March 31, 2005
It Has Just Begun
I should probably wait to write this, but we are never as real as we are in the moments after we hear news that touches us deeply. Terri Schiavo’s life was ended today. She died of the effects of dehydration, a death that is slow and incredibly painful (don’t start in with your “she couldn’t feel anything” arguments---you’re bringing a knife to a gun fight). And we watched it happen; indeed, if the polls are to be believed, most Americans agreed with the decision to starve this woman to death.
With this case, our judiciary and most of our population has arrived at the conclusion that some life is not worthy of life. I know the argument: no one wants to live Terri’s life. That’s correct. But every life has worth and purpose. If you don’t believe that, then what keeps you alive and getting out of bed every morning? You live your life because you are a parent, or someone in your life depends on you. You live your life because you are passionate about your job or your hobby or your faith. You live your life because you believe you are meant to defend other peoples’ lives.
I believe that some lives teach us to show compassion, mercy and hope. You don’t want your life to only serve as a lesson to others; I’m sure Terri didn’t want that, either. But Terri’s final days were probably of more service to our society than anything she did before. We were all tested by this, and we failed.
Regardless of your thoughts on this, there is one inescapable fact: Terri Schiavo was not “let go” or “allowed to die”. There was no plug to pull, to quote the idiocy of Larry King. Terri was killed with the full agreement of our law givers and enforcers.
God help us.
March 30, 2005
Bread and Venom
Republicans think government should begin and end in the bedroom.
They want people to have an absolute right to be born, to be poisoned by toxins in the waters whose pollution they have no interest in regulating, to be told who you can marry, to be maimed in the workplace for which harm they don't want you to be properly compensated, to get into a car accident because of faulty car design, again with a cap on your payment, and then to be kept indefinitely alive in a coma regardless of your wishes. If your spouse then shoots the corporate exec who didn't recall the faulty car, because it was cheaper to pay off the victims, then the Republicans want to kill your spouse. Their policies do cover you from the cradle to the grave; there's certainly no denying that.
So the next time I gently tee off on some crazy Dem or another, remember: this is what's out there on the other side of the blogosphere. Asshats.
From The Porch
powered by Audioblog.com
MP3 File
Please let me know what you think of this. Those of you who haven't met me probably won't get much out of it, but I'm not offended. Be honest.
We Don't Need No Stinkin' Fair Use!
The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in the MGM vs. Grokster case, which promises to decide whether or not peer-to-peer software companies are responsible for the piracy that takes place on P2P networks. The recording (RIAA) and film (MPAA) industries contend that these companies are successful only because of the illegal files they helped to spread. The software companies claim that their software has legitimate uses and that what circulates on P2P networks is beyond their control.
You may believe that this case has no bearing on your life because you don’t download music or, if you do, you use a legal service such as iTunes. But you would be wrong. On top of P2P software companies, the RIAA/MPAA legal hit squads are also considering if they have a fair chance of winning a case against manufacturers of MP3 players such as Apple, Creative, iRiver, etc. for helping to contribute to the illegal file-swapping environment. This may seem far-fetched, but keep in mind that it was the MPAA who wanted to keep VCRs out of your hands in the early ‘80s.
All copyright law has, in the past, included a common agreement on fair use by the buying public. Fair use includes things like being able to rent a movie and show it at home during a party or make a mix CD out of songs in your CD collection. Napster and its descendents made us all take a hard look at fair use, since it had become obvious that these services stretched the limits. But the RIAA/MPAA, instead of bringing alternatives to the marketplace with the intent of enticing people to remain legal, have simply attacked the very concept of fair use through judicial edict. They only conceded to online music stores when file-sharing moved out of the realm of the college dorm and into living rooms. Would we have iTunes if there had never been a Napster? I wonder.
Some of you have spent more time researching this case than I have, so please add any information you have. If the MPAA/RIAA is victorious, wouldn’t it make sense to sue Cingular because drug deals have gone down over cellular networks?
March 29, 2005
The Snob, The Journalist, The Blogger
I have written many letters to the editor in my life. Most were published, some were ignored and one prompted a call from the person who wrote the offending column. I am tempted to write one to David Shaw for his column on Sunday (HT: Hugh Hewitt), but I now have my own, unmoderated forum with which to deconstruct him.
As you know, there is a large legal question brewing about whether or not bloggers are journalists. This is not for bragging rights or societal acceptance, but rather because journalists are afforded many, many rights with regard to sources and protection from legal recourse. Shaw's assertion is that while the definition of "journalist" is broad, bloggers really shouldn't be in the club. Why? Because "real" journalists have to answer to an editor, publisher, etc. while those of us out here in our pajamas can sit in mom and dad's basement and just make stuff up.
If the courts allow every Tom, Dick and Matt [Drudge-ed.] who wants to call himself a journalist to invoke the privilege to protect confidential sources, the public will become even less trusting than it already is of all journalists.
Where did this mistrust of journalists come from? Was it born with the blogosphere? Of course not---it has been built like a wall, a brick at a time, by every self-aggrandizing reporter and columnist who was more concerned with changing the world than reporting facts. The fathers of mistrust have names like Rather and Jennings, men who had ascended to their ivory towers years before blogs even existed. To think that journalistic integrity is somehow this cracked crystal vase that would be fine if only those pesky bloggers would shut up is to live in a fantasy world.
Many words lose their meaning over time, and journalist is one of them. We are all journalists in a fashion. The big difference between and blog and a newspaper or nightly news show is that a blog has very little pretence: you know that it is the work of, at most, a few people. None of us claims to represent anything more than ourselves. I am not doing the work of the American people in ferreting out truth; I am merely putting my thoughts in a public space. So are the guys at Powerline and Instapundit and Little Green Footballs.
Take it or leave it, but at least you know what you're getting. Can we say that about David Shaw?
