The Very Name a Punchline

Orrin Hatch.

Sounds kinda like a crime of a sexual nature for which you would go to prison for many years in a number of states.

Sorry, Unca Orrin, but I kinda like that part of the Constitution. Makes it one generation harder for the Islamacists to get elected to the presidency.

And by the second generation, the damn kids are peircing things and rebelling against their parents. Or else we wouldn’t see the honor slaughter going on in England, wot?

(Link seen on Fark. They’re the subversive influence, not me.)

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Why Does Bush Want Foreign Troops in Iraq?

So President Bush has gone a-crawling to the United Nations, and he’s gone a-begging to Turkey and Europe and Japan for money and troops to help stabilize Iraq and to help rotate out some of our troops and give them a chance to rest.

Why, oh why, would he want a rested and ready military force that’s not currently committed to patrolling the streets of a nation in the process of regentrification and recivilization?

Because he’s chicken, or trying to win an election, or maybe because he wants to be ready for the next target?

What a bunch of second-rate hawks. Maybe I am a neoneoconservative. Or just read too much Machiavelli and Sun Tzu in my formative years.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Some Missouri Legislators Find Checks and Balances Too Confining

Our saga so far:

  1. Missouri Legislative Branch passes concealed carry law.
  2. Missouri Executive Branch vetoes concealed carry law.
  3. Missouri Legislative Branch overcomes veto by getting 2/3 majority. Barely, as Carol Daniel pointed out.

What’s missing from this picture? Ah, yes, the Judicial Branch. Someone had to sue, but what do you know, it’s state legislators.

That’s right. They opposed the legislation, but they couldn’t vote it down. Then they couldn’t prevent its veto from being overridden. So now that their part in the grand scheme that is the American system of government is over, do they lose graciously to the will of the legislative majority? Of course not, they do an end-run around the system and do their part to help unbalance the system so that we have a totalitarian judgeocracy.

Face it, it would be easier to spot if they got together with members of the executive branch to subvert the republican form of government and have a Strong Leader issue fiats and maybe even dissolve that useless legislature anyway. Instead, these legislators want to overturn in the courts something they couldn’t stop in the legislature by any possible method.

I wouldn’t be so bothered if some citizens group or even HCI or its brethren filed the suit. But that the legislators, who probably would tell us how sad they are that The Children don’t understand civics and the working of the government, are doing it twists my leash most of all.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

And Speaking of That Executive Branch (I)

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch also reports that Police are confused and fearful over new gun law.

Hypothetically speaking:

Suppose St. Louis police stop a car late at night in a high-crime neighborhood for a traffic violation. Suppose there’s a 21-year-old in the vehicle, along with three 20-year-olds. And suppose officers find four guns on the floor.

“What do the police do?” asked Mike Stelzer, an associate city counselor assigned to the St. Louis Police Department who offered the scenario.

I guess they write a ticket, tell the kids to drive safely, and go back to patrolling. I guess that’s not the answer they want, or that Mike Stelzer wants.

He knows what the cops would do today: Confiscate the weapons, arrest the occupants and figure it was a blow struck for public safety.

Well, yes, because that’s illegal today, having a gun in the car. Day after tomorrow, it’s not illegal. You see, the executive branch enforces the laws. It doesn’t make them (although with the all-you-can-charge salad bar on the books now, it can often pick them, can’t it?).

    “This is scary stuff,” said Stelzer. “A police officer’s job is hard enough without something like this. Can we seize those guns? Can we arrest anybody in the car? We don’t have the answers yet.”

Here’s a pointer for you associate counselors, a little tidbit you remember. It might just help you get promoted to full city counselor: Police cannot arrest people for doing legal things. Police cannot just seize lawful property. Police should also avoid discharging their weapons unless their lives are endangered, and should also avoid discharging their clubs unless violently resisted by criminals. Of course, in the city of St. Louis, perhaps these things are not important to city counselors or police.

Police Chief Joe Mokwa worries about those kinds of details, and the larger question of whether the new law allowing the carrying of concealed weapons – and the automobile provision in particular – will erode progress made into cutting violence on city streets.

:: sigh :: Because once law-abiding citizens are armed, they’ll start committing crimes?

The whole gun thing wearies me. I guess that’s what our agitators, litiguous legislators, and our guardians, our “betters,” want. I am bored of writing about it now.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

PSA from Frankie J.

