee is a bit stuck up, it would be hard to do better. I suppose he could start requiring reporters to stand when he enters the room. ... The seal probably started out as a bit of fun. But unless David Axelrod is insane, the thing will never be seen again. .. 2:15 A.M.
and, Obama wants history to start now, with him. Cassy says:

I especially love the line “the first presidential election truly funded by the people”. In that sentence, Barack Obama is smearing every single former President as illegitimate. Amazing. It’s as if Obama is actually starting to believe the hype, that he’s starting to actually see himself as the Obamamessiah. And I have to wonder, does he really believe that every other President was not funded by the people? Does he really think that? With that sentence, he’s painting even our Founding Fathers as swindlers and con-artists who cheated the people to get the Presidency, and himself as the benevolent Savior breaking away from that tradition.

I don't think that Obama is just believing the hype. He's been high on his own noxious emissions for a long time now. He's becoming more, well, exhibitionistic, since he's ostensibly clinched the Democratic nomination. Before it's all over, the emperor will be running around naked and doing back bends while in discussions with Ahmedinejad so we can appreciate him in his unfettered, diplomatic glory.

Obama is his own hope he can believe in.

What Up?

This weekend I've been working on the new blog. It is going to be so cool when it's done, but we're a little way away from finishing it up. The guy working on it, Daniel, is a saint. When it's finished, I'm going to write and tell you what I put him through and how he has surpassed all expectations. Truly, if you need your blog or website worked on, Dan is The Man.

FYI, I'm moving over to WordPress and using Hosting Matters and so far, I love both. I use MoveableType with John Hawkin's blog Right Wing News and don't like it as much. Of course, I'm not a programming guru. No one uses Basic anymore. So, take my opinion for what it's worth and it aint' worth much. Thanks for the push Rachel and Cassy! (Dan did Cassy's work, too, that's how I found him.)

Saturday, June 21, 2008

High Gas Prices Are Turning More Consumers Into Criminals

I am not freaking kidding. MSNBC's national news blames oil prices for making people criminals. My brother said, "Next up, unemployment turns more people into armed robbers." And the genius they quoted said, "stolen fuel costs the industry $140 million last year, and I expect it to go up this year." Ya think? I mean gas prices have doubled. If less gas gets stolen this year, and this is a stretch because I was public school educated, it will still cost the industry more money. Sometimes I'm so impressive. I can't help it.

And there isn't a direct link for this stupidity because it's not on their website yet.

Thank God Abortion Is Legal

I mean, if it were illegal, people would prey on women and women would be harmed by untrained people posing as medical personnel:

The owner of a clinic has been charged with posing as a doctor to perform abortions, some of them unsuccessful or resulting in severe complications and hospitalization, prosecutors said Friday.

Bertha Pinedo Bugarin, 48, was arrested Thursday after a yearlong investigation, San Diego County district attorney spokesman Paul Levikow said.
She was charged with 10 felony counts, including performing medical procedures without a license and grand theft, he said. She faces more than nine years in prison if convicted.

Bugarin, who was being held on $500,000 bail, was scheduled to be arraigned July 2. An call to her attorney Peter Hughes after business hours Friday was not immediately returned.

Prosecutors said Bugarin at one time operated six clinics in Southern California that provided abortions. For her clinic in Chula Vista, near the Mexican border, she advertised her service on Spanish-language television and charged $500 for an abortion.
Wow, America dodged a bullet. Legal abortion makes everyone safe.

Get The Girl With Blogging

Hey, it'd work for me!

Friday, June 20, 2008

Houston Is #1

Yeah, baby!

Nobody's An A@@hole Anymore

Sorry, folks, that's rather raw, but whatever. A friend was telling me about her troubles with her man and suggested that the guy had "manic-depression". I responded, "How about, he's just an a@@hole?" I mean, come on. Why the need to pathologize everything and everyone?

Ace points to this research that men with this "dark triad" get more women:

A "dark triad" of unpleasant personality traits lie behind James Bond's success as a womaniser, say researchers.

Two studies suggest that men who are narcissistic, psychopathic and Machiavellian tend to have large numbers of sexual conquests.


