Phelps Photos

Here is an incredible look at Michael Phelps' magic last night. That may have been the most pumped I've ever gotten watching a sporting event. It was just filthy.

Subprime Posts Debt

In these entitled times, I realize there's quite a growing list of posts that I owe you:

--Our wonderful new daughter
--A detailed account of my recent trip to India and Pakistan
--A bunch of other rad stuff

Thanks for your patience.

Stewart v. Feith

Very interesting and hearty exchange here.

Fun to Do Bad Things, and Drive Into A Car

This kid's gonna be trouble down the road, but he's awesome right now.

Drop It Like It's Hot

I'm going to India and Pakistan this summer.. remind me not to take Afton along.

Lame

Why didn't A&F pay that dude to wear their shirt in my face too? Because he isn't hip?

But neither are those other three tools, so I'm confused..

Life Imitates The Office (UK)

"I am deeply sorry that I did not live up to what was expected of me," [New York Governor Eliot Spitzer] said in a brief news conference announcing his intention to resign, effective Monday. "I will try once again outside of politics to serve the common good."

With his wife, Silda, at his side, he added, "Our greatest glory consists not in never falling but in rising every time we fall."

"That's So Good, It Shoulda Been Mine"

Paul's Poll Performance Perplexes Pundits (Plus Pic!)

I only caught the post-debate spin session for a minute last night, but in that time I had the distinct pleasure of hearing Sean Hannity's verbal disgust at seeing that their "Who Won?" poll had been jammed yet again by Ron Paul supporters.

The first iteration of the poll results came in while H&C were interviewing Fred Thompson, and when Paul pulled down 35% with second place being at like 18%, you could actually hear Hannity utter a "phlgrhaargh" of pissed incredulousness under his breath. (You'll recall that Sean got pretty riled about these hijinx after the last GOP debate, when he hotly denounced the Paul supporters for allegedly spamming their poll with multiplte votes.)

I don't know who Hannity's endorsed-- probly McRomniani-- but he's obviously not a fan of the revolution.

And while we're here, I should point out that Father Burly is right there in the shot at the end of Sean's fingers(!). This was actually at the last GOP debate, and it was right after this scene that my dad somehow managed to actually get me on the phone with Ron Paul. Yep, we exchanged pleasantries and thanked each other for being awesome for about 30 seconds, and it ruled.

"Change" is Bad if it Votes Like This

[From James Taranto's BOTW]

Obama Voted to Let Infants Die

"The Associated Press has a shocking report on Barack Obama's state legislative record, though the AP's Nedra Pickler does her best to play it down:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton criticizes rival Barack Obama's record on
abortion rights in a mailing sent to New Hampshire voters.
The mailer says
that seven times during his time in the Illinois state Senate, Obama declined to
take a position on abortion bills, while Clinton has been a defender of abortion
rights.
During his eight years in the legislature, Obama cast a number of
votes on abortion and received a 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned
Parenthood Council for his support of abortion rights, family planning services
and health insurance coverage for female contraceptives. He voted against
requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive, a vote that especially
riled abortion opponents.

There is a word in English for "aborted fetuses who survive." They are called infants."

------

Here's a good link from the Chigaco Sun-Times about that 2001 bill:

"Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago), who voted against O'Malley's abortion bills, predicted they would be struck down by a federal court if they became state law.

'Whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by
the equal protection clause or other elements of the Constitution, we're saying
they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a
9-month-old child delivered to term," he said. "That determination then
essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take
place.'"

It's a magical thing of his, that "pre-viable fetus" ontologic wand-- wave it over the head of a (living) baby who's undesirable and you can follow closely thereafter with a vacuum to its brains.

Utterly Random Thoughts

--Am I the only person who couldn't care less whether or not those dudes "taunted" that tiger in San Fran? I mean, sure, there should be a FAQ somewhere deep in their heads that says "Should I taunt a wild beast? No.", but that's not the point at all. No matter what you do in a zoo, the animals shouldn't be able to get out of their cages to kill you. Is that too much to ask?

--There's been a rash of good songs on commercials lately, and it's kinda weirding me out-- Stephen Merritt for Volvo, The Shins on McDonalds, The Books with Hummer.. what's going on? Has Madison Avenue been paved into the last of the sacred places?

--Forgive me for not believing that Hillary's near-tears were the least bit real yesterday. I know, I know, that's just the cynicism that's the metathreat in Barrack Obama's America, but it's just a bit too convenient that she'd well up today after, what, 60 years?

--I can't believe what I just heard. I was at a training workshop for our new web-based evaluation process at work when after showing us where the "spell check" was, the lady doing the demo said, "And this is the 'PC button'; language which may not be PC might've been used in your review, and this button will make you aware of that." I didn't realize that my company's a wholly-owned subsidiary of Russia..

--Given the tragic turn in the case of the missing female hiker in Georgia and the story's proximity to the Appalachian Trail, I wonder if any people planning solo thru-hike attempts will be scared out of attempting the same this year (especially females). That would perfectly understandable on an emotional level, but on the statistical one they'd actually be safer on the AT than in whatever average-sized city they live in now. It's true.