Frank J. has this reminder for liberals:

There are more conservative than liberals in America. There always have been, and there always will be. And we have guns and you don’t. If you want a street fight, it will be very short. This is important for you liberals to know, because we conservatives could easily slaughter you all if we wanted, but, instead, out of the kindness of our hearts, we let you live and tolerate your shrill dissent. You guys need to be more thankful of that.

Werd.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Potemkin Security Through Cameras

Surveillance cameras are getting to be all the rage for security-conscious people. Innumerable school districts and whatnot think it’s a good way to preserve security on campus. For more information see this article in the Christian Science Monitor or this recent NewsMax story. Suddenly, manna from the heavens, or at least state and federal governments, needs spending, and if the schools don’t buy the shiny new cameras, someone else will get to do something!, meaning spend that money.

But cameras don’t offer any security for killing rampages, particularly suicidal killing rampages. A camera will deter someone from tagging a wall because the the little vandal knows that if his image is captured, he’ll get a punishment he doesn’t want. But a freaking kiddie commando coming into school already knows what he’s going to get. Dead. Cameras won’t deter him.

Will the cameras help authorities stop crimes in progress? Uh, NO. Perhaps if they did America would have far fewer pretty pictures of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold in Columbine High School.

No, cameras offer no preventative measures for the serious crimes that their proponents use to sell us the little red light. A couple trained teachers with pistols, a couple of armed police per school full time, these things can prevent, not just offer compelling evidence for the lawsuits that come after.

So when Gut Rumbler linked to a story about our friends at Boing! building cameras right into the airplanes so that officials on the ground could monitor them at all times. Sounded like a Potemkinly good idea to me at first. Of course, it’s not going to prevent hijackings. The pissed-off passengers who’ve seen that particular inflight movie before might prevent the hijacking, a couple of armed marshalls, perhaps an armed pilot barricaded behind a reinforced door, these might prevent hijackings. But cameras? Not hardly.

Ah, but then I realized it’s not to prevent hijackings, you poor expendable air travellers (“F-16?” “BINGO!”).

So it’s only going to cost the passengers, crew, and bad guys, as well as a brand new Boing! airplane and Boing! air to air missile that will need replacing. As long as it is not a not anti-gun (add the negatives, carry the one…) solution requiring personal action for personal and public safety, I guess the bureaucratocracy will go for it.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

C&M

Over at Tech Central Station (what, it’s not on my blog roll? Look again!), Arnold Kling identifies discoursive argument types and classifies two:

Type C arguments are about the consequences of policies. Type M arguments are about the alleged motives of individuals who advocate policies.

He then proceeds to cudgel Paul Krugman in particular, but he’s cudgeled the nail right on the head.

The good old fashioned argument from authority. It used to be that to wield this particular logical fallacy, you had to say something was true because someone reputable said it was true. Of course, because many of the people who use the new version are also against authority, they’ve perverted this standby. It’s no longer true because a particular authority says it, it’s now untrue because someone said it.

Look on the bright side, though. The ad homenim never goes out of style.

(Link seen on InstaPundit.)

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Dichotomy

A reader e-mail over at Andrew Sullivan’s hits the screw right on the head:

Let’s face it – intelligence is the new morality. For the left there are no long-term historical precidents to cite or follow. They are all rooted in a misogynic and racist western culture. There is no transcendent truth because that demeans the individual and takes away individual liberty. By what standard then do you judge an individual and determine their worthiness? Not by character … not by integrity … but by how bright they are. This intelligence of course is demonstrated by embracing the tenets of the left. Personal morality, sound legal judgement and basics such as keeping one’s word do not have be followed as long as one is bright enough to to see the world from a left perspective. All other failings are excusable./blockquote>

Werd, brah. When I was in college, I saw a false dichotomy between intelligence and morality. Most of the bright people I new in college were immoral, or worse, moral relativists. Their intelligence provided them with any number of intellectual hedonistic excuses for whatever whim they wanted to worship at the moment. I liked them well enough, but I couldn’t really trust them, for whenever the wind within their wants blew a different direction, I knew they would betray me and think it was the right thing to do. Well, all right, except for maybe Doctor Who, who could have been my alternate universe twin, but who knows what changes those quantum fluctuations wrought?

