Insert that "Law & Order" Sound Here

As a conservative, I'm generally a law and order type of guy. I like to see rioters get hit with water cannons and nightsticks, for example. Like many people, I tend to give police and prosecutors the benefit of the doubt when it comes to most criminal cases. And I think the OJ Simpson jurors were morons.

However, I have read a number of items in recent months that have given me pause. Coyote Blog, one of my faves, has a number of posts on police abuse. In addition, I just read John Grisham's 2006 non-fiction account of lazy, incompetent police and prosecutors in a small town (by regular folks' standards, at least - to me, 16,000 people is a lot) who railroaded four innocent men. And then there's the case of the West Memphis Three. While I am loath to support something that is a rock star cause celebre, this looks like a conviction based on thin evidence, coercive interrogation and an unreliable "witnesses" angling for a plea bargain, much like Grisham describes in his story. Of course, none of this would fly if juries didn't convict in such cases, but I wouldn't want to place my fate in the hands of most juries. (I think we should have some sort of quasi-professional jury system, in which qualified people serve for a year or two as a full-time juror, but that's another topic.)

I think it comes down to this: just like there are incompetent, corrupt, and/or lazy people in any walk of life, such people exist in the police and prosecutorial ranks. Add to this the fact that police and prosecutors are government employees, and that many prosecutors are politicians, the likelihood of these attributes being found in some segment of these professions increases.

Therefore, we need to be vigilant in our civil rights (particularly the 4th and 5th Amendments) and attentive and critical if we find ourselves on juries. For one thing, if you find yourself in a police interview, get a dang lawyer. This video, on why you should never talk to the police (I assume he refers merely to situations where one is a potential suspect, not a witness), is worth watching.

On a lighter note, this Chris Rock video describes how not to get beaten by police (warning: bad language).

Lock Him Up

This black Harvard professor, Henry Gates, who was arrested the other day at his home, is an absolute ass. He was trying to get into his house, but had to force the door open because it was stuck. A suspicious neighbor called the police, who showed up to check on things. Gates, instead of being glad that the police were responding to a potential burglary, goes off on a tirade, getting himself arrested. Now, of course, he claims racial profiling.

What gets me is the way CNN covered this. They gave two options: either there was a misunderstanding, or there was racism. They didn't stop to think maybe this guy deserved to be arrested. CNN, like the Washington Post did in the attached article, repeatedly insists this guy is "renowned." CNN suggested that the neighbor who called police and the cops themselves should have recognized this guy on sight and left him alone. I am pretty knowledgeable about current events, and I've never heard of this guy before. If he's like most ethnic studies "scholars," I'm sure he's a quack. He probably saw the cop approaching and knew he could get some headlines by getting himself arrested. That's probably why he's "renowned;" he knows how to play the media.

I'm glad to see the cop in this situation is standing his ground. I hope his superiors don't hang him out to dry.

My dog days of summer

WARNING: I just read what I wrote, and it came out a bit meaner than I meant it to be. This is probably due to the fact that I am PMS-y. I am going to leave it how it is though because 1) I am still PMSy so even if I re-wrote it, it would be any better and 2) I meant it all, I just wish I has said it better/nicer. So if you still want to read this, you have been warned.

Someone recently brought up Bob Barker and it got me thinking about the mandatory spaying and neutering laws that are being brought up in CA. I had meant to write about this earlier but forgot. I know that the bill already died but too bad, I still want to rant. (And I am confused about the exact laws and what is going on with that, but I don't really care because it is California and you could never get me to live in California anyway, even for a million dollars, I'm talking about the principle.)

Personally, I like the idea of spaying and neutering. There are way too many dogs and cats out there that don't have homes and it makes me sad :-( All the pets my family have owned have been surgically altered so at to prevent more baby animals from entering the world (except our fish, that would just be weird). But, policy wise, I don't think it up should be up to the state to dictate to me what I can and can't do with my dog. If I want a dog with testicles, I should be able to have one. I will also have to be the one to pay the vet bills when the dog gets testicular cancer, or pay to have to carpets replaced because he has marked up the whole house, but that should be my choice.

