« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »

April 30, 2007

Will it Get Worse Before it Gets Better for the GOP?

Via Ross Douthat's new blog, Robert Novak is reporting that the Democrats are anticipating a pick up of 9-11 seats in next year's House elections, based on a survey of the 50 most competitive races. Coupled with the 30 seat turnaround in 2006, this would be a remarkable change in power in just two years. Republican House members who won by less than two percent of the vote in 2006 are targets, a list that includes Heather Wilson (NM), Deborah Pryce (OH), Mike Ferguson (NJ), Jon Porter (NV), Jim Gerlach (PA), and Jean Schmidt (OH).

Eventually the GOP will have fallen so far that it has nowhere to go but up. I'm putting the ETA on that at January 2009 at the earliest.

Posted by David Darlington at 11:53 PM | Comments (5)

Corzine's Speeding Problem

Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey offered an emotional apology today for setting "a very bad example" when his motorcade was traveling at more than 91 miles, all while not wearing a seat belt. But old habits die hard. As Gov. Corzine and his crew were leaving the hospital, the speeding continued:

No one in the motorcade used emergency lights, as his driver had been doing at the time of the accident. They kept to a pace of about 70 miles per hour, even though the posted limit is 55 on the stretch of Interstate 295 that leads to Drumthwacket, the governor's official mansion in Princeton, where Mr. Corzine will spend the next stage of his recovery.

All of this provides good opportunity to re-emphasize my long held opposition to unreasonably low speed limits. There's ample evidence which suggests it's counter-productive to force Gov. Corzine to drive under 70 mph on a sparsely populated interstate highway. Indeed, the research suggests Gov. Corzine's initial accident may have been caused at least in part by speed limits which were too low.

Many traffic laws are inacted because of a misconception by state and federal legislators. They believe that reducing the speed limit will slow the speed of traffic, while raising the speed limit will cause an increase in the speed of traffic, and thereby increase accidents. Their belief is misguided. Colorado's Department of Transportation already seems to understand (pdf) and notes that "Before and After" speed studies show that there are no significant changes in vehicle speeds or accidents after speed limits are changed.

As it turns out, a sort of "roadway democracy" seems to offer the best limits. Colorado's DOT explains that the optimal speed limit will result in the maximum number of vehicles traveling at about the same speed, reducing conflicts caused by speed differentials. The 85th percentile speed, the speed at or below which 85% of the traffic is moving, "is widely accepted as being closest to that 'just right' speed limit - a case of Majority Rule."

The Cato Institute's Stephen Moore reinforces this view in a 23 page paper titled "Speed Doesn't Kill" (pdf), as does the British Columbia Automobile Association. Moore notes that 33 states raised their speed limits after the federal government's repeal of the 55 mph law in 1995. Because of this, traffic death rates dropped to a record low level in 1997. In addition to saved lives, these more sensible laws offered an economic benefit estimated between $2 and $3 billion per year.

When Gov. Corzine chose to break the speed limit laws even after an accident which broke his left femur and 11 ribs, it may be a sign that our current traffic laws are not reaching the "85th percentile" and are much lower than the optimal limit. The risks are clear: by setting an artificially low speed limit, the state creates a risky mixture of normal, reasonable drivers in the majority crashing into slower drivers who abide by the unreasonably low limit.

Of course, as govenor, Corzine has an obligation to abide by the laws, as do all citizens. But it's time to re-think whether those laws need adjusting.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 04:57 PM | Comments (8)

More Thompson Chatter

I've been blogging daily now for roughly five or six years and written about virtually every topic under the sun. Yet in all that time I cannot recall a post attracting as many Google referrals as a recent one about Sen. Fred Thompson's wife titled "Jeri Kehn for First Lady!" People, for whatever reason, are clearly eager for information about Sen. Thompson and his wife. Yet the hype appears to be more than a fleating fancy. The Telegraph reports that "Ronald Reagan's closest allies are throwing their weight behind the White House bid by the late president's fellow actor, Fred Thompson."

On a somewhat related note, Americans won't need to wait long to see Thompson in the role of commander-in-chief. The actor will play President Ulysses S Grant in the HBO film Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, which premiers May 27th. When aproached by executive producer Dick Wolf and asked if he wanted to play him, Thompson replied: "Not if I have to grow the damn beard." Apparently they came to terms.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 04:02 PM | Comments (0)

Do Time Bombs Honor DST?

The switch to Daylight Saving Time is usually attended by all sorts of stories, anecdotes, cliches about people missing appointments, work, and that sort of thing due to their clocks being off. But ITA friend Doug Masson passes along this story of an unsuspecting innocent who was caught in the dastardly web of DST treachery due to someone else's clock:

A 15-year-old Pennsylvania high-school student was thrown in jail for 12 days because authorities believed he'd called in a bomb-threat. His voice sounded nothing like the voice that made the threat, but he had called the school at the time the threat was made... Or so they thought, until they realized that the call-logging program they used wasn't honoring Daylight Savings [sic] Time.

Twelve days! Twelve days they had this kid behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. When will the madness end?

Posted by Zach Wendling at 12:25 PM | Comments (0)

The Waning of the GOP

One of modern conservatism's fathers, William F. Buckley, has penned an artful piece on the the GOP's future following the Iraq war. It is my recommended reading of the day.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:55 AM | Comments (1)

April 29, 2007

Tenet Untenable

Most of what I know of George Tenet has come from the books I've read about Bush's foreign policy, like Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack, James Risen's State of War, and Thomas Ricks' Fiasco, and the portrait contained therein is not flattering. One gets the impression of an opportunist who quickly saw which way the wind was blowing when a new President came into the Oval Office and began a campaign of ingratiating himself to the new boss. One might say this is simple careerism, leading to the second-longest tenure of a Director of Central Intelligence, but more charitably, Tenet was also trying to make a fresh start that could lead to better use of national intelligence.

Nevertheless, it was this willingness to please Bush that led to an almost total capitulation to the political desires of the Administration, or so the story goes. I watched the 60 Minutes interview tonight looking for anything that would shed new light on this, but I was not impressed.

I suppose there's more to be gleaned from actually reading his new book, but the interview did little to repair Tenet's reputation. On interrogations, Tenet was a broken record, repeating that 'we do not torture,' never engaging the question of what torture is (apparently a semantic point). When Scott Pelley incredulously asked (most of his questions were incredulous) if it was true that Tenet had urged offensive action in Afghanistan months before 9/11, Tenet corrected him: he urged then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to "consider taking action." When asked why he didn't urge the President directly, with whom he met daily, Tenet blustered on about how the POTUS wasn't the "action officer," whatever that means. He went on to use other interesting word choices. Tenet doesn't have best guesses, he has "operational intuition." He doesn't say he screwed up, he accepts, "my share of responsibility."

When it comes to WMD, that share seems to be rather small in his opinion. Scott Pelley should have pressed him on the National Intelligence Estimate, from which, as Bob Woodward tells it, all uncertainties had been scrubbed before it reached Bush (though Pelley did include some pretty damning footage from Powell's presentation before the UN Security Council). The certainty with which the Administration made claims about Iraqi WMD's had tremendous persuasive power with the American public and Congress, and I'm not so sure the road to war would have been quite so easy had the uncertainties been fully realized. Even so, I believe Tenet when he says that his input made no difference about Bush's desire to go to war in Iraq. The problem is that he told the President what he wanted to hear yet now tries to exculpate himself by focusing all the attention on the 'what he wanted to hear' part. So his best defense is that he's an enabler, not an instigator? What a weasel.

In the end, all his huffing and puffing revealed a man whose regrets are sincere but whose ego has turned contrition into petulance.

Posted by Zach Wendling at 09:17 PM | Comments (1)

Buried in his Jammies

A road trip to Philadelphia this weekend provided the opportunity to see the new King Tut exhibit at the Franklin Institute. Eight million Americans saw the original traveling Tut exhibit in the 1970s; it was a legitimate cultural phenomenon that spawned Steve Martin's classic King Tut routine. The current collection is no less breathtaking. The exhibition includes approximately 130 objects from the tomb of King Tut and his immediate predecessors, with the division about 50/50. Most of the items were not part the 1970s tour. It takes about 60-90 minutes to go through the whole thing. The collection has jars for perfume and spices, containers for the organs of the deceased, religious talismans (the religion aspect of the tour was fascinating), tools for use in the afterlife, games, exquisite staffs, chairs, crowns, and other indicators of wealth and power, and of course, mummies. My personal favorites were the golden dagger that was entombed with King Tut at his side and the necklace that was on his chest. I was slightly disappointed that Tut's golden death mask was not on display, but the item is not allowed to leave Egypt.

