If you're gonna oppose Judge Alito, do it for the right reasons.

Think Progress has a handy Alito guide, featuring pithy headings such as "ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE" and "ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION". Such themes are being embraced in unsurprising places.

Patterico has already done a great job of outlining the true nature and implications of Alito's dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (which Think Progress wrongly construes as evidence that Judge Alito would overturn Roe); I thought I should touch upon Alito's dissent in Bray v. Marriott, which Think Progress offers as evidence that "Alito would allow race-based discrimination."

Read More »

*** Alito for SCOTUS it is. A mixed bag for me, though a solid win for conservatives:

Unlike Roberts, he has opined from the bench on both abortion rights, church-state separation and gender discrimination to the pleasure of conservatives and displeasure of liberals.

While he has been dubbed "Scalito" by some lawyers for a supposed affinity to conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and his Italian-American heritage, most observers believe that greatly oversimplifies his record.

Alito is considered far less provocative a figure than Scalia both in personality and judicial temperament. His opinions and dissents tend to be dryly analytical rather than slashing.

And yes, he's eminently qualified.

*** Dean Esmay on WMD historical revisionism:

Having been part of those debates when they were happening, I am utterly appalled at people I used to think of as intelligent and well-informed who keep repeating falsehood after falsehood after falsehood about it. And I am utterly exhausted with having to, at least once a month or so, go back and rehash the same arguments because some people are not simply honest enough, diligent enough, or caring enough to go back and look at the historical record and just be honest about it.

*** What's a a tadpole?

A tadpole (technically known as a protein-DNA chimera) is a hybrid of two molecules. Its head is a protein designed to bind to one specific type of molecule. Its tail is a strip of DNA that serves as a chemical bar code. Despite its name, the tadpole isn't alive. It's a chemical sticky. Mix some tadpoles into a blood sample and their heads will stick to, say, the specific kind of protein that breaks loose into your blood as a prostate tumor develops—months before your doctor would notice anything funny down there. In the past, biologists would have struggled to find and count the protein heads. But the tadpoles' DNA tails stand out like price tags. "No other biological molecule can be quantified as easily, or with as much sensitivity, as DNA," Ian Burbulis, the biker biologist, explained to me.
...
To test your blood for cancer, a medical lab would mix the tadpoles with a single drop of your blood. A minute or two later the tester would wash away any tadpoles that hadn't bound to a target. To measure the remaining tadpoles—the ones that have latched onto cancer indicators, the tester would place the tadpole-bearing blood sample into a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) machine, a sort of incubator that replicates short DNA strands.

This is the genius part. Even if there were only a dozen tadpoles in your blood sample, the PCR would multiply their tails until there were enough (say a thousand or so) to be detected by standard lab gear. By dividing what he or she had just multiplied, the tester would know roughly how many tadpole tails—and hence how many cancer-indicating molecules—were in your blood sample. The whole process takes an afternoon at most. MSI refused to let me quote a number until rigorous trials are done, but I'd wager that tadpoles could be at least 10 times more sensitive than current lab tests at spotting cancer.

Very cool. If it seems like the pace of medical technological development is accelerating, you're right, it is.

Part of a series:

Wilson was sent to Africa on an investigative mission regarding nuclear weapons, but never asked to sign any sort of secrecy agreement(!). Wilson returns, reports, then publishes an oped in the New York Times (!!) about his mission. This pretty much ensures that people will start asking why he was sent, which leads to the fact that his wife arranged it. Once Wilson's oped appeared, Plame's covert status was in serious danger. Yet nobody seemed to care. *(emphasis added)

Batman: Robin, we've got to find out who sent Wilson to Africa and why...
Robin: Maybe the CIA asked him to go because he had worked as a diplomat in several African countries, including Niger, and maybe he had contacts there that he could speak to?
Batman: That would be easy, Robin. Too easy. And not convoluted enough. No, there must be some riddle... Who sent him on this merry errand? Wait... merry, marry? Who do men marry, Robin?
Robin: Their wives!
Batman: Exactly! To the Batmobile!

The op-ed only leads to the fact that his wife sent him if that classified fact is leaked by those in the know. Nobody would have asked for the name of the individual who sent him, no foreign spycatcher would have started an investigation of his family. Can we please just stop trying to argue that Wilson brought this down on his wife?

Batman: What is yellow and writes?

Read More »

Yes Professor, it bears repeating:

ONE OF THE THINGS I'VE NOTICED in the Judy Miller / Scooter Libby coverage is the development of a new history that's very convenient for a lot of the people peddling it. The new story is that:

1. We only went to war because of WMDs -- that was the only reason ever given.

2. Bush lied about those.

3. He told his lies to Judy Miller, who acted like a stenographer and reported them.

4. Everyone else gullibly went along.

There are lots of problems with this, beginning with the fact that it's not true. I've addressed much of this -- especially parts 1 & 2 -- in earlier posts like this one, this one, and especially this one. It gets tiresome having to repeat this stuff, but the new history, despite it's falsity, is just too convenient for too many people to be stopped by anything as simple as the truth.

Yep. Distortion through frame of reference, and all. How quickly some of us forget ... or dissemble during evasion of honest discourse.

A reader's response to selective editing at the New York Times:

I know it just kills you guys to think that overwhelmingly our soldiers actually, consciously support the war, are perfectly aware of the dangers they face, and are as perfectly prepared to face them. I know it comforts all the Timesmen and women to think that soldiers are just sad, pathetic, barely literate dupes (when they aren’t being babykillers and Koran flushers), but in fact the soldiers view their lives as imbued with transcendent meaning, apparently something no Times reporter can claim. Maybe it’s just envy on the part of all your reporters that these American teenagers in uniform make history every day of their lives, while you all just continue to transparently twist the news and to accumulate contempt from the American people, which is now compounding at a daily rate.

Of course, the original, truncated letter that inspired the rebuke is the main event:

I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.

Have you ever seen one of those mysteries, where you can just tell the writer started at the ending and worked his way backwards, coming up with ridiculous "clues" that no non-imaginary person without benefit of hindsight would have reasonably come up with?

Yeah.

It's like something from the old Batman TV show.

"But wait! It happened at sea! See? "C" for Catwoman!"

Let's take a look at "Batman Versus The Foreign Spycatcher":

Read More »

Blackfive responds to Peter Daou.

*** New technology could make Dan Rather lean right.

*** Iraqi widow shoe slaps the terrorist who killed her husband. Very sad. Apparently this is a clip from one of the "Most Wanted" programs that are popular in Iraq.

*** No Fitzmas for Kos?

*** Raging Bill Gates headbuts camera.

*** "Cuba Accepts U.S. Aid Offer For The First Time." I'll leave the commentary to Val.

Sulu is gay.

Evolution: The Dover trial is looking pretty interesting. (Via WWR)

George Galloway: Repeatedly accused of being bribed under Oil-For-Food, this time in the Final Report of the UN's Independent Inquiry Committee. Ouch! (pdf, starting on pg. 71, more links at Tim Blair's)

No Miss Moneypenny in the new Bond movie. *

Napoleon Dynamite fans, check out these ads for the Utah State Fair. (Via File It Under)

Lady Miers
Embraced by peers
Plebes without JD
Howled with glee

For
your destruction

Lady Miers
Pride through my tears
Wracked with sobs
Mocked by snobs

Elitism
their instruction

Oh Sweet Lady Miers
I have such fears
The Mob has won
Blogs jumped the gun

GOP
obstruction.

Oh lovely, lovely Lady Miers ...
The smoke ... it clears
Though it begins anew
I'll always love you

My heart's
abduction.

Read More »

Harriet Miers Withdraws Nomination

Read More »

We did it! We did it!

BOW BEFORE THE MIGHTY POWER OF THE BLOGSWARM, BEEHORTCH!

...

What?

...

What?!

Why are you looking at me like that?

The most relevant analysis of George Galloway's recent troubles can only come from the fascist advocate's dogged bete noir, Christopher Hitchens:

Just before my last exchange with George Galloway, which occurred on the set of Bill Maher's show in Los Angeles in mid-September, I was approached by a representative of the program and asked if I planned to repeat my challenge to Galloway on air. That challenge—would he sign an affidavit saying that he had never discussed Oil-for-Food monies with Tariq Aziz?—I had already made on a public stage in New York. Maher's producers had been asked, obviously by a nervous Galloway, to find out whether I had brought such an affidavit along with me. I replied that this was not necessary, since his public denial to me was on the record and had been broadcast, and since it further confirmed the apparent perjury that he had committed in front of the U.S. Senate on May 17, 2005. I added that I wanted no further contact with Galloway until I could have the opportunity of reviewing his prison diaries.