--Does anybody actually give a single hoot whether Bloomberg is going to join the presidential race? And what need does he even think exists which is presently going unmet-- a Giuliani with more hair and less wives?

More Like, No Deal

I guess I'm in the minority when it comes to Huckabee's putative "charm"-- to me it just comes across as raw condescension. Sure he's witty and self-deprecating, but whenever he's laying it on me didactically he gets those wrinkles in his forehead and that look in his eyes as if he'd just given me a Werther's Original.

But more bothersome than that is the fact that, ideologically speaking, he's just another John Edwards, only without the hypocritical stack of millions. Ok, that's not entirely fair-- Mike is firmly against killing babies while Pretty John probably couldn't get enough of it, but still, you know what I mean-- "economically speaking" they're hard to distinguish at a distance.

This is a good piece from today's WSJ:

Mike Huckabee's New Deal
More God, more government.


BY DAVID J. SANDERS Friday, January 4, 2008 12:01 a.m. EST


As Iowa Republicans prepared to caucus yesterday, polls showed Mike Huckabee, the Southern Baptist minister-turned-politician, leading in some polls and placing a close second to Mitt Romney in others. The core of Mr. Huckabee's support, of course, comes from evangelical voters. Couching his policy positions in the language of faith and morality, Mr. Huckabee portrays himself as the dream candidate of the religious right. In October, he boasted to a gathering of conservative Christian activists: "I don't come to you, I come from you." The "language of Zion," he said, was "his mother tongue and not a recently acquired second language." Echoing the Gospels, he told the Des Moines Register editorial board that the essence of what made him tick was: "Do unto others as you would have done unto you." He admitted that his faith shapes his policy, but "if [voters] understand in what way, I think that they will say 'good, that's the kind of policy we would like.' "
But one wonders whether his newfound supporters would really say that if they took a close look at his policies. With increasing frequency, Mr. Huckabee invokes his faith when advocating greater government involvement in just about every aspect of American life. In doing so, Mr. Huckabee has actually answered the prayers of the religious left.

Since John Kerry's defeat in 2004 at the hands of at least a few "values voters," the Democratic Party has been trying to take back God, even launching a Faith in Action initiative at the Democratic National Committee. Meanwhile, a small but organized group of liberal religious leaders and faith-based political activists has been trying to convey the message that, as one recent book had it, "Jesus rode a donkey." They argue that increasing the government's role in the fight against global warming, poverty and economic inequality is a biblical imperative. They usually de-emphasize the importance of abortion and gay marriage in their agendas, lest they offend the secularist wing of the party.
Democrats have made some inroads with evangelical voters. A recent Pew poll showed that the percentage of Americans who see the party as friendly to religion has increased to 30% from 26% since 2006. But no one has articulated the message of the religious left more effectively than Mr. Huckabee.
In August, he told a group of Washington reporters that the application of his faith to politics must include concerns for the environment, poverty and hunger. "It can't just be about abortions and same-sex marriage," he said. "We can't ignore that there are kids every day in this country that literally don't have enough food and adequate drinking water in America."
As governor, he championed the ARKids First, which extended free health insurance not only to children of the working poor but to some lower middle-class families. He pleased teachers unions with his consistent opposition to school choice and voucher programs. He satisfied labor by signing into law a minimum-wage hike of 21%. "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me"--Mr. Huckabee's oft-cited scriptural justification for growing government--proved costly for Arkansans, who saw government spending double and their taxes rise about a half-billion dollars during his tenure.
It's unlikely that Mr. Huckabee, as president, would be able to shepherd a federal marriage amendment through the House, the Senate and the state legislatures, but signing into law a cap-and-trade system ostensibly aimed at limiting global warming (something he has called a "moral issue") would be much easier. If he wanted to push protectionist "fair trade" policies and a greater federal government role in health care, a Democratic Congress would be more than willing to let him live out his faith on the taxpayers' dime.

Looking at the past 30 years of American politics, many on the religious right reasonably assume that candidates who speak openly about their faith are conservatives, but that hasn't always been the case. Jimmy Carter is the most prominent recent example of left-leaning piety. The author Gary Scott Smith, in "Faith and the Presidency," reminds us that President Franklin D. Roosevelt even offered scriptural justification for the New Deal.
Speaking to the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America, in 1933, FDR explained that the "object of all our striving . . . should be to help citizens realize the abundant life Christ said he came to bring." According to Mr. Smith, "Roosevelt wanted to ensure that 'all elements of the community' had an equitable share of the nation's resources. The federal government's social planning, he contended, was 'wholly in accord with the social teachings of Christianity.' " It is not hard to imagine Mr. Huckabee--standing at a podium in the Rose Garden to announce a raft of government programs--talking in exactly this way.

Mr. Sanders is a columnist for Stephens Media in Little Rock, Ark.