Narcissists are self obsessed and manipulative, psychopaths are impulsive, thrill-seeking and callous, and people with a Machiavellian nature are deceitful and exploitative. There is evidence that the traits have an up-side - they lead to men having a prolific sex life and fathering more offspring. As a result, they have not been "weeded out" by natural selection.

Oh, and the research subjects were 200 college-age men not 50 year old 007 types. You know, the dudes who have sex with as many women as possible, will say anything to get laid and just generally seek conquest are at first worshipped, then they are viewed as dicks, and then they end up being viewed as just plain lame. I mean, it's one thing to be that guy in college. It's another thing to be, well, an old dude hanging out at the bar this way.

Narcissistic? Psychopathic? Machiavellian? How about pathetic a@@hole? Forget the elaborate research and diagnoses. Some people are just jerks. The need to pathologize is the need to shoe-horn anti-social, jerk behavior into evolutionary theory. These guys mess up the theory. They're uncooperative. They're self-seeking. So, in theory their behavior would open them up to harm because they are, well, a@@holes who no one likes and no one wants to help.

But the researchers miss the obvious. These thrill-seeking dudes can channel their testosterone into noble roles--killing lions, making heroic treks, winning feats of strength. So these guys spread their seed, but they were often warriors and maybe even general protectors like 007 even if they didn't commit to one unit to protect. So they're jerks, but maybe they have some redeeming characteristics which is why they have yet to be weeded out of the gene pool. Ace says:

Shock: Dicks Get More Tail.

Psychopathy? Really?

It actually sounds like this is just extroverted sociopathy or even just plain old being a bastard. They really seem to be overselling the "dark triad' thing with that "psychopathy." Isn't it enough to be sociopathic without wanting to butcher people and wear their genitals as hats?

Nerdy researchers, I have a newsflash: These guys survive and will continue to thrive. Psychologically "normal" guys often finish last. It sucks, sorry.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Comparing Obama and Limbaugh

Ann Althouse does and says this:

I'm inclined to say Rush is wrong, but I note that he's only asking a series of questions, so I can't. I'll have to say that, ironically, Rush is a bit like Obama, wandering aimlessly for syllabic combinations that will equal a cogent, salient thought. Both men mesmerize their listeners and move them along on a current of verbiage.
Well. Limbaugh is a radio personality and entertainer. His schtick is his ability to craft a sentence and provoke. Obama's ability to "mesmerize" and "move them along on a current of verbiage" is a little more distressing because the President actually has to stand for something as he will represent the country. Limbaugh represents his capitalistic imperative. More power to him, but he won't be representing me or America or defining foreign policy or imposing government solutions. (And I'm not saying that Althouse believes this, only that the comparison seems odd. Liberals pick fights with Limbaugh all the time--and Ann is no liberal. The compare and contrast should be with McCain.)

Believing Barack--UPDATED

We can expect more tap dancing on a grand scale from a future President Obama based on his response to the women banned from his photo op the other day. Gateway Pundit via Debbie Schlussel finds that the women are not sweet little Muslim girls who were discriminated against by Obama but rather radical anti-Israel activists and friends. That's interesting enough, but it's Obama's response to these two yahoos that's more interesting. When CAIR suggested he personally call them and apologize, he did.

Obama stepped in it over the unpartitioned Jerusalem and backtracked. Obama just generally seems befuddled a lot. Like most politicians, he'll say anything to anyone for one reason: to get elected. Perhaps the most disturbing thing about this though, is that no one will believe him. People need to believe the word of the Commander-in-Chief.

George W. Bush is hated because of his policies and because of his beliefs. He also has the temerity to follow through with his word. So, conservatives are angry about illegal immigration and No Child Left Behind, but can anyone act surprised? Bush did what he said he was going to do.

Barack Obama says anything to anyone. As President, he's preside like he's campaigning: appeasing everyone. It worked for Bill Clinton, but this is not Bill Clinton's world. America, for all the Left's denial, is at war and will still be in November should the Savior take the helm. Tough decisions requiring coherent ideas will make enemies. Maybe, at that point, Obama won't care. I suspect he won't. He will have won the prize and that's the goal. America's standing is secondary to the symbolic magnificence of Obama in the White House.