That day has now been brought measurably closer by the publication of the report of the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. This report, which comes with a vast archive of supporting material, was embargoed until 10 p.m. Monday and contains the "smoking gun" evidence that Galloway, along with his wife and his chief business associate, were consistent profiteers from Saddam Hussein's regime and its criminal exploitation of the "Oil for Food" program.

Hitchens examines the details of the new evidence and Galloway's various denials in the rest of the piece. Also notable is this graph:

Yet this is the man who received wall-to-wall good press for insulting the Senate subcommittee in May, and who was later the subject of a fawning puff piece in the New York Times, and who was lionized by the anti-war movement when he came on a mendacious and demagogic tour of the country last month. I wonder if any of those who furnished him a platform will now have the grace to admit that they were hosting a man who is not just a pimp for fascism but one of its prostitutes as well.

(Emphasis mine)

As a flashback to another example of the Washington Post Express's ridiculous anti-war bias, recall their narrative for Galloway's testimony back in May (representative of many Western outlets):

The other day, the "Express" version of the Post, which is handed out at various Metro stations as a commuter read, had an interesting headline describing George Galloway's testimony before the Senate regarding his bribery implication in the Oil-For-Food scandal.

Was it, "British Lawmaker Questioned for Iraq Bribery Ties?" Nope.

How about "UK MP Denies Pre-War Bribery Charges?" Nope.

It was something like (paraphrasing)...

"Lawmakers Rebuked Over Iraq."

As in, the lead was that the criminally charged British MP flew to Washington, DC in order to lecture our Senators for their decision to go to war. What an astonishing choice of headline.

Since everyone else is linking this odd formula to determine blog worth, here you go ...

Your blog, indcjournal.com, is worth $421,711.38

Great. To be honest, I was skeptical; how does the formula calculate worth? Why haven't I received any bids? What a load of hooey, etc.

But after running another familiar blog's projected worth, I became a BELIEVER:

Your blog, llamabutchers.mu.nu/, is worth $0.00

To the penny, I'd say. Spooky.

*** Moment of editorial disgust: today's Washington Post Express (the free mini-rag handed out on the subway), once again asserts its ideological identity by featuring a huge, color, semi-fish-eye perspective graphic of a line of American memorials in Iraq (boots, rifle, helmet) with the reverse bolded 60+ point type "2,000 DEAD" to celebrate report the grim, round number of the latest casualties from the two-and-a-half year old conflict.

This comes a mere few weeks after the same publication described an incident where insurgents pulled a handful of unarmed elementary schoolteachers out of their classrooms and executed them as ... wait for it ... "a bold attack." (no link, it's strictly a print edition)

This editorializing is repellent.

(And please note that I limit the use of the terms "repellent," "disgust," and/or "I'm outraged" to no more than 10 references during any calendar year.)

*** Some perspective on US casualties in Iraq:

Of course, there is a clear moral difference between "ordinary" deaths and military deaths in war. So let us draw a comparison to the statistics on American military fatalities in modern wars. According to a site that tracks such information, the fatalities rates, including killed-in-action and non-battle deaths, were:

For World War I, over 6,100 per month.
For World War II, over 9,200 per month.
In Korea, over 900 were killed each month (non-battle death information is not available).
For Vietnam, over 600 per month.
For Gulf War I, almost 300 in one month.

The first Gulf War was noted for its remarkably low casualties. Some even observed that the death rate for the deployed American military personnel was lower then than that during peacetime, making it "safer to be at war than at home" for the soldiers. In comparison, an average of 53 died each month in this war.
...
Today the news-hungry media reports each death in an agonizing, repetitive fashion. One learns of a death in the morning newspapers, hears about it on radio on the way to work, sees it on CNN during lunch time, and the cycle repeats itself for few more hours in the evening, capped by a special on Nightline. The effect is that the impact of each death is sensationally and numbingly magnified without any reference to the contexts, such as toppling a murderous dictatorship, defeating a sponsor of terrorism and bringing freedom to an oppressed people.

Bingo.

(Note: the excerpted statistical death rate for the current conflict is as of 2004. The relative context is still relevant.)

*** 1Lt Bruce Bishop of the Utah National Guard explains his motivation to re-enlist:

..."because as I look around at the state of this nation and see all of the weak little pampered candy-asses that are whining about this or protesting that, I'd be afraid to leave the fate of this nation entirely up to them."

*** Rarified quarters of Washington, DC wait for the boom:

Bush Aides Brace for Charges
Grand Jury May Hear Counts in Leak Case Today

My abbreviated opinion: Yes, Joe Wilson is a lying dandy, addicted to attention and responsible for projecting false martyrdom of his wife to fulfill his personal and ideological ambition. Yes, "faith-based" liberals have been willing to lionize him and distort and selectively interpret the scenario to fulfill their ideological ambition (ignoring the fact that his "report" from Africa was inaccurate and that he lied about being recommended for the assignment by his wife, for examples). Yes, the entire basis of initial potential indictments is probably thin, as it looks like no crime was committed in "outing" Plame according to the letter of the law ("intent" of the law is more subjective).

But if Libby, Rove or anyone else lied or obfuscated during testimony after the fact - hang 'em high (figuratively). If one gets caught playing games at that level - and I stress "caught," as many politicos do play such games - there are consequences. And it's fairly easy to imagine a mirror image interpretation of Clinton's impeachment scandal drawn along partisan lines, if the indictments are notable ones. We'll see.

Tom Maguire is doing the yeoman's work of fine analysis on this topic, if you're interested.

For those interested:

Read More »

RINO Sightings XII XVIII

UPDATE: Link is broken. The URL is correct, it's a problem with Blogger or Blogspot. Shrug.

*** Are you a blogger? The Commissar is gathering data for a family tree of bloggers: Who's Your Daddy.

*** Two highly accurate takes on blogging:

Iowahawk: How to Blog Good, Part Two:

Blog Dimension 3: Anger. If you expect to get and retain readers, you need to show your passion -- and nothing spells passion like good old-fashioned anger. Some of the blogosphere’s most effective writing comes from anger, and if you don’t see this, I’d be happy to come down to your mom’s basement and beat your pathetic face to a bloody pencilneck-stump, looser. Is there something, or someone, out there that’s got your goat? Nurse that grudge into a simmering beef! Set CAP LOCKS ON, then wade into the fray with the hobnailed boots of passion, swinging your organ-flecked club of reason.

By communicating that "I'm mad as hell" and "I'm not gonna take it anymore" and "I'm teetering on the convulsive edge of a violent breakdown," you will naturally draw an audience who will think, "say, now here is a fellow who really bears watching." Anger will also help differentiate you from the online herd of namby-pamby sob sisters, whose idea of punditry is stuff like

(a1) I really have some concerns with this Harriet Miers nomination.
(b1) If you ask me, Harriet Miers sounds like a pretty decent nominee.

Snore!! Like that kind of squeamish milquetoast garbage is going to make to Technorati Hot 100. Mister, if you are going to survive the online ThunderDome steel cage opinion match, you are going to have to 'bring the pain' with your shiv-like exclamation points. Also, don't be afraid to 'keep it real' with some brutal profanity. This gives you "street cred" with the blog community, who are always on the lookout for 'narcs.'

And a rather more pithy version of blogging how-to from Chiefly Musing. I like it!

*** Many of us were pleasantly surprised - and offered praise - when the UN issued a report that directly blamed the Syrian government for the assassination of Rafik Hariri, Lebanon's Prime Minister. This praise was naive and premature:

THE United Nations withheld some of the most damaging allegations against Syria in its report on the murder of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, it emerged yesterday. The names of the brother of Bashar al-Assad, President of Syria, and other members of his inner circle, were dropped from the report that was sent to the Security Council.

The confidential changes were revealed by an extraordinary computer gaffe because an electronic version distributed by UN officials on Thursday night allowed recipients to track editing changes.

The mistaken release of the unedited report added further support to the published conclusion that Syria was behind Mr Hariri’s assassination in a bomb blast on Valentine’s Day in Beirut. The murder of Mr Hariri touched off an international outcry and hastened Syria’s departure from Lebanon in April after a 29-year pervasive military presence.
...
But the furore over the doctoring of the report threatened to overshadow its damaging findings. It raised questions about political interference by Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary- General, who had promised not to make any changes in the report.

THIS MAKES ME VERY, VERY ANGRY!

(Actually, Iowahawk's advice aside, it kind of does, in a "'what do you expect?' followed by a deep sigh and then 'ooh, Rome is on!'" sort of way ...)

