Hey!

Why isn't someone de-linking me? I'm an amoral anti-feedtube unfeeling pro-death party to murder, too!

I'm kind of hurt, if you want to know the truth.

If you want to make a statement about the worth of Terri's life, at least do it with a little panache, like McGehee did when he posted his living will. Because beyond the Anglo-Saxon flourishes, he actually makes some good points other than "I don't want people to visit sites I disagree with."

UPDATE: The Chadster decides to "kill 'em all, and let God sort them out." Good man.

Johnnie Cochran's Dead

So long, Johnnie.

And, fuck you, too: you set race relations back by at least a couple of decades, setting white and black women, in particular, at each other's throats and getting a brutal killer off the hook for a vicious crime.

Wait. Did I say fuck you?

Via Protein Wisdom.

I'm Still Here

. . . but working a lot of hours right now. Real posts will resume soon (with any luck, tonight). In the meantime, check out the fine people on my blogroll.

Or send me money, to encourage me to give up this "work" madness.

My Last Terri Schiavo Post

Insty:

Trampling the Constitution in an earnest desire to do good in high-profile cases has been a hallmark of a certain sort of liberalism, and it's the sort of thing that I thought conservatives eschewed. If I were in charge of making the decision, I might well put the tube back and turn Terri Schiavo over to her family. But I'm not, and the Florida courts are, and they seem to have done a conscientious job. Maybe they came to the right decision, and maybe they didn't. But respecting their role in the system, and not rushing to overturn all the rules because we don't like the outcome, seems to me to be part of being a member of civilized society rather than a mob. As I say, I thought conservatives knew this.

I thought so, too.

Donald Sensing:

It's obvious that arguments about Terri Schiavo fall into two main camps.

• On the one hand are people who believe that the removal of Terri's feeding tube has been railroaded through the courts by hostile, adulterous husband Michael, who deperately wants Terri dead so he can make off with untold riches in newly-unhindered settlement money and life insurance. Michael, of course, actually injured Terri himself in the first place. Furthermore, Terri's condition is actually much better than a dozen or so doctors have testified under oath; their diagnosis that Terri is in a permanent vegetative state is simply wrong and the Florida courts have willfully ignored or rejected all evidence to the contrary. Likewise, the courts' rulings - that Terri herself had stated more than once, before her injury, that she would not want to be kept alive in such a condition - are unjust, flawed and based on bogus testimony by Michael and the two other persons who testified that they had heard Terri say so.

Hence, Terri is about to be murdered in a moral, if not technically legal, sense. Therefore, any measure is justified in restoring her feeding tube, including federal intervention or, as Gov. Jeb Bush was considering yesterday, taking Terri into state custody.

• On the other hand are people who trust that the PVS diagnosis is valid, having been confirmed multiple times, that the Florida courts followed both the letter and intent of Florida law governing such cases, including ruling that the burden of proof was met in showing that Terri had uttered statements that she would not want to be kept alive in her condition. People on this side may agree that Michael Schiavo is no paragon of virtue, but also acknowledge that allegations regarding his actions and motives were exhaustively explored by investigators and the courts and that no facts were found sufficient either to implicate him as a cause of Terri's condition or to impeach his testimony about Terri's pre-injury statements or the testimony of the other five persons who so testified.

This group believes that the Florida courts have handled this case properly, if not perfectly, and that there is no justification for federal intervention or unilateral executive intervention by Gov. Bush.

Not everyone in either camp cleaves to every point of the descriptions I make, but most substantially do as far as I can tell. We need to acknowledge that these two camps cannot be reconciled.

This business of "I don't like the outcome, can't we re-write the rules retroactively?" reminds me of the 2000 Election. Only now, people whose opinions I normally respect are the ones who want to change the rules so they can get the result they desire.

To tell you the truth, I feel a little betrayed, and it makes me crabby when I post. I'm actually not "anti-feed tube" so much as I am "pro-rule of law," and getting bitchier by the moment as I see my erstwhile allies spin—in my mind—further and further out of control.

Attila the Hub: But there is a cultural substrain out there that views human life as only worthwhile according to what the person can contribute; there's a utilitarianism that leads to situations like what we see in the Netherlands.

Attila Girl: It's out there. But I don't think it's driving this case.

(I then proceeded to win the argument, but I don't want to go into how I did that because it would be bragging.)

Pray for Terri. And then, please pray for our system of government and our way of life.

UPDATE: Please read the Terri Schiavo FAQ at Football Fans for Truth being linked by Instapundit, Protein Wisdom, and Gosh-Knows-Who-Else-By-Now. There's a lot of information there that one doesn't hear every day: for instance, I didn't know that an MRI scan would require brain surgery on Terri to remove implants in her head; I thought it would be a relatively simple procedure.

Kyrgyzstan Next?

The President of Kyrgyzstan, President Askar Akayev, has just resigned, according to James Joyner. Holy shit.

This democratic-leanings thing: it's like bobbing skirts in the 20s. All the rage. And authoritarian rulers are those ugly girls in the long skirts that no one wants to kiss.

Happy Easter.

And, By the Way

My name is Joy McCann. If I ever become brain-damaged or severely injured, I'd like my husband to make all decisions regarding my care.

Even if he's had kids with another woman. Especially if he's had kids with another woman: I think that would make him a little bit more objective than the 'rents. Ya know?

William F. Buckley Sez

There was never a more industrious inquiry, than in the Schiavo case, into the matter of rights formal and inchoate. It is simply wrong, whatever is felt about the eventual abandonment of her by her husband, to use the killing language. She was kept alive for fifteen years, underwent a hundred medical ministrations, all of them in service of an abstraction, which was that she wanted to stay alive. There are laws against force-feeding, and no one will know whether, if she had had the means to convey her will in the matter, she too would have said, Enough.

That's right. We'll never know for sure one way or the other. In theory, we should err on the side of life. But after a decade and a half, it begins to look like we as a society are trying to prove something: that no matter how ridiculous it might seem, we will not give up hope. We will leave no stone unturned. We will leave nothing undone. We are good people. We are a good nation.