And I don't think a law requiring s/n will really do that much. In most cities, there are already strong financial incentives for law abiding citizens to spay and neuter in addition to the very reasonable reasons the ASPCA informs us of. The people who don't s/n are the same ones who don't register their animal. They take their chances that the police will not find out that they have unregistered pets because they believe that the police will be otherwise occupied catching robbers and keeping Lindsay Lohan off our streets. So we are going to force the people that take care of their pets, and maybe do some knowledgeable, but hobby level, breeding, to fix their animals? Even if you think it is a great idea to spay and neuter every single dog and cat in CA, it shouldn't be government's business to make that happen.

On a related note, I also don't agree with no-kill shelters, despite the fact that I volunteer with a no-kill organization. Actually, it is because I work with a no-kill organization. I go out to the shelter and pick up dogs and take them to PetSmart so they can be adopted. The dogs that we take there are almost always really great dogs. Sometimes they have little problems, like pulling on the lead or a tendency to eat their owner's pet hamster* but I don't think that should be a reason for a dog to have to die, especially when it is just laziness on the part of whoever owned it before and a few weeks of love and discipline will help a lot. But we find them new homes and when they get adopted, it makes me really happy. And when an new owner comes back a few weeks or months later with their dog to show everyone how great he/she is and what they have learned, it makes me really really happy. I am glad that we were able to take a dog from the pound where it would have been put to sleep and turn it into someones beloved pet.

But there are other dogs to. The ones that we don't take to PetSmart because they couldn't handle it. The ones who aren't really adoptable. I see them, week after week, at the shelter, knowing that they will probably stay there till they die. In a cage, or tied up outside, with almost no interaction with other dogs or humans. They just sit there, getting less and less adoptable. What kinda life is that? I think it would be better for them to be put down. Don't get me wrong, the shelter I work with is great and the organizers and other volunteers are able to do amazing work, that is why I spend my time there. But you can't save everyone.

Before I volunteered for these last few months, if someone would have asked me if I like the idea of a no-kill shelter I would have said yes, because who wants to think about killing puppies and kittens? I wanted to think I was a baby animal lover, not hater. But I don't think animals should have to suffer because I want to feel good about myself. That is really just selfish.

Now, I know that a few of you will be thinking, even if you don't leave a comment, that I must be a cruel horrible person because I think we should let irresponsible owners' animals make babies all over the place and when we can't do anything with them, to kill them. And if you want to think that to feel better about yourself and your own love of mandatory laws and no kill shelters, go right ahead. But unless you got up early yesterday and spent almost 10 hours hanging out with a pack of smelly (cute but definitely smelly) dogs, I don't want to hear about it.




*(side note to Sasha's previous owner: if your dog had eaten a mouse you would probably have been thrilled, how was she supposed to know that the small furry thing running around your house was your pet and not a pest, why get rid of a well trained, adorable dog just because of that one little issue?)

Driving Soundtrack

MacKenzie's been manning the book review department of this blog, but I will be filling in for her today.

My reading interests usually tend toward non-fiction, often of the historical kind. But I started listening to audio books when going on long drives. Music puts me to sleep when I drive, so I need something engaging to listen to. I'd listen to talk radio, but you can't always be sure something good will be on (unless, of course, it's Rush Limbaugh time) or that reception will be adequate. So I turned to audio books. I prefer lighter fare when I drive, something more engrossing and easier to follow (since I can't easily go back and re-read something). I first listened to a couple of John Grisham books, but I exhausted the library's limited supply of Grisham books on CD (they had some books-on-tape options, but, like many people, I don't have a car cassette player).

While skimming the library shelves prior to one trip, I found the book One Shot by Lee Child. This was my introduction to the Jack Reacher series, of which there are 15 books, the first of which was published in 1997. Reacher is a former military police investigator who now wanders the country by bus or hitchhiking and invariably ends up, sometimes accidentally, in the middle of a situation where his investigative and butt-kicking skills come in handy.

I have now finished my 3rd Reacher novel. I joined the party late, as I have read the 9th (One Shot), 11th (Bad Luck and Trouble), and 15th (and latest) offerings (Worth Dying For) in the series. As far as I can tell,  there's not much carryover between books. Each one can stand alone. In fact, there are some aspects of Jack Reacher that only appear in individual books. Examples include his skill with numbers and doing calculations in his head, his money issues (or lack thereof), and his penchant for traveling very light (usually carrying just a toothbrush). In researching this post, I learned that Worth Dying For is apparently a continuation of the previous book, which I have not read, and I had no idea until now.