(Via IP)

First reason: Why are you spending your weekend watching DVDs and reading blogs? Make love to a woman or man you really care about, for chrissake.

Second reason: When you read this:

But I don't think W ever second guessed his manager when, in the top of the sixth, the manager made a decision the owner found inscrutable.

That's the difference between an owner and a sportswriter. One lives to win. The other lives to write good copy.

...you'll inevitably be reminded of when Denethor tries to burn himself and his son Faramir alive on a funeral pyre. Hugh likely identifies strongly with royal guardsman/flunky #2, who thinks to himself: "Hey, this is some pretty freaky inscrutable shit, but what do I know? Have at it, sire."

You may recall that Noam Chomsky won the public poll sponsored by Foreign Policy and the UK's Prospect Magazine to determine the top "public intellectual" from an initial list of 100 nominees. In a stinging deconstruction of Chomsky's credentials and anti-Western political ideology (originally published in Prospect), writer Oliver Kamm denounces the pick:

In his book Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline, Richard Posner noted that "a successful academic may be able to use his success to reach the general public on matters about which he is an idiot." Judging by caustic remarks elsewhere in the book, he was thinking of Noam Chomsky. He was not wrong.

Chomsky remains the most influential figure in theoretical linguistics, known to the public for his ideas that language is a cognitive system and the realisation of an innate faculty. While those ideas enjoy a wide currency, many linguists reject them. His theories have come under criticism from those, such as the cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, who were once close to him. Paul Postal, one of Chomsky's earliest colleagues, stresses the tendency for the grandiloquence of Chomsky's claims to increase as he addresses non-specialist audiences. Frederick Newmeyer, a supporter of Chomsky's ideas until the mid-1990s, notes: "One is left with the feeling that Chomsky's ever-increasingly triumphalistic rhetoric is inversely proportional to the actual empirical results that he can point to."

Prospect readers who voted for Chomsky will know his prominence in linguistics, but are more likely to have read his numerous popular critiques of western foreign policy. The connection, if any, between Chomsky's linguistics and his politics is a matter of debate, but one obvious link is that in both fields he deploys dubious arguments leavened with extravagant rhetoric—which is what makes the notion of Chomsky as pre-eminent public intellectual untimely as well as unwarranted.

Read the rest.

UPDATE: Also be sure and read these previous condemnations of Chomsky's intellectual credibility and political posturing.

(Via Allah)

Dorkafork adds: and one more analysis of a Chomsky whopper, from Kamm.

While My Ukulele Gently Weeps

Read More »

You can try out the new Xbox 360 in kiosks in select Walmarts. Check this map or find a Walmart near you and call to see if they have one. Tell them dorkafork sent you.

Bill Adds: while researching why one might be inclined to follow Dorkafork's direction, I found some impressive trailers and actual gameplay footage from an XBox 360 title called "Gears of War." Pretty intense.

Now imagine fully immersive, 3-D rendered environments in the not-too-distant future ...

dorkafork: forgot to emphasize it is not for sale, but you can play some demos and watch some trailers.

*** Dave Price fleshes out my IM'ed wonderings about the body politic as an organic system with a specific metaphor about the exponentional contextual complexity of the human genome:

Ray Kurzweil noted that the entire human genome is less than a gigabyte; you could store dozens of people’s full genetic codes on your hard drive. But the total amount of information in the design of a human body is far, far higher than that; the brain alone requires hundreds of million times that much data to fully describe. How then is your extraordinarily complex body created from such a small amount of data? The creation and maintenance of the body involves a relatively simple set of instructions, the iterative execution of which creates enormously greater complexity, far exceeding the amount of information in the instructions themselves. Rather than a blueprint, your body is constructed using a fractal process, a complex biological version of Wulfram’s cellular automata.

Something akin to a fractal process is also fundamental to the success of democratic capitalism, which like the human body is governed by a relatively simple set of rules rather than a blueprint intended to describe or dictate everything we do.

*** WaPo:

U.N. Report Sees Syrian Involvement in Hariri's Death

A U.N. investigation has implicated senior Syrian and Lebanese officials in the assassination of Lebanon's leading reformer in a move that U.S. and European officials expect will generate new international pressure on the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad.

In blunt language, the report by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis concluded that the Valentine's Day bombing of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri and 22 others "could not have been taken without the approval of top-ranked Syrian security officials and could not have been further organized without the collusion of their counterparts in the Lebanese security forces."

Everyone "knew" this, of course, most of all the Lebanese, but it's interesting to see a UN Report affixing such specific blame. Good on 'em.

*** Ok, which of you knuckleheads gabbed about the Venezuelen invasion plans? Remember, the first rule of the Neocon Combat Auxiliary is that we do not talk about the US plans to invade Venezuela.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Thursday that his government is preparing for a possible U.S. invasion and he warned that such "aggression" would send gasoline in the United States prices soaring higher. The U.S. government repeated that it is not planning any such thing.

Yes Hugo, you're big, you're bad, you won't take nada mierda de los matónes Americanos. Give thanks to the AP for running your paranoid political ads. Yawn.

*** Krauthammer nails it (again) on Miers:

And while I remain as exercised as anyone by the lack of wisdom of this choice, I part company with those who see the Miers nomination as a betrayal of conservative principles. The idea that Bush is looking to appoint some kind of closet liberal David Souter or even some rudderless Sandra Day O'Connor clone is wildly off the mark. The president's mistake was thinking he could sneak a reliable conservative past the liberal litmus tests (on abortion, above all) by nominating a candidate at once exceptionally obscure and exceptionally well known to him.

The problem is that this strategy blew up in his face. Her obscurity is the result of her lack of constitutional history, which, in turn, robs her of the minimum qualifications for service on the Supreme Court.

The rest outlines his prediction for rocky hearings ...

*** Also, once again, as I've elucidated before, I do NOT endorse INDC Contributor Hubris's shameless (and rather perverted) mockery of Hugh Hewitt's allegiance to the GOP.

I'd ban Hubris from posting rights on this blog, but the wily bastard's overridden the log-in that I gave him and is scurrying loose through the ship's bowels like a vicious rodent infestation.

*** And finally, speaking of "vicous rodent infestations," this is the funniest video that I've watched in recent memory.

(Via AoS and Red State Rant)

by Hugh Hewitt

Winston Churchill once said that “nothing can be more abhorrent to democracy than a flasher, a gentleman who exposes his private bits in public.” President Bush understands that simple maxim as well.

That’s why the anti-anti-anti-Miers crowd continually astonishes me. Actually, they shouldn’t surprise me. I can easily imagine the George Will types when they were children at the library, pretending to pore over Tolstoy while they were actually purloining copies of Lady Chatterley’s Lover or some such trash. Twenty years later, they put on bow ties and call themselves conservatives.

That’s how it works with “book-learning” elites, folks. First it's the library, then the hidden desire to emulate Oliver the game-keeper’s vigorous coupling, then they’re criticizing the president’s nominees and showing their genitals to innocent elderly women in parking lots to scratch the shameful itch on their souls. Some of them also opposed Bush’s social security reform plan.

Save democracy, my friends. Listen to Churchill. Support Miers.

*** ID proponent admits his definition of “theory” was so broad it would also include astrology. Also admits today will be a good day for financial dealings, suggests calling up an old friend.

*** Digital organisms shown to evolve into irreducibly complex forms according to an article from the Feb. '05 Discover Magazine. UPDATE: You can download the program the researchers used here.

*** Spanish arrest warrant issued for 3 US soldiers. A journalist who witnessed the incident believes the warrant is politically motivated.

*** "Mr. Foreman, has the jury reached a YAAAH! ... excuse me, didn't mean to jump like that."

*** Who could possibly be against choking the chicken? (The chicken in question.)

*** At the recent Million Man March, Wyclef Jean said "Father Saddam cries in prison" (apparently as part of an outreach effort to centrist voters). I'm unsure whether he meant it to be similar to "Mother Sheehan" or if he has just been reading old Hussein era propaganda.

Actually, that describes most of my posts. In this case, however, I'm referring to a headline from MSNBC:

"Rumsfeld spars with Chinese military officers." If this were a just world, I would have clicked over to find a story about Rumsfeld's tour-gone-wrong of a Chinese military facility. He would have demanded fuller disclosure regarding Chinese military spending, and when his inscrutable host said "We are sorry, but under the circumstances..." Rumsfeld would have yelled, "Circumstances hell! I make circumstances!" And then he would have ripped off his suit jacket and shirt and revealed a physique that rivals Matt Furey's just before the bloody sparring began.