He appeases now. He will appease later. It's a disturbing thought.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News


Right Wing Sparkle notes how the Brits see Obama:

My guess is that British voters would really prefer a dual presidency, with Obama handling domestic policy and McCain in charge of foreign policy. Obama could make America more like Britain with universal, government-managed health care; higher taxes on the "rich" and on capital gains; expanded social services; trade unions made more powerful; continued preferences for blacks seeking university places and government jobs; gay marriage or some variant thereof; abortion on demand.

He goes on to describe what McCain would do in foreign policy, but has anyone in America ever described so well Obama's domestic policy????

Simple, brief, and completely scary.
I think it's safe to believe this is what Obama wants domestically. And it is completely scary.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Babies For Love

This is what the world is coming to:

There's a stunning twist to the sudden rise in teen pregnancies at Gloucester High School. Seventeen students there are expecting and many of them became that way on purpose.

Time Magazine first reported that nearly half of the girls confessed to making a pact to get pregnant and raise their babies together. None of them is older than 16.

Schools Superintendent Christopher Farmer told WBZ's Bill Shields Thursday the girls had "an agreement to get pregnant."
No parents of the 17 girls were interviewed. What causes a peer group to come up with such a self-defeating scheme? The Superintendent says the girls "lacked love". Teenagers can be mind-numbingly stupid, though. It seems to me that at least a few of these girls had loving families. It's possible that they all had uncaring parents but I doubt it.

I'm putting this one to a vote. It just seems too crazy.

The PRIMARY reason the pregnancy pact happened is because:
The girls lacked love
Peer pressure
Little supervision
Oversexed culture
Teenagers are stupid
The girls lacked a moral foundation
Media's glorification of sex free polls
Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Testosterone Supplementation To Stay Young Feeling and Healthy

Testosterone does good things for a body, both male and female. It increases bone density, muscle mass, mental acuity, increases metabolism, enhances libido and according to this research, fights against metabolic syndrome in older men. So researchers are encouraging older men to supplement with testosterone.

Futurepundit (via Instapundit)worries about the evolutionary implications of declining testosterone in older men and that it might be a protective adaptation against diseases like cancer (since hormones, especially testosterone and estrogen can be tumor growth factors). Maybe.

Testosterone, for men, is the defining, healthy hormone just as progesterone, is the defining, healthy hormone for women. For both men and women the ratio of testosterone:estrogen and the ratio of progesterone:estrogen changes as they age. In both cases, estrogen increases proportionally. Part of it is age. Part of it is diet. Part of it is environmental. Estrogens are everywhere in the environment--from plastics to soy. Fat stores and releases estrogen. Estrogen, in and of itself, isn't bad, but it can be problematic when it's in the wrong proportion to testosterone and progesterone.

So, men can supplement with testosterone and women can supplement with progesterone and testosterone, too, for that matter, and this will happen: the body will down-regulate. That is, the body will stop producing as much testosterone and progesterone in response to the supplementation. This happens with all hormones which is why, once a person is on Synthroid, (synthetic thyroid hormone) he or she is on it for life. The body will stop producing it.

Now, there are vegetable-based hormone replacements that are less manipulative of the system and they can give the body a rest to recover, but the ideal is to produce these hormones oneself without the aid of supplementation. The answer to hormone balance is simple, but no one wants to do it because it's certainly not as easy as a supplement:

  1. Lose the fat. Fat produces the estrogens. Lose the fat, the hormone ratio gets better.
  2. Build muscle. Especially lower body muscle. Muscle growth produces testosterone.
  3. Eat right. You know what that means. Everyone knows what that means. Lean protein. Eggs. Veggies. Good fats like butter and olive oil and flax. Skip fast food. Skip soda. Skip fried food. Drink alcohol moderately. Drink coffee moderately. Eat chocolate moderately.
  4. Keep moving. It's not just the muscle, it's the metabolic rate. Aerobic exercise burns off the stress hormones that cause you to accumulate fat in the first place (which stores estrogen). So work up a sweat a couple days a week.
  5. Get some sun. Without Vitamin D, all sorts of bad things happen. Increased bone density helps a person carry more muscle mass which helps increase the metabolic rate. See how these things work together?
Unfortunately, as people age, they become more sedentary which itself creates risk factors for Metabolic Syndrome. I have read articles by doctors who have been on long-term supplementary testosterone themselves, and they seem perfectly healthy. I have had patients (women actually) who have supplemented, short term with testosterone, for weight loss. The usage is going up. People are making experiments of themselves.