The Conservative Wilderness
The Washington Post reports today on a study which purports to show that American colleges and universities are even more liberal than many of us imagine. Here are some highlights:
The study appears in the March issue of the Forum, an online political science journal. It was funded by the Randolph Foundation, a right-leaning group that has given grants to such conservative organizations as the Independent Women's Forum and Americans for Tax Reform
Have you ever seen a foundation of any type introduced as "left-leaning"? Please bring proof from a MSM publication.
When asked about the findings, Jonathan Knight, director of academic freedom and tenure for the American Association of University Professors, said, "The question is how this translates into what happens within the academic community on such issues as curriculum, admission of students, evaluation of students, evaluation of faculty for salary and promotion." Knight said he isn't aware of "any good evidence" that personal views are having an impact on campus policies.
The fact that Mr. Knight's title has the word "tenure" in it tells me that, perhaps, he's a little biased.
"It's hard to see that these liberal views cut very deeply into the education of students. In fact, a number of studies show the core values that students bring into the university are not very much altered by being in college."
Really? I can show about 30 personal examples of people who left their church and/or changed their party affiliation after attending a four-year institution. Even Catholic girls' colleges grow agnostic liberals as if they're in high demand. I don't know what his definition of "core values" is, though, so maybe I'm out in left field.
What's more, the study found, 65 percent want the government to ensure full employment, a stance to the left of the Democratic Party.
Are you surprised? These people live in a world where lifetime employement is virtually guaranteed.
The most liberal faculties are those devoted to the humanities (81 percent) and social sciences (75 percent), according to the study. But liberals outnumbered conservatives even among engineering faculty (51 percent to 19 percent) and business faculty (49 percent to 39 percent).
This is hardly shocking. Humanities and social sciences are less fact-based and more interpretive, a area in which liberals thrive because there are very few set instances of hard fact.
The most left-leaning departments are English literature, philosophy, political science and religious studies, where at least 80 percent of the faculty say they are liberal and no more than 5 percent call themselves conservative, the study says.
My wife, whose degree is in English Literature, introduced herself and her major at her first Campus Republican meeting some years ago. The room was quiet, and then someone spoke up: "You're all alone over there, aren't you?"
Teach your children well the things you value and love.
March 28, 2005
Dying Bees
This is a little frightening. Pollenation is one of those things that you just assume happens all the time because that's the way it's always happened. Wow.
Winding Down?
There's an interesting article in today's Washington Times concerning the changing, and weakening, insurgency in Iraq. Of course, you can ask ten people in-country and receive 10 different answers, but the trend seems to be on the side of the coalition and the Iraqi people. I read something in the article that I had never quite considered:
Maj. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, who commands the Army's 1st Cavalry Division and just returned from a year-plus tour overseeing Baghdad, is telling audiences that Osama bin Laden made a crucial mistake when he publicly encouraged Zarqawi.
It meant that the Saudi bin Laden was telling the Jordanian Zarqawi to slaughter Iraqis.
If the General is correct, then could it be that Iraqis are gaining a sense of nationalism over tribal or religious loyalty? It is, perhaps, only the formation of national identity and loyalty which will lead to long-term stability in the country.
Redefine
The Terri Schiavo case has brought a phrase to the fore that has been used in the abortion debate for years: the culture of death. This phrase is used by pro-life advocates to describe those who support abortion, assisted suicide and the starvation death of Mrs. Schiavo. It’s appealing to use phraseology such as this because it creates a clear demarcation line between one side and the other. But it’s inaccurate, and not for the reasons you might believe.
Modern liberals and their fellow travelers in our society have become very good at redefining even the most basic points of any argument. Move away from life issues for a moment and take a look at poverty. The number of families living below the poverty line in the United States has risen in direct proportion to the illegitimacy rate. It’s simple math: one-parent homes do not, on average, earn the same income as two-parent homes. The logical solution, to most conservatives, is to encourage abstinence and marriage. But the liberals, who “care” more, dropped this idea on its head. First, they redefined illegitimacy and began calling is single parenthood in an attempt to remove the social stigma associated with having bastard children. Was this kind? Yes, it was. Did it solve any problems? No, it didn’t. The illegitimacy rate in the United States is still incredibly high and costs all of us more and more every year. All the liberal solution did was introduce some newspeak into the lexicon and make everyone feel better about themselves.
When attacked on the concept of single parenthood, liberals respond by saying that single parenthood should be respected as another lifestyle choice, just like marriage. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to push their morals on everyone else. It does not matter, apparently, that children from two-parent households tend to do better in school, are less likely to take drugs, have a lower suicide rate and are more likely to seek a higher education---the liberals made it an argument about me wanting you to live by my moral standards.
And so it is with life issues. Instead of admitting that abortion is murder of an unborn child and that they support it anyway, liberals have redefined what life is. Life, it would seem, is defined as any condition that you find comfortable and livable. Don’t want to see a child born into poverty? Abort it! After all, you wouldn’t want live that way, would you? So it is with Terri Schiavo: since you don’t want to live that way (or you wouldn’t want to deal with someone who does), kill her. Anyone who believes otherwise is a religious zealot. Do you think I’m overstating the case? Go cruising around the blogosphere for an hour and tell me I’m wrong.
Many in our nation talk about how divided we are. I agree. It is not issues which divide us, for the debate over issues small and large has always consumed this country. Our division comes from the fact that the argument is no longer made from a common ground of common belief and basic fact.
March 27, 2005
Hopes Dashed
The University of Kentucky just lost to Michigan State. My hopes for a University of Louisville/UK championship game have been dashed. Well, at least we won't have to rebuild the city afterwards, I suppose.
By the way, I hope you had a Happy Easter. I thought of lost friends today.
March 26, 2005
It's An Adventure!