Fucking news cycle.

*** The Pundit Guy photoblogs Dachau:

As I walked into Dachau, I was greeted with these words.

“Work Makes One Free”. You might recognize this motto as the same one posted at the main gate of Auschwitz.

*** In a nanotech primer with a particular gloom-and-doom anti-military-industrial complex spin, Salon's Alan H. Goldstein nevertheless raises some of the relevant scary issues related to the 21st Century's fast approaching changes:

In high-technology incubators around the world, biotechnology and nanotechnology together are spawning. With the literary imagination for which engineers are famous, the offspring of this union has already been named nanobiotechnology. The overt goal of nanobiotechnology is to completely break down the borders between living and nonliving materials. This goal has the most profound implications for every aspect of human endeavor, but in warfare the consequences of integrating our most powerful technologies are almost beyond comprehension. The fusion of nanotechnology and biotechnology will erase any distinction between chemical, biological, and conventional weapons, altering the face of war (and life) forever.

The key thing to remember is that every military application also has a non-military one: tomorrow's sword will be next week's plowshare (and vice versa). In the nano age, if you aren't very afraid and very excited at the same time, you aren't paying attention.

Though I maintain faith that a Benevolent Glenn Reynolds will protect us, some of these issues echo Joel Garreau's description of the "Hell Scenario:"

The Hell scenario is the mirror image of the Heaven scenario in a lot of ways. The spokesperson for this scenario is Bill Joy, the former chief scientist of Sun Microsystems. Joy looks at the same information that Ray Kurzweil does and says, “It could all go the other way.” He absolutely agrees that we are on this curve of exponential technological change that is changing what it means to be human. But he worries that this power could get into the hands of nutcases, with extremely bad consequences. The optimistic view of the Hell scenario is that we extinct the human species in 20 to 25 years. The pessimistic view is that we wipe out all of life on Earth.

HAVE A NICE DAY!

*** On an equally fun note, more Llama mockery: the Llama Sutra.

*** And finally, Feminists perpetually aggrieved by THE PATRIARCHY! - what to make of this?

As women march forward, more boys seem to be falling by the wayside, McCorkell says. Not only do national statistics forecast a continued decline in the percentage of males on college campuses, but the drops are seen in all races, income groups and fields of study, says policy analyst Thomas Mortenson, publisher of the influential Postsecondary Education Opportunity newsletter in Oskaloosa, Iowa. Since 1995, he has been tracking — and sounding the alarm about — the dwindling presence of men in colleges.

College administrators shy away from the term “affirmative action,” a murky concept rooted in redressing historic inequities and loaded with legal implications. Yet the imbalances do trouble some admissions officials.

So just as they might consider race or geographical diversity in building freshman classes, they similarly look for gender parity.

There are more men than women ages 18-24 in the USA — 15 million vs. 14.2 million, according to a Census Bureau estimate last year. But nationally, the male/female ratio on campus today is 43/57, a reversal from the late 1960s and well beyond the nearly even splits of the mid-1970s.

Through a custom predictive algorithm created in INDC's own nanotech and bioinformatical warfare labs, I've been able to simulate a projected response from Pandagon's feminiacal Amanda Marcotte:

"An illusion! One designed to further the PATRIARCHY'S scheme to maintain cultural and economic control over my WOMB! They send their aryan males to secret elite schools built in wilds of the Rockies and Poconos, you see. It's all funded by corporate sponsorships from the underwire bra-Hooters-brazilian bikini wax-industrial complex, a hidden oligarchy of rich old white men scheming to keep us robotic, hairless, servile and shackled in orange hot pants! Larry Summers! Keep away. The sow is mine! Stick your &*$#@ up her @$#, you mother*&%$#@!@ worthless &%$#@%$@!*"

"Your mother's in here, Summers. Would you like to leave a message? I'll see that she gets it!"

You know, or something like that.

(Via Commissar)

Me?

The meme is spreading.

And Dean, you could have corrected the ridiculous amount of typos ...

UPDATE: the Final Historian belatedly contributes to the conversation with an interesting post on the concept of "satisficement."

... pulled from the work of Douglas Adams:

Douglas Adams' book and cult radio show The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (now made into a film) discusses the Babel fish, a marvellous creature that, when inserted into the ear canal, allows the wearer to understand any language in the Universe. Pan-galactic philosophers find the Babel fish so expertly designed for its task as universal interpreter that it can, in a bizarre twist of logic, be used to prove the non-existence of God.

The argument runs like this.

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing."

"Aha!" says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own argument, you don't. QED."

"Oh dear, I hadn't thought of that," says God, and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

All right, this is a bit silly. But the point it illustrates is not trivial. And it can be argued that followers of 'intelligent design' fall prey to the same flaw in logic.

Intelligent design is the idea that humanity and the world are so intricate that there must be a creator behind it all. Some proponents of the idea wish to see this concept treated as a proper theory, having it peer reviewed and accepted by the scientific community. The intention is to establish the existence of a creator, declaring along the way that unguided natural selection is not a credible process.

But they have failed to grasp the futility of this exercise. It is a tenet of any faith that the adherent should believe in the precepts on offer, without asking for evidence. Proof denies faith, says God, and without faith, I am nothing. And the old guy is right.

Read the rest. I made a similar argument back in June:

Who designed the designer? And why must we have a supposedly scientific answer, despite the fact that such an ultimate conclusion can only now be realized via faith and completely subjective reasoning, two human traits that largely fall outside of the mandate of true scientific inquiry.

And while some scientists certainly do cling to imperfect theories and protocols like their very own articles of religious faith, those examples fail to meet the true standard of scientific inquiry as well. Which is why that common strawman used in defense of ID - one that highlights flaws in scientific execution spurred by human emotion - sits mutually exclusive from the fact that science (clearly defined and executed), by its very nature, should maintain a healthy delineation from faith.

I'd even go so far as to say that using science to support religion actually undermines religion, chiefly by invalidating its central reliance.

(Ah, repeats)

But take heart, faith-based readers - in the rest of the piece, the author goes on to take a few very reasonable swipes at the politically correct scientific orthodoxy and reveals Adams' plan for the aforementioned atheistic riddler of God to go on to prove black is white and thus meet an ironically grisly end at a newly deadly zebra crossing.

Enjoy.

UPDATE: The Raving Atheist has an interesting post putting forth the postion that Atheism is not another belief structure comparable to religious belief (in the context of a story about atheistic prison inmates seeking religious benefits). I selectively disagree and stick up for theism (uh, sort of) in a pair of comments under the post. Might as well edit them into a rambling, barely coherent post:

Read More »

... as selected by Foreign Policy and the UK's Prospect Magazine.

Notables:

Noam Chomsky, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Bernard Lewis, BjØrn Lomborg, Bill Ardolino, Paul Wolfowitz, Fareed Zakaria, Camille Paglia, Thomas Friedman, Paul Krugman.

I guess that Maureen Dowd didn't quite make the cut.

Read More »

Miers didn't say that Griswold was "rightly decided"; rather, she said that it was "slightly misguided." Or "rightly derided." Pay attention, Specter!

I, for one, am confident that the confirmation hearings are going to go extremely well.

*** Yes, cranky Bill Quick may have misjudged the scope of an interventionist policy designed to strategically stabilize a region:

There has been terrorism in the Arab and Muslim worlds for decades, if not centuries. We didn't set out to discourage that. We set out to discourage Islamist and Arab terrorists from waging terror war on the United States of America.

To some degree, one follows from the other, Bill.

*** Mocking the Llamas: always a winner in my book. Because let's face it, reading Robbo's posts about gardening are about as entertaining as reading about someone watching plants grow.

*** Tweaking Goldstein with Photoshop: also a winner in my book.

*** In the forthcoming Rocky installment, Sly battles his toughest opponents yet: creeping androgen deficiency, age-related macular degeneration and a prostate the size of Mr. T.

*** Leading Intelligent Design advocate cites God as the force behind "irreducible complexity:"

The intelligent design concept does not name the designer, although Behe, a Roman Catholic, testified he personally believes it to be God.

“I conclude that based on theological and philosophical and historical factors,” he said.

(Via Commissar)

*** More grumbly naysaying on the Iraqi vote from the Kossacks. One might almost get the impression ... that they're rooting against success.

Nah.

I think it would be good for her to focus on the future to get past this devastating miscue. What should she do now?

Read More »

In case you're wondering how Mugabe's speech at the FAO hunger conference (mentioned earlier) went, if the speech he gave represented the ideals of the UN or was perhaps a touching look back at the good work the FAO has done over the past 60 years, well... no. He called Bush (and Blair) Hitler:

"Must we allow these men, the two unholy men of our millennium, who in the same way as Hitler and Mussolini formed (an) unholy alliance ... to attack an innocent country?" he said, occasionally gesticulating for emphasis.