Nevertheless, I recommend seeing the exhibit before it leaves Philadelphia (and the United States) at the end of September. Entry is time-slotted, so you'll need to buy tickets in advance. I don't know how well the exhibit did in other cities, but Philadelphia seems to have embraced it. The Franklin Institute was packed for our 8pm time slot on Saturday, and the Philly Phanatic had a King Tut-themed birthday party at the ballpark today. Also, Jamie Moyer, who pitched with King Tut in the minors, took a no-hitter into the 7th.

Posted by David Darlington at 09:17 PM | Comments (1)

The Global War Against Baby Boys

ITA neighbor Joe Carter of the Evangelical Outpost recently penned a piece titled "The Global War Against Baby Girls." In it Joe argues couples across the world, but particularly in China, are selectively aborting baby girls in favor of boys, having a dramatic effect on the boy to girl birth ratios.

This is, of course, a horrific and disturbing practice, although not necessarily a new phenomenon in the course of human history. What is new, however, is a different global war against the opposite sex, baby boys, for reasons far less evident. Thanks to high levels of air pollution and chemical toxins, the natural number of male births compared to female births is declining. MSNBC reports:

Traditionally, it's been expected that for every 100 girls born, there will be about 105 boys. This balances out the higher death rate among male fetuses and infants. But since 1970, the U.S. and Japan have experienced a downward shift in this male-to-female birth ratio...

Other areas have experienced similar problems. A team from Sao Paulo University in Brazil found fewer boys were born in the most polluted areas. Testing done in Scotland, Italy, Canada, and other industrialized countries such as Sweden, Germany, Norway, Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands all point to similar decreases. The link to pollution remains somewhat controversial, but it is gaining acceptance.

Declining ratios aren't the only problem. Males in developed countries have also seen lower levels of testosterone (with some attributing lower prenatal levels to higher incidents of homosexuality), lower sperm counts, and increases in testicular cancer. Many scientists point to increased pollution as the cause.

Joe ends his post with this: "As we will soon realize, changes in our global climate are a minor threat compared to the havoc that will result from the changes in global demographics." Yet, as these studies suggest, changes in our environment are much more than a minor threat. Pollution can also reak havoc on global demographics in equally powerful ways.

(Ed.: Updated to include additional links and clarity.)

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 05:47 PM | Comments (0)

April 28, 2007

Just for Fun

I've posted some pictures of my pup Izzy here (and also a site re-design).

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 11:42 AM | Comments (3)

April 27, 2007

When the celebrity cult goes too far

Starpulse News Blog reports the following:

An interactive Public Service Announcement featuring the graphic display of a tiara-wearing, autopsied Paris Hilton with removable innards is designed to warn teenagers of the hazards of underage drinking.

[...]

"Campaign to Rescue Women of Youth" featuring "The Paris Hilton Autopsy" offers a cadaveric nude Paris Hilton, laid out with twisted body and opened abdominal cavity on a coroner's table, while her cell phone remains in her grip.

The 'unglamorous' display which includes support material from anti-drunk driving organizations counters "the disturbingly glamorized trend of Hollywood's 'girls gone wild'," according to gallery director, David Kesting.

You can see hideous pictures and more here.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 04:00 PM | Comments (1)

The SC Dem debate--hot air and greenhouse gases

If, like me, you missed the Democratic Presidential debate last night, MSNBC appears to have most of it online, albeit in segments (scroll down and click on "watch the debate"). There's also a transcript here.

Not much substantive commentary in the blogosphere, which leads me to believe my instict was correct--this was a bland event where the candidates (the ones with a real shot at winning, anyway) mostly tried not to get themselves in trouble, meaning they didn't say anything particularly interesting. Mickey Kaus summed it up as "Obama soars, Hillary bores" and noticed an AP article written about the debate in past tense before it even started. NRO's Kate O'Beirne has a more detailed roundup, concluding that Obama held his own, but "his demeanor was more impressive than his content."

Perhaps the most interesting commentary of the evening was provided by Newsbusters, who noted an AP article which reported that Senators Clinton, Obama, Dodd, and Biden each took their own jet from DC to the debate:

A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season...

No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.

Not exactly going out of their way to put actions behind their pro-environment rhetoric.

Related ITA entries:

Gore Goes Green (J. Claybourn)
Al Gore and the difference between right and left (E. Seymour)

Posted by Eric Seymour at 09:18 AM | Comments (5)

Physician Independence

Just what role the judiciary and the legislature should play in the practice of medicine is but one issue that has been raised in the wake of Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. ____ (2007). For those who would agree with Justice Ginsburg that the decision "is alarming" (Dissenting opinion at 3), the specter of the judiciary vindicating a medical pronouncement of the legislature is the ghoul that dare not speak its name. NARAL, boldly stating that Carhart "opens the door for further political interference in our personal, private medical decisions," goes on to urge its constituents to contact their legislators to pass the Freedom of Choice Act (H.R.1964/S.1173). The irony of lamenting a judicial and legislative foray into "private medical decisions" by advocating further legislative action notwithstanding, one would be led to believe that, as a matter of judicial precedent and legislative principle, the practice of medicine is terra incognito.

Or consider the recent editorial by Dian Harrison of Planned Parenthood and Dr. Suzanne Poppema of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health:

The decision to enforce the ban sets a dangerous precedent for political intrusion into our most private decisions about medical care, and it undermines the autonomy of every American.... In essence, the door is open to let Big Brother dictate the type of health care you can (or cannot) receive.

But throughout the history of Anglo-American jurisprudence the judiciary and the legislature have exercised considerable control over the practice of medicine. The most recent examples:

• The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) determines the boundaries, security, consumer control, accountability, and public responsibility regarding how health information should handled. Yet its goal is to also "define and limit the circumstances in which an individual's protected health information may be used or disclosed by others" (sec. 1173(a)(1) (emphasis added).
• In perhaps the most famous case of Big Brother determining how medicine should be practiced, the Washington Supreme Court held in Helling v. Carey, 519 P.2d 981 (Wash.1974), that the court may impose its own standard of care on the medical profession when the court determins existing standards to be inadequate.
• Many jurisdictions mandate that physicians disclose to their patients not only the consequences of treatment, but also the results of inaction. In Truman v. Thomas, 611 P.2d 902 (Cal.1980), the California Supreme Court effectively compelled physician speech even in cases where, as in Thomas, the physician did not believe disclosure was necessary in the practice of good medicine.
• Even in contemplating our most private medical decisions, courts have, as a matter of law, demanded that patients exercise ordinary care to disclose "complete and accurate information about personal, family, and medical histories." In Brown v. Dibbell, 595 N.W.2d 358 (Wis.1999), the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that contributory negligence will serve as a defense when the patient has not disclosed what the court believed to be pertinent information.
• The court will, as a matter of law, construe a physician-patient relationship even where the physician did not believe one existed. Daly v. United States, 946 F.2d. 1467 (9th Cir.1961).

Whether or not this robust role is appropriate or beneficial to the medical community is a discussion in itself, but to suggest that such a role was, mirable dictu, decreed by recent judicial fiat is disingenuous.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at 12:23 AM | Comments (14)

April 26, 2007

Military strategy and popular opinion

I've noticed that in the wake of Congress passing the troop withdrawal timetable, Nancy Pelosi has been touting the bill as representing the will of the people as expressed in the mid-term election. Indeed, polling data consistently shows a majority of Americans supporting a timetable. There's little question that the Democrats are making the right political move by pushing this bill.

However, the question shouldn't be whether this move is popular--the question should be whether it is best for the U.S. and our allies. Frankly, the overwhelming majority of the voting public is utterly unqualified to determine military strategy or foreign policy. Public support for the war prior to its beginning was even higher (71%) than current support for a withdrawal timetable (56-57%). I presume Ms. Pelosi believes the 71% majority was wrong, so why does she believe the current 57% majority must be correct?

Is the withdrawal timetable the right thing to do? I really don't know; I've read good arguments on both sides. What I do know, however, is that dictation of military strategy by politicians is a recipe for disaster.

Posted by Eric Seymour at 06:55 PM | Comments (10)

A Brief History of Disbelief

A three-part program aired in Britain three years ago is about to make a splash on the other side of the pond in America. The program, A Brief History of Disbelief, is narrated by Jonathan Miller and will document a historical and philosophical review of atheism. Although it is not an overt advocacy piece, the documentary is clearly made from the perspective of a non-believer observing the religious as some sort of strange, dying species about to become extinct. The BBC summarizes it this way:

A Brief History of Disbelief combines an exploration of the origins of Miller's own lack of belief with historical perspective and interviews with leading authorities, including biologist Richard Dawkins, philosopher Daniel Dennett, recently deceased playwright Arthur Miller, and physicist Steven Weinberg.

