BoldlyRide

Precious Court Moments

2011-12-30T13:54:00.002-07:00

Occassionly, I or another attorney will do or say something in court that makes me think, "We're really not very smart sometimes." Fortunately, the great unwashed are much more dependable and a great deal more humorous when it comes to providing courtroom cheer.

Case in point: Defense counsel's client has already entered a guilty plea to driving while under the influence of alcohol and has not returned to court for his sentencing. This gentleman with dark locks that consort not with either shampoo or conditioner, spotty beard and spotted jeans has obviously not spoken with his attorney about appropriate attire for a serioius matter like his sentencing; the t-shirt of his choice featured a palm tree, a large bottle, and lettering in super-large font: CAPTAIN MORGAN.

Sometimes words aren't even necessary.

A visit to Lex Communis

2011-04-08T13:38:00.003-06:00

http://peterseanesq.blogspot.com/ is a place I haven't visited in a while. I can only say the pleasure was all mine in a recent visit. Few things ring the lame meter louder than posting directly from another blog -- clang, clang, clang... Anyway I found gems like this:
"Roger Simon reports on a talk given by Victor Davis Hanson on the dysfunctions of California: Victor counted the ways: We had the highest paid teachers in the country but one of the worst public educational systems. We spent more on prison inmates than we did on students K-12. 40% of the country’s illegal aliens (5-7 million people) lived in our state, stressing our social programs to the limit while sending billions home to their countries of origin, lost to our economy forever. What was once the world’s premiere highway system has gone rotting while billions are spent on high-speed railroads no one wants or needs. California was near bankrupt. Fiscal and moral insolvency were everywhere. We destroyed ourselves in a “therapeutic society,” which cared more for the delta smelt than it did for the survival of its own people — or their employment."

and: I also learned about the Dunning-Kruger effect which confirms my suspicion that I am not an expert at anything.

Although I would argue that I at least recognized the fact and that puts me ahead of many "experts."

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

2011-01-14T16:48:00.002-07:00

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

1962 Directed by John Ford
Written by James Warner Bellah, Screen play by Willis Golbeck
Starring James Stewart, John Wayne, Vera Miles, Lee Marvin
With Edmond O'Brien, Andy Devine, and John Carradine

The film is in black and white; it is all the more effective for that reason. We first see Senator Rans Stoddard (Jimmy Stewart) and his wife Hallie (Vera Miles). They are well dressed in black and white. Everyone else appears in shades of gray in the opening scenes. The Senator and his wife carry a burden, a sadness, more melancholy than gloom, as they arrive by train at the town of Shinbone. The Senator agrees to meet with the press while Hallie goes to see the cactus blossoms and an old burned, abandoned farm. The senator reveals that he has come for the funeral of his old friend, Tom Doniphan.
A pine box shields our view of this old friend. When the senator opens the coffin, he demands to know the whereabouts of the deceased's boots; he also orders that the boots, gunbelt and spurs be put on his friend for the burial. The trappings of the rough and lawless West are being buried with its soul in the form of Tom Doniphan, courtesy of civilization brought by the railroad and Rans Stoddard. The transition from the old to the new, between the rule of might and the rule of law, happened because of Tom Doniphan. The senator begins to tell the story of the change and the parts played in its construction by Doniphan and himself.
The story begins with the robbery and brutal beating of Rans Stoddard. He is a young attorney, coming west with law and order carried in a bag of books. Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin), embodiment of the coarse rule of force and violence where everyman does as he pleases, robs the stage and beats Rans with a heavy quirt. He scatters and tears the prized books. Tom Doniphan (John Wayne) enters on horseback with chaps, spurs and guns. He takes the battered Rans to his girlfriend Hallie for looking after. Although we don't realize it yet, the planets are now set in their courses for the eventual defeat of Valance as well as the inevitable heartbreak of Doniphan.
Doniphan has Rans eat on his credit. He also offers Rans a gun. Rans refuses the gun on the grounds that it would make him the same as Valance. Rans goes to work washing dishes and serving tables to pay for his keep at the eatery run by Hallie and her parents. Hallie is unable to read and when Rans offers to teach her, she responds, "What good has readin' and writin' done you?" But she finally agrees to learn. When Rans plans to put up his law shingle, Doniphan prophetically tells him, "You put that thing up, you'll have to defend it with a gun."
Early on, Doniphan tries to call out Valance over a steak that he has made Rans drop, but Rans defuses the situation by picking up the steak. Valance pays for the steak and then proceeds to shoot-up the town. Rans admits, "It was the gun that scared him off." He is also informed by Peabody, the newspaperman, that he "can't shoot back with a law book, Mr. Stoddard." Doniphan tells him, "Votes won't stand up against guns." At the school that he teaches, Rans erases from the chalk board, "Education is the basis of law and order" and goes out to learn to shoot. In the shooting lesseon he is humiliated by Doniphan who has pegged him as a rival for Hallie.
In the fight for statehood, Rans nominates Doniphan as a representative to the convention. Doniphan refuses and Rans in nominated instead. That night, Valance, a gun for the interests opposed to law and order, calls out Rans. He destroys the printing press, beats Peabody, and shoots Rans' sign. Rans goes out in his apron with his pistol. He takes down the broken remnants of his shingle. In the face off with Valance, Rans is wounded but appears to shoot Valance as Valance is about to shoot him between the eyes. Liberty is dead.
Hallie didn't want Rans to run from Valance, she wanted him to stay. Doniphan pretends that he got there too late. There is rejoicing at the cantina as Liberty is loaded onto a wagon and taken away. Doniphan realizes that he has lost Hallie to Rans. In a drunken stupor, he burns the little home he had been fixing for the two of them.
At the convention, the railroad and people stand against the law of the hired gun, anf for progress and statehood to protect rights. Doniphan shows up as Rans trys to walk out of the convention under opposition claims that his only qualification is the blood of Valance on his hands. Doniphan informs Rans that he killed Valance, shot him from the shadows. Rans is convinced to go back and take the nomination. Doniphan walks off and the story is done, except for learning that Rans went on to be governor, senator, ambassador, and a senator who could be the vice-president is he so chose.
The press hears the story and elects not to print it. Up to that time, no one else knew that it wasn't Rans who had killed Liberty Valance. The editor exclaims, "This is the west, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." Cactus roses are placed on Doniphan's coffin and Rans decides that they will come back to Shinbone, like Hallie has dreamed; her roots are there. As they leave, a railroad man mentions to them, "Nothing's too good for the man who shot Liberty Valance."

Review:
What is to say? This is one of my favorite movies. Jimmy Steward, Vera Miles, John Wayne, Lee Marvin, just to name to the major stars. Each of them gives an excellent performance. This movie is just excellent. The imagery and the script truly emphasize the difficulty in obtaining law and order; and the necessity of having guns on their side to prevail. This movie should be required viewing.

Dark City

2010-12-29T22:24:00.002-07:00

Dark City
Paramount Pictures 1950
Directed by William Dieterle

Danny Haley (Charleton Heston)
Fran (Lizabeth Scott)
Victoria Winant (Viveca Lindfors)
Captain Garvey (Dean Jagger)
Arthur Winant (Don DeFore)
Augie (Jack Webb)
Barney (Ed Begley)
Soldier (Harry Morgan)
Swede (Walten Sande)
Billy Winant (Mark Keuning)
Sidney Winant (Mike Mazurki)

The Story:
Cynical Danny Haley has his bookie joint raided (again). The shut down results in lean times. When he goes to see his girlfriend Fran who works as a lounge singer, he meets Arthur Winant at the bar. He sees a cashier's check for $5,000.00 in Winant's wallet and invites him to come and play poker with him and the boys. The boys include Augie and Barney. They allow Winant to win but invite him back again to get even the next night. Winant soon loses his money and signs over the cashier's check. Unfortunately, the money didn't belong to Winant. He hangs himself and is found by his psychotic brother Sidney. The police find Winant but not his brother. The other poker players soon begin to turn up at room temperature with ropes about their necks. Danny poses as an insurance adjuster to obtain a picture of Sidney from the dead Winant's wife Victoria. He romances her but never can get the picture because she has burned all the pictures of the murderous Sidney to protect her son. Danny reveals his true identity to Victoria and she kicks him down the road. He does leave her the cashier's check. Danny goes to Vegas and wins $5,000.00 at the craps table to send to Victoria and her son Billy. Fran shows up and passes on a warning phone call from Victoria to Danny that Sidney has learned from Billy that Danny is in Vegas. Danny waits with his pistol in his room for Sidney who already lurks in the room; Danny is saved from strangulation by the arrival of Captain Garvey and cops who have used Danny for bait. Sidney Winant takes some lead, goes out a window, and catches some more bullets for good measure. Danny decides he is over his commitment problem and it looks like he and Fran will get married.

About The Movie:
This movie reminded of one of my favorite movies, Five Card Stud (Paramount Pictures 1968, directed by Henry Hathaway), which starred Dean Martin, Inger Stevens, Robert Mitchum, and Roddy McDowell. Five Card Stud was a simpler and better movie; it also benefitted from a western setting and a bouncy, haunting little piece of theme music; even the revenge-killer had charisma.
One of the lounge songs, Letters from a Lady in Love, stands as the only memorable music from Dark City. I understand that Trudy Stevens sang for Lizabeth Scott for the soundtrack. Although the vocalization for the song is outstanding (every "L" in the title of the song receives a sensuous caress of the tongue), the visuals for the performance are distracting. In the black and white contrasts, The strapless dress coupled with Scott's arm motions give the impression of a hovering octopus. Actually, Scott's character doesn't do much that is memorable in the film. Scott herself brings to mind Lauren Bacall but the role never provides her a chance to make an adequate comparison.
Had the movie not been Heston's debut in a starring role it might easily have been forgotten. The role bears little resemblance to his roles in The Greatest Show on Earth, Ben-Hur or The Ten Commandments. His portrayal of Danny does foreshadow his performances of cynical heroes in Soylent Green and Planet of The Apes. If Heston hadn't been in the picture, I would have had any reason to like Dark City - apart from the resemblance to Five Card Stud.
Harry Morgan's small role in the film is nice but unremarkable. It is interesting to see him with Jack Webb outside of the Dragnet series. Jack Webb is credible as one of the poker players. I just kept expecting him to ask for the facts or to launch into a monologue about the evils of drink or gambling. Ed Begley gives a convincing performance as a loathsome character. Viveca Lindfors beauty shines through her character. It's unfortunate that her role in the film was not more prominent. Mike Mazurki had a rather one dimensional role as Sidney Winant; he has few lines and his face is never visible until the end of the film. Of couse, the psycopathic-revenge-killer tends to push the story along, evoking emotion and motivation from the potential victims rather than providing a great role for the actor who gets to tag the others for their death scenes. All or nearly all of the deaths take place off camera so Mazurki only gets a minute or two of screen time.
The best scene comes early in the film when Arthur Winant has reached the bottom and has to endorse the cashier's check over to the poker players. The camera shot moves around the table to take in the expressions of each poker player as the broken Winant submits to the collective will. Ed Begley's hungry-wolf attitude contrasts nicely with the cowardly call his character makes to Heston's character after one of the players has been found dead and he fears that he is next.

Memorable Lines
Danny: "Playing cards with you is like washing your feet with your socks on."

Fran: "Don't you want to know what's going on in the world?"
Danny: "What's going on in the world stinks."

Fran: "Danny, was the game on the level?"
Danny: "A guy like that defeats himself by just sitting down."

Soldier to Danny: You're worse than the rest of them. They don't know better."

Fran: "Why didn't you answer the phone?"
Danny: "There was no body I wanted to talk to."

No Intent to Speed - To Much Hassle - No Weapon

2010-10-08T00:15:00.003-06:00

Lots of folks in traffic court want to stipulate to the facts which would require the court to find them guilty, but still believe that the court should not find them guilty. Two of my recent favorites have been
(1)The speeder whose argument was that yes, she did speed up to 53 in the 35 mph zone, but she thought that was where the limit increased. So she had no intent to break the law, and she slowed right down when she realized the speed limit had not changed (which curiously coincided with the moment that she saw the cop car). Because she thought she was obeying the law and slowed down quickly the court should not give her a ticket. She was disappointed - but I'm sure the court had no intent to disappoint.
(2) The man with no current motor vehicle insurance whose claim was that the insurance carrier had canceled coverage for the entire state and he had never received a notification letter. He was informed by the court that it was his duty to make sure he was insured. But he still wanted to explain the long story and how unfair it would be for him to have to have the ticket. His sad story did get the ticket amended to a different charge (but only because my witness didn't show up; his previous record persuaded me that he had not been as conscientious about hsi driving in the past as he claimed so I wouldn't just dismiss it).

Another puzzling phenomenon involves the violators from out of state who don't want to come back to contest the ticket. They just want to tell me about it and have me dismiss the thing because it would be too much of a hassle or expense for them to come back and contest it. Often it's after a default has already been entered and they expect me to credit their version of events rather than the report by the officer or citizen witnesses.

More unique is the guy (whose faithful worship at the Church of THC has withered any grey cells he might have had) who thinks that his son should not be charged for ambushing another kid and punching him in the face and kicking him while he was down. Mr. Barely Thinking's argument: He didn't use a weapon, so he shouldn't be charged. At least his argument has the merit of offering a bright line rule for both criminals and prosecutors... but not much assurance for would-be victims.