I like the descriptive detail of the books. Whether describing the landscape of Nebraska, how you can kill someone by punching them in the chest at a certain precise phase of the heartbeat, or the cross-country travels of a truck full of contraband, Child (and the audio narrators) bring the subject to life in a way that is not always necessary to the story but is interesting and enriching nonetheless.

Jack Reacher is not one to leave it to the justice system to sort out guilt and punishment. Often, he is involved in a case because law enforcement, through corruption or lack of skill, is not doing its job. Reacher, through a thorough investigation assisted by his knowledge of human nature and top-notch interviewing skills, figures out who is guilty and how they should be punished. He then delivers the punishment clinically, without a pause or regret. As opposed to Jack Bauer of 24 fame, who was a pretty brutal guy who, in the end, deferred to the authority of the President, Reacher defers to nobody. Whereas Bauer was clearly tortured emotionally over the things he had to do, Reacher apparently feels no such remorse. Of course, Bauer had to hurt a lot of innocent people, something Reacher hasn't had to do in the books I have read. What Bauer and Reacher have in common is that they both know how to cause pain and how to debilitate a foe, and they do it regularly.

The Reacher books (again, as far as I know) end in a meticulous, elaborate assault on the bad guy's compound, in which Reacher is assisted by locals he meets on the case. Reacher is always the underdog and always outmanned, but his victories are complete and guaranteed, almost like a movie plot. Worth Dying For even includes a James Bond/Austin Powers-like ridiculously elaborate, foolish plan to off the good guy that inevitably fails and allows the hero to live another day. In fact, Paramount is apparently working on a production of One Shot.

For me, these novels serve their purpose well. They are enthralling driving fare that entertains me and keeps me alert. I plan to continue to check them out of the library as audio books on future trips. But I don't plan to start reading them the old fashioned way. I think I'll stick to nonfiction.

Craig to the rescue!

Last night I was out at hg having a lovely time chatting with the other wives, you know, "fellowshipping." But at 9:30 when we started wrapping up and I go to leave, I realize I can't find my keys. I take everything out of my purse, but still couldn't find them. Looked around their kitchen, still couldn't find them. Hmm, maybe I just left them in the car. Except the car was locked and it was dark. So I look around the kitchen more and try not to panic. One of the husbands gets me a flashlight and I go out to the car again. There they are, in the ignition of my locked car.

Now to be honest, I didn't handle it very well. I even said a bad word. (Okay, I know most of you don't think "suck" is a bad word, but it has been ingrained in my head as a bad word since I was little so to me it's bad, and I said it anyway last night).

But it had been having a rough couple of days and this was about to be the straw that broke the camel's back. The house was about 20 minutes outside of town and even if I got a ride back to my apartment, I couldn't get in to get the extra car key because the only key to the apartment was locked inside my car. That left two options: call AAA and wait for them to come unlock the car or have another one of the husbands, a police officer, attempt to break into our car. He said he could do it if he had the tools but as he didn't, he would be willing to try using a coat hanger. I choose option three: call Craig.

Now I knew he was too far away at the moment to actually do anything about it but I didn't really think either of my options sounded like it would get me home before 11pm and I was about to just sit down and cry on the floor (did I mentioned it had been a bad couple of days?) and I was hoping he would have an idea or at least prevent the crying.

No sooner than I had said "Craig, I locked the keys in the car" did he reply "Well, did you check the back window?" Of course, how could I forget the back window! Our car windows are by far the most annoying part of our vehicle (remember this?). Well, all except one is fixed now. But that one not only refuses to roll up and down when it is supposed to, but it randomly falls down. I say randomly but it isn't really. It happens - when it is snowing, when it is raining, and when I am driving alone on a dark road and can't possible stop to lift it up again. But last night, I was grateful. In less than 30 seconds, I was able to push it down, unlock the car, and retrieve my keys. Crisis averted. Sometimes having a quick thinking husband and a crappy car can be a useful combination.