Is God testing us? Are we afraid we will have failed that test if this one woman is allowed to die in peace?

And how much are we willing to give up to get there? What if the price tag is States' rights? The Republican Party? The next election? Another attack on American soil?

How far are you willing to take this? I want to know—and I don't.

Via Beautiful Atrocities.

Goldstein and Ardolino

. . . survived their first day on the radio. I can't seem to get the replays over at Rightalk to work, but I guess I've got through the weekend to figure it out.

Congratulations to Protein Wisdom and In DC Journal: you guys have guts.

The FEC Gonna Get Yo' Mama

Cassandra would like us all to take a valium, do our yoga—basically, to calm down with respect to the Federal Election Commission, and the possibility that it will try to regulate speech on the internet:

It does begin to seem that the B-sphere may be getting their collective knickers in a twist for naught. Because while there are aspects of blogging that legitimately fall under the purview of McCain-Feingold, they are narrow in scope and don't apply to the vast majority of independent bloggers. I continue to believe the FEC would be insane (and indeed has no authority) to regulate independent bloggers absent some financial involvement with political campaigns. It's that simple: keep your nose clean and your powder dry, and you've nothing to worry about.

She points out that several of the Commissioners are on record as saying electronic speech should be protected for individual bloggers, as long as large amounts of money are not changing hands.

Maybe. Nonetheless, I'm not against reminding the government exactly where its powers come from, and just how interesting life will be if it gets both the Leftosphere and the Rightosphere (along with the Libertarianosphere and the Greenosphere, for that matter) united against it.

And I don't care if the FEC thinks I'm a kook, so long as it acknowledges that the Constitution gives me the right to yammer on to my heart's content about politics.

These people don't know what trouble looks like. They really don't. But I hope they sense it on some level.

From the "have you noticed?" file: Cassandra lives up to her name . . . well, about as well as I live up to mine. She is, quite simply, the best, and we differ here more on strategic issues than philosophy.

Via Pirate's Cove.

The Audience

. . . is listening.

Via The Daou Report at Salon.

Jeff Sums Up

the story of the heroic Italian journalist in terms a child could understand.

If you want to know the truth, he seems a little acerbic about the whole thing.

Victory in Yemen!

Jane at Armies of Liberation has been successful in her campaign to free Al-Khaiwani from jail. You'll recall that President Saleh (who heads up the freaking judiciary there, presumably due to budget cuts) had him imprisoned because he criticized the government in his newspaper. After 600+ citizens (many of them associated with online journalism) signed Jane's petition requesting that Al-Khaiwani be released, President Saleh relented, rather than stay in the spotlight.

It should be noted here that Jane is a "real" journalist, and has her work published all over the world. She specifically threatened to highlight this situation in the Wall Street Journal if Saleh didn't come around. The Yemeni government was up against both traditional and online journalism, and it's a potent combination.

I want to be just like Jane when I grow up. (Uh-oh: I think that's "if.")

Seriously, thank you to everyone who signed the petition. It blows my mind that we made a difference in this way.

Go to Jane's site every day.

UPDATE: Those of us who supported Jane in her efforts are listed here, and that's where most of the pro-liberation high fives are taking place (in the comments section).

UPDATE THURSDAY: El Capitan discusses what a long shot this was from the beginning, and whether he was a cynic for thinking so.

I really don't: if dictators were so susceptible to public pressure, sanctions would have worked against Saddam Hussein. The thing is, when we can shame authoritarian rulers into doing the right thing, we should: it's much worse to have to accomplish this sort of thing by force. And it's not like our green berets are going to go into another country just to fetch a journalist.

Not That You Wanted to Hear This . . .

James sums up the facts in the Terry Schiavo case. Obviously, we need to get a little more organized around this issue as a society. We need more living wills. But it's very hard to paint Michael Schiavo as some kind of monster.

P.S. "We're the party of small government. We're here to help you."

Via Say Anything.

Eggagog

. . . is going on a trip. Business, or pleasure, I wonder.

When Kofi Met Yassir

Laurence is bad. Bad Laurence!

UPDATE: It's turned into a series. And it's pretty freaking funny.

Oh, Fuck.

Another fucking school shooting.

Just fuck.

(No. This is not a family blog when kids are dead. Try me next week.)

Maybe we can make lemons into lemonade, though, by trashing the Constitution over this! Anyone want to time it out?—I figure the first calls for gun control will hit the media by tomorrow, noon Eastern.

Like Everyone Else

I wonder why the mainstream media never ask actual Iraqis how they feel about the war.

Jihad, the Musical

Beautiful Atrocities has done it again; run, don't walk.

Camille Paglia

. . . writes about poetry as if it still matters. What a sexy idea. I used to write poetry before I concluded that 1) 100% of the people who read modern poetry also write modern poetry, and 2) I don't like modern poetry very much.

So then I turned to blogging, because only 95% of the people who read blogs also write blog entries themselves.

(h/t Oakland Jeff)

So, What Did I Do on Saturday?

Wonderful things.

Brunch in Marina del Rey with some of the Bear Flag Leaguers. Lawyer to non-lawyer ratio: 1-3, including the kids. (Check out the pix: the two babies are especially adorable, and Breaker took the fabulous picture of Baldilocks [Juliette] that I've always wanted to see. She's such a beautiful woman, and few pictures really capture that.)

Coffee with a dear friend.

And then I saw a rather brilliant scary movie with my cuddly hyperintelligent spouse.

I'm a pretty happy camper right now, I must admit.

Still, even a girl with the handsomest/brightest husband in the world (that would be me) has to have someone's picture on the inside of her locker door. Not a real person; you understand (and that's why I don't have blog-crushes). Just an actor or something like that, so as to stay in touch with her inner 14-year-old.

In that regard, I'm thinking of trading Adrien Brody in for Joaquin Phoenix, because of those amazing eyes. But it's a tough decision. The girls and bois should help me out, here.

