Author: Brian J. Noggle

Story: Legal bills drain money from public coffers: $100 million paid to attorneys in past 5 years:

Lawyer bills ate up close to $100 million in local tax dollars over the past five years in the five-county metro area, and legal spending by municipalities is on the rise, a Journal Sentinel analysis shows.

Of course, the Journal-Sentinel wants to point the finger at greedy lawyers who suck up all that public money. Personally, since the Journal-Sentinel tends to like spending public money and suing your way to justice or retribution, I find it disingenuous that the paper makes an issue of the combination. But it does.

You want to know what really burns up the people’s money when it comes to legal expenses? Governments suing governments, whether municipalities suing each other, local governments suing regional governments, state governments suing the federal government, or peer agencies suing each other. Such as:

• States Sue Bush Administration for Failing Consumers on Energy Standards
• Attorney General Lautenschlager Seeks Authority to File Suit Against FDA Over Delays in Approval of OTC Emergency Contraceptive
• ATTORNEY GENERAL PEG LAUTENSCHLAGER ANNOUNCES STATES SUE EPA FOR VIOLATING CLEAN AIR ACT AND REFUSAL TO TAKE ACTION ON GLOBAL WARMING
• State to File Environmental Lawsuit Against Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) and Twenty-Nine “Satellite” Communities for Sewer Overflows During 2004
• States Sue HUD Over Pesticide Use in Public Housing
• Lautenschlager Announces States Sue Federal Government to Protect Clean Air Act
• RICHFIELD JOINS MINNEAPOLIS, EAGAN IN AIRPORT LAWSUIT
• Nixon sues to stop giveaway of state interest in MKT bridge; says viability of Katy Trail too important to risk

Nah, that’s not wasting the people’s money on legal fees. Not if there’s a chance for a higher office for the right-thinking sort of person involved.

To emus from overrunning the neighborhood at up to 35 miles per hour, the neighborhood of Compton Heights has taken extreme measures:

This kid’s pet was not the typical dog or cat, but the world’s longest lizard, a rare – and, to some people, beautiful – animal called the crocodile monitor. It looks like a tiny dinosaur with teeth like razors and a bullwhip for a tail. It is very aggressive. It dines on birds and medium-sized rats.

Now it is missing.

The crocodile monitor escaped from its cage and is assumed still to be roaming the streets of St. Louis’ Compton Heights neighborhood, fending for itself and potentially scaring people.

The introduction of a predator to take care of the largely bulletproof flightless birds will likely save the police department money on ordnance it would spend on dangerous emus, which can act aggressive and elusive to anyone they meet. Carbondale police are watching with interest to see how the Compton Heights program works on controlling the emu population, as well as small yippy dog population, before unleashing exotic predators, anaconda or perhaps dingos, in the small university town.

It’s getting hard to tell them apart, with philosophies like this:

The surgeon general’s recent report on the hazards of secondhand smoke could spawn the next big summer sequel: Smoking Ban II.

Last year a controversial attempt to ban smoking in all public buildings died a slow, public death in the St. Louis County Council.

But the failed ban’s author, Council Chairman Kurt Odenwald, R-Shrewsbury, says the new report has led him to consider another run at the issue.

“After this report, I don’t think anyone can say this is not a health issue anymore,” Odenwald said. “The dangers of secondhand smoke are real. They are not hogwash, and I think we need to address them.”

When it comes to keeping a check on the government’s regulation of individual property rights, our elected leaders and the unelected agitators for legislation usurping personal dominion over personal property seem to espouse the philosophy: Today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once. You have to be lucky always.

L.A. yoga guru accused of running illegal studio:

Los Angeles prosecutors charged “hot yoga” guru Bikram Choudhury with operating a yoga studio without a permit and other violations that could land the controversial instructor in jail.

Choudhury, his landlord American Sunroof Corp. and company president Christian Prechter were each charged on Thursday with 10 criminal counts including operating without a certificate, overcrowding the yoga studio and not maintaining emergency exits. Each faces a maximum sentence of six months in jail for each count, and/or a $1,000 fine.

As his attorney would tell you, that’s a weak set of twigs to bind together into something with which to beat this instructor.

But, ladies and gentlemen, our activist, “Doing Something!” legislatures have given prosecutors with agenda the ability to legally beat upon the “criminals” using a bunch of lilliputian laws that could bind any one of us.

Sure, this prosecutor isn’t actually beating nor killing this fellow, but it’s just close enough for the Chinese to say that they’re dealing with their oddball religions/exercise programs the same way.

And just close enough that our own consciences will pull up short when it comes to sanctioning the Chinese. After all, we’re no different.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch dramatic headline: Bush rallies crowd to back war. However, the story indicates this might be an understatement:

President George W. Bush used his visit to St. Louis on Wednesday to make his case to local soldiers and supporters that the nation must persevere in Iraq and Afghanistan to safeguard America’s security.

His approach, he declared, is “not based on political polls or focus groups,” but on the belief that “we must stay on the offense in order to protect America.”