PS ~ Now that I have told you the secret to breaking into our car, please don't come and steal it. You probably wouldn't want it if you had it.

Threats and Hoaxes

One of the multiple threats/hoaxes that have taken place in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting occurred at my old stomping grounds in Minnesota today. Someone found a note in a bathroom, and eight buildings were evacuated and searched. Nothing was found.

You figure that the people who do this kind of thing aren't sick enough to actually hurt people, but they are sick enough to cause this kind of disturbance. But how thin is the line between the two? Are these people just losers who want to get out of class, or what? I would imagine that whoever did this won't be able to help but brag about it. Maybe then the police can bust him.

Yet Another Example of Government Waste

Is it really necessary for city governments to hire consultants to find employees for them? For example, my city spent $25,000 to get help finding a police chief. It seems like there would be a lot of interest in that type of job, and applicants would be plentiful. Then, put a committee of cops, citizens, and a couple of city council members together to evaluate the applicants. But no, they had to hire a consultant. And what did that get them? A chief that is leaving after one year. But it's OK; the city will get a 50% discount on the search for their next chief.

Emergency Practice

I participated in this active shooter exercise Thursday. I died. The point of the activity was to train local law enforcement and EMTs on how to react to a situation like that at Virginia Tech. Due to the fact that I was in pretty bad shape, according to the card around my neck, it took a long time for the police, rubber guns in hand, to pick me up off the floor. They took care of all the less-injured people first. I was kind of surprised it took so long. I was also surprised that they felt the need to handcuff and keep an eye on the "shooter" (some mannequin), even though he shot himself in the scenario. But I guess you have to be sure.

Presidential Commencement

On Tuesday I secured a ticket to attend today's A&M graduation ceremony, at which President George W. Bush spoke. This morning, I debated for 10 minutes or so whether I wanted to stand in line and wait for 2.5 hours for a 30-minute speech that I could watch on TV. I decided that I would go.

I expected to spend a lot of time waiting outside the arena to get in, but I arrived early and there was no such line. Instead, I waited in my seat for 2 hours for the program to begin. I brought a newspaper with me, so it wasn't too bad.

During the speech, Bush touched on some Aggie traditions:

I'll say this for A&M -- you've got some mighty fine traditions. Back in my day, I think I would have enjoyed dunking my ring. I would have loved to have taken Laura to "midnight yell." I especially like the traditions around Reveille. Anytime she barks during a class lecture, everyone in the room is dismissed. I wish she had been there for some of those press conferences.

He also alluded briefly to his waning presidency:

When you leave this campus, you will be well prepared for any endeavor you choose. To those of you who have jobs lined up, I -- congratulations. To those not exactly sure what comes next -- I know how you feel.

He also spoke of coming back to Texas:

This is also my last commencement address as President. And it is fitting that it takes place here in Texas, where I have been so blessed over the years. I was raised here by wonderful parents, surrounded by brothers and sisters whose love still sustains me. And Texas is where I went to a backyard barbeque and met a beautiful teacher named Laura Welch. Texas is where our girls were born and our lifelong friends live. And next month, when our time in Washington is done, Texas is where we're coming home.

After listing some examples of courage and service that he has witnessed over the last 8 years, he ended with some advice:

• Listen to your mother.
• Develop a set of principles to live by.
• Be on the lookout for role models.

On that last point, Bush gave a touching tribute to his dad. In all, the speech was in many ways your typical graduation talk, with a presidential touch. It was a worthwhile experience.

I should also note my fast escape from the area after the speech. Normally, after any big event, traffic is a problem, especially when the police shut down certain routes. Well, I planned ahead. I selected a parking lot diagonally across the street from the arena, thus avoiding having to wait at the main pedestrian-crossing intersection. I parked facing out of my spot, to avoid having to back up. And I parked near the far lot exit, which took me away from campus on a side road. I was quite pleased with myself as I drove away.

Window-Related Weather Woes

This is what my car window looks like today:


The towel is there to cover the window that is stuck open (these are power windows, of course).