"In making this series I have inevitably discovered that the history of faith and doubt is a great deal more complicated than it might seem," Jonathan Miller declares. Among the program's surprising revelations is that philosophy, not science as often assumed, played a larger role in the gradual erosion of belief. And contrary to what many Christian fundamentalists today consider America's founding principles, the first presidents were actually skeptical of religion. A Brief History of Disbelief traces the history of the first "unbelievers" in ancient Greece through the role of disbelief in America's founding to its flourishing today.

Part I visits the site of the Twin Towers and "searches for evidence of the first 'unbelievers' in ancient Greece and examines some of the modern theories around why people have always tended to believe in mythology and magic." Part II explores what it calls a brief resurgence of disbelief in the 15th and 16th centuries. And Part III ends with "issues of death and the religious fanaticism of the 21st century."

I first saw the program not long ago. Of course, it isn't the first documentary of this sort, but it is one of the most well done, intelligent and thought-provoking of its kind, all of which might put some Christians on edge. The series premiers on PBS May 4th.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:17 PM | Comments (4)

Public Service Announcement

If your new pet poodle is not barking or eating dog food, it may not be a poodle at all. Your "poodle" may in fact be a sheep.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 12:14 PM | Comments (1)

The dangers of a 'new 9-11'

GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani stirred up a hornets nest recently when The Politico ran an article titled "Giuliani warns of 'new 9/11' if Dems win". Sen. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton both chimed in with forceful responses. But as Brit Hume noted on Fox News this morning, Giuliani never actually said what the headline claimed. Instead, Giuliani only repeated a standard theme from his stump speech: Democrats would play defense instead of offense in the "War on Terror," and bring us back to a "pre-Sept. 11 attitude."

You could argue that Giuliani's real words are essentially the same as the headline, but I don't see it that way. Giuliani was stating Democrats "do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us." That hardly justifies putting "new 9-11" in quotations as if he suggested it will definitely happen under Democrats. I certainly don't agree with Giuliani's philosophy of preemptive military action, but that approach to terrorism remains a legitimate and important issue to raise in the public sphere. His argument is not, as Obama complained, "the punchline of another political attack."

Update: The Economist offers more on a related subject:

But aren't these valid points for debate? Why can't two fine patriots debate whether certain policies encourage terrorism in the same way they would debate whether certain policies encourage economic activity? The patriotism debate is a debate over intentions, not ideas. And, though I may disagree, I fail to see any hypocrisy in the White House saying to Democrats, "Your intentions are decent, but your ideas are rubbish."

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:54 AM | Comments (17)

April 25, 2007

Tomorrow I Dine with Rove

Tomorrow evening I'll be having dinner with chief White House strategist Karl Rove, along with numorous other politicos hoping to rub shoulders with one of the nation's most intriguing public figures. Should I get the chance to speak with Mr. Rove - which is no guarantee - what should I ask? The aim is three-fold: (1) gain unique insight, (2) make an impression, and (3) be respectful. Suggestions welcomed.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 08:41 PM | Comments (8)

Caught My Eye

Sometimes when I'm reading, a particular sentence will jump out at me as a stand-alone bit of profundity. Here are a few that recently caught my eye:

"At this point, the so-called government does little more than provide content for news channels and blogs." -- Scott Adams

"His last words, directed at the SWAT team, were, 'Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book.'" -- Radley Balko

"I also wonder why Italy has so many stores for fancy underwear, and why so many Italians conduct their arguments out in the street." -- Tyler Cowen

"To say that a certain kind of work is underpaid is thus identical with saying that people want the wrong things." -- Paul Graham

"'Customers will trade five miles per gallon to get fancy cupholders,' says Mike Jackson, head of AutoNation, the country's largest auto retailer."

Posted by Zach Wendling at 03:38 PM | Comments (0)

A New White House Design

Well, not to the building, but to its online presence. Although I thought I checked the White House website with some regularity, that must not be true. Apparently the change in design occurred way back on August 31, 2006. According to a govexec.com briefing, a WH spokesman said, "The site will have better graphics, navigation tools and a 'superior' search engine."

The site is clearly laid out in a "Web 2.0" style. For the non-geeks among us, Web 2.0 carries a lot of meanings and connotations, but as it relates to web design the phrase stands for some general principles: simplicity, central layout, a focus on content, soft and neutral colors, spiffy icons, plenty of whitespace and big text. Although WhiteHouse.gov doesn't incorporate every Web 2.0 principle, it certainly gets close and in the process gives it a much more stylized look.

Update: The re-designed White House website got me thinking about other sites switching to Web 2.0. (I'm happy to report that ITA incorporated many Web 2.0 characteristics long before it was ever a fad.) So I decided to check out our blogroll and list what I thought were the three best designed sites. They are, in no particular order: Freakonomics, Positive Liberty, and Matthew Yglesias. What are yours? Interestingly, my three favorite generally incorporated Wed 2.0 characteristics.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:47 AM | Comments (0)

April 24, 2007

Another Big Loss

I'm sure most ITA readers have heard already, but the world lost journalist David Halberstam yesterday. The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist was killed in a traffic accident in California, where he had been conducting interviews for an upcoming book about the 1958 NFL title game, aka "The Greatest Game Ever Played."

Halberstam first made a name for himself in the 1960s by covering the Vietnam War for the New York Times. His reporting, which cast doubt on the reliability of the South Vietnamese as allies, and, subsequently, the U.S. war effort, won him the Pulitzer in 1964. The Best and the Brightest, published in 1972, was the culmination of his work on the war.

Later in his career, Halberstam branched out in the topics he covered, publishing books on subjects including media figures, professional sports (baseball, basketball, football), the automobile industry, and 9/11 firefighters. His history The Fifties (which is sadly the only book of his I've read) argued that the decade was far more influential than generally recognized, as many of the revolutionary events of the 1960s found their origins in that seemingly placid era.

David Halberstam was 73.

Posted by David Darlington at 06:58 PM | Comments (1)

Poverty Revisited

I never much cared for cross-generational wealth comparisons. They're typically based upon the current notion of how much income is necessary, and with a few rare exceptions, that will always rise. During times of remarkable technological expansion - such as the industrial age, the post WWII boom, or the computer revolution of the 1990's - commonly accepted standards of living skyrocket. At first only the "wealthy" have indoor plumbing, telephones, cars or flat screen TVs. But before long these things become necessities, and the modern-day poor become the tycoons of yesteryear.

So I was a little skeptical when I came across a post titled "The Great Society Revisited" by Ezra Klein, which examines a graph from a TAP article by William Spriggs. The implication is clear - Lyndon Johnson's administration did more to help black children than Ronald Reagan's. That may or may not be true; I'll save that debate for another day. But I'm certain the statistics Klein and Spriggs used do not support the claim.

Klein and Spriggs use the official government poverty line, a figure developed by economist Mollie Orshansky. Using 1963 as a base year, Orshansky calculated that it took $1,033 a year to feed a family of four. She then multiplied this by three and arrived at $3,100. This number, she claimed, was the minimum a family of four need to get by. By 1969 this became the official government measurement of poverty. So, accounting for inflation, that figure would be $19,963.57 in 2006, or roughly $20,000.

In addition to my initial concerns outlined above, there are a number of other problems with using this measuring stick. Families no longer spend 1/3 of their income on food. Housing and transportation make up a much larger component. Indeed, food typically accounts for only 1/6 of all hosuehold expenditures. But that's not all. The statistics fail to account for geographic differences, and don't include a number of income sources such as food stamps and non-traditional compensation.

It's also worth noting that Klein and Spriggs wrongfully assume that presidents have the power to advance or curtail the wealth of black children, ignoring such powerful non-governmental influences as family and culture. Ultimately, though, advances in technology and, by extension, our own conception of wealth will continually alter the definition of poverty. When it comes to cross-generational wealth comparisons, tread lightly.

Related ITA entries:

Poverty (J. Claybourn)
The Minimum Wage (Z. Wendling)
How To Spend It (And How Not To Enjoy It) (S. Dealer)
Greed and Happiness (J. Claybourn)

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:26 PM | Comments (11)

Federalism'n'Fred

In the presidential test of checking all the right boxes, former Sen. Fred Thomspon is at the top of his class. In an article published yesterday on National Review Online, Thompson pens a strong defense of federalism in response to a column by Ramesh Ponnuru. He writes:

Adhering to the principles of federalism is not easy. As one who was on the short end of a couple of 99-1 votes, I can personally attest to it. Federalism sometimes restrains you from doing things you want to do. You have to leave the job to someone else - who may even choose not to do it at all. However, if conservatives abandon this valued principle that limits the federal government, or if we selectively use it as a tool with which to reward our friends and strike our enemies, then we will be doing a disservice to our country as well as the cause of conservatism.