Is The Tea Party Just Good Medicine?

2010-09-06T16:10:00.003-06:00

Thomas Jefferson on government by the people:

The mass of mankind under that enjoys a precious degree of liberty and happiness. It has its evils, too; the principal of which is the turbulence to which it is subject. But weigh this against the oppressions of monarchy, and it becomes nothing. Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem (Better hazardous liberty than peaceful servitude). Even this evil is productive of good. It prevents the degeneracy of government, nourishes a general attention to the public affairs. I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical... It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government...
From Jefferson's letter to James Madison of January 30, 1787

I Fought for You

2010-08-08T16:25:00.000-06:00

I Fought for You

No Intent to Permanently Deprive

2010-07-05T11:40:00.002-06:00

I was fortunate to watch a fairly short jury trial. The case of the purloined medicine ball.

Facts:
Defendant stole a medicine ball from the local health club by sneaking it out under his jacket at about midnight - just minutes before his membership was to expire. None of this was in dispute. He admitted to the taking both in court as well as on the video of when police came to his home (where he is seen producing the ball and wondering if the victim would take $25.00 for it). He claimed that he only took the ball to get the attention of the victim and to use it for a while as reimbursement to himself from the victim because the health club had cancelled his membership half-way through the month the previous year. So he said that he really planned to give back the item and had no intent to permanently deprive the victim.

Interesting Issue:
The health club is monitored by video. The video is stored on-site as well as at another location. The on-site storage is only temporary as it gets overwritten by the new video. The off-site location video was viewed by the victim who showed it to law enforcement. Law enforcement was unable to make a copy and that hard drive crashed. There was no video to present to the defendant in discovery nor to show the jury. The defendant's counsel objected under the best evidence rule to either the victim or the investigating officer testifying as to the contents of that video. After a break for consideration, the court determined that as the video was not available and had not been made available to the defendant, no testimony as to the content of the video would be allowed as it's probative value would be outweighed by its prejudicial affect. The defendant took the stand and the prosecutor was able to question him about the manner in which he had stolen the ball - all of which he admitted just as it would have been shown on video.

Verdict:
Guilty - the jury deliberated for about 20 minutes.

Bacon Bits for Tiger Woods

2009-12-12T14:12:00.004-07:00

As for Tiger Woods, the # of mistresses currently standing at 11 or so (I am compelled to predict the final total for the Tiger Woods Infidelity Course to be 18).

He would have done well to pay attention to Francis Bacon's Essays, which include this wisdom:

X. Of Love
... it is impossible to love and to be wise... love is ever rewarded either with reciproque or with and inward and secret contempt.
... Nuptial love maketh mankind; friendly love perfecteth it; but wanton love corrupteth and embaseth it.

Here's an excuse I heard in court last week: The defendant had ran a stop sign and hit another car. The officer cited him for inattentive driving. Unfortunately, the officer also told him that based on the color of the car that he hit, it would have been very difficult to see. So defendant argued that he wasn't inattentive, he was in fact paying attention, he just couldn't see the car; for example, if you're looking for a pencil on your desk and can't find it, only to discover later that it is right in front of you, you're not being inattentive, you just can't see it. He also pointed out that in one line of the police report the officer got his name wrong (although it was right everywhere else) - and he said, "now that's inattentive." -- After a little discussion, he decided to enter a guilty plea and pay the fine.

Guilt by Alliteration

2009-08-06T22:33:00.004-06:00

"And call these foul offenders to their answers,
And poise the cause in justice's equal scales,
Whose beam stands sure, whose rightful cause prevails."
(Henry VI - Second Part, Act II Sc. I).

While my arguments for sentencing found themselves no kin to Shakespeare, the court and clerk were apparently amused by my apt alliteration as I proclaimed the defendant (already found guilty by a jury) a martial arts practitioner of some prowess... and therefore by implication worthy of some more serious punishment for his crime. Alas, the court was amused but not persuaded.

In another case, defense counsel noted that his client was actually pretty young in spite of the lengthy criminal record that he had accumulated. However, he failed to make the argument at sentencing that the defendant should therefore be looked upon as an over achiever.

Limitations of Due Process

2009-06-15T20:17:00.001-06:00

This from ninomania.blogspot.com
A Talmudic maxim instructs with respect to the Scripture: “Turn it over, and turn it over, for all is therein.” The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Aboth, Ch. V, Mishnah 22 (I. Epstein ed. 1935). Divinely inspired text may contain the answers to all earthly questions, but the Due Process Clause most assuredly does not.-- Justice Scalia, dissenting in Caperton v. Massey

A Memorable Court Moment

2009-06-15T18:54:00.002-06:00

Police officer has just testified that defendant rolled through a stop sign without stopping.

Defendant testifies and says that she did stop.

Defendant: I call my mother as a witness. But she doesn't speak very much english.

The court has not been notified to provide an interpretor. But the witness takes the stand and is sworn.

Defendant asks witness if she remembers being there when defendant got the ticket. Witness doesn't understand and they exchange some words in spanish. The court stops them and asks the prosecutor if he minds that they communicate in spanish. The prosecutor says he doesn't mind. Defendant and witness exchange more phrases in spanish.

Defendant to the Court: Yes, she says I stopped.

And the really funny part is that the court found her not guilty - not because of the unique presentation or credibility of her mother's testimony - but because the officer gave testimony three times during the hearing and named a different intersection as the scene of the violation each time.

Hot Topics: Search and Seizure & Miss America

2009-04-21T18:28:00.003-06:00

The big legal news today is the USSC decision in Arizona v. Gant - which eviscerates the automatic vehicle search incident to arrest procedure adopted by law enforcement following the Belton decision 2o some years ago. The more sensational news is out of the Miss America Pagent where Miss California's answer to a question cost her the crown.
Here http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517137,00.html
is the story.

Pagent Judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, asked, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, whether she believed in gay marriage. Prejean answered "...I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman..."
Prejean was asked a question and she gave an honest answer. She did not try to evade the question or to spew some equivocal hodgepodge designed to please everyone.

However, she has been criticized by many, including Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, who said, "As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman... religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family."

WHAT?? PREJEAN DIDN'T CHOOSE QUESTION! The questions were all prescreened and six questions were selected to be submitted on a random basis to the 5 finalists. The fact is that Prejean is being crucified by the left because she gave an honest answer instead of the answer deemed by liberal extremists and gay activists to be the only correct answer. If there was only one acceptable answer, why allow the question? - Simply to continue to push the liberal agenda (which includes the destruction of traditional values, according to Chuck Schumer).

Fatal Shooting - Serial Killer

2009-03-21T10:38:00.003-06:00

A female has been killed in cold blood - by a juvenile. Manslaughter is out of the question. The juvenile intially gave false information to law enforcement but eventually confessed to the crime and to three other unsolved fatal shootings. The investigation contains some gruesome details. The killing was committed at close range with a small caliber weapon. However, because of the characteristics of the victim, there was some question about the point of entry for the fatal shot. The top of the skull was removed but the entry wound and trajectory of the bullet were not revealed until the skin was removed from the face - the victim was shot between the eyes. The perpetrator is expected to enter a guilty plea and pay restitution in the neighborhood of $1,000.00 - for the killing of the cow. As for the other fatalities, 3 deer, the appropriate law enforcement personnel will evaluate the situation.

High Courtroom Drama

2009-03-12T18:30:00.002-06:00

All the cops in the county, two crossing guards, and a hall monitor were in on a local drug bust. The road was blocked off and the thin blue line had metamorphed into a great, green, flak-jacketed caterillar that hit the gate doing 98 and executed the felony arrest warrant and the accompanying search warrant. The booty included some arrests and enough drugs to keep Molly Hatchet's roadies supplied for at least 45 minutes. Of course, all of this was preceeded in the morning hours by the legal stylings of my boss and myself at the probable cause hearings for the charges and the warrant; and we did a bearly passable job with it - only because the officer provided a fine affidavit and warrant for us to use. This was our first search warrant.

Later, at 4:45 p.m., law enforcement called during the execution of another arrest warrant where the druggie admitted to certain contraband on the premises, but then refused to give consent for the search. Did they have probable cause to search, or would they need a warrant? Immediately, the finest legal minds in the room, honed to a razor edge by the constant opposition of pro se traffic court defendants and that nasty corner on the end of the stair railing, fired out the quick and precise answer, "Uh, is it in plain sight? What else did the druggie say? I think we better get a warrant, and some fries would be nice too." Unlike the earlier warrant, where we had a knowledgable officer with completed paperwork, in this case we had nothing. We got some information over the phone and cobbled the paperwork together and rushed to get the warrant before the judge had to leave. The officer who showed up is among the nicest of gentleman, but he didn't happen to know didley about what the court was going to require for the warrant - and neither did the prosecutors. Laurel & Hardy or Tweedle-dumb and Tweedle dumber were the show. At one point the judge (a patient and helpful soul) suggested that we might just want to get our act together and then get the warrant later at his house. That nice offer was declined and a warrant was finally issued. Unfortunately, the judge was probably late for his appointment and the red badge of idiocy blazed brightly on our side of the bench. As one might expect, a good portion of today was devoted to remedial measures so that future appearances might fare better.

Judge v. Defendant - and the luxury of watching and thinking

2009-03-10T21:33:00.004-06:00

Here
http://www.nbc-2.com/Articles/readarticle.asp?articleid=26732&z=69
is a video of a defendant irritating a judge. You've really got to envy the defense attorney whose client tells the judge, "Come on, you're smarter than that" at his sentencing.
I think I would have requested the gag to go with the manacles and chains.

Here at the county of cattle and crimes, I observed an interesting court trial yesterday. The defendant was a former local police officer. He claimed denial of due process because the citation that he received had his first court appearance approximately 25 days after the day he received the citation. He pointed out that the infraction rule (come on, who reads those) clearly stated that the first appearance had to be not less than 5 days nor more than 21 days from the date of the citation. The prosecutor had not much to say with regard to the novel argument. The court took the matter under advisement as it was a question that had never arisen and some research would be needed to answer the question. It did give me an opportunity to consider what I would have said in that prosecutor's place; I would have said the following:
"Due process means ample or sufficient process to protect the defendant's rights. In this case, the procedural rule provides for a specific window of time for the defendant's first appearance and that window was missed in this case. However, the defendant has still had his day in court and the extra time that he was allowed to have has not in anyway harmed him. He has presented no witnesses whose memories might have lapsed in the short extension of time allowed in this case. He has not demonstrated or claimed any harm because of procedural irregularity. The rule provides no specific remedy for this particular irregularity, but typically, procedural irregularities do not equate to a "get our of jail free card." (Inspite of what some jailhouse lawyers will profess.) Therefore, the proper course is to determine whether there has been any prejudice because of the irregularity, and in this case there has been none. The defendant has had sufficient and ample process." - Of course, had I actually been in the prosecutor's chair, I would have likely babbled incoherently, but without the spotlight trained on me, I was free to come up with the above while the man actually in the arena did the babbling.
In speaking with the judge later, he indicated his research indicated that the question was whether the defendant was prejudiced by the procedure, and since he wasn't, no problem. Of course, then it occurred to me that even with the time to think about it, I had still missed the magic word, "prejudice." But at least my ramblings would have been in the right neighborhood, even if I had missed the correct legal term.

UPDATE: Two items, 1) I see that my rambling did include the word "prejudice" and 2) there is actually a criminal rule that says no dismissals if the error is harmless - it's amazing what you can find in that mysterious rule book.

Books: Good and Bad; Jury Train Wreck Averted

2009-03-07T15:01:00.004-07:00

As long as I'm on a book review rant, here are two things:
I ditched Turow's book and exchanged it at the library for Brad Thor's The First Commandment. This is a very good book that is difficult to put down. I didn't get any thrilling courtroom drama, but I did get an exciting read that kept me up late. I give it 4 bandoliers out of 5. I can see that I need to read the rest of Thor's Scot Harvath books.

I also note that this blogger http://bamber.blogspot.com/ has a review of Twilight that I can agree with, "[this book] is evil." However, I could only bring myself to read a few pages from the middle of the book before I made the call that it was without redeeming features.

In the prosecutorial zone (which I believe is just north of New Guinea and some what south of harmless error) a train wreck was narrowly averted. A case that went from a felony to a misdemeanor to "he's going to plead so don't worry about preparing for trial" and then to "you're star witness has memory problems so we'll be going to trial" (plus the influence of the new United States Supreme Court case dealing with the loss of the right to firearms for any conviction where the underlying facts involved violence against a household member) did not go to trial. We used a little imagination and the guy agreed to a conditional dismissal with voluntary probation for year, including some specific treatment and counseling.

On another case that is just starting, as we go in for the probable cause hearing, the officer informs me that we can't actually tie the guy we're charging to the crime, other than by some weak hearsay - which is probably enough to get us through the PC hearing. 1st I have to thank the officer for clarifying that point for me as I had not recognized the tenousness (if that's even a word) of the link. 2nd I had to let the court know that we would not be proceeding with the PC hearing as there was some additional information I felt we required. 3rd I instructed the officer to continue the investigation, including talking to the other 2 people who were supposed to be present when the crime was committed. I'm trying to put to use the thinking that was presented to us at the prosecutor training about getting the case built and made certain before we even charge the guys - to avoid wrongful convictions or wrongful acquittals.