The window was originally stuck open only a couple of inches. We opened it a crack for some reason, and it didn't go back up. This is in addition to our rear passenger window, which drops down a couple of inches every few days, requiring us to manually lift it back up. We are unable to do so with this window. When it was open a couple of inches, it wasn't soooo bad, in terms of noise, cold, and snow. But when MacKenzie took the car to Jiffy Lube to get a safety inspection, so that we could renew our 4-months-expired registration (oops!), some fool there opened up the window to its current level, where it stays. Of course, in one of the cruel coincidences that so often mark life, it has snowed approximately 15 inches in the two days since the Jiffy Lube incident. Hence the towel, which also serves as an anti-theft device (although I assume that any thief would prefer to steal a car with functioning windows). Here's what our parking lot looked like this morning:

Having taken in our car to get an estimate of the cost of fixing the broken rear window, I've learned that the window motor is the likely culprit, and that replacing it costs upwards of $300. It's not worth that much to fix the rear window, but the front window is another story. How will I get my Big Macs or give my license and registration to police officers without a functioning driver's side window? Since it's the weekend, though, and I figured it would be a few days before I would be able to get it fixed, I thought I'd try to take the door panel off and see if I could somehow get the window into a closed position. I was also hoping that maybe there was an octopus in the door, or some other obvious, easily fixable problem. That was not the case.

First, I took the window switch unit off. Here's what it looks like, and here's the backside, in case you're interested:


After taking the inside panel off, which required me to buy a new socket for my wrench, I was still unable to get the window to move. But I figure that there's no reason to fully fasten the panel back on, or replace the switch unit, if the mechanic is just going to take them off again. So I didn't. Hopefully I can get this fixed soon. Of course, it' s not supposed to stop snowing anytime soon. You can blame my car for that.

Unwarranted Apology

A Muslim family that was ordered off an AirTran Airways flight on New Year's Day received an apology and refund on Friday from the airline, which said its decision to bar the passengers was necessary.

Then why apologize!?!? If this action was necessary, then AirTran did nothing wrong. They should give no apology and no money.

Atif Irfan said in an interview with CNN that federal authorities removed him, seven family members and a friend from the flight after passengers overheard members of the group talking about the safest place to sit on the plane. He said they were being careful to avoid any "buzzwords" like "bomb" that would trigger a security alert.

The group was flying out of Reagan Washington National Airport and was headed for a religious retreat (!) in Florida when other passengers apparently overheard the conversation and reported it to authorities.

It is interesting that the articles I read about this tell the side of the story told by the evictees, but not the side given by other passengers. I suspect that there is a fair amount of divergence between the stories. Here's evidence on AirTran's side:

An earlier AirTran statement said the airline complied with all Transportation Security Administration and Homeland Security directives and had no discretion in the case.

And also this:

But he said the pilot was influenced not only by the complaints from passengers but by the actions of two federal air marshals on board, who had learned of the incident and reported it to airport police.

It wasn't just some hick racist passengers who made complaints; air marshals concurred. These factors considered, the need for apologies and refunds is clearly absent.

Of course, cries of discrimination from terrorist-group affiliated CAIR soon erupted:

"We believe this disturbing incident would never have occurred had the Muslim passengers removed from the plane not been perceived by other travelers and airline personnel as members of the Islamic faith," the group said in its complaint.

(Considering recent events, I think a Muslim-based sensitivity on airplanes is completely reasonable.)

Such cries are common in situations like this. Terrorists and their allies (not to say that those in this particular group necessarily were) are quick to use the media and our political correctness to their advantage. Recall the incident in Minneapolis not long ago. A lawsuit is likely in this case, too, I suspect. Despite such antics, we must remain vigilant.

Foreign Affairs Friday: How Will North Korea Land?

I agree with this analysis (which is a few years old) of the potential future of North Korea:

Andrei Lankov, senior lecturer at the Australian National University, writes: "in the long run the system appears doomed. Sooner or later the gradual disintegration of the police and security apparatus, increasing access to unauthorized information along with manifold social changes will bring it down, probably, in a chain of dramatic, even cataclysmic events."

There is hope is many circles that North Korea can have a "soft landing," in which it gradually reforms and improves, similar to how China has, while remaining a separate nation. Only then would talk of Korean unification occur. East Germany collapsed peacefully but suddenly in 1989, and the large gap between incomes of East vs. West Germans created much expense for, and resentment in, the latter to bring the former up to modern standards. But the gap between the two Germanys is much smaller than that between the two Koreas. While South Korea is one of the world's most advanced, prosperous nations, North Korea is one of the poorest and most backwards.