Draft Fred Thompson.

Related ITA entries:

Holier Than Thou, by Z. Wendling
Famous for Being Fred, by D. Darlington
Jeri Kehn for First Lady!, by J. Claybourn
Right Said, "Fred?" by D. Dalington

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:27 AM | Comments (2)

April 23, 2007

Grief as Self-Indulgence

Rosa Brooks:

Convincing ourselves that we've been vicariously traumatized by the pain of strangers has become a cherished national pastime. Thus, the Washington Post this week accompanied online stories about the shooting with a clickable sidebar, "Where to Find Support" -- apparently on the assumption that the mere experience of glancing at articles about the tragedy would be so emotionally devastating that readers would require trained therapists.

....Count me out. There's something fraudulent about this eagerness to latch onto the grief of others and embrace the idea that we, too, have been victimized. This trivializes the pain felt by those who have actually lost something and pathologizes normal reactions to tragedy. Empathy is good, but feeling shocked and saddened by the shootings doesn't make us traumatized or special -- these feelings make us normal.

via Kevin Drum, who lashes out at the media, the so-called "Tragedy Industry." A more evocative title comes from the Economist's Democracy in America blog, "Trauma Porn"

I get tired when people whine about "the media" as though it is some big, menacing monster that shovels crap we are duty-bound to consume. Anyone who complains about the insipid salaciousness of television news spends too much time watching it. But when it comes to the unbridled broadcast of Cho's public-relations package, it would be wise to think about just what kind of people would be glued to their sets, taking it all in.

In other words, we have no one to blame for the media beast but ourselves (or at least the people with Nielsen boxes). Considering that the Virginia Tech student government have asked the media to leave, we've not been 'vicariously traumatized' -- we've been vicariously shamed.

Posted by Zach Wendling at 09:31 PM | Comments (5)

In God We Drive

Here in Indiana, like most states, we have a number of options when choosing our license plate. For a mere $40 extra I was able to get a license plate which proudly displays the logo of Indiana University. $25 of that fee went to help fund university scholarships, while the remaining $15 was an administrative fee that went to the state.

Of course, not all drivers choose specialty plates. Motorists may instead choose between two default plates which carry no additional fee. One is a rather benign Hoosier farm scene, while the other boldly proclaims "In God We Trust."

I don't particularly care for this plate. It's too gaudy for my tastes and seems to run counter to Biblical principles found in Matthew 6:1-18, not to mention Exodus 20:7 and Deuteronomy 5:11. But this plate has ruffled the feathers of the Indiana branch of the American Civil Liberties Union for different reasons, and it has decided to sue over it:

The plaintiff bringing the case, Mark Studler, said he pays an additional $40 for one of the popular environmental plates depicting an eagle above the word "Environment." Of the total fee, $25 goes to a state trust to purchase land set aside for conservation or recreational purposes and the remaining $15 is for the administration fee.

The 2006 law establishing the "In God We Trust" plate waives the administrative fee.

"Therefore, those who obtain an 'In God We Trust' license plate are afforded the opportunity to make an affirmative statement through display of the plate without any additional cost while Mr. Studler must pay additional fees for his environmental license plate," the complaint said.

The ACLU faces an uphill battle. "In God We Trust" has been the national motto since 1956 and has appeared on currency in various forms since 1864. Its use by the government has been upheld by four federal appeals circuits (the 4th, 5th, 9th, and 10th). Furthermore, the Sixth Circuit has upheld the constitutionality of Ohio's state motto: "With God, All Things Are Possible." Clearly precedence weighs against the ACLU's position.

But the position is not without merit, particularly when one considers the intent behind the motto. Its use on currency was promoted toward the end of the Civil War to "relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism," argued Rev. Watkinson to Treasury Secretary Chase. While the Hoosier leaders doubtfully used such strong language in creating the plates, I would suspect the intent is not much different.

Whether the phrase was inserted on currency to help a devastated country, or adopted as a motto to guard against an atheistic communist philosophy, I believe "In God We Trust" is an "inherently religious" phrase. Nevertheless, most courts will likely conclude otherwise and base their decision on the "it doesn't matter" jurisprudence.

A much more prudent basis to uphold the phrase's use would be on the grounds that the 14th Amendment never actually incorporated the Establishment Clause to apply to state governments. After all, at the time of ratification of the Bill of Rights, several states had established official religions. This originalist interpretation might find favor with Justices Scalia and Thomas and I'll be eager to see if it does with lower courts as well.

Previously at ITA:

Are the Ten Commandments Cases Overblown? by Ed Brayton
Ten Commandments by J. Bunch

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 06:03 PM | Comments (14)

The 50% Rule

Former Soviet and Russian President Boris Yeltsin has passed away. Given recently enacted Russian rules which require at least 50% of all Russian News Service reports be positive, one wonders: how will the death of Yeltsin fit in? Yeltsin was a deeply unpopular figure in Russia, but by all accounts Putin and Yeltsin remained on amicable terms. Even in an authoritarian regime such as Russia's, one would hope a genuine sadness permeates government over the loss of such a unique national leader.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:01 PM | Comments (0)

Quick Links

Here are some pieces so interesting I'm at a loss for further commentary:

• Children should be praised for effort rather than intelligence, lest they "become risk-averse and lack perceived autonomy."
• The Top 10 CO2-producing States. Pennsylvania is #3; Indiana is #6.
• Women are worse oglers than men.
• The Indiana State Constitution does not require passage of a budget.
• Mammals experienced a period of diversification before the extinction of the dinosaurs (with beautiful phylogenetic tree).

Posted by Zach Wendling at 10:15 AM | Comments (2)

The Armed Citizenry

Even though killing sprees are relatively rare, there's been much discussion over which policies would solve the problem. Proponents will naturally tend to the solutions that most comfort their priors, such as the thought by gun-control opponents that armed citizens can put down mass killers like Cho Seung-Hui. The logic is compelling, and there are dramatic examples in the heroic efforts of Joel Myrick, Carolyn Pumphrey, and William and Paul Webber, among others. More often than not, I think this policy would work when armed citizens confront an gunman, and the suggestion that teachers should be trained and armed is interesting.

However, there are two things that should give us pause. First, as the sad case of Dan McKown shows, this policy is not foolproof (though another account (scroll down) salvages the efficacy of self-protection). Second, while armed citizens might discourage or stop a significant proportion of mass killings, they couldn't end them entirely. Determined killers have and will resort to other means; remember that the most deadly school killing occurred in 1927 in Bath Township, MI, where a bomb killed 45 people. Schools are regularly threatened with bomb attacks, and many such plots have been foiled. And this shows the pitfall of making this discussion only about guns and gun control.

Previously on ITA:

Framing the Debate by Z. Wendling
The other Virginia Massacre by J. Claybourn
Coping with Debate by Z. Wendling
The debate over the Virginia Tech debate by J. Claybourn
Gun ban assists gunman by J. Claybourn

And just to throw this out there, the gun-control debate has too many distracting side issues. If both sides wanted to clear the smoke, gun-control advocates would focus on accidental gun deaths, and gun-control opponents would focus on the necessity of an armed citizenry to resist tyranny.

Posted by Zach Wendling at 09:54 AM | Comments (4)

Plan C

This decision [Gonzales v. Carhart] will have a chilling effect upon all abortions and we believe as a religious coalition that women have a right to determine when and whether to have children.

Forget a "health exception" for the life of the mother. Forget cases of rape and incest. Forgo the difficult prospect of raising a child with Downs. Whether it's a pill, a little aspiration, or piercing the skull so as to suck out the child's brain, justice demands the choice. For the Rev. Carlton Veazey of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, convenience amply justifies any means sought. Rev. Veazey's gospel is no less life-shattering than the Lord's. You shall know the truth and it shall set you free...from unwanted children.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at 08:29 AM | Comments (20)

April 22, 2007

Thoughts on Earth Day

During the flight of Apollo 11, in the constant sunlight between the earth and the moon, it was necessary for us to control the temperature of our spacecraft by a slow rotation not unlike that of a chicken on a barbecue spit. As we turned, the earth and the moon alternately appeared in our windows. We had our choice. We could look toward the Moon, toward Mars, toward our future in space - toward the new Indies - or we could look back toward the Earth, our home, with its problems spawned over more than a millennium of human occupancy.

We looked both ways. We saw both, and I think that is what our Nation must do.

-- Michael Collins, September 16, 1969, in an address to Congress upon returning from the moon.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:32 PM | Comments (1)

April 21, 2007

A Guy Can Dream

Photograph from Richard Lugar's Wikipedia page. My caption is below.