“The American people expect the government to protect them,” Bush told an enthusiastic crowd of 500 at a fundraising dinner for U.S. Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo., at the Ritz-Carlton in Clayton. [Emphasis mine]

Yeah, this was more Henry V at Harfleur than Mark Antony at The Forum.

Sure, insurance against RIAA lawsuits sounds good, until you realize that the RIAA could just subpoena the insurance company and sue all of its customers on the presumption of guilt. Who would buy this insurance besides those who need it?

(Link also seen on Dustbury.)

Let me, prognosticator of unintended consequences, tell you what this Supreme Court decision means:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

The ruling, a strong rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.

If the executive branch and the military must apply United States constitutional protections to enemies captured on the battlefields of foreign wars, it will capture fewer enemies.

The Supreme Court has sentenced those who would have been captured to death.

From the dramatic story entitled "Suspect steals county patrol car in Berkeley; suspect, officer injured", we have this suspenseful episode:

The suspect drove the stolen police car for some time while surrounding police agencies attempted to stop him. The police car stopped for a short time at Suburban and Mueller streets in Ferguson. Then the suspect suddenly put the car in reverse and rammed a Cool Valley police car. At that moment officers from more than one police agencies fire shots at the suspect, all missing.[sic]

Fortunately, the suspect was acting aggressively and elusively with anyone he met, but he could not run 35 mile per hour, and both of these criteria must be met for instant execution.

New Surgeon General’s Report Focuses on the Effects of Secondhand Smoke:

“The health effects of secondhand smoke exposure are more pervasive than we previously thought,” said Surgeon General Carmona, vice admiral of the U.S. Public Health Service. “The scientific evidence is now indisputable: secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance. It is a serious health hazard that can lead to disease and premature death in children and nonsmoking adults.” Secondhand smoke contains more than 50 cancer-causing chemicals, and is itself a known human carcinogen. Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke inhale many of the same toxins as smokers. Even brief exposure to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and increases risk for heart disease and lung cancer, the report says.

To quote Dean Yeager, “Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman!”

Science is the most pragmatic of human endeavors, in that one only believes something is true because even if overwhelming evidence is in favor of a conclusion, science should only be 99% sure, reserving that 1% in recognition of human fallability. I’ve not seen all the data nor all the studies–like many, I’ve only seen the big exclamations from the studies which support the claim about second hand smoke and the vital italicizations of studies that dispute it which were funded by Big Tobacco!

But one thing I’m sure of: I doubt the "scientist" who says he has indisputable proof or an inarguable conclusion because that sort of scientist has mounted a bank and is trying to sell something.

(As some of you know, my beautiful wife vigorously disagrees with me, and I might be sleeping on the couch for the foreseeable future.)

Charles Krauthammer, "Why I Love Australia":

God, I love Australia. Where else do you have a shadow health minister with such, er, starch? Of course I’m prejudiced, having married an Australian, but how not to like a country, in this age of sniveling grubs worldwide, whose treasurer suggests to any person who “wants to live under sharia law” to try Saudi Arabia and Iran, “but not Australia.” He was elaborating on an earlier suggestion that “people who … don’t want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then they can basically clear off.” Contrast this with Canada, historically and culturally Australia’s commonwealth twin, where last year Ontario actually gave serious consideration to allowing its Muslims to live under sharia law.

Meanwhile, Australia, the beloved, features strict gun control and sword control policies. Let’s not forget that while we laud the plucky Australians for their collective spine.

In this post, I explain why random events outside of the home make me afraid to leave my house. Now, thanks to Ace, I have a new irrational fear:

Knock, knock.
Who’s there?

Ali.
Ali who?

Jeez, folks, dial my number from your cellular phone when you’re on my porch, otherwise, I’ll think you’re coming to give me the death roll in my own front yard.

Over at Boots and Sabers, Owen applauds the lowering of the threshold at which the government can seize property from individuals: if it’s annoying. Owen says:

This could be a good idea.

Wherein “this” is this:

Frustrated by a weekend cruising ritual that gridlocks intersections and gobbles up officers’ time, some Milwaukee leaders are pushing for new tools to fight the problem, boosting fines and letting police seize cars by declaring them a “nuisance.”

Geez, maybe I’m just a jack, maybe it’s just because I’m young enough to remember engaging in car-seizure yielding nuisance behavior–whether playing my car stereo too loud or getting into a car with friends to ride around on a Friday night– or maybe I just don’t want the government to seize private property based on a subjective call of one of its functionaries, but I think it’s a really, really bad idea to keep lowering the bar for reasons why the government can take your property. And a nuisance crime isn’t it.

Unfortunately, Owen doesn’t elaborate on how high a lawn would have to get before the government could take a house–but it’s a nuisance when neighbors let their lawns go to seed. It’s a matter of degree, not a matter of kind, that prevents the government from doing so once we’ve allowed the State to start stripping property based on arbitrary and subjective judgments of “nuisance.”

To allow this abuse of government power because it punishes that which annoys you leaves you no sympathy and no quarter when the government wants to take something from you because you’ve annoyed someone else.