Don't tell me I'm being shallow, people. I might take it as a challenge. Believe me: you haven't seen shallow here. Not yet.

The Next Step

Iowahawk chronicles the new trend of college professors turning to a simpler, sylvan kind of living:

Two years ago this month, Alan Lowenstein, associate professor of philosophy at Harvard University, came to a fateful conclusion. "I suddenly realized that the oppression of western technology extended to my own life," he explained. "That's when I got rid of my computer, threw away my Brooks Brothers suits, changed my name to Grok and moved into a cave."

A passionate critic of Euro-American "linear thought," Grok is one of a growing number of college professors around the nation who have relocated to caves, mud huts and makeshift sweat lodges to demonstrate their disdain for western culture and technology. For Grok, 44, the move to a cave was a natural step in his intellectual progression.

"My dissertation at Columbia synthesized the seminal works of Jacques Lacan, Derrida, and Michel Foucault," says Grok, referring to the influential French deconstructionist philosophers. "I was able to prove, conclusively, that conclusiveness is not conclusive."

The 1988 dissertation, entitled "Beyond the (Dis)Integration of Post-Modern Post-Toasties Pair 'o Dimes and Paradigms: Look at How Clever I Am," created a stir in academic circles and landed Lowenstein a prestigious teaching position at Harvard.

And:

"I think it all goes back to that Stingray bike I got in fifth grade," adds Grok, who grew up in affluent suburban Winnetka, Illinois. "Like other victims, I became fixated on material things. There was actually time, before graduate school, when I considered getting a job."

So what are you waiting for? Get over there.

A Family Affair

The President held a town-hall discussion in Florida yesterday that included his brother and his hyper-popular mother.

Naturally, the idea is to reassure all the retirees in the Sunshine State that their checks will continue to arrive.

I hadn't realized before that with a birthdate after 1950, I'll actually be eligible for the private accounts. Which will presumably have a much higher rate of return than Social Security.

But one doesn't want to count on either. My plan:

1) get rich (come one; how hard can it be?)

2) buy lots of real estate;

3) get richer.

I'm not saying there won't be some bumps in the road, but you have to admit that it's a solid gameplan.

(Via Lucianne.)

More on Bankruptcy

Xrlq is on my side regarding bankruptcy reform. Of course, I do see that the practices of the banks could use some fine-tuning as well, but that can certainly be done separately. The thing I'd truly like to see is for people to educate themselves a little bit better on how to use—and strategically avoid—credit.

Bush's Press Conference Yesterday

Trey Jackson has the video of both those moments people were talking about: Bush discussing his legacy, and his reaction to the question about Wolfowitz being the architect of "one of the most unpopular wars in history."

Anne Applebaum

Sez hi from the ghetto of chick opinion writers.

Naturally, that whole "editorial pages" flap splashed into the blogosphere, where we had to endure yet another round of mind-numbingly boring discussions of whether females are at a disadvantage in the blogging world. Cassandra calls it "booby counting." She's got that right.

(Applebaum article courtesy Beautiful Atrocities, who reads a lot of stuff so I don't have to.)

Jane Gets Serious

Over at Armies of Liberation, Jane threatens the Yemeni government with some badass bad publicity if they don't free the journalist they jailed for criticizing their President (who is also head of the judiciary: efficient, huh?).

She has 600 signatures she will send to the Yemenis on Monday, and they are from all over the world.

If you still haven't signed the letter, I'd do it, like, now. I'm sure she'll be spending the weekend checking the document over and preparing the hard copies, so I'd move on it today if you want to be included. It could be the most important thing you do for the cause of freedom. (Unless you're in the U.S./Aussie/British military, in which case . . . never mind. But still sign it, please.) It'll take you less than a minute.

A man's freedom is at stake. And so it the principle that even the most authoritarian ruler needs to account for himself to the world. We can make a difference, here.

Social Security Reform

Dean lays out the moral case for making changes while we can still do it without major upheaval.

If Worse Comes to Worst

. . . will you defy the FEC and continue your political blogging as you normally would?

Patterico asks the question. My answer: hell, yeah.

I'll be surprised if it comes to that, but you never know. The government has done some mighty strange things.

If they don't figure this one out, it's civil disobedience time.

UPDATE: Xrlq has some further thoughts, and they are good ones. He begins by pointing out that the FEC might value our "political contributions" so low that there's little or no point in our civil disobedience. But if the FEC does lose its head, then we need to be organized:

I don’t want any innocent non-participants pulled into the dragnet against their will. Instead, I’d suggest we form some kind of club, whose members not only allow each other to rat them out, but actively encourage it, from members and non-members alike. Maybe someone more artistic than I could devise a cute logo with a caption along the lines of “Political Blogmartyr,� “Report a Crime in Progress,� “Make My Day, Call the FEC,� or some other as-yet undetermined phrase. Whatever the symbol or caption may be, it should be available to everyone who wants to display it on his blog, and it must be universally understood as an open invitation to anyone and everyone to report this person’s political acitivities to the FEC. Those filing such reports on any given blog would be encouraged, but not required, to pick out the most ludicrous and the most technical violations they can find - provided that they must in fact be violations of whatever rule the FEC ends up handing down. So here’s my second pledge:

If I choose to disobey any FEC rule that I believe unreasonably limits my First Amendment right to express my opinoin on core political issues, I will not discourage, and will in fact actively encourage, other bloggers to report these violations to the FEC.

My first pledge alone reads like Patterico-Lite, but I like to think the two together are more like Patterico-Plus. Anyone with me on this? I’m more than happy to be one of many fall guys in some stupid FEC action, but I can’t represent the entire blogosphere alone.

You'll Know I'm a Full-Blooded Libertarian

. . . When I give up my sentimental attachment to rail projects.

(Insty.)

I Might Have To

. . . Build some kind of tokonoma to Jeff Goldstein, who just had a scintillating discussion with the ghost of Tony Randall.

Abortion: Why I'm Against Parental Notification

I promised Right Wing Sparkle that I'd debate her on parental notification laws, which she supports and I cannot.