April 2009: With the troops on their way home from Iraq, President Richard Lugar (right) and Vice President Jolie-Pitt discuss how to return the "peace dividend" to the American taxpayer.

Posted by David Darlington at 12:01 PM | Comments (0)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• The European Union has adopted a proposal which criminalizes "publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes" involving ethnic-based groups when such things are "carried out in a manner likely to incite to violence or hatred against such a group or a member of such a group." Eugene Volokh has more.

• The Economist reports that porn's share of U.S. website visits has been declining in recent months, while "net communities and chat" sites are on the rise.

• Following the bombing of a Christian publishing house which killed three people, the Associated Press reports that Turkish Christians fear more violence against them.

• The Rutgers women's basketball team - forced into the spotlight due to the infamous comments of Don Imus - skipped out of a meeting with Hillary Clinton, "citing their studies and Imus fatigue."

• France is headed to the polls this week and will replace President Jacques Chirac, who has served in that capacity for 12 years. The new leaders will have a tough task: "French workers detest the prospect of giving up long lunches, short workweeks, languid vacations and generous benefits. . . 'It is very difficult for politicians to tell the French people the truth, or they will demonstrate in the streets.'"

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 08:00 AM | Comments (4)

April 20, 2007

The emptiness that is cable news

Matthew Yglesias notes an all-too-common tactic among cable news producers: invite political strategists rather than policy experts. Here's an excerpt:

I caught some MSNBC earlier this afternoon, and it was really just pathetic. The topic under discussion was that Harry Reid apparently said the Iraq War was lost. Since Reid's an important legislative leader, this did seem like a good subject for a story. But, of course, instead of using it as an opportunity to bring some knowledgeable people on and discuss whether or not Reid was right about the war, they used it as an opportunity to bring on a "Democratic strategist" and a "Republican strategist" neither of whom seemed like especially prominent strategists, to talk about the political fallout from the statement.

Of course, following this segment they moved on to more pressing matters: Anna Nicole Smith coverage.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 03:39 PM | Comments (1)

Whose Line Is It Anyway?

And here I thought it was an act of Congress, signed into law by the President, that crossed the line, with the Court only affirming. Then again, with all three branches listed we loose laconic flair.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at 08:48 AM | Comments (6)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• "A bill giving the District [of Columbia] its first full seat in Congress cleared the House yesterday, marking the city's biggest legislative victory in its quest for voting rights in nearly three decades," reports the Washington Post. The bill is unlikely to overcome a Senate fillibuster.

• Following a joke about bombing Iran, GOP presidential hopeful John McCain told his critics to "lighten up and get a life."

• Matt Drudge reports that platinum selling rapper Cam'ron told 60 Minutes he "wouldn't help police catch even a serial killer because it would hurt his business and violate his 'code of ethics.'" Meanwhile hip-hop star Akon, who currently has the number 2 single on Billboard's Hot 100 Singles Chart, molested and assaulted a 14 year old girl on stage at a concert. The child's guardian said, "you should have seen her when she [came] home. She was covered in bruises."

• Google's 1st quarter profit this year was $1 billion. Revenue rose 63 percent to $3.66 billion.

• "A group of Islamic militants kidnapped and then beheaded an Evangelist Christian in Kashmir," reports AsiaNews yesterday. Meanwhile in other parts of Pakistan five Christians were charged under that country's blasphemy laws. The 5 face three years imprisonment, a fine and the death penalty, or life imprisonment and a fine. Four of the accused have escaped.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 08:40 AM | Comments (2)

April 19, 2007

A Theology of the Cross

During the days since the shootings at Virgina Tech I had not given much thought to what the tragedy means in a theology of the cross. Until this afternoon, when I received this beautiful prayer from the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod's Commission on Worship:

Gracious Father in heaven, You know the shock and sorrow that have resulted following the deaths of 33 students and faculty at Virginia Tech. We are helpless before the evil that afflicts us and therefore cry out to You for comfort, shelter, and protection. Mercifully embrace the frightened in Your love, empower the weak with Your strength, restrain the wicked by Your might, and preserve and comfort the righteous in Your grace, giving us Your peace and turning tragedy to triumph. Lord, in Your mercy, hear our prayer.

A theology of the cross seeks the beauty of God's grace in the bloody agony of Christ's suffering. At the very least it recognizes that man, simul iustus et pecattor, is stained with his fallen nature and Christ's blood; it realizes that even in the face of suffering there is good. And not just any good, but Christ, the ultimate Good.

Truly a development of Luther's Deus absconditus, his hidden God, a theology of the cross stands in stark contrast to a theology of glory which goes to the cross once and walks away on the road of the good life in Christ. Think Joel Olesteen, or "At the cross, at the cross where I first saw the light and the burden of my heart was rolled away ... and now I am happy all the day." Or consider the prayer offered by the United Methodist Church's General Board of Discipleship: "We cringe, paralyzed before the mystery of evil. We open our mouths, and join the silence of the disbelieving."

For more thoughts on theodicy, a theology of the cross, and the perils of a theology of glory, I warmly recommend Gerhard Forde's On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at 03:00 PM | Comments (5)

'Live Blogging'

What's the point of this practice? Although there may be a few definitions of the phrase, I see it almost always used in the context of writing (i.e., blogging) the entire time a speaker is speaking. When people "live blog," it seems to become a big deal. It's often advertised in advance (see here and here), and then just to make sure it gets maximum exposure, I'll sometimes get emails reminding me to check it out.

A recent example which inspired this post was Power Line's Scott Johnson deciding to "live blog" the Alberto Gonzales hearing. In Scott's defense he did not hype the event as many often do, but the futility of "live blogging" comes through. If I wanted to experience the hearings I would just watch them myself. Or, if I didn't have access to a television, I would watch it on CSPAN's archives online. And if I needed the actual text I would read the transcript, which will no doubt be available through congressional websites. Why would I turn to Scott Johnson's garbled summaries spread out over hundreds of posts? Here's an example of what we get:

I just tuned in to the hearing on CSpan. Senator Schumer is talking now.

Riveting. Here's an example from a live blog of the 79th Academy Awards (order reversed to fit chronologically):

10:25pm: Is anyone else getting excited about 'Best Documentary'? It's coming up!!

[...]

12:09am: Martin Scorceses has WON! His reply, "Will you check the envelope, please?" Finally!

12:15am: Wow, what an upset! The Departed beat out Babel to win for Best Picture.

One gets the sense that these bloggers imagine readers experiencing things with them in real time through their blog, collectively partaking in the highs and lows of whatever is on television. Is this what we've come to?

I hasten to note there are moments when "live blogging" makes sense, such as when the blogger sees an event live but it will only be showed to the public sometime later (here's an example). Or when you're witnessing an event or conference that will not be televised or published at all (here's an example). Yet the vast majority of "live blogging" I see does not fall within these exceptions. They're simply real-time accounts that can be accessed elsewhere in a far more superior ways.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:21 AM | Comments (6)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago asked 27,000 people questions about job satisfaction and general happiness. The results found that people with jobs "involving caring for, teaching and protecting others and creative pursuits" were the happiest: clergy (87%), firefighters (80%), physical therapists (78%), and authors (74%).

• Former Sen. Fred Thompson "took the stage and gave a virtuoso performance Wednesday during a private meeting with House Republicans -- leaving many star-struck and gushing about the prospect of the former Tennessee Republican senator running for president," the Tennessean reports. Meanwhile the NYT quotes friends of Thompson putting the odds of him running "at the 75- to 80-percent level at this point."

• Sanjaya, shaming the artistic taste of millions of Americans, was finally voted off of American Idol last night.

• "Russia plans to build the world's longest tunnel, a transport and pipeline link under the Bering Strait to Alaska," reports Bloomberg press. The project will cost $65 billion.

• In Turkey, three people, including a German citizen, were killed in an attack on a publishing house that printed Christian books. Andy Jackson notes three other Christians murdered yesterday in Malayta.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:30 AM | Comments (1)

April 18, 2007

DST = Gas Guzzling

So, we've already seen that the extension of Daylight Saving Time did nothing to conserve electricity. What about oil?

OTTAWA -- The U.S. government's plan to save energy by advancing daylight saving time -- and the copycat action by Canada -- appears to have driven up gasoline consumption as motorists took advantage of the evening daylight to hit the road, a Calgary energy analyst says.

Peter Tertzakian, chief economist at ARC Financial Corp., said the daylight policy is a textbook case of politicians "exacerbating the problems they were originally trying to tackle."

[. . . ]

The economist said the surge in demand came at a particularly bad time for North American motorists because supplies were already tight. As a result, pump prices will face upward pressure with the coming of the summer driving season.