Sad, but Unfortunately Necessary

To all my Liberal friends:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2008, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishes.

To everyone else:

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

[Adapted from an email forward from my mom.]

E = MC Hammer

Just checking in for a minute to let you know that I'm thinking of you. Hope all is well.

Also wanted to say that I've got a handful of mediocre posts coming up, so don't bail on me just yet: Ron Paul (my brief conversation with and a video of), Hirsi Ali's scandalous (but true?) comments on Islam, Chick-Fil-A's response, my $25 to iTunes, etc..

Thanks.

Women Drivers of the Year

Sacrifice: It Just Looks Better on Others

White House hopeful John Edwards has apparently decided that you need to start carrying your weight:

"Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards told a labor group he would ask Americans to make a big sacrifice: their sport utility vehicles. The former North Carolina senator told a forum by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, yesterday he thinks Americans are willing to sacrifice. Edwards says Americans should be asked to drive more fuel efficient vehicles. He says he would ask them to give up SUVs."

No word yet on what he wants you do with your 28,000 square foot mansion and all the energy that it takes to power it. Oh wait, nevermind,.. that's his. So it's cool.

Rawls, Rawls, Rawls Your Boat

From James Taranto's Best of the Web:

"Another letter to the editor in Saturday's Journal struck us as relevant to this debate. It came from Bruce Paulsen of New York (first letter; links for WSJ.com subscribers):

David Lewis Schaefer's opinion piece on John Rawls ("Justice and
Inequality," July 23) reminded me of an epiphany I had in college in the
late '70s. Then, as now, social justice and inequality were big topics on
campus. The conventional wisdom was that Rawls was right, that his nemesis
Robert Nozick was wrong and that "justice as fairness" was the goal to be
pursued. I proudly carried my thick, dog-eared copy of Rawls's "A Theory of
Justice" under my arm.

Then, in an ethics class taught by a well-known professor, I was asked
to write a paper on the lifeboat scenario--a thought experiment involving an
overcrowded lifeboat entering a storm, where it is clear that not all will
survive. A dedicated Rawlsian at the time, I decided to apply his theories to
the assigned situation. But no matter how I construed them, his theories kept
leading me to the conclusion that the only "fair" result was that everyone in
the lifeboat had to die. Even as a young, liberal college student, this struck
me as an unacceptable result.

Thereafter, I spent less time lugging around Rawls's volume, and looked
for a more practical philosophy.

What prompted our July 26 op-ed was Barack Obama's statement that he favored an American retreat from Iraq even if the result would be genocide:

'Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the
deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops
in the Congo right now--where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of
ethnic strife--which we haven't done," Mr. Obama told the AP. "We would be
deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of
us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea.'

This sounds an awful lot like Paulsen's collegiate application of Rawls to the lifeboat scenario. Obama finished college nearly a quarter century ago. Shouldn't he have started looking for a more practical philosophy by now?"

Free Tibet! But Not Really!

"Every so often, I find myself, for the umpteenth time, driving behind a Vermont granolamobile whose bumper not only proclaims the driver’s enduring post-2004 support for Kerry/Edwards but also bears the slogan 'FREE TIBET.'
It must be great to be the guy with the printing contract for the 'FREE TIBET' stickers. Not so good to be the guy back in Tibet wondering when the freeing thereof will actually get under way. Are you in favor of a Free Tibet? It’s hard to find anyone who isn’t. […]"

"Everyone’s for a free Tibet, but no one’s for freeing Tibet. So Tibet will stay unfree—as unfree now as it was when the first Free Tibet campaigner slapped the very first 'FREE TIBET' sticker onto the back of his Edsel. Idealism as inertia is the hallmark of the movement. Well, not entirely inertia: it must be a pain in the neck when you trade in the Volvo for a Subaru and have to bend down and paste on a new 'FREE TIBET' sticker. For a while, my otherwise not terribly political wife got extremely irritated by the Free Tibet schtick, demanding to know at a pancake breakfast at the local church what precisely some harmless hippy-dippy old neighbor of ours meant by the sticker he’d been proudly displaying decade in, decade out: 'But what exactly are you doing to free Tibet?' she insisted. 'You’re not doing anything, are you?'"

"'Give the guy a break,' I said when we got back home. 'He’s advertising his moral superiority, not calling for action. If Rumsfeld were to say, ‘Free Tibet? Jiminy, what a swell idea! The Third Infantry Division goes in on Thursday,’ the bumper-sticker crowd would be aghast. They’d have to bend down and peel off the ‘FREE TIBET’ stickers and replace them with ‘WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.’”

"But there’ll never be a Free Tibet—because, through all the decades Americans were riding around with the bumper stickers, the Chinese were moving populations, torturing Tibetans, imposing inter-marriage until Tibet was altered beyond recognition. By the time the guys with the Free Tibet stickers get around to freeing Tibet there’ll be no Tibet left to free."

--Mark Steyn, America Alone, pp.131-132.

Who Has More Fun than the Japanese?

Hello Yes