Vomit in Print

2009-03-04T21:47:00.002-07:00

I got all excited about a new legal thriller, Turow's Laws of Our Fathers. I found it neither legal nor thrilling. I have to admit that I only got about 150 pages into the 500 plus page munster cheese log before I was forced to make a judgment. I kept thinking that it would get better; it finally did get, but the getting was distinctly not better: No court room excitment and investigation; too much acid reflux reflection on the characters in the late 60's and early 70's; too much vulgarity and profanity. My determination: Vomit in print. No redeeming features. A must not read under any circumstances.

On the law and order front, only one traffic court defendant decided he wanted his trial. He got one, immediately preceding a guilty verdict. Meanwhile back at the juvenile ranch, a bad boy faced up to his crime and the big issue is how to get him treatment and whether that will have to be through detention or private treatment. Finally, over at the misdemeanor probation salon, a pie chart of my discussion with the misdemeanor probation officer, broken down by subject, would show the majority of our time spent in the discussion cattle markets, and only a fraction on issues of probation -- a fringe benefit of this rural practice; and I like it like that.

Prosecutor Training and Fighting for the American Way

2009-02-28T15:34:00.004-07:00

The week before last was prosecutor training. Mostly it consisted of boring power point presentations. However, of those boring power point presentations, two were actually well done: The latest cases from our state appellate courts, and that which is usually the put-a-gun-in-my-mouth-and-pull-the-trigger-put-me-out-of-my-misery-boring, the ethics presentation. Most disappointing was a presentation by a well-known judge that seemed to lack much substance. On the other hand, the absolute best continuing legal education presentation I have seen since Marlon Brando played Napoleon in the film Desiree, was an entire day from an experienced attorney on preventing wrongful acquittals and wrongful convictions. HE DIDN'T USE POWER POINT or props of any kind. This was shoot hard and fast, and lay out the facts; think not just outside the box, but flatten the box entirely and explore in every direction. This guy was a dynamic speaker and extremely talented trial attorney - his last name is Wintory. I was wishing all 3 days had been him, at least 2 days, anyway.

Back in the courtroom front, there was the usual mix of settlements and also a juvenile matter that went to trial. On the juvenile trial, I hadn't prepped the officer so his testimony turned out to be a waste of time (my fault, not his). We had 3 juvenile witness who put the instrument of crime in the hands of the defendant. One of these kids admitted to being with him and identified the vandalism the defendant did. The kid was very credible and forthcoming. This was a slam dunk... or so I thought. The defendant took the stand and gave essentially the same testimony as the star witness, except he said the star witness did all the crime. Naturally, I'm thinking, this kid isn't the least bit credible. He's already had more juvenile convictions in his life than I've had pimples (and that's a lot). So the judge can't possibly believe this. The matter is before the judge and not a jury because it is a juvenile matter. After the defense rested, the judge asked for my rebuttal witnesses. Well, I've already sent all my witnesses home; this was a slam dunk, one-hand behind the back, I don't need no stinking rebuttal witnesses case. As you might expect, when I heard the judge ask for my rebuttal witnesses, I had the distinct feeling that this gimme has just slipped away. Of course, the court ignored my brilliant (run of the mill) closing argument pointing out how the defendant was not to believed and must be found guilty. "Reasonable doubt... not guilty." Oh well. I have a jury trial next week, and I expect it to go even more poorly - the complaining witness has suddenly experienced memory loss; it should be fun.

And let's close with this gem from Coulter's latest:
"But as long as the nation is obsessed with historic milestones, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become speaker of the house?"

Finding Eldorado

2009-02-06T20:09:00.002-07:00

The words for the title of this blog come from Poe's work entitled Eldorado. Re-reading the post which began the blog, I find myself strangely relating to the hero of the poem:

Gaily bedight,
A gallant knight,
In sunshine and in shadow,
Had journeyed long,
Singing a song,
In search of Eldorado.

But he grew old-
This knight so bold-
And o'er his heart a shadow
Fell as he found
No spot of ground
That looked like Eldorado.

And, as his strength
Failed him at length,
He met a pilgrim shadow-
"Shadow," said he,
"Where can it be-
This land of Eldorado?"

"Over the Mountains Of the Moon,
Down the Valley of the Shadow,
Ride, boldly ride,"
The shade replied-
"If you seek for Eldorado!"

Can't Believe Any Of Them

2009-02-06T19:42:00.002-07:00

This week my boss, the Big Dog, was engaged in that peculiar mixture of trial by combat and trial by ordeal known as a jury trial. Unfortunately, the jury hung on the most serious charge. Post trial interviews revealed that they "were sure he was guilty" but didn't have enough evidence to convict him on that count. They were distracted with wondering why certain witnesses weren't called (Not called because they said they didn't see anything), some less than scintillating police procedures, and witnesses (both prosecution and defense) whose testimony differed at trial from the written statements they had provided near the time of the incident. The jurors indicated that if there was even one part of a witness' testimony that seemed to be a lie, they disbelieved the entire testimony. Now the Big Dog gets to decide whether he wants to retry the case. I'm thinking that it would be even more difficult now to get a guilty verdict, with all this testimony on record to potentially contradict the testimony that might be given later.

While the Big Dog grappled over at the grown-up court, I got to do a probable cause hearing on a 17 counts of fairly obscure crimes; my witnesses were officers who had never done PC hearings before - and the facts were messy. Especially messy were 2 charges related to the same incident. During the hearing I discovered that the evidence would not support the charges as set forth. Fortunately, when I looked to the judge for my own sort of bailout, he acknowledged probable cause for the crimes, but allowed me to correct the language to match the facts.

Chat with Judge Can Make it All Right - but not here

2009-01-28T19:15:00.004-07:00

Apparently a neighboring state differs in its procedures for resolving speeding tickets. In that state, the violator can just show up and "chat" with the judge about the situation and the judge will make things alright, at least cutting the fine in half--the officer who issued the ticket doesn't even show. In our state, no chatting is allowed; you get to make your plea and if you plead not guilty you get to go to trial. Today a citizen of a neighboring state just wanted to "chat" with the judge. I did, with the officer's agreement, reduce the charge by 3 miles to get the fine down and the citizen pled guilty; then he got to ask the judge some questions. The judge explained the differing procedure in our state-no chatting. He also explained that there was no way in our state, without taking some defensive driving course, to have the ticket not count toward points on your driving record. I appreciated the education the judge gave, as I had no idea what the procedure was in the neighboring state or why this gentleman thought he could get a special deal by chatting with the judge and not having the trial.

The Case for The Prosecution

2009-01-24T11:57:00.005-07:00

Two weeks into a new job as a deputy prosecutor in a rural western county. Make that chief deputy prosecutor in a rural western county. So far I've probably irritated juvenile probation and parole by giving a juvenile a complete gift on a plea deal, and definitely disappointed the fish cops by dismissing their charges against a pair of fishermen (husband and wife) for lack of probable cause on one of the elements of the crime. The crime only had two elements and the second element is triggered by the first, which must be in the form of a request to see the catch. The second element is the failure to show the catch. They wrote the ticket for failure to show the catch, but never actually requested to see the catch -- they felt the request was implied when they asked the folks how many fish they had caught. Later, the judge asked why I had dismissed the charges, he entirely agreed and mentioned bad or overcharging by the fish cops.

UTAH #1

2009-01-03T09:58:00.003-07:00

At least there's one "bama" that lost.

Utah played a great game. The Crimson Tide seemed incapable of consistently stopping the consistent pass attack. Bama just couldn't seem to put together the SEC trademark "smashmouth" football - and it looked like they quit trying and went to the air, only to go down in flames.

The Utes are the only undefeated team and are, without a doubt, the number 1 team in college football this year. They played several good, ranked teams. The big money BCS won't give any team from one of the "other" conferences a shot for number 1 - but the truth is there for anyone willing to see it. The SEC has feet of clay and so does the BCS system. The BCS is rigged for the big conferences with the big money.

Depression, Bad. Government involvment, worse.

2008-12-06T20:40:00.003-07:00

Here
http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=a6b24ac7-888e-4501-9e24-539629b30854&t=c

Thomas Sowell gives a serving of wisdom that is being ignored by (1) politicians clamoring for more government intervention in the economy, and (2) CEO's with their hands out for tax-payer $'s with governmental micromanagement strings attached.

...Even in the case of the Great Depression of the 1930s, increasing numbers of economists and historians who have looked back at that era have concluded that, on net balance, government intervention prolonged the Great Depression.
Many of those who have, over the years, praised the fact that this was the first time that the federal government took responsibility for trying to get the country out of a depression do not ask what seems like the logical follow-up question: Did this depression therefore end faster than other depressions where the government stood by and did nothing?
The Great Depression of the 1930s was in fact the longest-lasting of all our depressions.
Government policy in the 1930s was another bipartisan disaster. Despite a myth that Herbert Hoover was a "do nothing" president, he was the first President of the United States to step in to try to put the economy back on track.
With the passing years, it has increasingly been recognized that what FDR did was largely a further extension of what Hoover had done. Where Hoover made things worse, FDR made them much worse.

Pharaoh Obama

2008-11-01T09:33:00.003-06:00

"Hence as all history informs us, there has been in every state and kingdom a constant kind of warfare between the governing and governed; the one striving to obtain more for its support, and the other to pay less... Generally... the ruling power carries its point... and we see that they are never satisfied, but always in want of more. The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes; the greater the need the prince has of money to distribute among his partizans and pay the troops that are to suppress all resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred who would not, if he could, follow the example of Pharaoh, get first all the peoples money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants forever."

The preceding is from Benjamin Franklin's speech at the Constitutional Convention suggesting that the officers of government should not recieve salaries.

I suggest that it applies as a warning about those who seek government on the platform of raising taxes and redistributing wealth, or spreading the wealth around as they inartfully describe it: They promise to take the income of those who earned it and give it to their partizans who did not; provide money and healthcare to them, making them their servants forever.

Sarah Palin and Tall

2008-08-30T21:14:00.003-06:00

Okay, bad joke -- but her name is an anagram for plain -- I also note that Glen Close did play the role of a vice president at one time.

The good thing about the pick: It's not Lieberman or some other "moderate" choice guaranteed to split the party--we've already got McCain for that. I guess Romney was likewise out by virtue of evangelical blackmail.

So McCain picks a relative unknown. The Obamaphiles' retort is that she lacks experience, particularly foreign policy experience. I guess we should contrast that charge against all of the experience BHO has as a -- what was it again? Oh, a "community organizer."-- Funny they worry about her being just a heartbeat away from the presidency and so young and inexperienced, just being a governor, the chief executive officer of the largest state in the union; yet they promote a jr. senator whose past is cloaked in secrecy and who claims to be a uniter but his brief record clearly proclaims him the uberliberal partisan member of the chamber. Up to that last semicolon I was tempted to talk of pots and kettles, but I am constrained.

My 2 criticisms of Palin: (1) Her voice is not merely like fingers on a chalkboard to me; it's more like C-3P0 being slowly eaten by a metal shredder. (And in a salute to Joe Biden, let me give credit to James Lileks, from whom I believe I lifted that C-3P0 simile--although I forget for what it was that he was using it (That's Lileks, not Biden, who was using it). And (2) The picture they put on at least one of campaign the posters seems to be a poor pick for the former beauty queen; the glasses look like they were drawn on by my daughter well after the poster was printed. Oh, and my other second criticism: How many electoral votes does Alaska have?

Okay, so my criticisms are lacking in substance--but then again, so are most of my observations. Nevertheless, I pull no punches--it's just that I can't hit very hard.

A Step In The Right Direction

2008-08-27T22:54:00.002-06:00

The largest single work-place immigration raid in the U.S. history (so far) happened in Laurel, Mississippi. This story:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,411121,00.html
reports that many of the other workers applauded as nearly 600 illegals were taken into custody. As you might expect, the AP story concentrated on the trauma to the families, not knowing what was happening to their loved ones, and how many of the illegals didn't sent their children to school the next day out of fear. I especially appreciated the comment from the attorney representing some of the illegals: "There was no communication, an immediate loss of any kind of news and a lack of understanding of what's happening to their loved ones," -- Perhaps he expects law enforcement to schedule counseling sessions with the illegals and their families (who may also be illegals) before detaining and prosecuting and/or deporting them.

There are a couple important points to note: 1) No where in the report are the words "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" used. The illegals are simply referred to as immigrants; and 2) these illegals were working at a plant along with American Workers -- these are not jobs that Americans won't do, but rather are good paying jobs that could be filled by Americans and legal immigrants.

Sarkozy More Patriotic than Michelle Obama

2008-08-25T21:36:00.003-06:00

While the rest of world turns to the DNC, I note that the French Head of State pulls a page from the American Playbook of Self Condemnation and turns it into a double reverse. Sarkozy condemns his own nation's conduct over the last 64 years in ignoring the massacre of French citizens by German troops in Maille in August 1944. The liberal elite of the United States might have chosen to explain how those murdered citizens really brought the catastrophe upon themselves by their mistreatment of the environment, their misguided opposition to Nazi Totalitarianism, and their evil and foolhardy defense of their homes and families. Sarkozy found the memorial of the atrocity an apt occassion for also remembering the French soldiers killed in a Taliban ambush in Afghanistan and to call for a stand against such barbarism and terrorism. -- I bet we don't anything like that from Michelle Obama or any of the other Defeatocrats at the conventions.