So instead of saving 10,000 barrels of crude oil a day, like we were told, we guzzled an additional 266,000 barrels a day!

Last time, we heard from the disingenuous Fred Upton. What says his co-sponsor, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA)?

[Markey] said he still believes that, in the long run, the four extra weeks of daylight saving time will save energy. "We know it will have very small impacts over a three-week period [this spring]," said a spokesman from his Washington office yesterday. "But when you incorporate years of that, it becomes significant."

Yes, but, you see, when those impacts are detrimental, their cumulative effect over many years will be significantly bad. Note also the implication that the switch to the extended schedule is permanent. It's as if these guys are completely disinterested in evaluating the effect of their policy, but I suspect this is now more about their egos than energy.

Previously by the author:

"Daylight Stupidity Time"
"Evening Power Usage Time"
"Morning Darkness Saving Time"
"A Bad Plan for Indiana"
"DST and Broken Hearts"
"No, This is NOT Happening"
"Grrrrr"

Posted by Zach Wendling at 08:12 PM | Comments (1)

Vote Racer X in 2009

As some noted in comments to my previous post on the subject, NJ Governor Jon Corzine's SUV was traveling 91 MPH at the time of his crash last Thursday. Seven-year veteran state trooper Robert Rasinski was behind the wheel. Neither Corzine nor his political aid Samantha Gordon, who was in the back seat, were wearing seatbelts. Corzine has had three surgeries and has drifted in-and-out of consciousness since the accident.

New details of the accident place the blame mostly on Corzine's two-car motorcade. The governor was running late for his meeting with Don Imus and the Rutgers women's basketball team, and was traveling the parkway with sirens running. The approaching motorcade caused two pickup trucks to try to get out of the way; a white one went into the rightmost lane and a red one--previously blamed for the accident--went onto the shoulder. Unfortunately, the red Ford F-150 was forced back onto the highway by an oncoming mile marker, causing the white pickup to move left and into the governor's vehicle.

So far, police are drawing a blue line around the officer driving Corzine, with the state's fraternal organization calling Rasinski "professional and heroic." His driving skill in handling the accident prevented a worse catastrophy, they said. Nevermind how driving 91 in a 65 under sirens to a political photo-op probably caused the accident to begin with. I'm with Radley Balko on this one. The rules apply. Even to governors.

Previously by the author:

"Click it or Ticket, Governor"

Posted by David Darlington at 04:57 PM | Comments (1)

Back to 18?

Thanks to Radley Balko's column in Reason magazine arguing "a new chorus of critics" say it's time to lower the drinking age, there is a renewed debate among several bloggers on the issue. I have nothing new or insightful to offer to the discussion, but I thought I should note a couple good reads I've found. Following Balko's original piece titled "Back to 18?" (which Papa Bear likes), Jonah Goldberg responds arguing in part that, rightly or wrongly, lowering the drinking age will increase drinking among 18-21 year olds. Balko then responds to Goldberg here.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:20 AM | Comments (2)

Framing the Debate

Once past debating the seemliness of talking about policies that could prevent mass shootings, I think it is helpful to have some sort of framework to recognize what underlying causes each proposal is addressing. I'm no expert on violence, but I believe we can obtain a fairly accurate framework by breaking down the problem into a few propositions

1. From time-to-time, certain individuals will lose their sanity*.
2. A set of the insane will have violent tendencies.
3. Some of the violently insane will have the means to inflict great damage.
4. Some of the violently insane will have the opportunity to inflict great damage.

The key to understanding the myriad policies, and to evaluating them, is to weigh which ones will address the most significant of the four steps to tragedy.

By far the most ridiculous is the knee-jerk anti-immigrant argument. I'm unconvinced that immigrants are more likely to go insane than the rest of the population, so this would not address proposition 1. (One might argue fewer immigrants would mean fewer people going insane, but this is pointless; fewer people generally would, taken to its limit, eliminate the need for politics altogether.)

It is fairly uncontroversial that we ought to have more mental health screening, which would help us to catch those on the verge of insanity (1) and action (4). We now know there were warning signs at VT, and other plots have been similarly foiled by paying attention. Uncontroversial, however, does not mean noncontroversial. It would be costly, and there are non-trivial opportunities for abuse.

Some have suggested that our culture is to blame for violent tendencies, and it follows that were we more genteel, individuals not in full control of their faculties would be less likely to lash out (2). I'm not familiar enough with this argument to debate its merits (ok, this one is bunk), but any policy prescription would take generations to pan out.

Gun-control advocates clearly have proposition 3 in mind. The violently insane may always find some means of hurting others, yet without firearms, the results would probably be less deadly. It bears reminding, though, that many mass shootings are premeditated; someone seriously committed to mass murder may look for other means.

Gun-control opponents have proposition 4 in mind. I believe this is less intuitive, as not everyone recognizes that an unarmed public represents an opportunity for violent insanity. For those who fear guns, arming the public would seem to exacerbate both propositions 2 and 3. Further, we have vivid illustrations of the latter yet few of armed citizens stopping a gunman. Josh notes one below, though the "citizen" in question was also a trained law enforcement officer. For a different perspective, the counterfactual in the case of the Luby's Cafeteria Massacre is plausible.

Greater security directly addresses proposition 4. This can be situational policies like placing public spaces into lockdown, or more general precautions like metal detectors, eliminating public spaces by making them limited-access, increased presence of security personnel, and so forth. Some of these steps will seem like common sense; others strike me as intrusive, wasteful, and a bit creepy.

It would probably be helpful to keep in mind which proposition each policy proposal seeks to address, whether it would be successful, and whether that proposition is the most significant underlying cause.

*Here, I pass over the legal definition of insanity for a more vulgar sense of 'mentally disordered.'

Posted by Zach Wendling at 08:54 AM | Comments (4)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories...

• "All at once, the world went searching for the meaning of 'Ismail Ax'." So begins a news article from The Age, which explains the phrase was written on the wrist of Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung Hui, setting off "a massive internet hunt by the public for clues to what might have motivated the nation's worst mass killings."

• "The American public has given about $160 million to the 2008 presidential candidates so far this year, more than four times the total contributed to campaigns in the same period four years ago," reports the New York Times.

• Sen. Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani get the most support from young voters, according to a new Harvard University poll. The poll does not appearto have offered likely GOP candidate former Sen. Fred Thompson as a choice.

• Today is the last day to vote on Indiana's 2008 standard license plate. The website requests an Indiana zip code, which is available here (alternatively you can just use mine: 47715).

• Reuters reports the "spiritual leader of the world's 77 million Anglicans has said conservative Christians who cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality are misreading a key passage written by Saint Paul almost 2,000 years ago."

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 08:09 AM | Comments (0)

April 17, 2007

Blogrolling

On the lighter side of things, we've re-vamped our blogroll. This should better reflect what we are reading and what catches our eyes.

Posted by Zach Wendling at 05:54 PM | Comments (0)

The other Virginia massacre

A little over five years ago at the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, Virginia - a roughly 2-3 hour drive from Virginia Tech - Peter Odighizuwa was not in a good mood. Peter was a U.S. citizen from Nigeria who had flunked out of school. In response, he went on a rampage and shot and killed a dean, a professor and a fellow student. Three others were injured.

We can only speculate what more Peter might have done if he had been given the chance. Perhaps his spree would have continued and the death toll gone even higher, or perhaps he would have decided to stop on his own volition. We'll never know because classmate Tracy Bridges, who was also a police officer back home, decided to do something about it. "We saw the shooter, stopped at my vehicle and got out my handgun and started to approach Peter," he told reporters. When Peter saw the loaded gun being pointed back at him, he "threw up his hands and threw his weapon down." The students then began to approach Peter and wrestled him to the ground.

I suspect that the addition of this bit of history has the potential of acting like gas on a lit fire. But given the derision some readers and visitors here offered to the notion that students with guns would affect the outcome of gun rampages, anecdotal evidence like this should not be forgotten.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 03:33 PM | Comments (8)

Coping with Debate

I'm ambivalent about the propriety of introducing policy advocation to the Virginia Tech Massacre, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it is surprising. From the Right and the Left, two views defending the urge:

John Podhoretz:

The effort to shoehorn an event as devastating as this one into a predetermined set of ideas -- like the need for gun control, or the need for the abolition of all gun controls -- is an effort to make the unthinkable thinkable. Does this massacre seem to be utterly without cause? Well, then, we will find a cause in order to be able to wrap our minds around it, because when we have a cause we can determine a remedy.

Kevin Drum:

When stuff like this happens, people like to talk. And when they talk, they talk about all sorts of stuff. They're just being human.

Above all, I believe that policy-talk has its greatest utility in distracting us from contemplating the pure horror of the massacre. Even the parents of VT students have taken up a call for action, albeit merely the dismissal of university officials.