It started at an unrelated thread at Beautiful Atrocities, wherein Jeff discussed the relative importance of abortion vs. the War on Terror right now to the GOP. Naturally, his readers (including me) immediately began arguing about abortion itself.

Right Wing Sparkle joined in, mentioning that she was once a pro-choice Democrat, a fact she's recently reflected on in her own blog.

RWS:

Jeff, Your quote, "Saying girls who get abortions should be sterilized & abortion doctors killed is just fringe insanity" is right. It is so fringe insanity that I have been involved in pro life work for 20 yrs and never heard anyone say anything like that.

The fact is that for over 30 yrs abortion on demand throughout the 9 months of pregnancy has been the law. Democrats have fought us on parental consent for minors, informed consent, and partial birth abortion.

We may have won elections, but we haven't won anything else. So it is important to us to at least have someone on our side.

The vast majority of Americans want restrictions, yet we can't get a damn one.

LMA:

I would love to see more restrictions in place, but I'm adamantly against parental notification, because it places girls in the position wherein they have to go to potentially abusive parents to discuss this matter. It forces girls to open themselves to abuse when they are most vulnerable. Parents who have an open dialogue with their daughters, and have instilled pro-life values in them, should not need this law to get their own children to come to them for help! It's an absurd idea that reflects parental insecurity.

[ . . . ]

This isn't a Federal issue, and it shouldn't be. Most Americans--whatever label they take--are in between the staunch pro-lifers and the militant pro-abortionists.

RWS:

Attila girl, There are exceptions for that abuse situation in the parental notification bills.

I have worked as a crisis pregnancy counselor and I can tell you that most (and all the girls I dealt with) are so afraid to tell their parents, not because of abuse, but because of disappointment. I have a 16 yr old girl. She cannot have a tooth pulled without my permission. The thought of an underage girl going through a medical procedure that will affect her the rest of her life without parental notification is insane imo. This is the time the girl needs her parents the most. They are not emotionally mature enough to make this decision on their own.

I could tell you so many horror stories, but suffice it to say, underage girls need thier parents. It all cases I dealt with the parents were upset at first, but came around and were very supportive. Most parents love their kids. The exception should not be the rule.

LMA:

RWS, I'll meet you over at your blog (or mine) tonight to discuss parental notification. It's a very emotional issue for me: I had a crazy parent who appeared normal to outsiders (and who could hold it in whenever she needed to). Yet she was a sadist when we were alone.

If the "exceptions" are dependent upon persuading people outside the family that a parent is off-kilter, I will never support parental notification. Period.

RWS:

Attila Girl,

All the girl has to do is tell a judge that she is abused and will be if her parents are informed. Thats it. She doesn't have to bring her mom in or have witnesses or anything. And believe me, Planned Parenthood or any abortion clinic will be more than happy to get her there.

I can't tell you the horror I would experience if my daughter were to undergo a medical procedure without my consent. And many parents have had to deal with horror after finding out their child is dead. You don't hear too much about it, but there have been several cases of death during an abortion. I knew of one personally.

But, trust me when I say that no one would be doing the girl who has a pyscho mom a favor by allowing her to go through with an abortion. The emotional damage I have personally seen and heard has been almost too hard to bear.

Read my post about when I was pro-choice. Giving shelter, hope, and compassion is the much better choice. Which is why I have been associated with Birthright and The Nuturing Network. Unlike the abortion horror stories, I have yet to hear a birth horror story.

A child's life is a precious thing.

Well, at least we both care. That's a good thing. I'm not sure there's too much more to add, but I do have some thoughts that I might as well share before the entire right side of the blogosphere de-links me tomorrow.

For the record: I had an abortion the summer I turned 20. For the record: I regret it deeply. For the record: I was in a relationship with a domineering male, and it was his decision to terminate the pregnancy. But the idea that this could have happened two years before, while I was still 17, makes me pale. The outcome probably wouldn't have been any different in terms of my having an abortion, but my mother would have rubbed my face in it every day. I might not ever have made it to college at all.

1) Let's remember that emotional abuse is a lot harder to prove than physical abuse. It's especially difficult for a teenager who has lived with vitriolic language every day to see this as being quite the wrong that it is. And to describe psychological torture to the authorities is difficult as well. The reaction is very likely to be "hm, she said that? Why, young lady—she must have been at her wit's end. Whatever did you do to push her to that point?"

And if the teenager in question has misbehaved in any way—if she's acted out in the least—she'll probably hang her head and say, "well, I got a D in a class."

"There you are," the judge will say, kindly but sternly. "You must stop provoking her." Case dismissed.

2) It's also important to keep in mind that a lot of parents are in favor of abortions, especially for their young daughters! I think a lot of pro-life parents are so busy over-identifying with these parents (and wondering, horrified, if their own kids might ever sneak out and get an abortion themselves) that they lose track of this essential fact. Had I gotten pregnant two years earlier, the pressure on me to terminate would have doubled. I truly believe that the main pressures on young women to have this done come from a) boyfriends and husbands, and b) parents.

Your parental notification law will help you sleep better, but it probably won't reduce abortions.

3) Parental notification laws are a cop out for parents. If you want your daughter to trust you, it behooves you to be trustworthy. If you want her to anticipate that you will be supportive when she's having a hard time, the best way to guarantee that is to show her that during other hard times. If all she expects from you is judgment, then you need to examine your parenting style, rather than expecting the state to bail you out.

4) Girls and women do die during abortions. But let's be fair: they also die during childbirth. Two or three women die every day in this country due to pregnancy complications. Even here in the U.S. we haven't entirely removed the risk. There are risks either way, and if you haven't ever heard a "birth horror story," you might be spending too much side gathering data from only one side of the fence.

What do I think? I think our extremely permissive abortion laws are on their way out the window. This is one area in which we are way to the left of Western Europe, due to Roe v. Wade, a rather ridiculous decision that has kept the wound festering for decades.

This should be a state issue, and it should be solved on a case-by-case basis. But it will take a long time.