"Where are their democratic tenets? Where is their morality? Where is their compliance with the salient principles of good government?" Mugabe said.

*** Kos and Oliver Willis chat with some Iraqi voters.

*** How could the UN top the previously disturbing irony of Libya chairing a human rights commission? Easy, just invite Robert Mugabe to address a hunger conference:

THE United States has expressed "amazement" at a UN invitation to Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe to address a hunger conference in Rome on Monday to mark the 60th anniversary of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

"I find it amazing they've invited Mr Mugabe to speak at the 60th anniversary, who in a way has done so much to hurt the hungry, and who has absolutely turned his back on the poor," said Tony Hall, US ambassador to the UN food agencies in Rome.

"I find it amazing. What can he possibly say to us at the conference, when he has done so much to hurt his own people. Food has been used as a weapon against his own people," Mr Hall said overnight.

*** RINO Sightings XI

Imagine Hollywood were to make a movie that wasn't a remake, that wasn't based on a TV show from the '70s or '80s. A movie that wasn't based on a video game. Imagine, also, that when that movie was released, that it got good reviews including one in which a world famous science fiction author calls it the best science fiction movie ever. How would you expect that movie to do at the box office?

Not all that great. Serenity is projected to have a final take of around $28 million, not enough to cover it's budget of $39 million.

I still hope it will be a sleeper hit. It's hard to believe it's not doing better. There are the reviewers who like it well enough to buy the Firefly DVDs, the reviewer who thinks Whedon's dialogue is his "chief weakness" (?!) yet thinks Serenity is terrific*... It's just sad to think that we'll sooner see a Street Hawk movie remake than a Serenity sequel. Oh well, at least we'll have Snakes On A Plane. *Shudder*

(Incidentally, Amazon.com lists the top DVD sellers by the hour. And here* is how well Firefly has been doing by the hour. It hasn't dropped out of the top 10 in any hour in the past 3 weeks, regularly beating DVDs like Lost: Season 1 and the new Family Guy DVD they've been advertising.)

*links found through TBOTCOTW

Published back in January, an interesting look at Condoleeza Rice and her perception among certain leaders in the black community:

What Would Martin Luther King Have Made of Condoleezza Rice?

In September 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. delivered the eulogy for three of the four girls killed in the bombing of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Ala. What King could not know was that, within earshot of the blast, just blocks away at her father's church, was another little black girl, a friend of the youngest victim, who 42 years later would be on the verge of becoming America's foremost diplomat.

This year, the Martin Luther King holiday, marking what would have been his 76th birthday, falls on Jan. 17. The next day, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee opens hearings on the nomination of Condoleezza Rice to succeed Colin Powell as secretary of state.

It's a stunning juxtaposition that offers those who knew King, lived that history and ponder his legacy an opportunity to wonder: How might they explain Rice's rise to him? And what would he make of it?

She is, after all, the literal fulfillment of King's dream -- a woman judged not by the color of her skin but by the content of her character. She is also living proof that King's eulogy was prescient, that "these children -- unoffending, innocent and beautiful -- did not die in vain."

Of course, there are dissenting views in the remainder of the piece.

(Via Wizbang)

(AFP/Tauseef Mustafa)

And it's a big one. CNN:

After decades of repression and years of war and insurgency, millions of Iraqis let their voices be heard Saturday, voting in a historic constitutional referendum whose results could significantly alter the way the country is governed.

An Iraqi election official reported early signs of high voter turnout in eight of Iraq's 18 provinces, but the United Nations' top elections official said it was too early to be certain.

Fareed Ayar, spokesman for the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq, said initial figures show more than two-thirds of eligible voters cast ballots in Baghdad and provinces in northern and central Iraq.

Iraq the Model publishes the official approximate turnout by province.

And Goldstein looks at the various coverage proclivities and angles within the mainstream media and certain quarters of the blogosphere.

T.M.I.

Dorkafork adds: a visual.

Jane Novak's investigative reporting on the government of Yemen's questionable activities is a must-read:

Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh is scheduled to visit the United States in November for a round of meetings with President Bush and other high ranking US officials. As the representative of the Yemeni people, Saleh deserves a great deal of respect and hospitality. Yet it has become increasingly apparent that the regime, under the total domination of President Saleh, is engaged in a wide variety of criminal activities to the detriment of regional stability and the Yemeni people themselves.

Check it out.

No matter how tempting it may become to try and cast out the evil, demonic forces gathering around the Miers nomination, an expert advises: don't try exorcism at home.

A far cry from sorcerers, satanists and other practitioners whom he dismisses as "charlatans," Italian exorcist Andrea Gemma fights the devil only with the strength of his prayers and advises Catholics: 'Don't do this at home".

But harken, there is a class!

A rotund, expansive Neapolitan, the 74-year-old bishop was the first lecturer to face the Catholic Church's latest crop of budding exorcists at a unique course run by clergy at Rome's Pontifical Regina Apostolorum University. The course began Thursday and will run for several weeks.

Unfortunately ...

When someone is really possessed by the devil, he said, "freeing them of it can take months, if not years."

We haven't got that kind of time!

Father Gemma notes:

Asked about his method of discerning real cases of possession from other psychological illnesses, the priest revealed his "secret weapon":

"If I speak Latin, the demon responds to me in Latin. He has a horror of that language."

Watch the gallery very closely when Chuck Schumer asks Miers about her view of "stare decis." I lay odds we see green vomit and goat horns.

*** Dean looks at Islam and Freedom:

There is a belief in widespread circulation, mostly spread by conservative pundits and general hawks (Mark Steyn and the Little Green Footballs crew spring immediately to mind) that Islam is an inherently intolerant, slavery-oriented religion incompatible with democratic pluralism. The picture they paint is often of a dying West allowing the growing cancer of Islam to spread, with liberalism having weakened us to the point where we no recognize the threat or have the will to fight it.

If this picture is true, we should be seriously considering forbidding any muslims to immigrate, and looking with suspicion on all muslims within our borders.

It is, however, untrue. By objective, scientific measure.

I haven't completely digested his methodology, but he runs some numbers to make the case.

*** Kevin Drum rounds up the latest Harriet Miers proclamations from James Dobson and Pat Robertson. It's interesting to see the natural dichotomy between political and religious interpretations of a SCOTUS nominee, and those that are expressly interested in legal philosophy and rationale.

*** Chewbacca becomes an American citizen on Monday. And a Texan.

(Via VodkaPundit)

*** The Chechen terrorist assault in Russia seems to be winding down:

MOSCOW, Oct. 14 --Early Friday, Russian special forces stormed a police station in southern Russia where eight militants were holding five hostages. The hostages, including police officers, were freed and all eight militants were killed as they tried to flee in a van, Russian officials said.

Around 8.30 a.m. local time Friday, another three gunmen were killed in a downtown Nalchik souvenir store where they had barricaded themselves with two hostages on Thursday. The Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported that two hostages were freed. Russian officials said the militants in the store refused to talk to the security forces that had surrounded them.

The exact death toll remains unclear, but may top 100 dead. A spokesman for the local Interior Ministry said Friday morning that 68 militants had been killed. The Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported that 24 security officers and police had died, and there were other reports that between 12 and 24 civilians had died.

At least they didn't specifically target children this time.

*** And finally, here's a requisite JOHN HAWKINS WARNING for any confused literalists and, uh, well, John Hawkins: some of the journalistic efforts of INDC Journal's new contributors are not "real," in the traditional sense of the word. You dig? (And by "dig," I mean "understand." Do you "understand?")

By now you have all seen this story of the horrific massacre of Smurfs. But there is a wider war out there. Western media has a tendency to focus solely on the effects of war on blue skinned people, but we need to also pay attention to the effects of war on green and purple skinned people. We now present The Widening Smurf War (In Pictures):

One thing to note is that it is a world of constantly shifting alliances, where motivations can be hard to determine. For example, it's not easy to simply say "the green ones kill the blue ones" or "cats are bad and dogs are good". Some dogs revel in the war:

WARNING! The next photo in the extended entry may be considered graphic.

Read More »

BY GARY HART

After my last column, several readers suggested that I should follow up by giving Mr. Bush more specific advice on how to take his responsibilities seriously. Perhaps the president will surprise me and demonstrate the maturity needed to accept constructive criticism.