Here is the story on Sarkozy:

http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2008/08/25/nicolas-sarkozy-a-maille-la-france-a-commis-une-faute-morale_1087737_3224.html

Hooray for Texas - Law Prevails

2008-08-03T21:22:00.010-06:00

"The law is clear: Texas is bound not by the World Court, but by the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed this matter and determined that this convicted murderer's execution shall proceed," said Jerry Strickland, a spokesman for the Texas Attorney General's Office.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Aug03/0,4670,TexasExecution,00.html

The U.S. Embassy in Mexico City has warned of "possible protests."

The Medellin case to which reference was made came about as a result of the International Justice Court's decision in The Hague which held in the Avena decision that
"based on violations of the Vienna Convention, 51 named
Mexican nationals were entitled to review and reconsideration
of their state-court convictions and sentences in
the United States. This was so regardless of any forfeiture
of the right to raise Vienna Convention claims because of a
failure to comply with generally applicable state rules
governing challenges to criminal convictions."

Medellin, who is named in the Avena decision, brought a petition for a writ of habeus corpus claiming that prior to giving his written confession to brutal rape and murder, he was not notified of his right under the Vienna Convention to contact the Mexican Consulate. The Texas court dismissed his petition as untimely for his failure to raise the issue at trial or on direct appeal. Pres. Bush had issued a memorandum directing state courts to comply with Avena. Texas declined to comply. Two narrow questions were presented to the USSC:

"First, is the ICJ’s judgment in Avena directly enforceable
as domestic law in a state court in the United States?
Second, does the President’s Memorandum independently
require the States to provide review and reconsideration of
the claims of the 51 Mexican nationals named in Avena
without regard to state procedural default rules? "

The USSC concluded that "neither Avena nor the President’s Memorandum
constitutes directly enforceable federal law that
pre-empts state limitations on the filing of successive
habeas petitions."

Here are some of the elements of the Court's reasoning:
"In sum, while treaties "may comprise international
commitments . . . they are not domestic law unless
Congress has either enacted implementing statutes or the
treaty itself conveys an intention that it be ‘self-executing’
and is ratified on these terms."

"[T]he ICJ’s judgment in
Avena does not automatically constitute federal law judicially
enforceable in United States courts."

"The pertinent international agreements...
not provide for implementation of ICJ judgments through
direct enforcement in domestic courts, and 'where a treaty
does not provide a particular remedy, either expressly or
implicitly, it is not for the federal courts to impose one on
the States through lawmaking of their own.'"

"Our Framers established a careful set of procedures that
must be followed before federal law can be created under
the Constitution—vesting that decision in the political
branches, subject to checks and balances. U. S. Const.,
Art. I, §7. They also recognized that treaties could create
federal law, but again through the political branches, with
the President making the treaty and the Senate approving
it. Art. II, §2. The dissent’s understanding of the treaty
route, depending on an ad hoc judgment of the judiciary
without looking to the treaty language—the very language
negotiated by the President and approved by the Senate—
cannot readily be ascribed to those same Framers."

"Medellín’s interpretation would allow ICJ judgments to override
otherwise binding state law; there is nothing in his logic
that would exempt contrary federal law from the same
fate. See, e.g., Cook v. United States, 288 U. S. 102, 119
(1933) (later-in-time self-executing treaty supersedes a
federal statue if there is a conflict). And there is nothing
to prevent the ICJ from ordering state courts to annul
criminal convictions and sentences, for any reason deemed
sufficient by the ICJ. Indeed, that is precisely the relief
Mexico requested."

As for the President's Memorandum the Court said:
"The President has an array of political
and diplomatic means available to enforce international
obligations, but unilaterally converting a non-selfexecuting
treaty into a self-executing one is not among
them. The responsibility for transforming an international
obligation arising from a non-self-executing treaty
into domestic law falls to Congress."

McCain Can't Raise His Arms -- but Obama Can

2008-07-28T21:27:00.004-06:00

Here is a candid shot of Obama giving training to the troops to prepare them for when he is commander in chief.

The audio was a little garbled but I believe this is what he was saying: "Make sure that the elbows follow the palms. If you don't sell the surrender in the first seconds after you've dropped the weapon, you're dead."

And I think Cheap Trick sings his favorite song.

Honestly, this post is a shameless jab at BHO... I can only confess that I hope it will not be the last. (Hat tip to the writers for Zorro with Antonio Banderas from whom I borrowed this remark).

Berlin Obamalogue

2008-07-26T21:34:00.003-06:00

Here is the digested and excreted version of the Obamalogue delivered in Berlin:

"This is the time... for empty rhetoric. This is the time... to criticize America and show the world that the perfect lips of BHO are perfectly suited for kissing European feet."

As I recall, the Dixie Chicks experienced some unfavorable repercussions (temporarily) when they did essentially the same thing (except for the empty rhetoric part).

I have to wonder if anyone has told the Obamanable candidate that he's not president and Europeans don't get to vote for the President of the United States (but George Soros is buying it for them anyway).

Global Warming, NOT

2008-07-24T02:59:00.002-06:00

Scientist and former Global Warming Devotee does about face:

He notes that the data sources "all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

A Reason To Welcome Mexican Immigrants

2008-07-19T14:47:00.003-06:00

Now if a baby had filled this diaper in the usual manner, this
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080719031503.ceolci5z&show_article=1
would be a good reason to welcome immigrants - at least those with this talent.

Unfortunately it's only drug money.

The jr. Senator's Slip Is Showing -

2008-07-19T13:57:00.004-06:00

Obama has captured the liberal left and with the help of his media groupies (and frequent praise from that idiot John McCain) he is attempting to move toward the center. Fortunately, he keeps tripping over his fundamental, anti-American values. Here is one great example. "Instead of worrying whether immigrants can learn English — they’ll learn English — you need to make sure your kids can speak Spanish. " Did you get that? "Make sure your kids can speak Spanish." He couldn't just encourage education and learning a second or third language, he had to specifically command that our kids learn one particular language.

Watch it at sweetness and light
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-your-child-needs-to-speak-spanish

And for the record, how many languages do BHO, his wife and children speak? Just one. They can only bad-mouth the United States of America in English (or Ing-lish as BHO pronounces it). But like Algore, BHO excels at telling us what we all need to do - he doesn't need to lead by example and actually do the things he decrees for the rest of us folks. He just needs us to change: Make sure our kids can speak spanish (that will make the whole Reconquista go so much more smoothly) and don't forget to cut back on our energy use, especially oil, because we don't need to be disturbing the scenery and the wildlife (we'll never learn to wean ourselves from oil if just drill for more) better that we continue our dependence upon other nations (many of whose leaders are avowed enemies). Come to think of it, that is the essence of the democratic platform: Perpetuate dependance until we die -- and this is likely to be sooner rather than later with BHO in the oval office. Our only hope (an audacious thought) would be to find an intern to distract him.

Update:
In the words of Syndrome, from The Incredibles, "This is just toooo good."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080718164611.a7s1ghxx&show_article=1
Obama is to meet with Sarkozy in Paris on the 25th. -- And what is Obama gonna have to say?

Why of course, "Merci beaucoup."

Intentionally Hostile

2008-07-16T20:56:00.002-06:00

This story indicates Escondido is making itself "intentionally hostile" to illegal aliens.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/immigration/la-me-escondido13-2008jul13,0,5880010.story Hooray for Escondido!

That's exactly what we should have, an environment that is hostile in every respect to illegal aliens; life here should be unbearable for them -- so they'll go back to their home country and stay there until they can come here legally.

I think liberals like Obama think the same way about illegal immigration as they do about the oil crisis. On illegal immigration they say it's just too big of a problem and too late to do anything about it; they blame conservatives for not having solved the matter -- when in fact liberal stonewalling has long been a serious factor in prolonging the problem. They say a wall won't solve the problem. On energy, they say drilling won't solve the problem, it's too little too late. Why is that? Because they have been busy preventing the drilling for so long that drilling now won't have an immediate affect.

Build the wall now and drill now -- both are crucial elements in the solutions to the respective problems. Neither is the sole solution.

I don't trust McCain and while I admire and respect him for his service to our nation am not enthusiastic about the prospect of his occupation of the oval office. McCain praises TR as a conservative (yet TR was not a conservative president) but McCain lacks the presence, enthusiasm and inspiration that TR seemed to have. Whereas, TR was a political fighter, McCain has failed to exhibit any serious personal ability to go after BHO on important issues. On the other hand, I remain "intentionally hostile" to BHO. His own words, as well of the activities and statements of his wife and associates clearly define him as an enemy to the United States. His record as the most liberal senator of his time, his inexperience, reliance upon race exploitation, appearance and hollow rhetoric over substance make him the worst of the two.

Mother Nature Dominatrix

2008-05-03T16:51:00.003-06:00

Here
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353844,00.html Steven Milloy's Junk Science has this:

"Researchers belonging to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported in Nature (May 1) that after adjusting their climate model to reflect actual sea surface temperatures of the last 50 years, "global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations … temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic warming."
You got that? IPCC researchers project no global warming over the next decade because of Mother Nature."

Cooling is the forecast. Milloy goes on to point out that Mother Nature is the weather dominatrix and a major flaw in the global warming predictions is the assumption that "without human activity climate change would not occur."

The evidence against global warming continues to grow to glacial proportion. Not only should Gore's nobel prize be stripped from him, he should go to prison, like this lady: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354049,00.html story in which a woman who caused her lover's death by a false cry of rape is convicted of manslaughter.

Immigration and Oil

2008-05-01T12:00:00.005-06:00

Immigration
This http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008May01/0,4670,ImmigrationProtests,00.html links to the foxnews story about the immigrants rights activists rallies. According to the story, a man identified as a legal immigrant from Mexico, carried a sign showing immigration agents handcuffing a man with a little girl crying, "Where's my family?" -- Emotional and inflammatory but hardly a meaningful statement for immigration reform. Parents go to prison for crime all the time. Their children suffer to some degree for the crimes of the parents. The illegal immigration issue is no different -- if they don't want their children to suffer the consequences, they shouldn't do the crime. Illegal immigration is a crime. The fact is, illegal immigrants are willing to take the risk for what they hope to gain. One thing that may make it worth the risk is the possibility of "immigration reform" or what is in fact "amnesty" or "shamnesty." Unfortunately, whenever the immigration issue arises, there is much hand wringing and complaints that we can't do anything about it, but maybe if we grant amnesty to all those that are already here (so we wouldn't have to worry about that whole problem) then, and only then, could we do something about our borders. But we have already been down that road (or rather, led down that primrose path). Congress gave Reagan a bill that included an amnesty provision. He signed it. Border security did not improve in any meaningful way but former illegal aliens achieved an unearned legal status.

This amnesty first idea makes about as much sense trying to take care of a flooding tub by refusing to turn off the water and instead arguing about whether the new flood level should first be declared a legitimate part of the home -- meanwhile the whole house suffers from the continuing water damage.

My idea of reform is to shut off the flow and then worry about how to drain the water we've already got. I have no doubt that we have the resources and ability to significantly improve our border security. I do doubt that we have the political will to do so. I won't rehearse Glenn Beck's arguments from his Inconvenient Book but I think it does suggest that there are influential people and organizations who have interests that are contrary to the border security of the United States of America.

Oil
I see that as oil prices go up, the money available for reconstruction in Iraq also increases. Canada and Mexico also benefit from the higher prices. We see an ever increasing flow of American dollars to these countries. Unfortunately, our enemies, the crazy leaders of Iran and Venezuela also benefit from the rising oil prices.

The Dilemma

2008-02-16T12:13:00.006-07:00

Now that there is no joy is mudville because the mighty Romney has bowed out, what is a conservative (or anyone with an IQ above that of a peach pit) to do if he* doesn't want to vote for a presidential candidate that is a cog in the George Soros One World Government machine?
Here http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/6066/ are Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter discussion the matter.

Obama talks in glittering generalities but when one looks at the specifics of his ideas, it is obvious that he is nothing more than a suicide bomber of the economy.
And here http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/5827/?ck=1 is a clue about the political stripe of this supporters: watch for the picture of Che.

And here http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/14/america/LA-POL-Nicaragua-Ortega-Obama.php Sandanista leader Daniel Ortega praised Obama's campaign and says that Obama is "a spokesman for the millions of Central American and Mexican citizens who migrate to the U.S. in search of work," -- Yeah, I know. I thought that was McCain's job -- but apparently all three of the front runners are big supporters of illegal immigrants.

The main theme of each of the three remaining viable candidates (McOHillary) is the destruction of America first. In fact, I'm convinced that they could all run on the same ticket. I'm reminded of Aesop's Fable about the frogs who wanted a king and settled on the stork -- I think we're in for the same fate.