Posted by Zach Wendling at 02:54 PM | Comments (1)

The debate over the Virginia Tech debate

The Virginia Tech tragedies have led to numerous musings on the appropriateness of discussing obvious questions: how did this happen and how do we prevent it? Inherent within that discussion, of course, is gun control. Prof. Eugene Volokh frames the struggle over whether to address such things here, but then follows it up in another post with his conclusion. Here's an excerpt:

It seems to me clear that such discussions are generally sound, even worthy. Using the attention created by a tragedy to try to prevent similar tragedies strikes me as in principle an eminently proper response, a way to allow at least some good to come from the evil. Preventing the tragedy from leading to unsound reactions likewise strikes me as an eminently proper response. (Complaints that legislative proposals triggered by the tragedies "politicize" the tragedies thus strike me as misguided, though of course complaints that particular proposals are practically or morally unsound may be eminently sensible.)

And while some liberal bloggers like Eric Muller are quick to chastize libertarian advocates of greater gun freedom, Eric ignores an equal number of swift calls for greater gun control in the wake of the shootings (see this NY Times editorial and these reactions from international newspapers). (Ed.: As Mr. Muller notes in the comments, he updated his post to correct this.)

I think Prof. Volokh gets it right. Learning from such tragedies, no matter how rare they may be, is an important and necessary response, and some arbitrary moratorium on discussing such things is without merit.

It seems the disgust ultimately comes from a misguided belief by a vocal minority that any discussions are for "political points" or, as Doug Masson accuses me of doing, using it for "agendas". When does a policy stance become an "agenda" anyway? After all, couldn't advocating any policy position be spun as an "agenda"? I believe some speed limits are too low, so I suppose I have an agenda when I discuss traffic laws. But my so-called "agenda" is one that was formed from lengthy research and considered, thoughtful reflection. "Agenda" as Doug uses the word is simply a sly way of marginalizing a policy position without giving it its due riposte.

I am not an ardent advocate of repealing gun control laws, although they seem to have done no good at Virginia Tech and may have actually hindered help. I am not completely sure, but that's the point - discourse on the subject needs to proceed. If I am an advocate of anything it is discussing how this tragedy came about and how it can be prevented in the future. Squashing such discussions with labels like "agenda" helps no one.

Update: Ross Douthat at Andrew Sullivan's blog and Prof. Volokh continue the discussion.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 11:47 AM | Comments (8)

Benedict's Big Day(s)

This week marks not only the 80th birthday of the Holy Father, but also the two-year anniversary of his reign. For those interested in what the Sunday Angelus looks like from the Pontiff's eyes, here is a video (auf Deutsch) following Benedict Sunday. (Notice that he celebrates Mass ad orientem.) You may also send Benedict an e-card, courtesy of the Vatican.

In a number of instances, Benedict's reign has proved surprising. His first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est did not address doctrine or liturgy, but was poignant theological reflection on the depth of God's love for man and what such a love means for men created in His image. Carrying on the example set by his predecessor, Benedict is cordial and conversational in public audiences, as his recent foray at Rome's Casal del Marmo witnessed. He has also continued John Paul's reform of the reform, addressing liturgical aberrations, sacramental devotion, and the universal call to holiness in his Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis. Finally, for those of us who feel an attachment to the Mass as codified at Trent and most recently promulgated in the Missal of 1962 by Pope John XXIII, Benedict is poised to release a motu proprio granting universal permission to every priest to celebrate the Tridentine liturgy if he so desires.

(Note: For those vexed by the planned increase in postage ($.41 effective 16 May), notice the rate in Germany - .55 Euro or $.75 - and that is the domestic rate!)

Posted by Seth Zirkle at 08:54 AM | Comments (0)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• As details of the Virginia Tech massacre emerge, one heroic story about Liviu Librescu, an Israeli lecturer, indicates he may have blocked the doorway of his classroom from the approaching gunman before he was fatally shot. A list of some of the victims is available here.

• In what may be his first goof of the campaign former Gov. Tommy Thompson recently told a Jewish group, "I'm in the private sector and for the first time in my life I'm earning money. You know that's sort of part of the Jewish tradition and I do not find anything wrong with that."

• The St. Petersburg Times reports that Ron Goldspink has spent years inviting monarchs to his birthday parties and applying for head coaching positions "[j]ust to see if they'd write back." Surprisingly, England's deputy prime minister showed up once "with a card and a bottle of whiskey from the House of Commons."

• Senate Republicans are blocking legislation that would let the government negotiate directly with drug companies for lower drug prices under Medicare. The justification appears to be that the current system is "working beautifully, with remarkable coverage."

• In an article titled "Hollywood preparing to unleash 'Summer of the Sequel'," AFP notes that many of the most popular movie franchises will feature sequels this summer. One Hollywood reported estimated a total of 14.

(Ed.: Correction made to original post.)

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 08:29 AM | Comments (2)

April 16, 2007

Click It or Ticket, Governor

Last Thursday, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine was involved in a near-fatal car accident on the Garden State Parkway. The governor was en route to a meeting between Don Imus and the Rutgers University women's basketball team over Imus's controversial comments when his Chevy Suburban was hit by a white pickup truck and smashed into a guard rail. Police indicated that a red pickup truck, driven by 20-year-old Kenneth Potts, moving erratically caused the white one to lose control and hit the governor's vehicle. Potts left the scene of the accident and was not found by police until the next day. No charges have been filed so far. Corzine's femur was broken in two places and protruded through his skin. The governor also sustained 12 broken ribs, a broken sterum, a broken collarbone, and a fractured vertebra. A state trooper and a political aide also received minor injuries in the accident. Corzine is in critical but stable condition at Cooper University Hospital. He has had several surgeries so far, including an unplanned one to clear fluid from around his lungs, and one this morning on his leg. The governor is "not out of the woods" his doctors said today. He is expected to recover slowly next few weeks and may require crutches or a wheelchair for up to six months. Senate President Richard Codey will serve as acting governor for the third time while Corzine recouperates (New Jersey only approved an amendment creating a Lt. Governor in 2005 and the office has yet to be filled).

Corzine was not wearing a seatbelt in clear violation of state law. Friends report that Corzine habitually does not wear his seatbelt. This contributed to the seriousness of his injuries, as the governor was thrown from the front to the back seat of his vehicle during the crash. New Jersey has a harsh history against seatbelt offenders. It was the 2nd in the nation to make front seatbelts manditory, and, in 2000, began allowing police to pull over drivers suspected of not wearing seatbelts. Ninety-percent of drivers and front seat passengers in New Jersey wear seatbelts, the eighth-highest rate in the country. In addition to facing long recovery time for his injuries, Corzine may face charges from the state police for his seatbelt violation. This is totally appropriate, as the governor should set an example for the rest of the state in following state motor vehicle law.

Nevertheless, prayers for the govenor's recovery and for his family.

Posted by David Darlington at 04:55 PM | Comments (13)

Gun ban assists gunman

The fact that Virginia Tech was a "gun-free zone" was apparently not enough to stop a crazed gunman from killing at least 32 people and injuring even more. Go figure. Unfortunately the law forbid students and faculty from carrying a gun to defend themselves, but clearly did nothing to those whom the law was intended to stop. There was an effort to change that but it failed: "A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly." (H/T: Instapundit)

Update: The Associated Press reports, McCain Backs Gun Rights After Shootings.

Update 2: One commenter decries, "Is this Joshua Claybourn person seriously implying that if other people on campus were allowed to carry firearms that somehow this crazed rampage would not have happened? Seriously?" Based upon recent history, the idea is based on good reason.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 01:33 PM | Comments (32)

Below the fold

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• The NY Times reports, "A wave of research shows that increasing percentages of Hispanics [immigrating to the US] are abandoning church, suggesting to researchers that along with assimilation comes a measure of secularization." Of the Hispanics who claimed no religion, 2/3 said they had once been religious.

• "Is our children learning"? According to new polling data, people are no smarter today regarding politics and current events than before the advent of 24 hour news channels. According to the poll regular viewers of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart were the most knowledgeable while regular Fox News viewers knew the least.

• A recent Associated Press article about a surge in interracial marriages grabbed significant coverage. More than 7% of America's married couples in 2005 were interracial, compared to less than 2% in 1970. But the NY Times' John Tierney looks at dating websites and finds preferences for the same race are still strong and deep.

• You've heard the phrase, "given a hundred typewriters and enough time, a hundred monkeys will write Shakespeare's complete works." Well, some researches decided to test the idea and "shut six Sulawesi crested macaque monkeys with a computer keyboard in an enclosure at a Devon zoo for a month, and filmed what happened."