I just saw an ad for the US Navy that ended with the phrase: "because rocket science is more fun if you actually have rockets." That's not the new Navy slogan, but it did make me think if some slogans we come up with in "A" school:
1. The Navy: it's not just a job, it's two jobs.
2. The Navy: it's not just a job...well, maybe it is just a job.
And my favorite:
3. The Navy: it's not just a...awwww, f*** the Navy.
We kid because we love, you know.
March 25, 2005
Finally, My 10 Things
It's time to lighten up the day a bit (yes, I know it's Good Friday, but shouldn't we be glad that....oh, hell, nevermind). So, I'm returning to my list of 10 Things I've Done That You Maybe Haven't because it keeps popping up on the blogs I read:
1. Live in a 140-year old house
2. Met Chuck Yeager, the first man to fly faster than sound
3. Went to the emergency room dressed as the Cowardly Lion
4. Made the run from Jeffersonville, IN to Gate One, Naval Station Charleston, SC in 8 hours flat (that's 630 miles).
5. Got quoted in the Washington Post by a syndicated columnist.
6. Married the first girl I dated out of high school (but it took me a while; she can tell that story if she wants)
7. Threatened a car full of teenagers with a semi-automatic weapon (I didn't have a round chambered---I'm not a maniac or anything)
8. Walked over the Falls of the Ohio on a rickety walkway connected to a train bridge (Steve, I know you did this, too; I'm running out of ideas)
9. Single-handedly corrupted a SQL database, thus erasing one days' worth of work for 300 people.
10. Played Blackjack all night (7 hours) in a casino and came away with more than I walked in with.
Huh?
I don't know anything about Pakistan, but I do know they are supposed to be an ally in our war on terror. Even so, is this a good idea? Couldn't we start them out with, say, F-86 Sabres left over from the Korean War and then proceed from there? Wait, wait, I've got it---let's sell them some surplus Canadian stuff. They'll never miss it.
Broken Kristol
Bill Kristol is mad. And it's a sight to behold. (HT: Hugh Hewitt)
March 24, 2005
Wow, That's Gotta Hurt
TORONTO (CP) - An American war dodger who fled the U.S. military because he believed the invasion of Iraq was criminal has lost his bid for refugee status in Canada in a case closely watched on both sides of the border.
In a written ruling released Thursday, the Immigration and Refugee Board said Jeremy Hinzman had not made a convincing argument that he faced persecution or cruel and unusual punishment in the United States.
There was no immediate comment from Hinzman but his lawyer Jeffry House said he would ask the Federal Court to review the decision.
"Mr. Hinzman is disappointed," said House.
Disappointed? Ya think?
Endgame
Terri Schiavo's parents are out of judicial options. 1PM EST Friday will mark one week since her feeding tube was removed. She will be dead in less than a week.
Other options remain, but they all require action by Governor Bush in Florida. He could order the National Guard to remove her by force from the hospice, an action that would probably result in his impeachment. He could have her seized by the state's APS (Adult Protective Services) unit, a move that would also mean violating a court order. But neither of these things is likely to happen. Terri Schiavo's death order was signed a long time ago, probably about the time her "husband" became an adulterer. One day, I promise we will learn the truth about Micheal Schiavo, and the truth will be hard for many in this country to swallow.
There's more here, a thought that entered my mind last week and refuses to leave. I can't shake the belief that I'm not just angry about Terri Schiavo; I'm angry about what we're becoming. I fear that we are moving in a direction which will lead to the destruction of everyone not considered desireable, productive or beautiful. We already have abortion for the sake of convienence---how much further do we need to go? Assisted suicide---already legal in some places. Are we far from saying that killing people like Schiavo early on is preferable (despite any wishes she may have) becsause, after all, she's used up a lot of health care resources?
I hope I'm wrong, but history tells me that first-nation societies have been here before. The results were genocidal.
March 23, 2005
That Ship Has Sailed
Powerline is all over the "Republican talking points memo" non-story. To catch you up, the drift of this tale is that Republican Senators were supposedly sent a copy of talking points concerning the Schiavo legislation. ABC ran with the story as if they had something (Dan Rather, call your office) but now they appear to be backing off. Shocking! After all, logic and a lack of evidence never stopped the MSM before.
The Dems and their minions in the MSM need to realize that you just can't play these games anymore. There are too many people out here now who can smell a bad play from a mile off and they will act to find the truth. The networks are acting as if they're still the only game in town.
Here's a thought, and something that points out my bias: had the Dems been accused of circulating a memo like this, I wouldn't be surprised at all.
Where's NOW Now?
You probably know by now that the 11th Circuit Court appeal for Terri Shiavo was turned down today. There is another legal step involving the Supreme Court, but I'm not a lawyer so I won't delve into it here. Hugh Hewitt has an excellent post on the matter.
A caller to Bill Bennett's show yesterday raised an interesting question: why have we not heard from any feminist organization with regard to the Schiavo case? Unless I missed it (which is, admittedly, very possible), no one from NOW has hosted a press conference to say yay or nay on the issue.
One could conclude from this, possibly, that these groups wish to stay above the fray. But when have they been silent in the past on any issue involving a woman or women? No, I think the answer lies elsewhere. Stepping back from what is a heart-rending situation, let's look at the facts of this case:
1. A woman was being fed via a feeding tube. According to some, she is brain-dead; according to others, she isn't and only needs physical therapy in order to leave a fuller life than the one she has now.
2. Her "husband", who is her legal guardian, claims he knows what's best for his wife and that he is only following her own request to "not be allowed to live like this."
3. The woman's parents and family are willing to care for the woman for the rest of her natural life, if only her "husband" will sign over his legal guardianship.
4. The courts side with the husband because, legally, he has the right to make life and death decisions for a woman who can not, in her current condition, make them for herself.
With these facts in mind, let's take a look at abortion.
1. A pre-born baby is completely dependent upon her mother for everything: nutrition, life support, etc. until very late in the pregnancy. Some argue that life begins as conception; others claim that life doesn't really begin until the child can make it on her own outside her mother's womb.