What helps? The fact that women keep having abortions. Ten years later, they get pregnant on purpose, and they go in for their ultrasounds. They look at pictures of their babies. "Isn't he/she cute?" they ask their doctors. And then there is the oh, shit! moment:

Oh, shit! If it's a baby this time, what was it last time?

Answer: a baby.

Give it time. And try to remember that the problem of racial equality took centuries to solve (if it has been: two schools of thought on that). Pro-lifers like to compare their cause with slavery, and there are certainly parallels. But even the abolitionists were willing to accept limited victories, and fight to prevent states from accepting slavery on a case-by-case basis.

I'd submit that the goal right now should be reducing the number of abortions, rather than legislating against them entirely.

(Now, if I've done everything correctly both sides will be hopping mad at me, and I'll wake up to buckets of hate mail.)

UPDATE: RWS discusses how she got into counseling women faced with this decision, how hard she fought against it, and how painful it is to do. A very wrenching read for potential adoptive parents (such as myself).

UPDATE 2: Rae of A Likely Story provides a cogent counterpoint to my thoughts from a parent's perspective. Recommended reading.

If You Do Nothing Else

. . . for the Constitution in your lifetime, please sign the internet freedom of speech letter. This petitions the FEC to refrain from restricting bloggers and other online journalists in their political speech, and it probably represents the only time I'll ever be forced to join forces with the Daily Kos.

Read through the names: it's like an online "who's who," left and right.

McArdle on Bankruptcy Reform

Megan gives a comprehensive outline of the current situation, sparing neither bankruptcy filers nor the credit card companies, and finally makes a cogent statement against the current bill, arguing that our loose bankruptcy laws make us more risk-tolerant, spurring production.

It's a powerful argument that I'm not sure I quite buy. 'Course, I'm a short-sighted moralist.

The Abortion Issue of Damocles

Oakland Jeff points out that rejecting the best candidate on the basis of her position on abortion could get us—and the world—into serious trouble.

Be careful out there.

Law Enforcement Babes

Michelle has an issue with the capture of a murderer who overpowered a female officer in a courtroom and was then brought in by a team that included a woman.

Give me a break.

As some of her commenters point out, the original problem in that Atlanta courtroom had to do with faulty procedures, not the gender of the officer that was guarding the prisoner.

When it comes to firefighters and some military personnel, I agree that standards have sometimes been compromised in an attempt to bring more women into the ranks. But when it comes to cops, I want cunning and intelligence as well as sheer dumb muscle. Bear in mind: there are women who are plenty strong. I don't happen to be one of them, but I know several. And for police, intelligence and intuition are just as important.

Conservatives need to be careful. It's one thing to say, "we're degrading standards too far in our attempt to bring a cosmetic 'gender balance' into traditionally male-dominated fields." And it's another to say, "this officer is a woman, so she is automatically unable to handle a dangerous male prisoner, no matter her level of fitness or training, and irrespective of who else is on her team."

The strength argument is based on averages, not the exceptional individual—such as the young lady a head taller than I, 22 years old, who is on my contractor's team and helped to rebuild my walking bridge last week, doing all the heavy lifting. When you make that argument you will make a fool of yourself.

I don't like to throw the word "sexism" around. But this is what it looks like, in case you were wondering.

Radio Daze

Goldstein and Ardolino, coming to an internet connection near you. March 24th.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Los Angeles: Breast Cancer Fundraiser This Wednesday Night

It's called Club Pink Ribbon, and the idea is to give "real people" access to some of the fun and amenities usually found at the celebrity fundraisers: good food, good drink, good times at the Spider Club. European recording artist Anastacia will be there sending a note, as she is on tour right now. Supermodel Beverly Peele will be present.

Angeleno magazine is a co-sponsor of the event (full sponsership list on the web site).

Details here.

Wednesday night, 7:00, Hollywood (1735 No. Vine). Admission is $75, and you can get raffle tickets without actually attending the event.

Proceeds go to the Anastacia Fund, which focuses on young women sticken with breast cancer, and on helping those who may have been "caught by surprise" because they have no family history of the disease.

UPDATE: I mis-read the material I was sent. Anastacia will actually be on tour, so she's sending a note to be read at the event. And L.A. Magazine is not one of the co-sponsors, though there should be some media presence; several of the L.A.-based glossies are likely to cover the evening. (And at least one L.A. blogger.)

Paul at Wizbang!

. . . discusses the recent ruling that suggests bloggers can't go around publishing the trade secrets of companies such as Apple with impunity.

It seems like the common-sense decision to me, in the absence of some sort of overriding public concern in knowing these things—that is, whistle-blowers who expose corporate misconduct should fall into a different category from people who simply can't adhere to their employment contracts because they are blabbermouths.

On Bankruptcy Law

Rick Heller rails against the tide of "libertarian" bloggers who deride the new bankruptcy-limiting bill as a one-sided piece of legislation, pointing out that it only affects people of means who choose to declare bankruptcy, leaving the way clear for the genuinely poor. He calls the backlash against the bill "yuppie rage." Heh.

The issue has provoked spirited debate at Dean's World, with great arguments being made on each side. I'm inclined to think that it would have been preferable to include some restrictions on the credit industry as regards pre-approved offers, but I have to say that as my credit score has slid, once again, into the gutter, I haven't been getting any of those lately—so the "predatory practices" only go so far.

What I've observed in my personal life has been that the people who declare bankruptcy tend to do it frivolously, in a fairly cavalier spirit. They tend to be either spoiled trust-fund babies or people with generous incomes who spend a bit beyond their means. There's often some form of wealth that's a bit beyond the reach of the law, such as family money that isn't theirs quite yet.

It's interesting to me that Debtors Anonymous used to prohibit bankruptcy as a tactic for its members, but now apparently takes the stance that in some cases it's permissible, leaving the matter up to individual conscience.

I'd like to see reform of credit-company practices; I really would. But I'm having a hard time advocating the current loosey-goosey approach to bankruptcies, which amounts to legalized theft.

There's got to be a middle ground.