I suspect that it will be agreed that testosterone has salubrious effects for men and women short term, but like supplementary estrogen, the long-term effects won't become apparent until after years of use. Manipulating mother nature usually has a downside even if it's not immediately apparent.

What would I recommend to my patients? Well, short term use could be beneficial, but long term, the advice would be the same old boring stuff: lose weight, get fit and eat right.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

What Parents of Special Needs Kids Worry About

We all hear the stories of sexual abuse, and unfortunately, it happens too often. Parents of autistic children in particular worry about this because the child, if he or she is non-verbal, can't express what happened. So this story (via John Hawkins) is particularly egregious:

Leduc's weird tale began on May 30, when she dropped young Victoria off for class at Terry Fox Elementary and headed in to work, only to receive a frantic phone call from the school telling her it was urgent she come back right away.

The frightened mother rushed back to the campus and was stunned by what she heard - the principal, vice-principal and her daughter's teacher were all waiting for her in the office, telling her they'd received allegations that Victoria had been the victim of sexual abuse - and that the CAS had been notified.

How did they come by such startling knowledge? Leduc was incredulous as they poured out their story.

"The teacher looked and me and said: 'We have to tell you something. The educational assistant who works with Victoria went to see a psychic last night, and the psychic asked the educational assistant at that particular time if she works with a little girl by the name of "V." And she said 'yes, I do.' And she said, 'well, you need to know that that child is being sexually abused by a man between the ages of 23 and 26.'"

Victoria, who is non-verbal, had also been exhibiting sexualized behaviour in class, actions which are known to be typical of autistic behavior. (See other typical actions here) That lead authorities to suspect she had a bladder infection that may have somehow been related to the 'attack.'

Leduc was shaken by the idea. "It's actually your worst nightmare your child being violated," she admits. "So for them to even suggest that, and that be my worst nightmare, it was horrific."

So, then, the mother is investigated by CPS, but thankfully she had proof to back herself up. She bought a GPS system that records, non-stop, all sounds around the child because the school had "lost" her child a couple times.

A psychic? You'd be surprised, right, but you've dealt with the public school system or heard the stories, so nothing is shocking. The teacher won't be fired. The assistant teacher won't be fired. The principal won't be fired. The school district won't pay for the education the child needs.

The school district will dedicate its resources to defend against this woman's lawsuit when the same amount of money, or less, could help her child. You see, the policy is to deny, deny, deny, because if they help one child, they'd have to help them all. So no children will get adequately helped, or will get the bare minimum of assistance and it will be couched in ARDs as the "least restrictive environment" which is code for--we don't want to pay. And parents have no choice. They're stuck. Private schools are under no obligation to take on a special needs child. And the private schools that specialize in helping these kids are expensive.

John says, "If we had a voucher system, Colleen Leduc could simply send her kid to a private school that isn't run by complete morons." Well, the money would be a start. Public schools are woefully deficient at dealing with these children. It's a problem nationally. There simply just isn't the training or desire to be trained to deal with children outside the mean.

I've been to continuing ed seminars for teachers dealing with autism. The level of apathy among the teachers was appalling. The parents in attendance, took it all in. In fact, while the teachers ignored the speaker (who happened to be one of the brightest thinkers and a leader in autism education), I was learning and went home and taught my son how to speak that week. The information was good, but you can't teach someone who thinks she knows everything or who just doesn't care.

And out there, there are amazing teachers, wonderful teachers who are underpaid, overworked and unappreciated. That's the problem with public education. A teacher can phone it in or can work and care, she gets paid the same. She can be dull-witted and show zero judgment and still get paid. It's almost impossible for her to get fired.

What a mess. On the word of a stupid assistant teacher's psychic, a woman and her child can be completely traumatized, meanwhile, there's the little problem of the child not being educated.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Why Blog?