But on a completely different lunatic fringe, http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/02/13/veteran-loch-ness-monster-hunter-gives-up-86908-20317853/
there's this:
Despite having hundreds of sonar contacts over the years, the trail has since gone cold and Rines believes that Nessie may be dead, a victim of global warming.

*in the best tradition of the English Language, the masculine includes the femine

Romney Gets Most Important Indorsement

2008-01-31T19:21:00.000-07:00

All day I've been hearing about the misgovernator's nod to John McMexiCain*. But this is the real news: (from http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog)

Sean Hannity: "I'll tell you right now, and I've not announced this, but I will be voting for Mitt Romney in this campaign. It's the first time I've stated it publicly. I'll state it now." ("Sean Hannity Radio Show," 1/31/08)

Here is a misguided prediction:
http://www.examiner.com/blogs/tapscotts_copy_desk/2008/1/30/Is-Romney-the-real-winner-in-Florida-GOP-primary
PREDICTION: McCain is now established as the clear front runner and that means he will soon experience a depth of analysis and critique from the mainstream media and the Right side of the Blogosphere that he has never before had to endure.Two things will follow: First, the more typical Republican voters know about McCain's views, the less likely they will be to vote for him, and, second, as this process become more evident, McCain's legendary temper will manifest itself in ways that are extremely damaging to him.
Why is it misguided? Because the mainstream media will not do any meaningful analysis of John McMexiCain. A McMexiCain win of the republican nomination would as good as guarantee a win for the democratic candidate -- and even he did win the presidency, it would be just about the same result as if Obillary won.

*John McMexicoFirstCain -- shortened to McMexiCain

McCain's Reconquistador Advisor

2008-01-26T12:25:00.000-07:00

Dr. Juan Hernandez

Hugh Hewitt interviews Michelle Malkin on the subject:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=1a200363-a8d0-4886-8346-0df6b68b3449

HH: Hats off to some superb reporting today. Let’s do the facts first, and analysis second. Who is working for John McCain on immigration?

MM: Well, it’s a man named Dr. Juan Hernandez. He’s the Hispanic outreach director for the campaign, and my colleague, Brian Preston at Hot Air confirmed his status there, and dug up a sweet picture of Dr. Hernandez with Mark MacKinnon and Megan McCain, McCain’s daughter, during the Univision debate last December. The guy is somebody I’d known for a while. He’s been a debating opponent of mine for several years. And he is the king of double talk and crooked talk when it comes to border enforcement. He is a dual citizen of Mexico and the United States, and served in Vicente Fox’s administration, overseeing a now-defunct office called the presidential office for Mexicans abroad, whose primary and sole purpose was to undermine immigration enforcement in this country.

HH: Now Michelle Malkin, I think this is a fairly stunning bit of news, that John McCain’s director of Hispanic outreach is a former Mexican cabinet government official. Now I know he’s got dual citizenship, and that’s a legitimate form of citizenship. But to go get a former Vicente Fox cabinet member and make him your…it’s just not going to assuage the concerns of the base in the Republican Party, is it?

MM: Absolutely not. It’s going to confirm the suspicions of a lot of grassroots conservatives that despite McCain’s assurance that he now understands the need for border security, that in fact what he simply understands is that he has to pay lip service to it to try and get elected. And this guy is not just somebody that he hired on at the last minute. It turns out that he is also serving as a senior fellow at a McCain-founded non-profit, supposed non-profit, non-partisan think tank called the Reform Institute, which has come under scrutiny by mainstream media outlets in the last couple of years, because it appears that this thing was set up to solicit donations from people who then benefit from lobbying by McCain, for example the Cablevision company, but then also is used to funnel a lot of left wing, open borders money, including funding from George Soros.

Here is quote from Hernandez' own website:

http://www.juanhernandez.org/index-33.html

* A few weeks ago, Hernandez visited a U.S. credit union in North Carolina on a tour to extend banking privileges to undocumented Mexicans and to drive down wire-transfer fees for Mexicans sending money back to their families.

Translation: He wants banking privileges for illegals in the U.S. in order to expedite the flow of cash out of the United States to Mexico. Now we can better understand McCain's position on illegal immigration.

What's to Hate About Romney

2008-01-26T00:32:00.000-07:00

The American Thinker http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/why_they_hate_mitt_romney.html has this (and much more) to say about why the other candidates dislike Romney:

Why do the Republican candidates hate him? Because they don't have any answers to his challenges. They seek to undermine him by using personal attacks more worthy of a middle school playground than a presidential contest. This is politics and Washington as usual, and choosing any candidate that employs these tactics will only get us more of the same. One would hope that Americans could see beyond these base attacks and choose the candidate who is best for the country - Governor Mitt Romney.

McDemocrat -- McCain's true colors

2008-01-25T23:39:00.000-07:00

Hewitt has the latest bad news, including video on McCain's true nature. The video includes Britt Hume reporting that McCain actually considered crossing the aisle officially. I don't think it's crossing the aisle so much as he's trying to deliver the whole ship of the republic to the dems.

McCain may best be likened to Benedict Arnold: Once tremendously talented, an heroic patriot giving his blood and suffering for the nation -- but remembered only for selling out and betraying his nation. Arnold was to give up West Point to the British. McCain wants to give up the U.S. to Mexico and the Democrats (to add to his treacheries in campaign finance, tax cuts, etc.) It's difficult to tell which of his twin aims is more detrimental to the nation.

My Travel IQ

2008-01-21T11:53:00.000-07:00

On a completely different note, playing this game
http://www.travelpod.com/traveler-iq/game1?536d=5ca4
for the first time, I completed level 10 of 12 and I scored 373,168 with a traveler IQ of 111.

Romney Leads going into Florida

2008-01-21T11:05:00.000-07:00

Hugh Hewitt has results showing Romney leading both in delegates and in total votes -- with 59 delegates and 530,162 votes. And the results don't include Wyoming, which Mitt also won.

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog

Coulter continues her praise of Romney:
"One clue that Romney is our strongest candidate is the fact that Democrats keep viciously attacking him while expressing their deep respect for Mike Huckabee and John McCain. "

http://www.anncoulter.com/

"The candidate Republicans should be clamoring for is the one liberals are feverishly denouncing. That is Mitt Romney by a landslide. "

What's Huckabee really after:
Politico thinks it is to be a Mitt-Killer for McCain: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8003.html
“In Florida, McCain is desperate to keep conservative Republicans from coalescing around another candidate, and the best way to prevent it is to have the GOP vote fractured,” said University of Virginia political science professor Larry Sabato. “Huckabee knows that by keeping his candidacy alive, he’s potentially helping McCain win another split plurality vote. McCain knows it, too. Gratitude will follow — but whether that includes the vice presidency is anybody’s guess.”

I've wondered if the media hasn't latched on to Huckabee as a darling because they have a whole congregation of lunatic quotes and statements that can easily be made to sound like religious tyranny that they can beat him to death with in the general election and thus guarantee a win for Clinton or Obama. On the other hand, McCain might as well be a democrat, so the liberal media would like him just as well as either Hillary or Barak.

Ice Melt not caused by global warming

2008-01-21T10:57:00.000-07:00

An old and largely ignored article claims the melting of antarctic ice began approximately 10,000 years ago. Not caused by man-made global warming.
http://www.cnn.com/NATURE/9910/09/antarctic.meltdown/

Romney Appeal

2008-01-06T23:26:00.000-07:00

Malkin posted this with regard to the latest NH Debate:

Wow. Interesting. Frank Luntz’s focus group was just asked about Romney. Only a few raised their hands to say they supported him before the debate. Almost all raised their hands to say they were supporting him afterward.

Can't just be the hair, it didn't really change during the debate. I also notice that Malkin has started calling that Arkansas Govenor, "Shuckabee" -- and apparently the focus group found him to be slick and evasive.

I may not agree with Romney on everything -- but the more I see of him, the more I think that he should be the nominee -- with no one else even running a close second.

New Link on the Global Warming Hoax

2007-08-04T19:25:00.000-06:00

There are three issues that I consider to be the most important of our day:

1. Border Security
2. War against Terrorism
3. The global warming hoax

So in honor of the third item on my list, I have a new link: http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/

Probably already has more info that I will be able to accumulate.

I did just finish State of Fear -- and an objective reader can only come to one conclusion: You have to be a complete moron to believe in man-caused global warming.

Rope-a-dope in the Senate -- Dope Duped

2007-07-28T20:52:00.000-06:00

In an interesting coincidence, I find WeWin's latest post speculating on the retirement of a couple of the US Supreme Court Justices -- so that a Republican President can appoint their successors. To which I respond, what makes us think the Senate would confirm them before the election? Then I find Michelle Malkin quoting the following:

We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”

Schumer claims that he was duped by Alito and Roberts and didn't realize that they were going to be part of that evil child-eating conservative bloc.

Quote of the Week - Arrogance of Global warning

2007-05-31T23:01:00.000-06:00

is found here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,276722,00.html
"First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown," he continued. "And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take."

While I won't be quoted, I maintain 1) there is no man-caused global warming and 2) we ought not to do anything about the appearance of global warming.

But maybe one good thing can come of all of the religious movement that calls itself environmentalism, ecology, green, etc.. An alternative to oil -- not for the sake of the environment, which is not really much at risk from a global perspective, but to end our dependance on foreign oil.

As long as I'm rambling -- here is another prediction: Gas prices will continue to rise, making the oil in the U.S., which is currently too expensive to extract, a profitable venture. Americans will keep paying more and alternative fuel supplies will also become more cost effective.

Dirk Benedict

2007-05-12T23:38:00.000-06:00

http://www.dirkbenedictcentral.com/home/articles-readarticle.php?nid=5
This is a piece by Dirk Benedict called "Lost in Castration" a just indictment of the new Battlestar Galactica -- as well as much else -- just can't bring myself to watch it. But I still enjoy the reruns of the original.

Sharpton not so sharp -- a glass house divided

2007-05-09T22:30:00.000-06:00

Sharpton is one more who should go the way of Zumbo and Imus, but who will continuesto rage into that night. His recent comment, in spite of his feeble explanations are clear religious bigotry and the epitome of that which he purports to fight against.

These are Sharpton's words with regard to Mitt Romney:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270853,00.html
"As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways, so don't worry about that; that's a temporary situation,"

The words are unequivocal. The plain language of his speech is not subject to any alternative meaningful interpretation. Let's break it down: "As for the one Mormon running for office" -- Do you think he means McCain or maybe Brown, or Hunter? It is obvious to whom his remark made reference and even his explanation admits that he was talking specifically about Romney, and referring to Romney by his religion, not by political affiliation, position on issues or even nice teeth and big hair. This is the great problem that all of the excuses, discussions and spindectomies have missed: The fact that he would single out Romney, or any other candidate by his religious faith alone demonstrates Sharpton's problem: He is a bigot.

When I was a kid, a sort of public service commercial aired frequently that featured an old guy and his grandson fishing in a boat. The kid tells his grandfather that "Jimmy" (I forget the actual name used) told him that he was prejudiced. The kid asks the grandfather, why Jimmy would say that. The grandfather then asks the boy, "Who is Jimmy?" To which the kid responds, "Oh, he's my Jewish friend." And the grandfather informs the boy that he is prejudiced because he thinks of Jimmy as Jewish instead of just as his friend. I guess Sharpton never paid attention to simple messages like that.

Of course, Sharpton can't stop with just one Wylie Coyote step out into nothingness. He continues with "those who really believe in God" -- Sharpton has created a dichotomy. On the one hand we have Romney, i.e., "the one Mormon," and on the other hand we have "those who really believe in God." That would be two mutually exclusive and separate (but not equal) sets. The image is clear and simple. But wait, Sharpton explains that the one hand and the other hand are actually the same hand. He explains that he was including Romney as one of those who believe in God. Amusing but not convincing sleight of hand. If Sharpton had been trying to dispute Hitchens, who does not hide his atheism, Sharpton could have left out the word "really." Hitchens doesn't believe in God, so there would be no need for the emphasis intended by the word pairing "really believe." Sharpton would only need to make such an emphasis if he were making a comparison between those who have a sort of, or perhaps a pretend belief in God, and those like himself, who really and truly do believe. Sharpton's excuse is an attempt to graduate from coyote to pharisee. The pharisee's accused the Savior of casting out devils by the power of the devil. Sharpton would have us believe a species of the same befuddled argument: Those who really believe in God, including Mitt Romney, will defeat Mitt Romney. I think Romney understands that a house divided against itself cannot stand, and Sharpton should understand that too. His explanation has no substance and the leftist pundits defending him are insisting that the emperor looks great in those clothes -- and the clothes are not even new.

The concise translation of Sharpton's words are: Mormons, like Romney, don't really believe in God, they are mere poseurs in the Christian world.

Sharpton refuses to apologize. Why? Because Mormons are still fair game and the flap over his remarks will be short lived. The real problem for Sharpton and/or Christians is that a house divided against itself cannot stand and the criticisms that are routinely leveled at the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, (e.g., belief in miracles, revelation, heavenly messengers, etc.) are fundamentally the same arguments that athiests, like Hitchens, also make against Christianity in general but too many Christians fail to think beyond their own prejudices and forget there own glass house is subject to the same stones that they throw at Mormonism.