UPDATE: Gail Heriot of National Review debunks the Harvard study that purports to show half of bankruptcies are due to medical bills. Among other methodological flaws, the study treats drug addiction and compulsive gambling as illnesses, and labels any BKs in which those factor in as "medical," whether there are any medical bills at all. In fact, 75% of the bankruptcies in the study involve medical bills of $1000 or less (not $1000 a year; $1000, period).

The study is very up-front about its bias, which is that there should be universal health-care coverage without any co-payments or deductibles or limitations at all. Yet its highly massaged data is being reported as gospel by the mainstream media. Scary.

Via Joe Gandelman, working the weekend shift at Dean's World.

Gmail

If anyone needs a Gmail account, he/she/it should send me a note.

Please be sure to specify what "first name" and what "last name" should appear on the invitation, because that's what you'll be stuck with for your address (example: miss.attila@gmail.com).

I think it's significant that Gmail has changed the allocation of invitations. I used to have six available to give out at any particular time. Now I have 50, which may indicate that the Google folks are moving beyond the beta-testing stage on this.

Iowahawk Gives Us

. . . the final installment of the Dan Rather mystery, with quite a surprise ending. It's masterful.

(Of course, if Rather travelled to L.A., he really should have run into a short, buxom blogger with a Glock .40. That would have changed his day.) The best part lay in Rather encountering, not Lileks himself, but his young daughter. Genius.

Jeff Has Topped Himself

. . . which sounds kinky as hell, frankly. But, never mind.

Wearing his advice-columnist hat, Oakland Jeff answers the concerns of an "anonymous" woman named (oddly enough) Sondra K, who fears she might be harboring Islamic terrorists in her house.

And it's absolutely freaking hilarious.

Get Your Prominent Celebrities Here!

Beautiful Atrocities gives OBL a few more suggestions on prominent cultural icons he might kidnap that would devastate us more than nabbing Russell Crowe. I mean, we'd be wandering the streets with our eyes wide open, our mouths forming little O's if some of these guys went missing.

(But, God help me, I do like Elvira. Can't help myself.)

Dean Thinks

. . . that we may be reaching the tipping point in terms of throwing out this silly, destructive "don't ask, don't tell" policy in our armed forces.

About flippin' time.

The Folks at Jib Jab

. . . are now promoting a little animated short that they themselves did not produce. It makes fun both of the pharmaceutical industry and our tendancy to see pills as the solution to many of our problems—especially here in the States.

It's funny enough that I'm willing to accept that its makers have different biases from mine.

Go. Now.

A Friend of Mine

discussed his demanding job with the Attila Spouse today.

He said he realized it might be time to think about moving on to something else about a week ago when he was heading home at 9:30 at night and found himself hoping that his toddler son would be asleep when he got in—that way, he'd be able to get some more work done.

He pulled his car over to the side of the road, then, and figured out that the job had taken over and neatly inverted his values.

He started sending out gentle inquiries about possible jobs the next day to all his business contacts.

Take-home question: how many men have that moment of clarity? And how many men (and women) simply go, "yeah, I hope the kid's asleep; it'll sure make my life easier."

Call for Action: Yemeni Journalist Jailed

As many of you know, Jane at Armies of Liberation has been conducting a one-woman campaign on behalf of Abdulkarim al-Khaiwani, a Yemeni journalist who was imprisoned for writing an editorial that criticized the Yemeni President.

Jane's petition will be presented to President Saleh on March 17th, several days in advance of Mr. Khaiwani's next trial date (trials have been delayed before, on flimsy pretexts; the Yemeni President is also head of the judiciary, for despotic one-stop shopping). Jane would like at least 400 signatures by the time she sends this material to President Saleh. I'm hoping we can do even better than that. As it stands, she has a number of the blogosphere's heavy hitters on her list, which is available for viewing.

Those of us who enjoy freedom of speech and the press must remind ourselves what a blessing it is, and have an obligation to speak up for those who do not yet fully possess these rights. Some Yemeni journalists have signed the petition at risk to themselves and their families: the least we in the West can do is to follow their example. If you live in the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or Western Europe, I urge you to make a statement, here.

[/schoolmarmish lecture]

Jane's petition reads—

To President Saleh:

We the undersigned private citizens of many nations are writing to demonstrate our solidarity with Abdulkarim al-Khaiwani and Yemeni journalists.

We have come to the conclusion that Mr. al-Khaiwani is a prisoner of conscience having examined the details of the case including his irregular trial, his lack of a defense, the charges which include insulting the president, and his inability for six months to receive his appeal after several scheduled court dates.

We express our commitment to the concept of a free press in Yemen and to the Yemeni people as they peacefully work toward representative government.

We trust that Mr. al-Khaiwani's new court date set for March 22, 2005 will not be delayed again, as occurred five times previously. We hope that his appeal will be heard by a judicial member acting with independence and the authority of conscience.

We are concerned for Mr. al-Khaiwani's health and will be monitoring his well being through time. We ask that you do your utmost to insure his care.

We are acting with respect and affection for the Yemeni people in asking that you permit the free flow of ideas both in the media and in society. This is the essence of democracy.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Please. Let's bring some pressure to bear on this guy. I'm counting on you guys to spread the word over the next 10 days.

Thanks.

Change is Inevitable

Jeff at Beautiful Atrocities does a kind of roundup called "Freedom on the March," mostly focused on changes the Middle East, but also discussing events in Western Asia and Africa. Some quibble with the exact examples he chose, but the specifics are less important to me than that sense of expectation in the air—the zeitgeist of self-determination that's spreading, virus-like, in several areas all at once.

And suddenly I'm humming Buffalo Springfield:

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind
I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side
It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

For real, this time: the sixties got nothing on us now.

If We Wanted Her Dead,

she'd be dead. And we probably wouldn't have used small arms and regular GIs at a check point to do it.

Laurence Simon writes about the Italian "journalist" who was putatively shot at by U.S. soldiers. (Why is the word journalist in quotes? Well, because she writes for a Communist paper. We've learned from the Jeff Gannon affair that anyone who has a strong ideological leaning cannot be a real journalist.)