You need to be engaged with the governance process. I think we would all agree that when you’re going to orally pleasure a woman, it shouldn’t start with a smirk and a swagger, followed by a lick and a promise. You should invest yourself in the craft, and to the special young lady with whom you’ve made an acquaintance. Again, you need to engage. Should we expect anything less in terms of dedication from the president with respect to the execution of his duties?

Being an effective leader means being an effective planner. It’s like preparing for a boating excursion. You don’t just pop onto the boat and head out. You toss out the Mich Light, restock the boat with something classy like expensive vodka or gin. Queue up some nice music ahead of time (I would recommend Ready for the World, but follow your instincts). Apply some musk to your pressure points. You’ll be surprised what benefits are yielded by careful planning in every aspect of your job and your life.

Also, as I implied yesterday, it’s a bit ridiculous to waste two hours a day working out when you’re the leader of the free world. It should only take ten to fifteen minutes daily of sweaty, vigorous reverse-cowgirl action to maintain cardiovascular fitness, in any case.

None of my advice will mean a whit unless you do one other thing, Mr. Bush: Grow up.

What's behind all of this hullabaloo and internicine GOP warfare over the Harriet Miers nomination?

Why are natural allies butting heads? Why are administration officials insulting their base? Why have the normally collegial commenters at Ace of Spades degenerated into fighting like rabid curs in a blogospheric blood match?

And why, oh why, is everyone picking on Hugh Hewitt?!

Why? Any ideas?

I have one ...

Oh, just one ... hmmmm ... let's see ... I don't know ... could it be ...

Read More »

INDCBill: hey
INDCBill: did you want me to watch Satchel if you go to NY for the Pajamas Media launch party?
INDCBill: I will, you know
INDCBill: he's a cute little bastard
INDCBill: seriously think he could attract some ladies
INDCBill: I could take him to the park on a leash and parade him
INDCBill: like a really slow, doughy Labrador puppy
INDCBill: I'll feed him and stuff
INDCBill: let him watch tv
INDCBill: not sure about bathing him or anything
INDCBill: I think that's against the law
INDCBill: but really, how gamey can a five year-old get in 4 days?
proteinwisdom is away at 12:01:16 PM.
INDCBill: does he eat sushi?
Auto response from proteinwisdom: I am currently away from the computer.
INDCBill: hot pockets?
Auto response from proteinwisdom: I am currently away from the computer.
proteinwisdom returned at 12:11:38 PM.
INDCBill: look
INDCBill: yay or nay on the babysitting, man. last offer
INDCBill: Uncle Bill's paternal instinct has its limit
proteinwisdom: No.
INDCBill: oh
INDCBill:
INDCBill: you don't think I'd be any good, do you?
INDCBill: kind of insulting, really

Read More »

*** To my respected God-fearing readers: do NOT click on this site. Whatever you do. It's safe for work and all, no worries there, but you DO NOT want to click on this site. Trust me. I have your best interests at heart. No clicking. Don't click. FYI. Don't let your curiosity get the best of you. Have faith in my judgment.

(Via Feministe)

*** John Cole hits the nail on the head regarding Bush's revelation that a prime factor in the Miers nomination was her religious conviction:

While Bush and company may think this is a clever way to reassure the base that Miers will ‘vote the right way’ on Roe and other social issues, this is a disastrous calculation, as well as patently offensive. Most conservatives (and, in all likelihood, most liberals) recognize that she will probably vote against Roe. Roe, however, is not the only issue facing the Supreme Court, and, as Andrew Sullivan noted, this misuse of an individual’s religious affiliation and beliefs for crass political motives smacks in the face of what most conservatives claim to want- someone who will faithfully interpret the constitution ...

*** Unsurprisingly, I'm with Reynolds on Miers - mildly disdainful of the pick based on qualifications and perceived cronyism and unmoved by her political and ideological inclinations, all garnished with a dash of apathy. Ace believes that there is a seriously brewing conflict in certain quarters, however.

*** In case you missed it everywhere else, CENTCOM has posted an intercepted communication between Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda #2, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, which outlines their strategy to restore the Islamic Caliphate. If you have any doubts about the US staying in Iraq to finish the job and stabilize that country, read it. Twice, if need be.

For shorthand, Spartacus bullets the main points as well as offers a bit of analysis:

Personally, I was struck by the criticism of Zarqawi (diplomatically phrased, of course) for alienating Muslim opinion by targeting the Shia population and releasing gory videos of beheaded hostages. In addition, al-Zawahiri's descriptions of life in Pakistan seemed to be pretty difficult, with many reports of "brothers" captured or killed, taped communiques that failed to reach their audiences, lost computers, disrupted lines of communication and financial difficulties.

Yee-haw.

*** Cam Edwards is raising money for a blog redesign. If you enjoy his blog or his excellent radio show, kick in a few bucks.

*** More enjoyable synth pop, this time from Goldfrapp: Number 1. (wmv file)

(Via Flea)

In a further attempt to fuel the dim torch of a fading INDC Empire, a man known as Dorkafork may or may not be throwing up the occasional piece as INDC Journal's Assistant Colorado Bureau Chief, Graphics Editor and sparkly-bowtied and speedo-wearing Cabana Boy. And I stress "occasional," because he only updates his own blog about once per month. Nevertheless, they are quality efforts - you may specifically recall his fine Photoshop work (see update) visualizing my heartfelt poem about Donald Rumsfeld. Bravi, bravi, bravisimi.

Welcome, Dorkafork. When I'm not around, you'll report to Hubris, who I'm told is a petty, power-enamored sadist. And please don't forget to scrub the deep fryer and mop the john before you go home at night.

With a toothbrush, boy. Get down there in the grout and use a toothbrush.

My blogging contributions have been (even more) non-existent today because I'm sick. And I think that it may be avian flu, as in addition to having the standard flu symptoms - runny nose, exhaustion, sore throat, aches and pains - I've also recently started farming chickens in my one-bedroom downtown condo and trading them for spring rolls, laundry service and "massages" at the local Vietnamese market.

Just FYI. Hubris is doing a fine job taking up my slack on his first day.

Actually, he put it a bit differently, but not by much.

I've always found that some Gloria Gaynor, a few scented candles, and a whole lot of "me time" helps one move past the bitterness of the breakup. Most importantly: Never let them see you cry.

Liberal blogger "Balletshooz" from Blogger News Network makes the case that John Roberts may be leaning towards "conservative judicial activism" in Gonzales v. Oregon, the Oregon Assisted Suicide case currently before the SCOTUS:

One conservative contradiction is that they claim to favor judges who don't "legislate from the bench", who obey the "will of the voters", and who aren't "judicial activists". They also claim to favor limited federal government, respect for the plain meaning of the constitution, and judicial deference to law-making bodies, like legislatures. Typically this meant that conservative judges paid attention to the 10th Amendment to the constitution, which specifically reserves ALL RIGHTS to the states that aren't EXPLICITLY given to the federal government in the text of the constitution.

The Rehnquist court led forcefully in the degredation of the 10th amendment, except when it achieved a result the judge wanted. For instance, Rehnquist had no problem leaving decisions up to the states when those states wanted to deny gay marriage or enforce anti-sodomy laws -- because those are the positions he espoused.

However, when it came to allowing medical marijuana to ease the pain of the sick or the right of the terminally ill to die with dignity, Rehnquist, like an activist, twisted court reasoning any which way he could to ignore the plain meaning of the 10th amendment and to legislate against those voter-passed laws.

There were hopes that new chief Justice Roberts would break from this hypocrisy, specifically with regard to Oregon's right to die laws, and become a true enforcer of state's rights ...

Read the rest. I've previously (and perhaps clumsily) made similar arguments about conservative inconsistency in the application of the "judicial activist" label.

I think Balletshooz prematurely judges Roberts' ultimate opinion based merely on remarks during the case, and I'll wait for the decision before cutting loose with condemnation, but I'm also very interested to see if the Court winds up leaving the power to regulate this medical practice in the hands of the state, specifically since Oregonian voters have directly approved the measure twice via ballot.

Since the Constitution provides no specific instruction on Federal regulation of medical practices - and Ashcroft and now Gonzalez's legal rationale for challenging the Oregonian law, the federal Controlled Substances Act (which itself relies on inferred Constitutional authority based on "'interstate commerce' and the 'general welfare' of the American people") was not written with physician-assisted suicide in mind - how would the SCOTUS overturning the will of Oregon's voters not constitute "legislating from the bench?" How would it not represent a violation of a strict constructionist's interpretation of the 10th Amendment?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

I'm all ears, if any avowed Conservative originalists would like to provide feedback.