2. A pre-born baby's mother has legal guardianship of her baby during her pregnancy. Some mothers have abortions because of economic conditions, drug dependency, or a lack of a stick-around sperm donor. They don't want their child to "live like that."
3. Millions of couples who can not have children wait for years to adopt babies in the United States. Many of them go to places like China to adopt because there are so few babies placed for adoption here. Yet, abortion kills over a million pre-born babies in this country every year. Almost all of them could be adopted, if only their mothers cared enough to give them life.
4. The Supreme Court decided in 1973 that a woman has a right to have an abortion; in other words, she was given the right to make decisions for someone who, in their present condition, can not.
Now it becomes clear. Feminists groups must remain silent because if they speak in favor of starving Terri Schiavo to death, they may appear to be in favor of a man being able to make life and death decisions for women (you know, the whole slippery slope thing). If they come out against Schiavo's "husband", then they would logically have to re-examine 30 years of arguments for abortion.
Either way, they might just wink out of existence. And wouldn't that be a shame?
Did None Notice?
By now, you are familiar with the school shootings which took place at Red Lake High School in Minnesota. It almost seems as if these shootings continue an all-too familiar theme in this country: loner comes to school and shoots indiscriminantely, then kills himself.
But there were warning signs. Jeff Weise was always seen in a black trench coat, black clothing and seemed obsessed with ideas of Nazism and racial purity. He was a frequent poster to several white supremecist sites, which seems unusual given his Native American ancestory. He posted over the summer that his Indian brethren had lost a sense of racial purpose and that less than 1% of them still spoke their native language.
I know this question has been asked before and will be asked again, but didn't anyone see these actions as a cry for help? In hindsight, it's obvious that the boy was trying to identify with something, probably so he wouldn't feel so alone. Did he have unrestriced internet access? Did anyone notice what he wore EVERY DAY?
We have more Red Lakes and Columbines in our future if parents and teachers don't wake up to the realities facing them.
March 22, 2005
Deletion
I had to delete the latest audio entry because I made it using the speaker phone on my cell while I was driving home. Not a great idea under the best of circumstances, but the truck is loud and the speakerphone is pretty bad. I'll try to stick to doing these things from a stationary location.
Those of you who have dial-up connections may find that you have trouble getting the audio posts. Please let me know how bad it is. I want to provide the same access to everyone, so if I need to find another solution, I will.
By the way, this is not podcasting, as I stated in my test post. Podcasting would actually allow you to take the audio file, download it and do whatever you wanted with it. Unfortunately, this service does not allow that, so you have to be sitting in front of your PC to hear my words of wisdom. Help is on the way, possibly in June, but I'm not going to say anything more about that yet.
As always, thanks for reading (and listening).
Sowell On Schiavo
Thomas Sowell, one of the greatest minds of our age, has an excellent column today concerning Terri Schiavo (courtesty of Town Hall):
If the tragic case of Terri Schiavo shows nothing else, it shows how easily "the right to die" can become the right to kill. It is hard to believe that anyone, regardless of their position on euthanasia, would have chosen the agony of starvation and dehydration as the way to end someone's life.
A New York Times headline on March 20th tried to assure us: "Experts Say Ending Feeding Can Lead to a Gentle Death" but you can find experts to say anything. In a December 2, 2002 story in the same New York Times, people starving in India were reported as dying, "often clutching pained stomachs."
No murderer would be allowed to be killed this way, which would almost certainly be declared "cruel and unusual punishment," in violation of the Constitution, by virtually any court.
Terri Schiavo's only crime is that she has become an inconvenience -- and is caught in the merciless machinery of the law. Those who think law is the answer to our problems need to face the reality that law is a crude and blunt instrument.
Make no mistake about it, Terri Schiavo is being killed. She is not being "allowed to die."
She is not like someone whose breathing, blood circulation, kidney function, or other vital work of the body is being performed by machines. What she is getting by machine is what all of us get otherwise every day -- food and water. Depriving any of us of food and water would kill us just as surely, and just as agonizingly, as it is killing Terri Schiavo.
Would I want to be kept alive in Terri Schiavo's condition? No. Would I want to be killed so slowly and painfully? No. Would anyone? I doubt it.
Every member of Terri Schiavo's family wants her kept alive -- except the one person who has a vested interest in her death, her husband. Her death will allow him to marry the woman he has been living with, and having children by, for years.
Legally, he is Terri's guardian and that legal technicality is all that gives him the right to starve her to death. Courts cannot remove guardians without serious reasons. But neither should they refuse to remove guardians with a clear conflict of interest.
There are no good solutions to this wrenching situation. It is the tragedy of the human condition in its most stark form.
The extraordinary session of Congress, calling members back from around the country, with the President flying back from his home in Texas in order to be ready to sign legislation dealing with Terri Schiavo, are things that do us credit as a nation.
Even if critics who claim that this is being done for political or ideological reasons are partially or even wholly correct, they still miss the point. It is the public's sense of concern -- in some cases, outrage -- that is reflected by their elected representatives.
What can Congress do -- and what effect will it have? We do not know and Congress does not know. Those who are pushing for legislation to save Terri Schiavo are obviously trying to avoid setting a precedent or upsetting the Constitutional balance.
It is an old truism that hard cases make bad law. No one wants all such cases to end up in either Congress or the federal courts. But neither do decent people want an innocent woman killed because she was inconvenient and a court refused to recognize the conflict of interests in her legal guardian.
The fervor of those who want to save Terri Schiavo's life is understandable and should be respected, even by those who disagree. What is harder to understand is the fervor and even venom of those liberals who have gone ballistic -- ostensibly over state's rights, over the Constitutional separation of powers, and even over the sanctity of family decisions.