• The NY Times has an incredible searchable database of all first quarter presidential campaign contributions. God bless the internet.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:11 AM | Comments (0)

April 15, 2007

It's That Time of Year Again

When you're done filling out your 1040's, check out the Tax History Project. This web has some pretty cool stuff, like the 2006 tax returns of the president and vice president, some old editorial cartoons, and research papers on tax bills of the past.

And while most people feel done with their taxes on April 15th, let me remind you that Tax Freedom Day isn't until the end of the month.

Posted by David Darlington at 03:20 PM | Comments (0)

Around the Horn

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• After raising a mere $12.5 million from January to March, GOP presidential hopeful John McCain has only $3.4 million left to spend after accounting for debts. A recent LA Times poll placed him 3rd in the group of likely GOP candidates, garnering 12% support.

• A new creationist museum is being constructed in Petersburg, Kentucky. It is intended to promote "the idea that the Biblical book of Genesis should be taken literally in describing the creation of the world, life and humans as carried out by God over a six-day period a few thousand years ago." The museum's website is here.

• Miami Herald reporter Fred Gonzalez interviewed various porn stars to see what kind of men they would like to date. The answer, he found, was "normal guys," known in the industry as "civilians." One star told him, "In the end, when the curls come out and the eyelashes come off, you want someone who will love you for you." Unfortunately for them, "Jealousy can rear its ugly head." Go figure.

• Famed Russian chess champion Garry Kasparov "was among about 170 people arrested as police moved against a banned anti-Kremlin rally in Moscow." He leads the United Civil Front group, part of the opposition coalition The Other Russia.

• President Bush and his wife Laura "paid $186,378 in federal taxes on income of $642,905 for 2006," according to returns released by the White House. The Bushes gave $78,100 to churches and charitable organizations. Meanwhile the Cheneys "owe $413,326 in taxes on income of $1.6 million," and gave $104,425 to charity. No word on whether they filed their returns online.
  

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:22 PM | Comments (3)

April 14, 2007

Robin Hood to the Rescue

A recent poll discovered more than three in 10 U.S. homeowners are too ignorant to know what type of loan they own. The use of so-called subprime loans has received some moderate attention in recent week as it forces the bankruptcy of major lending companies. Yet the impact on homeowners is equally significant. Some estimate these loans "will force 1.1 million homeowners into foreclosure over the next 6 years," with the cost of paying off the debt for those borrowers roughly $120 billion.

Now some congressional Democrats - ever quick to use government force in the aid of the ignorant - want to steer "hundreds of millions of dollars into nonprofits to help the growing number of homeowners who are having trouble paying their mortgage." The result is obvious: "If the plan is to pay off loans when people quit, then I plan to quit paying my loan," says Michael Englund, chief economist at Action Economics. Count me in, too.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 12:43 PM | Comments (10)

WWJD?

What Would Jackie [Robinson] Do?

This weekend Major League Baseball is going to celebrate the legacy of Jackie Robinson and the 60th anniversary of the sport's integration. This Sunday, more than 150 baseball players plan on wearing Robinson's #42 (retired league-wide since 1997) as a tribute, including the entire rosters of the Los Angeles Dodgers, Houston Astros, Philadelphia Phillies, St. Louis Cardinals, Milwaukee Brewers, and Pittsburgh Pirates.

The Robinson tribute stands in stark contrast to the obvious decline in African American participation in baseball in the last two decades. Only 10 percent of current major leaguers are African American, compared to 50 percent in professional football and 70 percent in the NBA. The reason why is complex, and the increasing diversity of the American population is one obvious reason (Asian Americans and Latinos have seen their participation in baseball skyrocket in the past decade). Twenty-five percent of baseball players are from the Dominican Republic, and just under 50 percent are from Latin America, for example. There are other reasons as well:

According to Harris pollsters, African Americans are the least likely group to claim baseball as their favorite sport. Ironically, one explanation for this falling interest, said [Penn State professor of kinesiology and history Mark] Dyreson, is that Major League Baseball so adeptly markets the game's connection to America's history. "Nostalgia for the American past doesn't sell well to the African American community -- and rightly so," said Dyreson. During the 1940s, perhaps baseball's glory days, the baseball establishment bitterly fought integration. In 1947, when Jackie Robinson became the first African American to play in the major leagues, he endured plenty of racism: separate and unequal facilities, taunts and death threats. In the South, such treatment met African American players into the 1960s.

Baseball has other reasons for its dwindling popularity. Beyond the ever-increasing competition from other sports, one strike against the game has been ongoing labor problems, said Dyreson. The 1994 baseball strike was the third in 22 years and led to baseball becoming the first sport in history to lose its postseason to a labor dispute.

Another strike against America's pastime may be the sheer pace of today's society. How many times have you heard people complain that baseball is boring? Blame TV, Dyreson said. Many fans find faster-paced games like football and basketball are better-suited for television. Baseball shines on radio, as a listener can do other things and still enjoy the game playing in the background, Dyreson suggested.

Baseball is not going away any time soon. Indeed, the game's increasing Latin flavor coupled with the increasing presence of Latinos in American life might suggest a renaissance in the years to come. However, on this the 60th anniversary of Jackie Robinson, it is fitting to wonder why, in terms of African Americans, the sport remains the least integrated of the Big Three.

Posted by David Darlington at 11:44 AM | Comments (6)

Around the Horn

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• Indiana Health Commissioner Dr. Judith Monroe has "publicly apologized for the state's role 100 years ago in pioneering state-authorized sterilization of 'imbeciles,' paupers and others it deemed undesirable." For much of the early 20th century, Indiana was a national 'leader' in eugenics.

• "Thousands" of women are getting breast implants cased in titanium metal "to try to reduce post-op deformity."

• Pope Benedict XVI has release his first book which, according to the Associated Press, "criticizes the 'cruelty' of capitalism and colonialism and the power of the wealthy over the poor."

• Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), who just won re-election last year and became the longest serving senator in history, says he's not any closer to retirement, the New York Times reports. He would be 95 years old when he's up for re-election. "I will run in 2012, the Lord willing," he said.

• The Washington Post recently hosted a marshmallow peep diorama contest, expecting 8 or 9 entries. In fact, they received 350 and now invite you to vote for your favorite.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 07:34 AM | Comments (2)

April 13, 2007

One Last Time

James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web cites an ITA post from yesterday to examine Barack Obama's cultural musings and his disdain for Imus-like invidious stereotypes.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:01 PM | Comments (0)

Around the Horn

A daily round up of five newsworthy stories:

• Warren Buffet is no longer the second most richest person in the world. That distinction now belongs to Carlos Slim Helu, who slips in a jab at the men who sandwhich him on the Forbes list: "Poverty isn't solved with donations," he reportedly said, adding that building businesses often does more for society than "going around like Santa Claus."

• Former Sen. Fred Thompson, who has not yet even officially declared his presidential candidacy, now ranks second in an LA Times poll of potential Republican contenders. Liberal former mayor Rudolph Giuliani leads with 29% of the vote.

• Australian Prime Minister John Howard responded to a radio caller's question about HIV-positive immigrants with a suggestion of restricting access. "I think we should have the most stringent possible conditions in relation to that nationwide, and I know the health minister is concerned about that and is examining ways of tightening things up."

• Sophisticated New Yorkers are now "walking" their dogs in strollers. "They are becoming more popular, especially for senior dogs who don't want to walk anymore." Next up: doggie toilet paper.

• Scientists in the United Kingdom have learned how to create human sperm cells out of bone marrow. This raises the prospect of an all-female conception. Rosie O'Donnell could not be reached for comment.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 11:47 AM | Comments (2)

Legal Quote of the Day

"This is the first time in my life I've brought diversity to a group."

-- Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), quoted by the Washington Post, on his Judiciary Committee membership. Said fellow committee member Sen. Chuck Schumer, "normally, you've got to be a Jew or a Catholic to get on this committee. You're the first WASP."

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 10:05 AM | Comments (0)

Gore Goes Green

In a well-reasoned post in February, Eric analyzed "Al Gore and the difference between right and left," with Al Gore's energy inefficient house as the basis for discussion. So it seems only right that we also note he appears to be moving toward installing solar panels on his home.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:57 AM | Comments (0)

April 12, 2007

Daylight Stupidity Time

Despite recent evidence that the early switch to Daylight Saving Time this year is not saving energy, one of the co-sponsors of the extension, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), gave an interview today to WSJV's (Fox-South Bend, IN) morning show during which he touted the energy savings. Either Rep. Upton is unaware of the reported effects of his bill or he is lying.

Even worse, despite a provision in the legislation for reviewing -- and possibly repealing -- the extended switch, he states that, "We're not going to change this again. This is it."

Previously by the author:

"