Republican Presidential Debate

2007-05-03T21:24:00.000-06:00

I watched the debate and actually enjoyed it.

Hewitt had a few thoughts; this was this first:

"1) Mitt Romney – Romney was clearly the class of the field. I know, I’m biased, blah, blah, blah. But if you saw the debate, believe your own eyes. Romney has a command of the facts and an effective delivery that must be the envy of the field. As America gets to know him in forums like this (not that I’m hoping there will be other forums precisely like this hideous one – perish that thought), the country will come to understand why Romney has generated such excitement among insiders and people who know him."

I thought his first 3 observations were right on. I disagree with Hewitt on Tancredo -- but it is true that he did look a little uncomfortable.

Illiteracy and Literacy

2007-05-03T21:09:00.000-06:00

This
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269533,00.html
story has a few important facts: 1) The top dems are illiterate on the Iraq War.
2) Eco friendly light bulbs are actually hazardous to the environment.

This
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May02/0,4670,ReaganDiaries,00.html
one refers to journal entries of a great man.

The "C" Word

2007-04-12T22:19:00.000-06:00

Imus goes all Dixie-Zumbo
or
The Laddie Is A Trampas

I know this makes two consecutive Coulter quotes but I think I've just made up my mind on this issue and her remarks are a good starting point. I disagree with much of Coulter's column on this, but this is what I think she got right:

"The reason people don't like what Imus said was because the women on the Rutgers basketball team aren't engaged in public discourse. They're not public figures, they don't have a forum, they aren't trying to influence public policy. They play basketball — quite well, apparently — and did nothing to bring on an attack on their looks or character. It's not the words Imus used: It would be just as bad if he had simply said the Rutgers women were ugly and loose. "

So all of the examples Coulter gives about Churchill and Reagan are really out of place. (I think there is a fancy debate term that would be an appropriate label for her tactic here, something like non sequitur or red herring or something else that I don't remember--I was never on the debate team). Anyway, back to my point. Those defending Imus (while deploring what he said) claim to honor his right to free speech. Well, Imus, like Zumbo and the chicks still has the right to free speech, it hasn't been infringed -- but speech still comes connected to another "C" word -- that word is of course, consequences.

Why should CBS continue to subsidize Imus' and his unprovoked and offensive remarks that insult private citizens who have neither influence in the public arena nor a forum comparable to a daily national radio show with which to respond? Cutting Imus constituted the correct choice. He still has his right to free speech -- but no longer subsidized speech. He has abused the privilege that he had (probably not the first time) and now suffers the consequences of that abuse.

I've also heard a great deal about the double standard, how it is unfair or that the consequences are unpredictable in public discourse where blacks can use that kind of language but others cannot. First, I don't believe that the words were really a racial slur. Yes, I am ignoring the whole Sharpton/Jackson uproar, but I always do; they are guys who have nothing but hammers in their tool box and they have neither the desire nor the skill to put their hand to the right tool for the job; they use a hammer in every situation--doing more harm than good. Imus' words were unwarranted and insulting to the individuals on the team, regardless of race. But, for those who continue to see the matter as a racial double standard,

Consider this passage from The Virginian:
' "I suppose you have me beat," said Steve, grinning at him affectionately. "You're a son-of-a----- when you get down to work. Well, so long! I got to fix my horse's hoofs."
' I had expected that the man would be struck down. He had used to the Virginian a term of heaviest insult, I thought. I had marvelled to hear it come so unheralded from Steve's friendly lips. And now I marvelled still more. Evidently he had meant no harm by it, and evidently no offence had been taken. Used thus, this language was plainly complimentary. I had stepped into a world new to me indeed...'

And contrast it with this passage from the same chapter:
'Therefore Trampas spoke. "Your bet, you son-of-a-----."
'The Virginian's pistol came out, and his hand lay on the table, holding it unaimed. And with a voice as gentle as ever, the voice that sounded almost like a caress, but drawling a very little more than usual, so that there was almost a space between each word, he issued his orders to the man Trampas:-
' "When you call me that, smile!" And he looked at Trampas across the table.
'Yes, the voice was gentle. But in my ears it seemed as if somewhere the bell of death was ringing...'

Imus didn't know the players -- he wasn't jesting or complimenting them. Unlike Steve, he had no relationship or common ground with the players from which to speak. Instead, like Trampas, his words were at least an insulting observation. If his words were a jest, they were not a jest with or to the players -- and when the remarks are being broadcast nationally, the players will hear them and be duly insulted.

So don't cry for Imus, Argentina. He'll probably get a more lucrative deal just around the corner.

Collecting Coulter

2007-04-06T21:17:00.000-06:00

Here's a snippet from Ann Coulter's latest -- this just slays me:

"These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever — and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?"

I love this loose cannon on the right. Under no circumstances should the right be apologizing for her. Although the comparison is unfair to Ann, I would ask, 'When was the last time you heard Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, or Barak Obama apologize for Michael Moore?' I also note that that tub of guts has been pretty silent of late (no doubt so that the aforesaid lefties won't be asked to apologize for him -- like that's even a remote possibility).

I didn't get the link for the article -- but try the Coulter link from my list.

Pick a Card

2007-04-06T21:10:00.000-06:00

An Orson Scott Card, that is.
Enjoy his article here:
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2007-03-18-1.html

I like this thought from the piece -- which I paraphrase or quote to the best of my recollection: "Frankly, I would be more concerned about George Soros telling a Democratic President what to do than the Mormon Church telling Mitt Romney what to do. "

Way off on way out

2007-04-06T20:53:00.000-06:00

This has been too long in coming --the Cam man at Way off Bass is now way out of my links. Hermes (Rightwing of the Gods) and skelly have also been replaced-- Now Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt.

Way off will be out once I grab a few of his links for my own site as that has become the only reason I go there anymore.

Link - Zumbo's discharge - Winning in Iraq

2007-03-29T19:05:00.000-06:00

I should probably add this guy http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com/ to my links. He doesn't claim to write well, but he enjoys good writing and quotes/links to some.

On other matters, I see Zumbo has eaten his words, claiming ignorance and new found wisdom. Of course, he could have educated himself before he shot his blog off and wounded (mortally, perhaps) his career. I find no excuse for his unsafe discharge and will therefore be slow to hearken to his cries for forgiveness. I hope his sponsors are equally slow; every marksman knows that you can't unfire the shot that has left the barrel.

On the Iraq War, Arthur Herman writes here http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110009862: That if gains are being made in winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, the hearts and minds of Congress are all but lost. He notes: "The roots of failure in fighting insurgencies like the one in Iraq are not military. To the contrary, Western militaries have shown remarkable skill in learning and relearning the crucial lessons of how to prevail against unconventional foes, and tremendous bravery in fighting difficult and unfamiliar battles. If Iraq fails, the cause will have to be sought elsewhere."

Herman uses David Galula's book "Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice," drawing lessons from the French experience in Algeria where "the key to success lay in bringing to the surface the portion of the populace that hated the guerrillas, and then turning that minority into a majority by a combination of political, social and cultural initiatives."
Galula broke the matter into three parts, which Herman say are applicable to Iraq today:
1. Concentration of Force to gradually win over areas to the cause -- block by block.
2. A visible and continuous military presence to build civil institutions, support and trust--punishing insurgents on the spot and visibly rewarding allies.
3. Projecting a sense of inevitable victory.

Herman reports that Gen. Petraeus is implementing these three strategies in Iraq. My concern is something that even the most historically challenged know -- the French pulled out of Algeria. Herman answers that concern with details about the history (a striking parallel with the situation in Iraq): The military had all but won the war in Algeria but De Gaule believed that he had to cut and run. "What happened was this: while the French military had been concentrating on fighting the insurgency in the streets and mountains in Algeria, an intellectual and cultural insurgency at home, led by the French left and the media, had been scoring its own succession of victories. " The opposition at home call the French leaders and soldiers "Nazis" -- sounds kind of familiar --blaming all the violence on the French (an irony in todays climate) so that the politicians ran scared, leaving Algeria "to a totalitarian band that had lost the war on the battlefield but managed to win a stunning victory in France itself. The result was the massive flight of Algerian whites and, at home, a bloodbath as FLN terrorists put to death tens of thousands of Muslim Algerians who had been loyal to the French regime. Soldiers who had fought alongside the French were forced to swallow their medals before they were shot."

Herman goes on -- this is a must read article.

Dumbo Zumbo -- biting the hand that feeds you

2007-03-23T22:14:00.000-06:00

The key to note is that the NRA and Outdoor life apparently acted quickly and properly:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=S3348&dbname=2007_record

I must admit that I seldom read Zumbo ( I can't even remember the last time) because of that snobbish attitude that many of those spoiled hunting writers get. They go on safaris and hunt everything in the world, perhaps paid for by the magazine or a gunmaker or bullet manufacturer or optic maker or some combination thereof, and then they criticize all of the poor "common" hunters enjoy something a little simpler and more easily attainable. Consider his use of the word "terrorist" in his description of the weapon used by some praire dog hunters: Why is he using such a word in conjunction with legitimate hunting activity? Remember, he's only talking about semi-automatic weapons which require a separate trigger pull for every shot; the sort of weapon that is popular for small varmit hunting. Truly a case of biting the hand that feeds you (maybe he was done eating). I guess he can commiserate with the Dixie Chicks -- and in a couple years he'll probably win some meaningless award that he doesn't deserve.

More Than A Feeling

2007-03-09T23:25:00.000-07:00

Another piece of my youth dies.

Brad Delp, the lead singer for Boston, a huge rock sensation in the 1970s, was found dead Friday in his home, police said. He was 55.

http://music.msn.com/music/article.aspx?news=254540&GT1=7702

I could not have told you who the lead singer was -- but I always loved that Boston sound -- both guitars and vocals blended in euphonious chords. On the other hand, my dad just called in screaming noise -- I listen now and think, he wasn't necessarily wrong, but I still like it.

Time is Energy

2007-03-09T22:32:00.000-07:00

"Congress extended daylight-saving time by three weeks in the spring and one week in the fall as part of a broad energy savings bill passed in 2005. "
http://tech.msn.com/howto/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3318115&GT1=9233

If moving the clock ahead saves energy, why move it back in six months? Why not keep it ahead, or better yet, keep moving it forward an hour every six months? -- eventually we should have an energy surplus.

The Poop on Global Warming

2007-02-01T20:31:00.000-07:00

Actually, I remain committed to the fact that "man-caused" global warming is the biggest hoax in history -- although that is not the conclusion released by the UN panel today (what a surprise).

However, this, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,248698,00.html?sPage=fnc.science/naturalscience is the more interesting story -- hence the title.

Funny how we had a slow hurricane and tornado year -- but the Al Bore(ing) and the UNscientists (pun intended) say global warming is responsible for the increased number and power of those phenomena. So why did we have an easy year?

The March to War

2007-01-12T18:48:00.000-07:00

Here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16593301/from/ET/ is the real threat.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, even North Korea are minor affairs compared to this looming problem:

"China will have 30 million more men of marriageable age than women... The tens of millions of men who will not be able to find a wife could also lead to social instability problems..."

What to do with those 30 million extra men -- I don't think the Chinese are interested in forming a peace corp.

You heard it here first: The world blood bath will have its source in Beijing.

China is a prospering nation, building up infrastructure and technology. Billions of U.S. dollars pour into the Chinese economy every year. Although China has prospered by adopting some of the trappings of Capitalism, it is Communism that rules, wielding both the sword and the purse strings. When the boom hits an inevitable bust cycle, the rest of the world will learn how China will avoid its "social instability problems."

More Strategies for Winning in Iraq

2007-01-04T13:43:00.000-07:00

This article from July 2005
http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/pollack/20050701.htm
by Kenneth M. Pollack proposed 5 steps to win back Iraq:
1. Build up the infrastructure and protect the Iraqi civilians: "de-emphasize chasing insurgents around the Sunni Triangle, and to instead put a higher priority on protecting Iraqis as they go about their daily lives."
2. Increase manpower: "Achieving these goals will require more than the 155,000 troops in the country, and it is time for the Bush administration to bite the bullet, whether by deploying additional standing forces, calling up reserves, or spurring recruitment by increasing pay and benefits (and maybe even providing a rationale that the American people would buy)." And also patrol on foot with the Iraqis
3. Give the Iraqis more time to train and have them deploy in formations with our troops.
4. Decentralize by getting beyond Baghdad.
5. Follow the tradition in the middle east of buying off the tribal leaders "to refrain from attacking the roads and government facilities and to keep other groups from doing so. Already some prominent Sunni sheiks have made overtures to the American authorities and the Iraqi government; they are willing to keep the peace if the price is right."

Here, http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/615hksxa.asp William J. Stuntz gives three reasons for increasing our forces in Iraq: "First, experience may suggest that more men and more materiel will lead to better results. Second, the value of victory or the cost of defeat may justify a greater investment in the fight. And third, time may be on the enemy's side: Sometimes victory must be won soon if it is to be won at all."