I dunno.....'cuz I wanna?

Well, TigerHawk talks about the friends he's made and I agree. Perhaps the most amazing thing to happen through blogging has been making friends with some of the smartest, kindest, funniest, and most interesting people. It's like being in college and enjoying all the diverse people, minus the buttheads (check that, there's buttheads in the blogosphere, I just don't have to smell them--wait, that sounds really bad) and roommates (actually, I had good roommates, so I can't complain), so it's way better.

Also, I like sharing ideas and honing them, too. People smarter than me correct my stinkin' thinkin' and that makes me smarter--well, a little.

The money generally sucks, but I make my own hours and can work with a toddler sitting on my head which is a bonus.

Do Some'in

Is that how Brit Brit would spell it? I dunno. Anyway, this oil business can be solved. You can help. Go here and make a "bit" of a difference.

Shoot me now. I've employed way over the limit of puns today. Had to wedge that in there. Darn you, John NOT F. Kerry!

The First Sacrifice On Obama's Altar: Giving Up Impure Thoughts

Oh, there will be many sacrifices. If the Dems have their way, teensy things like taking over private companies in the oil industry (because it's worked so well for Russia and Venezuela) and socializing medicine will be the new and better way, because the government never f@cks up anything they touch. Nosirreee, the government is super fantastic awesome!

There will be joy at the oil prices because well, middle class people can walk to work or take public transportation, never mind that there isn't transportation in the suburb where they live. Suburbs are suboptimal anyway. I mean, real people live in the cities and don't birth children. It's the lame people's fault for being breeders and being so stupid. Stop having kids and use something besides incandescent bulbs, people. And stop eating cheeseburgers and driving your SUV, pigs. Loving thoughts like that.

So, there will be that. There will be the little thing of saving the world with some sweet, huggy love. It will get even better, though, because it won't be enough to control business, your personal life and your way of life. No, your very thoughts and words will have to comply, friends, because there are good thoughts and there are bad thoughts and bad thoughts and ideas are not acceptable. Jeff Goldstein shares one example of an ideological debate that really isn't about ideas at all, you can go read the details, and concludes:

As progressivism moves forward, free speech will almost surely be murdered on the altar of political correctness — if only because that ploy rids progressives of the messy business of having to deal with what they consider unpleasant and untoward opposition to their ideas.

Which they can only do because they believe their ideas are inherently right and just by virtue of their holding them.

Circular and dangerous, but the state of nature in this, Obama’s America.

Well, it's not Obama's America, yet, but it's disturbing how many freedoms Americans seem willing to give up for the false security progressives promise but have never, since Marx himself, delivered.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

AP: Turnabout Is Fair Play

So the AP doesn't want bloggers to use their content without paying. Remember when you were in college and wrote a paper and quoted an AP newspaper article and gave credit? That's called fair use and it's not copyright infringement. It's quoting with attribution. Bloggers do this all the time. AP doesn't like it and want to charge bloggers per word. It's hilarious, but they're serious. Seriously stupid.

Michelle Malkin would like to charge AP for using her material without attribution and no link--a serious violation of blogger ethics. You'll notice, that when I quote someone or appreciate their take, I link it. Major newspapers don't seem to feel bound by this same courtesy. They are above the insignificant bloggers but have no problem lifting material. Michelle says:

Ok, let’s play. Tongue planted firmly in cheek, of course. Unlike the AP, bloggers appreciate getting linked and excerpted. That is how we roll in the 21st century.
But let’s apply AP standards for the hell of it. I have found two recent examples of the AP quoting from this blog without linking to the quoted posts or obtaining my consent for a usage agreement. In April, AP quoted from the comment thread in this post about Absolut’s Aztlan vodka ad:
More than a dozen calls to boycott Absolut were posted on, a Web site operated by conservative columnist Michelle Malkin. The ads sparked heated comment on a half-dozen other Internet sites and blogs.
“In an Absolut world, a company that produces vodka fires its entire marketing department in a desperate attempt to win back enraged North American customers after a disastrous ad campaign backfires,” a person using the moniker “SalsaNChips” wrote on Malkin’s Web site.
That’s 42 words. Cha-ching-ching-ching.
The old media is dying and they think this will breath life into them. Ace has a novel solution.