Unlike people who pretend to support our troops, I actually support our troops. And when some Italian behind the wheel of a car decided "Excusa mea! I'ma gonna justa flya trougha this-a checka-pointa!" instead of stopping, well, I think the troops were right to go for the engine block and I support their decision 100%.

If the driver didn't want to get the car shot up and possibly his passengers along with it, then he shouldn't have tried to run the checkpoint.

Via James.

Today

. . . is my two-year blogversary, though you have to visit the archives at the the old blogspot digs to see posts from the first year and change. This has to do with the fact that the little brownies who were supposed to transfer my old archives to this site haven't done it. (Neither have they cleaned my house lately, and they are awfully behind in filing my papers. Bad brownies. Bad.)

How can you help me celebrate my blogversary? It's very simple: you can buy me some nice juicy ads (another $40 in advertising, and I'll meet my $75 minimum; Blogads will therefore send me the money they owe me—that's only two more $20 ads to buy from adstrips 2 and 3. Such a deal. Do it for the children! Or for libertarianism! Or for my avatar pinup's tight sweater!)

Or, you know: cut to the chase. Hit the Paypal button, and buy me a nice glass of decent red wine. Think of what all those antioxidents will do to my longevity.

Keep in mind that if enough of you shower me with cash and blogads, I'll be able to get my car tuned up. Won't that be exciting? Maybe we could work something out: if you guys pay for the tuneup, I'll promise not to blog about it. Deal?

Come on, boys and girls: don't make me lay on you that sob story about my bandwidth costs, and how I just MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE THIS SITE DOWN if you aren't generous enough.

I also won't be going on any extended multiple-month vacations right after I reach my fundraising goals.

So there you go.

Syria

. . . says it will be pulling out of Lebanon in time for elections in May.

Perhaps at this point it would be easier to keep track of the Middle Eastern countries that haven't had to make some sort of changes to their style of governing in the past two years, rather than those that have.

The comparisons between Reagan and Bush '43 become more pronounced as time goes on: reforms are happening that I thought I'd never see in my lifetime.

Like Overweight to Obesity

As 2-3 of you know, famed lefty blogger and eminent silly person Oliver Willis is demanding Brit Hume resign from Fox News for interpreting some of FDR's writing to mean Roosevelt would support private retirement accounts as part of Social Security reform. (A lively discussion ensues in his comments section, and some people argue quite convincingly in each direction. Whatever. FDR is dead, and I'm alive, and more importantly, so are my nieces and nephews, who should not have to support me in my old age.)

Anyway, O-Dub is making a bit of an ass of himself by creating a "petition"—a list of lefty bloggers who are calling for Brit Hume to step down. As if.

So Sortapundit has hit upon the idea of calling for Oliver himself to stop blogging—a far more satisfactory resolution to the situation, if you ask me. I'd love to never again see that silly banner reading, "Like Kryptonite to Stupid." If you're going to have a lame-o slogan, can't you at least be grammatically correct about it? I think Oliver was after "Like Kryptonite to Stupidity," which is just as idiotic, but literate.

Here's Oliver:

Brit Hume is the anchor of Fox News Channel's prime time news report, Special Report with Brit Hume, and he makes things up. On February 3rd, Hume intentionally manipulated the words of the 32nd president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, to make it appear as if FDR supported privatization of social security. This is a brazen falsehood. President Roosevelt's grandson, James Roosevelt Jr., describes Hume's journalistic malfeasance as an "an outrageous distortion". We agree.

Be sure to hop over there, and check out his silly Brit Hume banner.

To which Sortapundit replies:

No matter how hard I try to ignore him, I find myself coming to in front of my PC, Willis' smug face and non-sensical tagline loading before my eyes. How did I get there? Just a moment ago I was reading Wizbang, Powerline or any number of blogs that, you know, make sense. Now I find myself hit full in the face with this shrill abrasive voice of the left - the very voice that pushes me ever rightwards. In the words of INDC's Bill - "Never have so many been annoyed by the stupidity of so few. One, actually."

And so, the time has come to demand that Oliver Willis cease and desist - if only to protect the two-party system. With spokesmen such as Willis, even the best Democratic politician finds it hard to get elected. We don't want to win too easily.

Since Willis sets a lot of stock in petitions he really has no choice but to accede to our demands. Unless he's, ya know, a hypocrite.

And Sortapundit has a banner too, courtesy of Political Teen.

Via Jeff at Beautiful Atrocities, who implies that he and Oliver have a groovy thang goin', Baby. Please, Jeff: don't ever "take one for the team" that way. Ick.

The Supremes: What Are They Smoking?

Iowahawk discusses some of the Supreme Court's recent reliance on law in other nations.

He seems a little tart about it, too. Slighly, um . . . snarky.

Is It True, Ann?

My jury has been out on Ann Coulter for years. But sometimes the sheer ovarian swagger is charming, in a certain way.

The New Meme in Town

Via McGehee comes this colorful little quiz conceived by Frank J.

THE "WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?" BLOGGER QUIZ

1. Who the hell do you think you are?

Joy McCann, aka Little Miss Attila (or Attila Girl). And I don't just think it: I'm absolutely positive. I just checked my own I.D.

2. So, other than blogging, what's your job? Do you work at some fast food joint, dumbass?

Writing, editing, fact-checking, assisting with marketing campaigns, fixing up and maintaining houses, including mine. All kinds of stuff; I get bored easily, you see.

3. Do you have like any experience in journalism, idiot?

Magazines, yes. Newspapers, not since junior high.

4. Do you even read newspapers?

Those large thin slices of dead tree I remember from childhood? I had no idea they still made those. How quaint.

5. Do you watch any other news than FOX News propaganda, you ignorant fool?

On television? The television's downstairs. I watch it twice a week: once on Sunday nights with my husband (generally a movie), and once on Wednesday nights after T'ai Chi (I've become addicted to The West Wing).