Here, http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/12/03/fighting_to_win_in_iraq/
Jeff Jacoby argues for sending more troops to Iraq: "Sending in significant reinforcements would not only make it possible to kill more of the terrorists, thugs, and assassins who are responsible for Iraq's chaos. It would help reassure Iraqis that the Washington is not planning to leave them in the lurch, as it did so ignominiously in 1991. The violence in Iraq is surging precisely because Iraqis fear that the Americans are getting ready to throw in the towel. That is why "they have turned to their own sectarian armed groups for the protection the Bush administration has failed to provide," Robert Kagan and William Kristol write in The Weekly Standard. "That, and not historical inevitability or the alleged failings of the Iraqi people, is what has brought Iraq closer to civil war."

In part two, Jacoby ridicules the appeasement/pull out recommendations.

Greg Palast posits here http://www.gregpalast.com/are-us-corporations-going-to-%E2%80%9Cwin%E2%80%9D-the-iraq-war that the way to win the war is by turning the reconstruction over to Iraqi rather than American companies.

How to Win in Iraq

2007-01-03T22:23:00.000-07:00

Information and opinions on how to win in Iraq.

I don't have an ounce of faith in John McCain, but his old article on the subject http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A14254-2003Nov7?language=printer
seems to be a legitimate starting point. He makes some good points but falls short on the details of his plan to commit at least another division. He does seem to favor a search and destroy campaign against the insurgents.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84508/andrew-f-krepinevich-jr/how-to-win-in-iraq.html In this article from 2005, Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr., suggests "an "oil-spot strategy" in Iraq, ... Rather than focusing on killing insurgents, they should concentrate on providing security and opportunity to the Iraqi people, thereby denying insurgents the popular support they need. Since the U.S. and Iraqi armies cannot guarantee security to all of Iraq simultaneously, they should start by focusing on certain key areas and then, over time, broadening the effort -- hence the image of an expanding oil spot. Such a strategy would have a good chance of success. But it would require a protracted commitment of U.S. resources, a willingness to risk more casualties in the short term, and an enduring U.S. presence in Iraq, albeit at far lower force levels than are engaged at present. If U.S. policymakers and the American public are unwilling to make such a commitment, they should be prepared to scale down their goals in Iraq significantly."

Krepinevich proposes this "hearts and minds" strategy to win the American people, the Iraqi people and the American soldier -- as opposed to a campaign to hunt insurgents. He admits that this strategy takes a great deal of time. Each "spot" would still require an anti-insurgent campaign followed by fortification and training of the Iraqi's within the area to increase security so reconstruction could begin. Krepinevich maintains that this strategy could be effectively carried out with fewer troops than the 140,000 in Iraq at the time he wrote the article.

The other pillar of Krepinevich's strategy is the Grand Bargain - a coalition of Iraqi interest groups. "The grand bargain would cut across key Iraqi religious and ethnic groups and across key tribal and familial units. Its underlying assumptions would be that there are significant elements of each major ethnic and religious group willing to support a democratic, unified Iraq; that a sufficiently broad coalition can be formed, over time, to achieve this end; and that the United States is willing to undertake a long-term effort, lasting a decade or longer, to ensure the grand bargain's success. " With the success of the grand bargain, U.S. troops could be scaled back to 60,000 or less.

I don't know if this piece on "Why Military Occupations Fail" gives any strategy for winning in Iraq, but it looks interesting. http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/pdf/isec_29_1_49_0.pdf I'll have to read and summarize it in another post.

There is also a stick figure presentation out there (see ABC news for it) that makes some simple points -- but I think it is too simplistic. I think Krepinevich's suggestion includes and goes beyond stick figures concepts.

This piece http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/how-to-winlose-the-war-in-iraq.htm advocates replacing the soldiers with a paramilitary police force.

This blog entry by Juan Cole http://www.juancole.com/2005/08/ten-things-congress-could-demand-from.html lays out a 10 step plan -- the first two steps are to withdraw nearly all of the ground troops. The remaining steps propose helping the Iraqi's with air power, weapons, and training. -- Really nothing more than a glorified cut and run proposal.

This August 2005 piece by Gen. Wesley Clark is long on criticism and short, in that old familiar way, on specifics for winning http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/25/AR2005082501623.html. It concludes with the cut and run solution.

This piece by Fred Gedrich and Paul E. Vallely http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20061227-092444-4051r.htm advocates putting the special forces in charge and letting the conventional military play a back up role.

More to come

Democracy French Style

2007-01-02T11:16:00.000-07:00

Some of the political parties in France are using the internet for their party primaries:

"Though many French parties were on the Web in the last presidential elections in 2002, the impact of political sites has skyrocketed during this campaign, helping change the way politics are done here. "

All geared to making even quicker surrenders possible. After all, those rifles that have never been fired and only dropped once, still cost money to produce.

"Socialist candidate Segolene Royal has made her Web site the cornerstone of a campaign based on what she calls "participative democracy," with users invited to take part in a host of online forums and debates. Royal, a former minister, drew on online feedback in drafting her platform, which she released chapter by chapter on the Web site.
"Politics must be based on the realities of people's lives," Royal has said. "

But here are some interesting "realities" from later in the article:

"UMP members have been issued security codes that allow them to access the polls on its Web site, though it would be hard to throw a race with only one candidate."

"Most of France's 40 million voters are not party members and thus not eligible to vote in primaries. "

So the primary has one candidate and most voters are ineligible to participate anyway -- now that's democracy in action.

BSU v. Nebraska

2007-01-02T10:53:00.000-07:00

The Boise State Broncos football team remain undefeated 13-0. Will any other team go undefeated? The BSU victory over Nebraska was a great game. It's unfortunate that BSU tried to give the game away in the last quarter (with help from the officials making more than generous pass interference calls) but the way BSU came back to snatch the victory from Nebraska in the final seconds and on the gutsy overtime two point play probably made it more exciting than the Ohio - Florida game is going to be.

Wouldn't it have been nice to see two undefeated teams battling each other?

News Themes

2006-12-21T22:35:00.000-07:00

Trump doesn't fire the beauty queen for unbecoming conduct.
Rosie O' is disturbed on so many levels that she makes attacks on Trump.
Trump says he'll sue and everything she touches turns to garbage.
Sandy Berger pleads guilty to smuggling out classified documents, hiding them in his shorts and socks; he hides them under a construction trailer, retrieves them and cuts up some and puts them in the garbage -- and then claims it was all just a mistake, a misunderstanding. (Meaning it was a mistake that he got caught).

Obviously, Berger had an accomplice -- Rosie O' must have touched the documents.

One man's treasure

2006-12-05T18:16:00.000-07:00

"My project in Antarctica is to gain understanding of ice and its relationship to glass. "
http://davidruth.blogspot.com/ the september 25th entry.

Maybe I'm judging too harshly -- but isn't this an incredible waste of time and money etc.???

Distasteful

2006-12-05T18:06:00.000-07:00

There's nothing quite so repulsive a sphincter being laid bare. Lileks bleat of this date has the
"the now-famous Danny DeVito scene on The View..."

http://www.lileks.com/bleats/index.html

We're just so darned unilateral

2006-10-30T21:34:00.000-07:00

This is really all I need to hear to be in favor of the border fence.

The 28 nations express "deep concern regarding the decision adopted by the United States of America to build and extend a wall on its border with Mexico, considering it to be a unilateral measure that goes against the spirit of understanding," it said in the declaration, which was read out by Mexico's Ambassador Alejandro Garcia Moreno.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,225318,00.html

Funny that there is a "UN" in unilateral -- I guess I've finally found a "UN" that I favor.

What are we thinking

2006-10-11T20:57:00.000-06:00

"Schools are one of the few places in the United States where the government has guaranteed that there will be no licensed, trained adults with a concealed firearm that could be used to resist a would-be mass murderer."

Just think about it.

Now read the whole article. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTNmZDZhYzg4NTMwODFlMzFmOThjNjhkODMzYzYzMWI

It's not just hitting the fan

2006-10-05T21:39:00.000-06:00

It's in the water too:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/28/AR2006092801994.html
"...more than half of the bacteria in the streams came from wild creatures. EPA documents show that similar problems were found in Maryland, where wildlife were more of a problem than humans and livestock combined in the Magothy River, and in Northern Virginia tributaries such as Accotink Creek, where geese were responsible for 24 percent of bacteria, as opposed to 20 percent attributable to people."

More hunting equals cleaner water?

Like this is going to work

2006-10-02T20:41:00.000-06:00

Israel withdrew the last of its troops from Lebanon early Sunday, fulfilling a key condition of the Aug. 14 cease-fire that ended a monthlong war against Hezbollah guerrillas.
The pullout ended a nearly three-month troop presence in Lebanon and cleared the way for the full deployment of an international peacekeeping force that will police the border with the Lebanese army.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216870,00.html

The way is cleared for "full deployment" of the international peacekeeping force that won't even dare to require the Hezbollah to give up their weapons as resolved by the UN.

The cease-fire also calls for the unconditional release of the soldiers. The United Nations has appointed a mediator to try to win the soldiers' freedom, most likely through a prisoner swap with Israel.

Unfortunate for those soldiers that their fate is in the hands of the UN.

No Fun Allowed

2006-10-02T20:32:00.000-06:00

Overnight stays in national parks fell 20 percent, to 13.8 million, between 1995 and 2005, and are down another 4.3 percent for the first eight months of 2006.
Among the declines in the 10-year period, tent camping dropped 23 percent, backcountry camping fell 24 percent and RV camping was down 31 percent.
"Camping is one of those areas that is a concern to us," said Butch Street, a statistician for the National Park Service who compiles the figures each year. "That is definitely going down.
"Let's face it: It's hard to protect the parks if no one is interested in them."

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4391721

I love that last line about it being hard to protect the parks if no one is interested in them. I thought that was goal of the park service -- keep people out of the parks, and that way they (the parks) are protected. Rules, regulations, park fees used to create improved areas and then only those improved areas can be used -- all of the old places a person could camp can no longer be used. This is what the environmentalist trend leads to -- keeping the public away from nature. I'm just surprised the article did not list global warming as a probable reason for the decline.

Back Like a Bad Rash -- 7 times

2006-09-28T22:51:00.000-06:00

An illegal immigrant who has been arrested previously on drug and firearms charges and deported seven times Friday pleaded not guilty to illegally re-entering the United States.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,211807,00.html?sPage=fnc.specialsections/immigration

Records also show Garcia-Morales was convicted of misdemeanor drug possession in Las Vegas in February 2000 and sentenced to 45 days as part of a plea agreement after he was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to sell, possession of an unregistered firearm and drawing a deadly weapon in a threatening manner.

I'm guessing that he must have been a rather poor artist -- perhaps his drawing simply lacked feeling and could not adequately convey enough threat to warrant actual punishment.

Seven Times? How about the third time is life in prison in a low budget warehouse -- and I don't mean working for WalMart. I guess either alternative is probably too severe.

But for sure we don't want the U.N. in charge of border security -- see below -- they would have to wait for a "political consensus" before doing anything.

The Teeth of the U.N.

2006-09-28T22:29:00.000-06:00

UNbelievable the power of U.N. resolutions. 6 weeks later and the terrorists (which the UN still refuses to define) are still armed.

But the multinational troops, who now number 5,000, are acutely aware that their presence could become unpopular if they are viewed as supporting Israel's attempts to eliminate Hezbollah's arms.
French peacekeepers setting up base near the town of Deir Kifa noted they had encountered a less-than-friendly reception from some residents, who defiantly waved yellow Hezbollah flags.
"We mustn't be seen as an occupying force — the people can reject us very quickly," said Col. Jerome Salle.
He said the U.N. troops would mount patrols but would not establish checkpoints on public roads, to avoid inflaming residents.
Gen. Alain Pelligrini, the French officer who commands the U.N. force, said the peacekeepers wouldn't even act if they saw weapons being carried openly by Hezbollah fighters.
"No, I would ask the Lebanese army to intervene and if the Lebanese army has difficulties in intervening, then we would see what we need to do," he said last week.
Halim Sarhan, who runs a dental laboratory in the market town of Nabatiyeh, expressed a common sentiment when he said no one should try to disarm Hezbollah by force. "There must be political consensus on the issue first," he said.
Hezbollah has said it would agree to disarm only if the government is strong enough to defend Lebanon against Israel — a stance that reflects its own ambitions to become the country's dominant political force.
Read the whole article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216364,00.html

I wonder just how long it will take before a "political consensus" disarms Hezbollah.

2006-09-16T17:09:00.000-06:00

http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/2006/09/13/wars_books_and_democrats.php

Enjoy Victor Davis Hanson at the above link. Hat tip to Way off Bass for leading me to it. Here are a my favorite excerpts:

"Just a passing note of general observance: why is it that those who support the current policy of democratization in Iraq seem dispassionate, and consider counter-arguments, while those who write off Iraq are furious, angry, and in near apoplexy discount any who disagree?"

"Frustrations follow from learning that a cobbled together coalition of gay marriage advocates, radical feminists, abortion on demand supporters, the old race industry emblemized by Jesse Jackson, as well as the radical pacifism of the leftwing blogs—all that only garners 45% of the popular vote—..."