However, this is not what North Koreans think. Due to the extreme lengths Kim Jong-Il and his regime go to to suppress information (phones are rare, TVs and radios only tune to government channels, etc.), North Koreans think they're doing OK, and their southern brothers are the poor ones.

This is what creates the problem. If North Korea were to open up and reform its economy, as China has done, interactions with foreigners would increase, and North Koreans would learn more and more information about the outside world and how backwards their country is. This could lead to violent revolt or massive emigration. It is unlikely North Koreans would accept their current situation for long if they knew how bad it really was. Therefore, the regime there cannot follow the Chinese path to prosperity. China has created some danger for its regime with its gradual opening, but the danger to the Jong-Il regime is much higher. That's why they have to engage in illegal activities and nuclear blackmail to bring in revenue in lieu of economic growth.

The US, South Korea, and China will have to prepare for the day when a "hard landing" occurs. Major issues will be large numbers of refugees, unguarded nuclear material, rash North Korean military action, major humanitarian needs, and potential for US-China conflict as the two countries' militaries potentially come into close proximity while trying to stabilize a collapsed North Korea. While we can all hope for a better day for the people of North Korea, getting there will not be easy.

My Bus Commute by the Numbers

In a week of bus trips, here's what I've experienced:

• Crazy people: 2
• Crazy people that prompted me to call police: 1
• Women with more kids than they could handle: 3
  
• Number of kids under age 6 one woman had: 5
• Rainstorms I narrowly avoided having to walk through: 3
• Missed buses: 0 (so far)
• Rides offered by old male passersby: 1 (I declined)
• Percentage of my transit costs the government will pick up: 100
• Books completed: 1
  
• Asian men with poor English skills trying to make complicated trips: 1 (I tried to help)
• Time it would take to drive to work: 7 minutes
• Time it takes on bus: 35 minutes
  

It Beats Eating Dog

The US has recently been trying to get South Korea to open up to US beef imports. However, the South Koreans are kind of nutso about beef:

Protests this past weekend were the largest and most violent. As more than 40,000 people gathered in front of Seoul City Hall on Saturday night, police used water cannons to stop them from marching on the president's office. More than 220 people were arrested.

I only protest about beef when MacKenzie refuses to let me eat it. The South Koreans' protests are based on bizarre mistruths:

Rumors spread on the Internet that school lunch programs would be a dumping ground for cheap and potentially deadly American beef. Lee's government tried and largely failed to knock down the rumors and assorted alarmist media reports, one of which claimed Koreans were more genetically vulnerable to mad cow disease than Americans.
...
Cha Yoon-min, 13, attended the protest with his mother, a lawyer in Seoul. "I am afraid of American beef," he said. "I could study hard in school. I could get a good job and then I could eat beef and just die."

My sister is actually over there now, and she's blogging about her experiences. For firsthand eyewitness accounts of the beef controversy now taking place, read this and this. She has plenty of other interesting insights, too, like how South Korea is not a good place to be when you are a nerd.

It's a fun campus, really it is.

The Beaver arrived on Friday. After spending the 4th of July at my aunt and uncles, we headed home. I wanted to show him around campus and when I emailed the Hospitality department, they said that there weren't any official tours this Sunday but they would be open from 12-4. So we ate a quick lunch and headed out so could get there in time. Except when they said the visitors center would be open from 12-4, I guess they meant every other weekend. On this weekend, the one I asked about, it was closed for the holiday weekend.

Oh, well. I know the campus fairly well, having spent more of my life living here than pretty much anywhere else in the world, so I just made it up as I went. We walked all around, seeing Sul Ross, Sbisa, the Rec, Kyle Field, Rudder Tower, the Century tree, Fish Pond, G. Rollie White, some dorms and the Bonfire Memorial. It only took about an hour and a half which was long enough because we were both hot and I was beginning to get sunburned. It would have been nicer to go in the evening but remember, we hurried so we could make it to the visitors center. I still think he enjoyed it but I tried to get across the fact that normally, there are actually people here. But it is a Sunday afternoon on a holiday weekend in the summer so the only people we saw were a couple of campus police men giving us funny looks.