I have a solution: Never again link to the AP, don't read anything from the AP and exclusively read original content on the Web or from writers.

Thong-Induced Injuries Deserves Class Action Status

Some things are inevitable, you just wonder why it took so long:

As she was attempting to put on a Victoria's Secret thong, a Los Angeles woman claims that a decorative metallic piece flew off the garment and struck her in the eye, causing injuries and a new product liability lawsuit against the underwear giant. Macrida Patterson, 52, alleges that she was hurt last May by a defective "low-rise v-string" from the Victoria's Secret "Sexy Little Thing" line, according to a lawsuit filed last week in Los Angeles Superior Court. A copy of her June 9 complaint, which does not specify monetary damages, can be found below. Patterson's lawyer, Jason Buccat, told TSG that a "design problem" caused the decorative piece to come loose and strike Patterson in the eye, causing damage to her cornea. He added that the eye injury, which caused Patterson to miss a few days of work, will be "affecting her the rest of her life."
Most women I know have been injured by thongs. Besides the physical damage, there's the humiliation of knowing that she's willfully put a clothing garment in her butt crack ostensibly to avoid a lesser disaster: the dreaded panty lines. Men wouldn't wear a bra. Men wouldn't wear high heels. Men wouldn't wear panty hose. And men certainly wouldn't wear thongs. It's a conspiracy to create a perpetual state of discomfort and misery in the fairer sex.

This lawsuit deserves a lot more attention. Women of the world unite! Bring Victoria's Secret down for being the purveyors of a clothing product that has complete disregard for human health and dignity.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Antipsychotics Up Death In Those With Dementia

Antipsychotics should be given to psychotic and schizophrenic people. Period:

Antipsychotic drugs aren't specifically approved to treat dementia. They're mainly used to treat patients with schizophrenia. But people with dementia sometimes suffer delusions or hallucinations and may exhibit violent behavior. Doctors may prescribe antipsychotics to control these behaviors.

Are Americans That Stupid?

Rachel Lucas wants to start a new category on her blog possibly called, “Most People Are Too Stupid To Vote But They Do Anyway So We Are All Going To Die.” I already have a category "We're All Gonna Die", but I usually reserve that for the latest bird flu epidemic, global warming or other bout of unhinged hysteria put forth by the elites aimed at enslaving the masses, so it's kinda related.

Rachel is despondent because most Americans are idiots. Yes, well that can give you a lifelong depression, if you think about to much. There is a solution, though, for the screwballs who think things like this:

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 29% of voters favor nationalizing the oil industry. Just 47% are opposed and 24% are not sure.
Here's my proposal: America should go back to the good old days when only those who own property can vote. If you don't have a vested interest in a piece of property, you just don't have a vested interest.

Also, it would help if a person could read and as some of Rachel's readers suggested, pass a common civics exam. Of course, that would eliminate Obama and his 57 states from voting, too.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News

Best Emails Yet

I know I'm not the lone blogger receiving crazy emails. It's part of the territory. The funniest have been from Nazmul. Yesterday, he sent me this request:

Dear Melissa,
Would you please tell me about clothe free or nude society?
Last week he sent this:
Dear Melissa,
My name is Nazmul, I am 19 years old, right now studying Economics in university and I live in Bangladesh (Bangladesh is located in South Asia).Lately I have learned how operate computer as well as internet. I have gotten your e-mail number through searching internet.I shall write some thing to you honestly. When i was in school,the main topic of our conversation among friends was girls,prostitution,nude,pornography.Since my childhood i have been dreaming to go to America.But now it is impossible to visit USA for a boy of third world country.As a doctor would you please tell me about prostitution,pornography,nude society,child pornography illicit relationship between boys and girls?Hope you will reply to my e-mail.g. Good bye.
I didn't respond to these emails. But I'm tempted to say that in America, people don't wear clothes. People have sex all the time. The only reason for the internet is really good porn. Prostitution is a right confirmed by the constitution. And boys and girls get their sexual education from public school teachers.

Come to America, Nazmul. You'll love our nude society. I would say he has a skewed perspective of America, but, really, who are we kidding?