UPDATE: Astute commenter Phil Smith, aka "Baseballshooz," points out that one of the main assertions in Balletshooz's piece - that Rehnquist ruled in favor of government regulation of medical marijuana - is wrong. Rehnquist dissented, upholding the sanctity of the 10th amendment:

Unfortunately, Rehnquist's federalism legacy has been undermined by the Supreme Court's recent decision in Gonzales v. Raich (search), which held that federal law legitimately supersedes a California law legalizing medical marijuana (search) and gave the Commerce Clause an extremely broad interpretation. Although many would expect a conservative justice to be unsympathetic to marijuana users, Rehnquist dissented in Raich, joining an opinion by recently retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Obviously this undermines the specifics of Balletshooz's piece (and highlights my poor scholarship for not catching it), yet fails to bury some of his relevant overarching points, depending on John Roberts' ultimate conclusion in Gonzales v. Oregon, as well as the fact that the ostensibly Conservative literalist Scalia ruled in favor of the government's authority in Raich. To his philosophically consistent credit, Justice Thomas did not.

Karl Rove didn't tell James Dobson how Miers would vote on a Roe v. Wade issue. Instead, according to Dobson,

What did Karl Rove say to me that I knew on Monday that I couldn’t reveal? Well, it’s what we all know now, that Harriet Miers is an Evangelical Christian, that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life, that she had taken on the American Bar Association on the issue of abortion and fought for a policy that would not be supportive of abortion, that she had been a member of the Texas Right to Life. In other words, there is a characterization of her that was given to me before the President had actually made this decision.

I'm glad that the conversation stayed away from how Miers would vote on specific issues, and instead focused on general judicial philosophy.

I guess we can put this whole controversy behind us.

Bill adds: I think we've got some video of Dobson's speech.

Very similar to a creatively flaccid Sherwood Schwartz casting cuddly Cousin Oliver in the waning days of the Brady Bunch, I've decided to recruit some new blood to inject life into this tired, old blog. Therefore, henceforth, forthwith, a man called Hubris may or may not be throwing up the occasional piece as INDC Journal's Assistant Florida Bureau Chief.

So, when you read a post, make sure to doublecheck the author's identity. You'll be able to distinguish Hubris's handiwork from mine via the "Posted by Hubris" signature at the bottom. Or, you know, because the material is actually interesting or funny.

Please welcome Hubris. Between two people who write intermittently, we might just make one real blog. Now if I could only get Dorkafork on board ...

(And I mean welcome him, you lurking bastards. I know that I sank my traffic by taking a month off, but if you faithful readers don't drop at least a dozen or so comments in this thread, I'm closing INDC's doors and burning the joint to the ground. Either that or I'll go all "Random IM Conversations with Goldstein" all the time. I've got a million of them. Try me.)

UPDATE:

Jealousy

Read More »

As an urban self-defense item - too much?

Read More »

RINO Sightings

... is just an awesome post:

Karol’s argument represents a legitimate opinion—and exposes a problem many people have with the progressive worldview that feels the need to establish its bona fides with knee jerk self-criticism before it can dare criticize others / Others. Comparing—even obliquely—the situation of women in Saudi Arabia to that of women here, causes many people in the center and on the right (and probably a few pragmatic Dems, too) to tune out. In fact, such mannered, rote, forced introspection is the reason CNN and the networks lost so many viewers after 911. It’s the reason people have cancelled their subscriptions to major newspapers. In it’s desire to spread the offense and so avoid the charge of making a directed rebuke (which rebuke would invariably be labeled racist, imperialist, sexist, homophobic, etc), it ends up putting people off and soft-peddling the abhorent behavior it starts out to criticize.

We in the US know our failings. We know our past. And we know that, at heart, we are a good country. But after 911, we surrendered much of the liberal guilt we had the luxury to feel when we thought we’d reached the end of history, and we have little time for it now, particularly when it strains to point up a symmetry between ourselves and the culture from which our enemy springs like some sword-wielding weed.

*** UNICEF napalms Smurf Village:

To that I say, "Why the hell not?" What has their merry little hippie commune given the world anyway? The sing, they dance, they do shrooms, and they smurf that little tart Smurfette in her smurf day in and day out. And don't even get me started on that gray-haired know-it-all. I think we can all agree it's been a long time coming for someone to give Smurf Village the "Belgian Congo" treatment.

(Via AoS)

*** Who wants to donate to Tom Delay's legal defense fund? Show of hands? Anyone? No one? No one? You there, in the back - stop your snickering.

HAVE YOU NO HEART?

ANIMALS!

*** Check out Harriet Miers from a lefty feminist perspective:

While I am not comfortable with someone whose experience with interpretation of Constitutional law is next to nil and whose stance on abortion is that women are murderous, and thus do not want her to be the newest member of SCOTUS, there are several things that make me like her against my will.

This may be just enough to push Patterico into armed revolt.

*** Captain Ed and the aforementioned Patterico ask folks not to pick on Hugh Hewitt, who thusly defendeth his support of the Miers nomination:

"Yes, Gentlemen, I am a Party Man."

Don step fools
Don f*@#$ wit me
Big trunk swingin
I party elephant-style
Rollin wit da
G.O.P.
whaaaa?
wit da
G.O.P.
little louda!
G.O.P.
uh HUH uh HUH
G.O.P.

Ok, maybe that's not quite what he meant.

But again, personally, I blame Hubris.

*** Hearty and sincere congrats to James Joyner on his recent marriage. Another slice of HOT CONSERVATIVE BEEFCAKE off the market, ladies and futiley pining log cabiners ...

*** And if you're a Harry Potter fan, be sure and check out this British Comic Relief spoof on the second movie. Very funny. And even a bit twisted.

Has anyone at Burger King checked on the "subservient chicken" lately?

Read More »

The first nine minutes of Serenity are available online. Check 'em out. And then go to a theatre and see the rest.

(Via Dean)

The original, with news links.

(Via PD)

Mary Mapes peddles unreality:

"I was incredulous that the mainstream press -- a group I'd been a part of for nearly twenty-five years and thought I knew -- was falling for the blogs' critiques. I was shocked at the ferocity of the attack. I was terrified at CBS's lack of preparedness in defending us. I was furious at the unrelenting attacks on Dan. And I was helpless to do anything about any of it."

-- “And right now, on the Internet, it appeared everything was falling apart. I had a real physical reaction as I read the angry online accounts. It was something between a panic attack, a heart attack, and a nervous breakdown. My palms were sweaty; I gulped and tried to breathe. . . . The little girl in me wanted to crouch and hide behind the door and cry my eyes out."

--"Faxing changes a document in so many ways, large and small, that analyzing a memo that had been faxed -- -in some cases not once, but twice -- -was virtually impossible. The faxing destroyed the subtle arcs and lines in the letters. The characters bled into each other. The details of how the typed characters failed to line up perfectly inside each word were lost."

-- "To these people, there was no such thing as unbiased mainstream reporting, certainly not when it came to criticism of the president, no matter how tepid. To them, there was Fox News and everything else -- and everything else was liberal and unfair."

What can one say to that, especially as one of "these people"? Mary Mapes is stark, raving delusional. As a political blogger, I'm overly familiar with the human capacity for distortion in individual frames of reference, but Mapes' continued assertions about the possible veracity of the documents take this phenomenon to an astonishing level.

Very brief, mildy exasperating housekeeping for the potentially uninitiated below the fold:

Read More »

Depeche Mode: Precious

Read More »

Ten Reasons to Like SCOTUS Nominee Harriet Miers

(#7 is a cheap shot, but following the link, I'm unsurprised at the original source. #5 is particularly persuasive.)

*** I saw Serenity last weekend and concur with Dean's brief review. Please go see this movie. I want a sequel. I need a sequel. The world needs a sequel.

Also, check out this great review of the film by Orson Scott Card:

I’m not going to say it’s the best science fiction movie, ever.

Oh, wait. Yes I am.

Heavy praise from the man that wrote Ender's Game.

(via Dorkafork)

*** Ok, offering a rare attaboy for a Llamabutcher, I'll admit that Robert's domestic postings about his kids have a certain charm.

There, I said it. Shhhh. We must never speak of this moment of weakness again.

*** Goldstein stands confidently astride the universe and delivers a satisfying heaping helping of "I TOLD YOU SO." Given his extraordinary coverage of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, it's a well-earned moment.

*** PunditGuy turns one year old. In celebration, I've finally blogrolled Bill Nienhuis's quality blog, correcting an oversight that's a testament to my shameful laziness and manic self-absorption. See? Even this paragraph is about me. Ridiculous.

Check him out ...