Afterwards, I was going to take him out to eat at the Dixie Chicken but we didn't feel like a big meal (we'll try to get to it later this week) so I thought frozen custard from Shakes would be fun. It probably would have been except Shakes is also closed on Sunday. Geez, you would think I was back in Utah. In theory I like it when places are closed on Sunday but it is less than pleasant when you don't remember that and drive all the way down University to not have ice cream. We ended up at Dairy Queen. It's not the coolest place in College Station to show him, but you can't really beat two dipped ice cream cones for $3.

Why we have a 1st Amendment

I am rather perturbed by the event depicted in this Quickmeme:



Here is a news report of what happened, but Glenn Reynolds has a better description:

By sending — literally — brownshirted enforcers to engage in — literally — a midnight knock at the door of a man for the non-crime of embarrassing the President of the United States and his administration, President Obama violated that oath. You can try to pretty this up (It’s just about possible probation violations! Sure.), or make excuses or draw distinctions, but that’s what’s happened. It is a betrayal of his duties as President, and a disgrace.

I wouldn't go so far as to say this (the hauling into the police station of the man who supposedly made the "Innocence of Muslims" film) happened in response to embarrassment of the President, but it was indeed "deputies assisting the federal probation department" who carried this out. In other words, it was the feds.

The probation violation excuse is indeed a fig leaf to explain what is an act of intimidation and warning to other provocateurs. It dilutes the impact of statements like that of SecState Clinton, who said, "...we do not stop individual citizens from expressing their views no matter how distasteful they may be." How does it look when this happens two days after Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi  "asked Obama to 'to put an end to such behavior?'" We are told that the protesters don't understand that, in America, government doesn't control speech, and thus that when they see this video, they assume the US government authorized it. Well, what does it tell those people when they see this photo? Eugene Volokh makes a point to this effect.

It is easy to say, in this case, "Oh, this video is stupid, he shouldn't have made it." But it takes a lot less than this to set off riots. Recall the reaction to the Danish Muhammed cartoons a few years back. Or this: "Since Mubarak's fall, several churches have been attacked by mobs, stoked in part by hard-line Islamic clerics warning that Christians were trying to convert Muslim women or trying to take over the country." Attempting to find a line that we can stay behind, speech-wise, to prevent such outrage in the Middle East would amount to slowly painting ourselves into a corner of silence.

On a related note, we are told that the causation of the current conflagrations is: video posted to Youtube --> video translated to Arabic --> riots. That assumes that this video just organically went viral, like a Rebecca Black song or something, but that is unlikely. It is certain that this video was promoted widely by those who are eager to incite riots. We know it appeared on an Egyptian TV station, which would have exposed many people to it for the first time.

Here is the video that is said to have set everything off (note: I haven't watched it). I applaud Google for refusing the White House's request (ahem) to consider taking it down from Youtube in this country (they have restricted access to it in some countries)

Nice Lunchbox You've Got There

MacKenzie just wrote tangentially about the North Carolina government lunchbox inspection story, and I had a Facebook discussion on the topic, but I'm going to expound upon it here, in order to make some further points. As an introduction, here's what happened:

RAEFORD — A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because the school told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.  

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the person who was inspecting all lunch boxes in the More at Four classroom that day. 

I remarked on Facebook that if anyone thinks there is nowhere to cut government, here's a prime candidate. I think the idea that government is now inspecting lunches is the latest, greatest example of government overreach in this country. The response by supporters of this idea will be that some kids get really poor lunches, and we have to help those kids out. That idea prompts several responses.

The first of these is that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. You can give kids all the healthy food you want, but that doesn't mean they will eat it (never mind that the lunch in question in this article was what most people would consider perfectly acceptable). Schools in LA found out that, no, kids would not eat quinoa salad. Instead, they bought junk food off the "black market." If kids don't eat their government-approved lunches, do you force them? I don't think that will work.

Second is the question of where this ends. After we start inspecting everyone's lunches, what's next? The kids who are bringing unhealthy lunches to school are quite possibly not brushing their teeth as often as they should. Will we have inspectors looking in kid's mouths after they look in their lunchboxes? Will the government hand out toothbrushes with their chicken nuggets?