These are not things that liberals have any track record of caring about. Is what really bothers them the idea of the sanctity of life and what that implies for their abortion issue? Or do they hate any challenge to the supremacy of judges -- on which the whole liberal agenda depends -- a supremacy that the Constitution never gave the judiciary?
If nothing else comes out of all this, there needs to be a national discussion of some humane way to end life in those cases when it has to be ended -- and this may not be one of those cases.
Thanks to Powerline for linking to this.
Nothing For Now
The federal judge presiding over the Schiavo case has ruled that he will not force the feeding of Terri to begin again. More later. Much more.
Linux, Linux, Linux
My manager is attending BrainShare this week. BrainShare is Novell’s annual festival of all things geeky, held in Salt Lake City every spring. I received an e-mail from him this morning which centered around one theme: Linux, Linux, Linux. The revolution is coming; some would say it’s already here.
For those of you who don’t speak in bytes and binary, Linux is an operating system like Windows or OS X. It’s open source, meaning that anyone can look “under the hood” and make changes, fix security problems, etc. as long as you’re willing to share your work with the rest of the community. Linux is a generic term for the kernel, or core, of the operating system. Companies (like Suse, which is owned by Novell) take that kernel and build the rest of the OS on top of it. The finished product is called a distribution. Many users do not consider it proper to refer to your operating system as Linux; instead, it should be referred to by the distribution name (“I’m running Suse 9.2 but it won’t see my tuner card”).
Why should you care? Because Linux will, in my opinion, have an effect on your life, especially if you use a PC at home or at work. Until now, we have all adjusted the way we work based on the way Windows works. You don’t realize it because most of you have never used any other operating system. It’s like a bunch of people carrying an elephant around on their backs instead of riding it. Those of us in the IT field who deal with desktop machines have gotten so used to Windows’ various quirks that we don’t even think about them.
I could move most of our end users to a Linux machine and they would be up and running and comfortable in a few hours, maybe less. The desktop(s) is/are familiar, with icons and something that passes for the Windows “Start” button. Installing applications can be daunting for new users, but it’s not hard to learn once you unlearn the way it’s done in Windows. That’s not to say that Windows is terrible as a desktop operating system in terms of usability; in fact, I like Windows XP quite a bit.
But consider this: have you ever been doing something on your PC and thought, “why can’t I do this or that or why didn’t they make a button for this?”. The cool thing about Linux is that, no matter what little improvement you think of, I can almost guarantee that someone, probably in his or her spare time, thought of the same thing and is actually working on the solution. They’re not waiting for the next release of Windows and hoping that their little doodad is in there---they’re making it happen right now. And after they turn their project loose on the world, there’s going to be feedback and maybe another person who says, “That’s neat, but I think I can do better.” And then he’ll go off and improve on it.
In the end, we all get a better product that is still cheaper to buy and own than Windows (many distributions are free) that is infinitely customizable and isn’t plagued by all the spyware/virus problems of Windows. It’s a new world of computing at the front door.
By the way, the spellchecker in Word 2002 does not recognize non-capitalized “linux” as a word. Funny, that one.
March 21, 2005
Culture Of Death
As I write this, Michael Schiavo is on Larry King and Terri's parents are on Hannity & Colmes. We're in a strange holding pattern until the federal judge reviewing this case reaches a decision. Mr. Schiavo seems weirdly placid, something that I can only attribute to a sedative or anti-depressant. I can not read his heart, and so I won't make any assumptions, although I have a theory which I believe time will show to be true. The pain in the hearts of Terri's parents must be unimagineable.
Dr. Bill Hammesfahr is talking to Sean Hannity right now. Dr. Hammesfahr spent a year with Terri Schiavo and is as familiar with her case as anyone alive today. According to him, there are only four licensed doctors who have examined Terri who say that she is in a PVS. Furthermore, Dr. H claims that they were all paid for their analysis by Michael Schiavo, whereas he did his work pro bono. It makes one wonder.
If nothing else, this case is going to make all of us rethink our definition of life. As my friend Hash has told me, we can keep a group of organs alive almost indefinitely. But is a person in that state really a person? Or just a body? It depends on who you ask. But Art Bell made an interesting observation on his radio show last night: if you don't know a person's wishes (and, other than an ever-changing claim by Michael Schiavo, we have no idea what Terri wants), shouldn't we err on the side of life?
Many people, both liberal and conservative, laugh at the idea of the slippeyr slope. But let there be no doubt: this case is an enormous fork in the road. We see a story about an abortion performed because of a hair lip and cleft palate and we are shocked. But why? Isn't this a natural product of a society that values looks and earning capacity above all else? After all, most abortions in this country are performed out of convienence, not out of concern for a "damaged" baby. In our ever more fast world, inconvienent infants are now disposable. Why not adults?
The Logic Of Dean
Howard Dean has called all Republicans "brain-dead". Cute. According to him, Democrats will once again come to national prominence only when they learn to be very "focused".
That's exactly the wrong message to send to the faithful in his party. When Democrats win, it is precisely because they are not focused on issues or their own agendas. Take John Kerry, for example: he said he had a plan for Iraq, but none of us knew what it entailed other than going back to the UN for something. What he ran on was the Democratic base's hatred of President Bush. Had it not been for the blogosphere and the swiftboat vets, he probably would've won.
This kind of tripe from the Left goes back to what I have always said: liberal arguments are always based on emotion. Bombarding a liberal with facts is pointless, because the emotion of the issue has already been cast. This helps to explain why Democrats do so well among young people---they have drama on their side.
Passed
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush signed emergency legislation sent to him by Congress early Monday to allow Terri Schiavo's parents ask a federal judge to prolong their daughter's life, capping days of emotional debate over who should decide life and death.
"In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life," Bush said in a statement after signing the bill.
After flying back to Washington from his Texas ranch, Bush had waited at the White House to sign the measure permitting a federal review of the case, which could trigger the reinsertion of feeding tubes needed to keep the brain-damaged Florida woman alive.