6. I bet you're some moron talk radio listener too, huh?

The radio? That's in my car. I'll listen if there's nothing good on the classic rock stations. But I'm getting a satellite radio, courtesy of my husband, and then I'll never run out of good rock 'n' roll. Which is all I really ask from life.

7. So, do you get a fax from the GOP each day for what to say, you @#$% Republican parrot?

The fax machine is also downstairs. It's amazing how little those things get used these days: remember when that was the way to send documents?

8. Why do you and your blogger friends want to silence and fire everyone who disagrees with you, fascist?

I don't know. But there you have it. And why, given that, do I let them comment on my website? I'm really a bundle of contradictions, I guess.

9. Are you completely ignorant of other countries, or do you actually own a passport?

I've gone through two passports, and as time goes by the pictures on 'em seem to get worse. Why is that, do you suppose?

10. Have you even been to another country, you dumb hick?

Only Mexico and most of the Western European countries; nowhere of note. Can we talk again in 5-10 years? I hope to have substantial updates for you.

11. If you're so keen on the war, why haven't you signed up, chickenhawk?

Because they wouldn't take me: I'm 42, short, and have no specialized skills other than writing iambic pentameter verse. All four branches of the Armed Forces have assured me that there is no need for sonnets about the war. They promised to get back to me, though (exact wording: "don't call us; we'll call you"). So there's hope.

12. Do you have any idea of the horrors of war? Have you ever reached into a pile of goo that was your best friend's face?

Um. My face is in front of a skeletal structure called a "skull." So even if you shot it off, there would be lots of bone fragments in it. Therefore, it wouldn't qualify as "goo," exactly: there'd be some hard material in it, along with a good deal of connective tissue that would be semi-firm. I would imagine it would have a texture vaguely like a good Jell-o salad—the kind that has fruit cocktail added in. Then just throw in some bone fragments, and you're done: Attila's face salad. If you're daring, take that to your next potluck.

13. Have you ever reached into any pile of goo?

Well, that's my main complaint about adulthood: that, and having to maintain a checking account. One just isn't called upon to play with piles of goo very often. In stark contrast, I spent most of my childhood playing with goo of every imaginable consistency, from finger paints to various types of paper maiche, to Play-Doh and that interesting stuff made out of corn starch and water.

Can you get me some good goo? I'll pay.

14. Once again, who the hell do you think you are?!

Are you a Deep Purple fan, by any chance?

This Whole Post

. . . should go on Oakland Jeff's gravestone when he dies.

From The Simple Life: Fallujah:

PARIS: Hi guys. We just came from Ramallah.

NICOLE: They hated us. We got fired from the intifada.

PARIS: So. What do you guys do for fun in Fallujah?

INSURGENTS: Behead the infidel!

PARIS & NICOLE: Niiiiice.

LEADER: I am Mohammed Mohammed. (points to drooling mongoloid) This is Mohammed³. He will achieve martyrdom after you perform ritual shaving of the anus.

The whole thing is note-freaking-perfect. Jeff knows his low art.

Sharks and Jets!

It's on, Baby. So-cons vs. South Park Republicans. Over at Goldstein's place.

Bring your black leather jacket, and your dancing shoes.

Amazing Grace.

It feels like the world is on fire: democracy is breaking out everywhere.

What a great time to be alive.

Viva Lebanon.

(Pix courtesy Instapundit.)

And Now for Something Completely Different

An interview with Jeff Gannon's penis, courtesy of Protein Wisdom.

PW: “What do you hope to accomplish now that you have re-entered the public domain?  Obviously, a book deal is in the future.  What message are you hoping to send by telling your story?�

COCK: “I suppose what I really want to say is that I’m really just like any other GAY PORN COCK.  Prick me, do I not bleed?  Stroke me long enough, do I not, y’know --�

PW: “Gotcha.  Sure.  But let me ask you directly, for the record. Are you gay?�

COCK: “I go where I’m told, to be honest with you.  And from my perspective?  There’s not a whole lot of difference from one cave to the next.�

Read the whole thing. Now.

UPDATE: I hadn't realized some of you out there hadn't seen the original interview with Jeff Gannon himself. Here you go.

I Might Just

. . . build a small shrine to her in a corner of the living room. My husband wouldn't mind, I don't think.

Who Knew?

While I was out of town earlier this month, two of my favorite bloggers got into a minor war. Of all people, Allahpundit emerged (for a time, at least) as the voice of reason and moderation. How often does that happen?

The original issue, as I understand it, had to do with Lt. Gen. James Mathis' infamous off-the-cuff remarks:

"Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot," Mattis said, prompting laughter from some military members in the audience. "It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.

"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil," Mattis said. "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

Faced with the Patterico-Andrea Harris kerfuffle, many bloggers stepped quietly away, muttering to themselves about how they were late for an appointment, or needed to wash their hair, or tweeze their eyebrows, or . . . something.

Which is exactly what I would have done.

For what it's worth, the dispute—for many—appeared to hinge on whether one thought the term wife-beating meant exactly that, or whether it was a euphemism for the misogynistic streak in many Islamists, often expressed by brutal murders. That is: does wife beating mean wife beating, or does is it shorthand for "killing women whose ankles we once glimpsed, or who were the victims of rape"?

I tend toward the latter interpretation myself, and wonder whether Patterico's legal training might have lent him a teensy blind spot, a small sliver of literal-mindedness. Though I certainly laud his mental discipline in evaluating a statement on the basis of what's in that statement: a good thing in most cases.

I'm glad I try to steer clear of blog wars. They are good for one's traffic, but not necessarily good for one's soul.

Personally, I'd love it if we all spoke to one another as if they were standing there in front of us in a friend's family room, and everyone had a Diet Coke, glass of wine, beer, or snack in his/her hand.

Yup: I'm a regular hippie chick most of the time.

And, by the way: it would be great if we could steer clear both of lethal threats and of legal action against one another. Together: Kumbayah, my Lord, Kumbayah . . . .

[Dons kevlar vest, and runs, zigzag-style, toward the nearest cover.]