Third is the impact of government policy on Americans' eating habits. The lunch police are motivated by the growing (literally!) obesity problem in this country. But why has this come about? I think someone could probably write a good journal article on the effects of various government food policies on our diets. The example that jumps out at me is high fructose corn syrup, which exists because sugar tariffs have driven up US prices well above the world market price, prompting food manufacturers to find alternatives. A lot of people claim that US farm policy, which promotes growing grains, makes bad food cheap and attractive. Food stamps and school lunches are two other programs worth examining in this regard. Maybe this is one of the countless examples (e.g. the housing crisis) of government trying to create solutions to a problem it has created (while refusing to admit that it is culpable).

Fourth is the application of government programs, supposedly intended to help the poor, to everyone. Why do rich senior citizens have to use Medicare? Why do rich women have to receive free contraceptives? Why is there a consistent push to shove every kid into pre-kindergarten? And in this case, why must everyone's lunch be inspected? I suspect that it is not out of a desire to help everyone, but instead out of a desire for government to control more and more of our economy and our lives, because we can't take care of ourselves. This has to stop, not only for budgetary reasons, but for reasons of freedom and self-reliance, characteristics our country needs to remain successful, but that are slowly melting away.

There's a little food for thought for you, that the lunch inspector will surely disapprove of.

Beat-down Time

Few things bring me more joy than seeing hippie protesters being assaulted by police. This is what occurred in Chile today. The weapons of choice were tear gas (always a favorite) and water cannons. I saw some nightsticks, too, I think.

The subject of the protest is not that relevant, because these groups always have some grievance. But if you're interested, they were protesting against, to quote the BBC, "free-market economic policies."

Here's a photo:

24, Season 7: 4-5 AM

We're getting down to the end here, with three hours left. Which will happen first: the bioweapon will be released, the bioweapon will be obtained by the authorities, or Jack will die from his bio-illness?

-The bogeyman of racial profiling was raised in this episode, with Janice asserting her new role as the FBI's ACLU liaison and protesting the move. Jack responded that the search they were doing (for local Muslims) was based on a tip. This is similar to the Oneonta case decided by the 2nd Circuit Court in 2001; it basically said that profiling is allowable when based on a tip. In that case, an elderly woman said a black man was her attacker, so that's who the police looked for. Makes sense to me.

-I thought that our framed terrorist-to-be (FTTB - I don't recall his name) made a bad move when the cops knocked on the door. Tony told him to make them go away, and FTTB did so by saying the noise that was reported was just friends having an argument. I think he could have easily gotten away with pointing at Tony through the door and mouthing "In here." But he was meek, unlike his brother, who later had the werewithal in a moment of chaos to smash a mirror and use a shard of glass as a weapon. Maybe the brother spent some time in an Afghani training camp?

-On the way to the FTTB's apartment, the imam told Jack "it's never too late to turn to God." Is Jack going to become Muslim?!

-To Hodges: when you go into witness protection, you have to get rid of everything. You kept that picture of your family, and look what happened.

You Tell 'Em, Granny

This story is great. The idiot health police in New York told senior citizens they couldn't have free doughnuts, which were being donated to senior centers, because the officials didn't want to "set a bad nutritional precedent." So the old people held a protest.

I think everyone that's not a kid should be able to eat whatever they want, whether it be trans fat or horse meat. This is especially true for old people. Having survived for as long as they have, I think they can eat all the doughnuts they want. I'm pretty much going to stop eating vegetables once I hit 80.

Look at some of these asinine quotes:

• "It was disgusting the way people went after them," said 80-year-old Rita Jorgensen. "I think the senior center did them a favor by taking it away."

• "We don't tell them what to do, we don't force them to eat what's good for them. But we certainly don't give them anything that's bad for them," said center director Silvia Ponce."

• "They have choices, and we show them how to make good choices," she said.

It seems like seniors and kids are the canaries in the mine when it comes to government taking control of people's lives. Smoking bans are supported by appeals to "protect the children." The march towards government health care is starting with these two groups (via Medicare and SCHIP). And governmental diet control is also focused on these groups.

Today's senior citizens won World War II. They've been called the Greatest Generation. Can't we at least let them eat some doughnuts?