The House passed the bill on a 203-58 vote after calling lawmakers back for an emergency Sunday session for debate that stretched past midnight.
I'm already hearing the complaints that this has become "political". Just for the record, the Senate and House are political bodies; everything they do is political. And there are no guarantees that this will change anything.
March 20, 2005
Put Off
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congress on Sunday put off action on a bill aimed at prolonging the life of brain-damaged Terri Schiavo, in the face of anticipated objections from at least one Democrat that could temporarily stall the measure.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, convened the House in rare Sunday session, but immediately recessed it until further notice.
Why not just wait until after the Easter break (which, for Congress, is a WEEK long)? Or better yet, just bring it up after the 2006 mid-term elections.
Update On Schiavo
There is still no concrete action on the part of Congress today, although that could change by this evening. I've received more e-mail about this issue than I ever have over the course of a single day, so I know that many of you are thinking of this today.
For those of you who are wondering about an activist judiciary and the like, try to remember that this is, after all, Florida. This is the same judiciary that made such a disaster out of the 2000 election that the Supreme Court had to step in. If left alone, they'd still be counting votes in Tallahassee.
Daily Kos--Off The Rocker?
The Daily Kos, which is probably the most widely-read blog on the web, is reporting what is perhaps the most crackpot theory I've heard in a while: that the Pentagon is going to float the idea of bringing back the draft some time after March 31st.
I'm a little disappointed in Kos, mainly because he's an Army veteran. He knows, as I do, that the people who run the military don't want to have anything to do with a draft for many reasons. First, the military is very different now than it was during the Vietnam era. Most jobs are very technical and require someone who is both intelligent and wants to learn. You don't always get these qualities with a draft.
Second, the nation is different now than it was 30 years ago. People fought the draft during Vietnam, but not to the degree that I believe that would fight it now. We've created two generations of spoiled brats since 1973 (my generation included) wherein only a small percentage is willing to live the life of sacrifice necessary to be a good solider, sailor, airman or marine.
I don't think the Pentagon wants the hassle. This is just more scare tactics by the Left, eager to put some fear out there for the second anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.
March 19, 2005
The Deal
About 45 minutes ago, a deal was reached within Congress for a bill (which may be signed on Sunday) that would allow the feeding of Terri Schiavo to resume while a federal judge reviews lower court rulings in the case.
I know that some of you out there are questioning my conservative credentials right now, wondering how I could support federal action on what should be a state matter (since it is not implicitly claimed as a federal responsibility in the Constiution). My answer is two-fold:
1. Congress is calling for federal oversight on a lower court ruling. This is not new, as judicial review is a common practice.
2. The wording of the bill is very specific to this case and, according to quotes in the linked story, sets no precedent.
I know I promised to start a top 10 list thing on the weekends and we may return to it tomorrow. But I think this case is of tantamount importance to our society, and so is worth spending some extra time on. I hope you understand.
March 18, 2005
The Nuts And Bolts Of Thirst
As you read this (after 1PM EST Friday), Terri Schiavo is dying. She's not dying in the way that we're all dying, but she is deliberately being cut off from food and water. She will not die of starvation, but of dehydration. Here's what will happen to her over the next week or so (courtesy of the San Jose Mercury News and the AP):
_Day One: The percutaneous endoscopic gastrotomy tube, which is placed through the skin and into the stomach, is removed in a simple surgical procedure. Patients who do not have mental cognition to have a sense of thirst or hunger will not be uncomfortable.
_ Days Three to Four: Urine output decreases and patients begin to lose normal body secretions. The mouth begins to look dry and the eyes appear sunken. Patients will look thinner because the body tissues have lost fluid. Their heart rate gradually goes up and their blood pressure goes down. In some patients, dehydration releases endorphins in the brain that create a state of euphoria.
_ Days Five to 10: People who are alert have a marked decrease in their alertness. Respiration becomes irregular with periods of very fast and then very slow breathing. Some patients will become restless while others will be less active. For patients in a persistent vegetative state, there may be no discernible change in their movements.
_ Days 10 to Death: Patients do not appear to respond to their environment at all and may appear to be in a coma. Length of death process is determined by how well-nourished patient was and how much body fat and fluid they had when procedure began. May be outward signs of dehydration, like extremely dry skin. Kidney function declines and toxins begin accumulating in the body. Toxins cause respiratory muscles to fail. Multiple organ systems begin to fail from lack of nutrition.
I'm not my normal concerned right now. I'm angry, the sort of angry that makes me want to break things and hurt people. I won't, of course, and I know that there are countless people around the world suffering as I write this. But this one woman, in this country, is being allowed to die a slow, agonizing death because a man who has moved on with his own life claims that she once said she didn't want life support.
And, for the record, there is evidence (see my earlier post) that Terri does possess mental cognition. That means that she will feel the same pain you or I would if we were allowed to die of thirst. It would be less cruel to smother her with a pillow.
This is the splendor of our acheivement.
PVS
From Drudge this morning:
**Exclusive Fri Mar 18 2005 00:50:07 ET** The Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pension (HELP) Committee, Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming) has requested Terri Schiavo to testify before his congressional committee, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. In so doing it triggers legal or statutory protections for the witness, among those protections is that nothing can be done to cause harm or death to this individual.
Members of Congress went to the U.S. Attorney in DC to ask for a temporary restraining order to be issued by a judge, which protects Terri Schiavo from having her life support, including her feeding and hydration tubes, removed... Developing...
The Terri Schiavo case has been in and out of the news in recent weeks, but it looks as if things may be coming to a head soon. This case is important because it deals with an assumption that a person is in a permanent vegatative state (PVS). However, recent reporting suggests that Schiavo has not had the therapy and examinations necessary to reach such a conclusion. If this is true, then this may not be an issue of letting a person with no hope of recovery die in peace, but an issue of neglect and abuse by a man who should not be her legal guardian in the first place due to the life decisions he made after his wife's hospitalization.