*** If I were Six Meat Buffet's Preston Taylor Holmes, I'd be a great deal more careful about taking in strays, lest one night he wakes up with an empty safe, a burning home and a shiv between his ribs.

A translator hired by CBS News alleges that Dan Rather and 60 Minutes distorted and softballed an interview with Elian Gonzalez's father. Color me surprised.

And more from babalu blog, where Val deconstructs a Columbia Journalism Review critique of Cuban bloggers:

Mr. Gillette's bolded question above clearly depicts the problem with the coverage of the Elian case, as well as most reportage on Cuba: you only get one side of the story from the MSM, and handled with kid gloves, I might add. As a Cuban-American, I know what Im talking about when I write about Cuba. I've lived it. My family and friends have lived it. We all know what we are dealing with when it comes to fidel castro and his regime. But the MSM, so in love with fidel castro from the very beginning, choses to ignore the obvious atrocities commited by his regime, and choses to relegate the Cuban-American community - who in one household know more about fidel castro and Cuba than the whole lot of the MSM put together - to a bunch of extreme anti-castro hard liners.

The MSM doesnt stop to think for even a second that if the Cuban-American community is in its entirety anti-castro, it's for a reason. It doesnt stop to ask itself why the rafts only go one way. And if it does, it chooses to ignore the obvious answer, perhaps simply to justify their preconceived and ill-informed notions.

proteinwisdom: hey
proteinwisdom: Bill?
INDCBill: what
proteinwisdom: I found the meaning of life.
proteinwisdom: I was eating a Devil Dog
proteinwisdom: and there it was
proteinwisdom: in the creme filling.
INDCBill: wait
INDCBill: let me guess
INDCBill: um
INDCBill: oh, screw it. i give up
INDCBill: what is it?
proteinwisdom: Well, that's the ironic part
proteinwisdom: The meaning of life?
proteinwisdom: Is the creme filling in the middle of a Devil Dog.
INDCBill:
INDCBill: I've never had a devil dog
INDCBill: this explains a lot

Less than two days back in the blogging saddle and I've already received my first batch of fan mail!

Letter #1: Eric Larson writes in about my link to Hubris's notorious Hugh Hewitt post:

Classy, it's one thing to disagree with one's views, but why not just call him a shit sandwich eater.

Good argument.

Point well taken, Eric, but I'm not certain that HUBRIS intended to literally imply that Hugh Hewitt eats scatalogical sammiches; in fact, I believe that HUBRIS was utilizing an old colloquialism that represents "persevering through an unpleasant activity, often with a disingenuous smile." To reference Wikipedia's entry on the (fecal) matter:

Shit sandwich or crap sandwich is a metaphor for an unpleasant situation that one is forced to endure. The normal usage is in the phrase "eating a shit sandwich". The metaphor follows from the idea that eating a sandwich composed of feces would be highly unpleasant.

This would constitute a relevant metaphor based on Hewitt's consistent attempts to put the best spin on all of the Bush Administration's policies, the most recent example being Hugh's positive assessment of the nomination of the woefully unremarkable Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Further, I believe that HUBRIS'S employment of the term was intended to primarily serve as a humorous device, rather than a sober or detailed criticism of Hewitt's position. I hope this clears up HUBRIS'S intent. I only stress HUBRIS'S role in the matter because I happen to agree with you - it was a mean, mean post to write and HUBRIS is a very, very bad man.

Damn you HUBRIS.

Straight to Hell. HUBRIS.

HUBRIS

Letter #2: Next up, reader Neva Moody writes in to tip me off about a neat new dating service!

I noticed this no-charge dating place filled that has a bunch of sex-addicts

No flowers (AWESOME!!! -- ED), no walks on the beach, just get together for some action :)
There might also be a few people who want something serious though
And if your into a long-term relationship, or a one-night-stand, you got it ;)

Whatever you might enjoy

"No-charge" and "filled ... (with a) bunch of sex addicts," you say?! What a find! Thank you for passing this info along, it sounds like a swell place to meet fun and interesting people that have an unhealthy obsession with screwing every animal, mineral and vegetable in sight, while at the same time wanting "something serious."

And by "something serious," I take it to mean "venerial disease that won't go away with a 5-day treatment of amoxicillin."

Truly, the best of all worlds!

*** Hubris mocks Hewitt's GOP team politics. Delicious!

*** Cole nudges along the gloom-and-doom surrounding an ostensibly impending real estate crash:

The Times has a piece up which could be a real sign of short term and long term financial problems for the US- a real estate crash:

"A real estate slowdown that began in a handful of cities this summer has spread to almost every hot housing market in the country, including New York.

More sellers are putting their homes on the market, houses are selling less quickly and prices are no longer increasing as rapidly as they were in the spring, according to local data and interviews with brokers."

John properly hedges with "could" cause problems. Certainly. But acting as buffers on any "crash" (I would define crash as a 20%+ reduction in value within one to two quarters) are low inventory compared to supply that still favors sellers in certain growth areas, construction supply shortages and rising costs that will slow new construction and further keep inventory low, a tightening up of loan standards by the FDIC and individual financial institutions (also slowing rampant speculation), the fact that rising energy prices and disaster-related unemployment will put pressure on the Fed to keep interest rates low and this year's counterintuitive behavior of mortgage interest rates, which have remained fairly low in defiance of the Fed's upward pressure.

On the flip side, in my opinion, the fairly immutable factors bolstering a flattening or downward market correction in real estate are the widening gap between salaries and home prices and the concomitant gap between mortgage payments and rents. In the short term, this does presage at least a slow-down of growth (which we see in the Times article) due to the fact that upward wages are sticky in a recovering labor market (it's far harder for them to catch up to home values than for home values to flatten or decline), but it does not signal a crash or even significant reduction in value unless the Fed hikes rates at a prematurely accelerated rate. It's in Greenspan's hands.

The thing that's lost in much of the real estate bubble talk, including the way the Times article is analyzed by sensationalists (like Drudge, not Cole), is the fact that a slowdown is both inevitable and good for the market, something that increases the odds of locking in gains over the past few years and dilutes the chances of a sudden, double-digit retraction in value. Keenly-interested real estate investors (not pure speculators) should almost herald the news. Or at least not fear it.

*** The little things make life worth living and one should take a moment to appreciate them, I always say. For some, this means savoring the robust aroma of that first cup of coffee; for others, it may be the quasi joyous feeling of crawling into freshly-laundered sheets during a fierce rain storm. But for me, it's the random flavor life hands you when you're walking to the gym in the dark of 6 AM, obliviously listening to your headphones, and a young, wild and red-eyed homeless man runs and leaps out at you from behind a planter, thrusts his angrily contorted face less than 4 inches from yours and primal screams with foam and spittle-flecked punctuation, "YOU ARE WORKING MY LAST NERVE, MOTHERFUCKER!"

Delightful!

In case you happen to see this, and because you scampered off into the early-morning gloom in such a dreadful hurry, please accept sincerest apologies, sir!

Donnah discusses her place in the "Stages of Blogging:"

I'm currently finding things like this far more interesting than anything political out there.

Those fighting the good fight, go ahead. I'm only interested in nonsense right now.

I'm with you, Cracker. I'm with you.

Yes, I've taken on some ads for the week, so I'll try to blog a bit. It's an interesting mix - one a radio network whose "positive, Christian family programming" has been dropped by Sirius and is responding via petition, another advocating "drawing the line between church and state" with a petition to one's governor (I am in support of their general goal as it relates to Intelligent Design), and a third ad for a dating service with the tagline "Lovelife Not Progressive Enough?" which I assume angles to weed out stealth Republican suitors.

The internet is a funny sort of place.

proteinwisdom: Dude
proteinwisdom: I came home drunk last night and tried to cut my hair.
INDCBill: brilliant
proteinwisdom: Ended up having to shave my head
INDCBill: ha
INDCBill: you ass
proteinwisdom: Took out the clippers and set them wrong
proteinwisdom: suddenly I've got a landing strip in the middle of my head.
proteinwisdom: Cut off about 6 inches.
proteinwisdom: And the worst part is, if I don't go bald? My head looks really small, like a fuzzy chick pea.
INDCBill: like some Shuar headshrinkers did a job on you
proteinwisdom: So now I'm just going to hide inside for a month
proteinwisdom: My kid won't look at me
proteinwisdom: I frighten him.
INDCBill: truly, I'm stunned by your good sense
INDCBill: but hey, I can't judge
INDCBill: I did almost that exact same thing once
proteinwisdom: Yeah?
INDCBill: yeah
INDCBill: when I was EIGHT

Read More »