Illegal Trash Dumping

2006-09-16T16:56:00.000-06:00

Those who say illegals are trashing the country may have a point:

Immigrants crossing through the forest leave behind trash and leftovers, tainted with human scent, that teach the bears that people mean food, experts said. And the numbers of crossers and the trash is growing.
"The number of job seekers, drug smugglers and other illegal traffic coming through the mountain ranges has resulted in interactions that we're concerned may exacerbate human-bear interaction," Skinner said. "There's a tremendous amount of trash including food items that's being left on these travelways."
That means bears are more likely to move into areas where people live, because they know there is food and they've lost much of their fear of humans. Since mid-June, Bahti said Game & Fish has had more than 30 calls about nuisance bears.
"We've got more doggone bears than you can shake a stick at," Bahti said.
Illegal immigrants crossing into Arizona invariably carry backpacks with clothing, food and toiletries that they throw away, and the discarded food, and even toothpaste, are prime attractions for the bears, Skinner said.
The biologist for the Forest Service's Sierra Vista Ranger District has voiced his concern, Skinner said.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/26374.php

At least in AZ, it's just the bears getting killed -- see below.

The Price of Night Hunting

2006-09-16T16:38:00.000-06:00

A hunter who fatally shot an undocumented immigrant on a South Texas ranch when he mistook the man for a hog should not be indicted, a Maverick County grand jury has decided.
The grand jury's no bill means Jaime Gonzalez will not be charged with manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide for the 2004 shooting near El Indio...
Maverick County District Attorney Roberto Serna said he first presented the case to the grand jury last spring and didn't resume the presentation until Monday, when the jury declined to indict Gonzalez.
He said the grand jurors saw every report related to the case and interviewed live witnesses.
"They asked a lot of questions and were very attentive and tried to sort it out," Serna said. "I just presented the case to the grand jury and they decided what to do."
Celestino Lopez is survived by a wife and five children in the Mexican state of Guanajuato.
Lopez's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit last year against Gonzalez and the owner of the ranch, Eduardo Rodriguez, seeking $8 million in damages.
The case was settled out of court in November for $50,000. The settlement included legal costs for Lopez's widow and $1,800 for each of his five children. The children's money was put into U.S. savings accounts under their names, according to court records.

Read the whole story here:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4186090.html
Anyone know if it's legal in TX to hunt hogs at night?

Ann Coulter

2006-06-17T22:53:00.000-06:00

Coulter has received a lot of attention recently for comments in her latest book. I understand sales of the book are really hot. I read a few pages in the store and loved it. I'll have to get it. While she has been condemned for her shrill tone and pointed attacks. I begin to think that she's the only conservative with any of those things that four of lets you take your base. Funny how the scraggily faced doughboy (aka michael moore) and the grinning gnome (alias Al Franken), among others can make false and terrible attacks and no one cares. Actually, I guess that's what happened to Air America -- no one cared -- never mind.

Earth Day Activities

2006-04-22T15:27:00.000-06:00

Things that I did, or would have like to have done, on Earth day:

Mowed the yard with a gas engine mower.
Barbecued meat on a grill over charcoal.
Cut down a tree and used it to build a table, chairs, and swing set.
Built a wood fire and burned styrofoam on it.
Bulldozed a weedy lot and filled in a fetid pond (aka wetland).
Poured used motor oil over noxious weeds.
Dropped a boulder on a solar powered car.
Trapped or shot and skinned a wild animal varmint and used the hide to make useful leather goods.
Shot a deer or an elk and put the meat in the freezer.
Give an extreme environmentalist a wedgee.
Burned ditch banks and fields.
Delivered a couple tons of manure to Al Franken and Michael Moore -- just returning the favor.

Idiots on Planes

2006-04-15T22:29:00.000-06:00

Traveling frequently by plane, I overhear many things. Last week some moron two seats back was loudly proving that adage about opening one's mouth and removing all doubt (about being a fool). My favorite litte gem was this statement:
What Europe learned from WWII that the U.S. failed to learn is that war doesn't solve anything; the military is a useless tool.

I invite your comments.

The loud one obviously does not possess a knowledge, or even a vague familiarity of the actions abroad of the European nations after WWII. I'm tempted to rant on but the lateness of the hour whispers restraint.

Pascal Follow Up

2006-04-15T22:26:00.000-06:00

I must confess that I have stopped reading Pascal's thoughts. Thus the progression:

1. Great thoughts
2. A great many thoughts
3. A great many boring thoughts

By What Right

2006-04-15T22:18:00.000-06:00

Right-Wing of the Gods: "Those whose country this is, have every right in the world to say 'no' ... That's what ownership means - one has the right to make one's own choices, even bad ones - and the citizenry owns its country. Please do not insult anybody's intelligence by pretending to believe otherwise. Note that Mexico, whose government has long screamed a blue streak about US limitations on Mexican immigration, has not been shy about limiting immigration into Mexico from Central America, from countries whose emigres often have had a far stronger claim to refugee status than the vast majority of would-be Mexican immigrants. "

I expect to hear from my friend Mike on this issue. I think that quite some time ago I did a post or two on the founding father's views on the immigration issues. I will renew that one or post another. In the meantime, RWOTG is worth the read.

Blaise Pascal - Thoughts

2006-03-11T22:07:00.000-07:00

Blaise Pascal Quotes - The Quotations Page: "If all men knew what each said of the other, there would not be four friends in the world. "

I have started reading Pascal's Thoughts (no I have not acquired psychic powers -- reading from a book, I mean). I wish I had the time to add my own -- but no such luck -- but we shall see.

New Funeral Plan

2006-01-12T12:22:00.000-07:00

Coroner: Body Was In Madisonville Home For Years: "the deceased believed when she died she would come back to life and her caregiver wanted to honor that wish. "

She may have been a reader of Edgar Allen Poe and wanted to avoid that whole nasty escaping from the tomb problem.

Federalist No. 37, part 1

2005-12-22T13:16:00.000-07:00

Carrying-on in that manner to which I am accustomed, i.e., having no rhyme nor reason but rambling about like an unsupervised three-year old burning off skittles and juice, I present some excerpts from The Federalist No. 37.

Madison, in attempting to "determine clearly and fully the merits of this Consitution, and the expediency of adopting it," rehearses the issues which faced the Constitutional Convention. His list includes the "stability and energy in government, with the inviolable attention due to liberty and to the republican form." Madison states, "Energy in government is essential to that security against external and internal danger, and to that prompt and salutary execution of the laws which enter into the very definition of good government." These are the fundamental purposes of government. A government without the power to protect the citizens against dangers from without and from within and to enforce its laws is little more than a pinata -- a painfully empty one at that. Madison follows with the argument for stability. "Stability in government is essential to national character and to the advantages annexed to it, as well as to that repose and confidence in the minds of the people, which are the chief blessings of civil society." A stable government affords the citizenry better opportunities for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, including commerce and property, than would insecure institutions subject to frequent change.

Madison also recognizes the inherent tension between liberty and the stability and energy in government. "The genius of republican liberty seems to demand on the one side, not only that all power should be derived from the people, but that those intrusted with it should be kept in dependence on the people, by a short duration of their appointments; and that even during this short period the trust should be placed not in a few, but a number of hands. Stability, on the contrary, requires that the hands in which power is lodged should continue for a length of time the same. A frequent change of men will result from frequent return of elections; and a frequent change of measures from a frequent change of men: whilst energy in government requires not only a certain duration of power, but the execution of it by a single hand."

In this paper, Madison does not reveal the constitutional resolution of the tension between energy, stability, and liberty. He simply states that the convention faced an arduous task. He goes on to describe the extreme difficulty in defining the line between the power of the states and the power of the federal government, and between the states themselves. He considers the nearly insurmountable difficulties faced by the convention and marvels that a resolution was obtained at all, noting: "It is impossible for a man of pious reflection not to perceive in it a finger of that Almighty hand which has been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stages of the revolution."

Winter Solstice

2005-12-21T10:49:00.000-07:00

Winter Solstice Brings Shortest Day Of Year: "The winter solstice marks the shortest day and the longest night of the year. The sun appears at its lowest point in the sky, and its noontime elevation appears to be the same for several days before and after the solstice.
Following the winter solstice, the days begin to grow longer and the nights shorter. "

If it's the shortest day, it must be followed by the longest night, right? Is it somehow significant? If so, how?

Link Change

2005-11-30T09:49:00.000-07:00

BlondeJustice is no more - at least at this site. I have replaced that link with YeahRightWhatever.

Quick Come Backs

2005-11-22T08:40:00.000-07:00

The Dilbert Blog:This is just the first of Scot Adams' excuses for buying over priced bottled water. "If I'm dumb enough to buy water, I'm certainly dumb enough to pay too much for it!" An entertaining site. I'm probably the last one to know about it.

WMD's

2005-11-18T11:42:00.000-07:00

FrontPage magazine.com :: Where the WMDs Went by Jamie Glazov: "the error was not with the pre-war assessment, the error was with the weapons hunt. "

Results...

2005-11-15T08:54:00.000-07:00

Results...: "
Rohirrim

To which race of Middle Earth do you belong?
brought to you by Quizilla"

Marriage Penalty

2005-11-15T08:34:00.000-07:00

This: Sounds exactly like a case that I got a call about last week. But in my case, the roles were reversed and the ages were 13 and 21. The scary part was the "friend" considering an abortion as the way to hide the evidence.
Hat tip to Lammers for the link.

Consider This On Veteran's Day

2005-11-11T12:31:00.000-07:00

Orson Scott Card recognizes Scowcroft: as scold rather than a strategist because Scowcroft (like most of the left on this issue) presents only criticism and no solutions. Card goes on to examine "reality" based foreign policy and near the end he offers this:
"But if they prevail in the next election, will their policies accomplish more and better things than our present ones? Will they be more realistic? Does Scowcroft think that the isolationism and appeasement and token self-defense policies of a Clinton administration are better than what we have now?
Perhaps so. And perhaps he'll get his way -- certainly Hillary, the likely Democratic candidate, is, if anything, more anti-defense and pro-appeasement than Bill ever was.
But under the Clintons, our military strength was gutted, our readiness brought to its lowest ebb since the Depression. If that were to happen again, then what kind of 'realistic' foreign policy could America hope to pursue? Without military might and the disposition to use it in a good cause, the only thing we can realistically do about anything in the world is wring our hands and send diplomats around.
You know, like the U.N. "

Arbitrary Cat

2005-11-10T09:25:00.000-07:00

Arbitrary and Capricious: "his cat's behavior showed who should live and who should die has been sentenced to 50 years in prison for first-degree murder, the top of the standard range."

I just want to know -- what happened to the cat?

What about North America?

2005-11-08T10:02:00.000-07:00

Radio Blogger: Victor David Hanson discusses the French Riot Situation with Hugh Hewitt: "VDH: I think it's two-fold. I think it tells us that with our own un-policed borderd, and ten to fifteen million illegal aliens in the United States, that we can immigrate and assimilate them much better, because of our egalitarian, populist traditions, if we get serious. And we do not want to have a MECHA, ATZLAN, La Raza culture dividing us. That's one. And two, I think it should really bring a little sobriety about Europe. We've had this nostalgia, this idea that the Europeans have transcended all of our problems. In fact, economically, militarily, politically, socially, they're in a complete mess, and I got that the last three and half weeks. "

VDH goes on to point out how european governments swing left and then a "man on a horse" -- a strong man appears with promises to lead them out of the mess. Interesting. I am more concerned about MECHA and ATZLAN as radical, perhaps militant groups who might like to do the same thing here -- not assimilating but making a reconquista. But perhaps I'm just paranoid.

European Powder Keg

2005-11-08T09:51:00.000-07:00

Radio Blogger: "This is a fuse that's been lit all over Europe. " These are Mark Steyn's words from a Hugh Hewitt interview.

It was 20 years ago that I was in France, 7 months in Paris and a year in other parts. The Arab enclaves existed then but they were certainly not threatening. In fact, I found the Arabs (and I'm lumping all of the Muslims whether from the Levant, North Africa, Iran or elsewhere unfairly into one clump, but that was the terminology we used), very friendly. They were always willing to talk and especially to argue. Late one night, a "gang" of Arabs in their teens and twenties were the only other people in the subway with me and another guy. They had a fight among themselves but were very civil to us. In fact, the only guy that ever threatened me, a guy in the mandatory military service and apparently home on leave came at me with a broken beer bottle but his designs were frustrated. One weird experience was being invited into the home of a Lebanese Muslim listening to the radio as live reports were coming in of fighting between the marines and Shiites (as I recall) -- he was a shiite. My how times have changed. It doesn't sound like an American would be welcome at all in those enclaves anymore.

North of the border, up Ottawa Way...

2005-11-07T10:31:00.000-07:00

There is a revolution hidden in a definition. North of border, gay marriage spurs social revolution: "How could a simple law redefining marriage as a union of 'two persons' have such a revolutionary effect? There are two reasons.
First, marriage is Western society's most fundamental institution. As such, it is embedded throughout our law, child-rearing practices and culture in general. When marriage is redefined, other social institutions are likewise transformed.
Second, when male-female marriage and same-sex marriage become equal in the eyes of the law, treating them differently becomes discrimination. In Canada, 'privileging' male-female marriage in any way is now a violation of human rights. According to Henry, 'Canadians who believe in the historic definition of marriage, who believe that children need a mother and father, are now the legal equivalent of racists.'"

Anyone recognize the title tune? -- Change "North" to "South," "up" to "down," and "Ottawa" to Mexico