Terri Schiavo deserves to live, not because she is alive, but because she may have the opportunity to live a fuller life.
March 17, 2005
Once Again, No Bias Here
If you listened to the President's press conference yesterday, you heard this question (transcription courtesy of Hugh Hewitt):
THE PRESIDENT: Elisabeth.
Q: Paul Wolfowitz, who was the -- a chief architect of one of the most unpopular wars in our history --
THE PRESIDENT: (Laughter.) That's an interesting start. (Laughter.)
Q: -- is your choice to be the President of the World Bank. What kind of signal does that send to the rest of the world?
Now, I'm sure Elisabeth didn't mean to work any bias into that question. Were I the President, I would've asked her how she knew the current conflagration in Iraq is one of the most unpopular wars in our history. I would then ask to her to please list the most popular wars from least to most. Where would the Spanish-American War fit in there, you think? "Well, it's got nice rhythm, Dick, but I can't dance to it."
Hugh Hewitt made an excellent point about this question with regard to Jeff Gannon. If you recall, the Gannon hunt began when he made the terrible mistake of asking a few softball questions during a press briefing at the White House. As we can now see, had he accused the President of being a coke-sniffing draft-dodger who only went to war with Iraq for oil, he'd be writing for the New York Times or doing long, low-voiced, somber pieces for NPR. Instead, he was outed for being (gasp!) gay. I guess liberals only love gays when they vote for Democrats.
If you can't see the obvious bias in the MSM, you're not paying attention. But based on the blogs I read every day, there are many people out there who still like to assume that since GE owns NBC and Rupert Murdoch owns Fox that all media has a conservative slant. One fellow whose blog I forgot to bookmark (sorry, man; drop me an e-mail and I'll credit you) explained the liberalism in media this way (I'm paraphrasing):
UPDATE: here's the actual blog link.
Most reporters start out at a small newspaper or radio station. They are overworked and underpaid. Anyone who aspires to wealth will immediately go into some other line of work, while the liberal, who is not motivated by money, will stay on. Most editors actually want a diverse opinion base on staff, but all the conservatives leave.
Uhuh. Here's my take on that:
Most reporters start out at journalism school where they are indoctrinated by professors who exist in a tenured environment wherein competition is not only frowned upon, but is illegal. These professors instill in their young pupils the idea that a free and open economy is essentially evil and leads to war and injustice. Thus, all war is a result of business dealings gone awry. Spreading democracy and freedom is just a cover for writing big checks to Haliburton.
Our young journalist (we'll call her Elisabeth) graduates and moves out in to the real world. She works for a small media outlet, where she is overworked and underpaid. Her chums from college who majored in finance or accounting or engineering are making more money than her, which doesn't seem fair since she works just as hard. She begins to despise businesspeople just like her professors did because, after all, she is only underpaid because they are overpaid (since liberals believe that any economy is a zero sum gain).
One day Elisabeth gets to join the White House Press Corps. The President represents everything that is soulless and wrong about society: he has firm beliefs which don't need to be nuanced and finessed; he's from Texas; he's against abortion; he's a Christian. So when she finally gets to stand up and speak truth to power, do you think she's going to just ask a fact-finding question? Of course not. She has to work in her beliefs because, by God, she got into this racket to change the world, not report the facts.
But then, she still comes off like an idiot. Nice try, Liz.
March 16, 2005
Late
Sorry about the lack of posts today. I have a situation here at work that is probably going to keep me here very late. Thanks for stopping by; please check with me in the morning.
March 15, 2005
Retraction
Philip Bennett, the Managing Editor of The Washington Post, responded to Hugh Hewitt this evening concerning his Chinese interview of a few days ago (see "Imperial US" below). Bennett claims that his answers were heavily edited and some were complete works of fiction.
If this were the NY Times, I would put a retraction on my old blog site and hope you found it next year some time. But I try to hold myself to the same standards to which I hold others, so let me be the first to say that I should've waited to hear more about the Bennett story before posting what I did. Any Chinese paper should've made me suspicious; it will not happen again.
Thank you for reading.
Bloom Off The Rose? Hardly!
Some of the good ol' boy NASCAR crew chiefs are in trouble for cheating. I can almost hear the laughter as those of you who scoff at stock car racing are thinking that, finally, here's proof that these racers are no better than NBA or MLB guys.
They may or may not be; I really don't care. What's important to remember here is that this kind of cheating has gone on since the beginning of the sport. In some areas, this is just another aspect of the race. Is it right? No, but you could make the argument that bump-drafting isn't right, either.
I still believe that NASCAR racing is the best choice for a family-friendly sport.
The UAW Blinks
This update just in:
The United Auto Workers union waved a white flag Monday in its parking skirmish with neighboring reservists, but the 1st Battalion, 24th Marines are not accepting surrender.
Facing intense criticism, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger reversed his decision to ban Marine Corps reservists driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers from parking at the union's Solidarity House headquarters in Detroit.
"I made the wrong call on the parking issue, and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years," Gettelfinger said in a statement.
Wounded by what they consider an unpatriotic ambush, the Marines rejected the union's olive branch and secured an alternative parking lot.
"I talked to Ron; I let him know that I understand he has rescinded his decision," said Lt. Col. Joe Rutledge, a top-ranking officer at the reserve infantry rifle battalion. "However, I've made my decision -- either you support the Marines or you don't."
Like A Red Rubber Ball
When I leave for work in the morning during winter, the sky is still dark and, if I’m lucky, the stars are still out. But as winter turns to spring, the eastern sky turns orange earlier and earlier until, around March 10th, the first sliver of sunrise peeks over the eastern Kentucky hills. I am always reminded of beautiful sunrises I have been blessed with, all of them connected to something significant in my life. This morning was no exception.
I graduated from boot camp 15 years ago this week. It was a happy time, for I had completed what had been the greatest challenge of my life up to that point. My parents came to Orlando for the event, which was sort of an unspoken affirmation of my decision. But for all the work and sweat and friendship of that time, my fondest memory is of a sunrise.
Every morning in boot camp involved PT. We would get up long before the sun rose and head out to a large asphalt area known as The Grinder. Once there, we met up with the other companies and did all the things the military is famous for: pushups, sit-ups, jumping jacks, etc. Then we ran. Some days, we ran two miles and called it a day. But once in a while our Company Commanders would be in a mood (I think they both had marriage troubles) and we would run until they were tired. It seemed like this happened once a week.
We were about three days from graduation when our senior Company Commander, a First Class named Vaughn, decided to let us run ourselves into the ground. His idea was to have us run until all the other companies left The Grinder and went back to their barracks. We ran for about an hour, until I could no longer feel my legs. I think I had achieved the fabled “runner’s high”, for I was almost euphoric. As we made our turn and faced east once more, there it was: the tip of sunlight peeking out from the top of the orange grove on the other side of the base fence. In my state, I thought it was the most beautiful sight I had ever seen. Since we were normally back in our barracks getting dressed when the sun came up, it was the first sunrise I had seen since coming to Orlando in the middle of the night on January 16th. It felt victory.
You can tell I have a long drive to work, can’t you?
March 14, 2005
Berlin or Beijing?
Hugh Hewitt is posing an interesting question on his show this evening: will the demonstrations in Beirut today and in the past two weeks lead to Berlin 1989 or Tianamen (sp.) Square 1989? That is, will we see the dawn of a free, democratic Lebanon or a crackdown by the military on the civilian population?
I vote Berlin for one reason: times have changed in the Middle East. Iraq held elections in January and there are rumbles of discontent from many in Iran. We can argue about why this is, but I believe it is because George W. Bush has thrown down the gauntlet: if you stand for democracy, we will stand with you. And he means it.
Hugh was talking to Claudia Rossett, who is in Beirut. She said that people know of Bush's promise and they speak of it openly. It means something to these people. She spoke of signs thanking the free world for the attention they are receiving. But there is also this plea: don't forget about us.
As the President has promised, so he must do. An America who does as promised will win many friends in that part of the world; an America who abandons those struggling for freedom will earn generations of enemies.
The Imperial US
Philip Bennett, the Managing Editor of The Washington Post, was interviewed by the Chinese paper People's Daily last week. His answers are not surprising for a mainstream American journalist at the beginning of the 21st century, but the basic beliefs which lead to such opinions never fail to puzzle me. His basic assertion is that America has no business leading the world.
The history of Western civilization is surprisingly cyclical. From the fall of the Roman Empire to the present day, different nations have risen to positions of leadership in the world. Some have done so through commerce and innovation; others have done so through force of arms. I believe that most liberals today see the United States as just another imperial power in a long line of such nations. The fact that this nation is the first true republic to hold a position of leadership and that we have achieved the position more through influence than violence is somehow lost.
That is not say our record is spotless. We supported dictators in the name of stopping the spread of communism. We supported suppression of even the most basic human rights in the Philippines. Thousands of Americans of Japanese heritage were imprisoned during the Second World War for no other reason than that their parents came from Asia.
But it is not overreaching to say that democracy would be dead today were it not for the United States. Europe remains free because of two American interventions during the 20th century. Our post-war occupation of Japan all but guaranteed a freely elected government in a nation which had known only despotism. Even the young democracies in the former Soviet states owe many of the freedoms they enjoy today to our Cold War policies, especially those of Ronald Reagan.
Many on the Left believe in the concept of a balance of power. In their eyes, a communist superpower kept the United States in check, as if there is some moral equivalence between us and the former Soviet Union. America as the world’s strongest nation is somehow wrong. This is the crowd that supported unilateral disarmament and who scoffed at the idea of helping freedom fighters in Central America. Any mistake in our foreign policy is one mistake too many (except, of course, if it’s made by a Democrat) and points out how imperialistic we really are.
Who would stem the spread of Islamo-facism and, eventually, Chinese economic hegemony in the world if there were no United States? England? France? Germany? The answer is no one.
March 13, 2005
Slipping
I'm afraid I owe you all an apology. Since I haven't been posting much from work, I've noticed that the quality of my posts has slipped. I'm at my best early in the morning; I'm full of ideas and opinions.
I shall endeavour to do better.
Remind Me...Why Unions?
The UAW...keeping Dems in office and the shirker employed. Man, I hate unions. And now, they're coming down on the Marines.
UPDATE: Sly sends the following information in case you want to make a call:
The UAW can be reached at 313.926.5000. Ask to speak to someone in the PR department. You might want to mention, as Sly did, that you're seriously considering buying foreign cars from now on.
Podcast
You may or may not have heard about podcasting; if not, you will soon hear about it in the same way you hear about blogs now. Podcasts are, in essence, audio blogs. The name comes from the iPod, which is currently the portable audio player of choice among the technorati. Here's how it works:
1. Someone creates an audio file (the podcast) using his PC, a microphone and some inexpensive software.
2. The file is uploaded to a blog, FTP server, etc. and is made part of an RSS feed.
3. The end user (you and I) download software such as iPodder which allows one to find podcasts, download them and listen to them on a computer or portable media player.
You may think that there's nothing technologically new here, and you're correct. However, podcasts are starting to show up in the blogosphere, meaning that it may soon take hold as a new way to spread news, opinion, etc. I have everthing necessary to create podcasts at home; the only thing I need is a server that will let me host them. If I can find someone willing to donate some space to a poor Hoosier, I will start producing an audio version of my senseless ramblings. I know that's what yo