My closest friends from the time period were fellows I met at work, which was way the heck off campus. These guys don’t have college degrees, but they’re good guys. And although I don’t talk to anyone from Marquette’s Writing-Intensive English Department, I still talk to Tulsa and Moose every couple of days and see them when I am in town.

And man, was the romantic outlook bleak. I thought I could choose between a woman who could satisfy my intellect as well as my loins, and a woman moral enough to keep that satisfaction to one set of loins. Of course, you have a good theory and bam, you find the exception. Not that I am complaining.

So there you have it. It can be a bleak world for the isolated intelligent-but-moral twenty-something, or at least it was back in the 1990s. I cannot speak to whether it’s improved, or whether any twenty-somethings are intelligent-but-moral in the 21st century, but if you’re out there, you’re not alone, and intelligence/morality is not a dichotomy from which you have to choose one.

Unless I am mistaking the word dichotomy for something else and it really means two colors. But certainly one of you would have said something before letting me go on this long about it.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Whitney Gould on Marquette University’s New Development

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel’s architecture critic weighs in on the the new buildings that Marquette’s putting up. A ho-hum, tinkling endorsement.

I walked through campus late this summer and was taken aback by the new buildings sprouting almost overnight. The campus has changed a lot in the nine years since I was masticated from its undergraduate program, and so much has changed. New buildings everywhere. Exciting, but somehow disappointing as the past continues to steal the present from me and flaunts it from the other side of the street. Neener neener, says the past.

Of course, as you all know, Milwaukee can do no wrong in my eyes, and Marquette’s new development fits right into the continuing revitalization. I took some photos to illustrate it when I was on vacation, and as soon as I get them scanned, I’ll share some with you. Until then, read Whitney Gould every week. Werd.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Another Schwarzenegger Perfidy

Exultate Justi has the scoop on more of Schwarzenegger’s devious nature:

Arnold’s position on the morality of kitten-punching is not on record, leading some at The LA Times to speculate that the candidate may indeed have something to hide.

Kitten-punching!

Actually, it’s not as easy as it sounds. Those kittens are awfully low to the ground, so it’s hard to get in a good punch with your body behind it, pivoting on a foot and following through. I am surprised no entrepreneurs on the Internet have come up with harnesses where you can make kitten speed bags. Bwappata bwappata bwappata meow!

Cripes, Cagey, I hope you enjoyed that image. I am sleeping in the guest room tonight on account of it.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Disqualification for Public Office

There’s a lesson to be learned from the short parade of women making accusations against Arnold Schwarzenegger and the solemn judgment cast upon it by Gray Davis, who claims that some of the contact is in fact, criminal and anyone who would vote for Arnold Schwarzengovernor is voting for a potential (in case you missed it, I will bold, italicize, and CAPITALIZE) CRIMINAL. Also, by parade, I mean couple of people walking single file, so a passerby might confuse this parade of aggrieved and traumatized women with a normal bunch walking to lunch. But I digress.

The lesson to learn is that touching the breast of a female who doesn’t want her breast touched is criminal and a man who does such is not morally qualified to lead. To put it more succinctly:

Getting thrown out at second base should bar you from public office.

That’s right. Every guy who’s kissed a girl in high school and then thought, “Hey, we’ve been dating a week and a half, maybe I can touch her sweater….” is now a man beast incapable of leading. Because let’s face it, in our youth, we men have often tried to encourage persons of the opposite sex into sexual congress with varying styles of unspoken subtle nudging or overt, “Nice shoes, want to, er, fornicate?” and with varying degrees of success, which sometimes ended in unsuccess when male hand met female flesh and the female said no.

So that leaves the following people eligible for office:

  • Heterosexual women.
  • Ricky Martin (or other sexy from a young age celebrities) to whom the women have probably never said no.
  • Guys too dorky to ever consider sex as feasible.
  • Gay men, particularly gay men who were never in the closet in high school and didn’t date girls in confusion or as a cover.
  • Catholic priests or other religious or ascetics who have taken, and held, a vow of chastity.
  • Extremely cautious guys who insist upon consent forms signed in front of witnesses and insist upon videotaping the proceedings for evidence. A lot of my dates went fine until that point, let me tell you.
  • Guys who held out resolutely until marriage. I’m not sure we could elect a full Senate from this group.
  • Guys who only frequent prostitutes.

That’s a wider list of possible rulers than I thought when I first started compiling the list, and you know, I think you could draw a whole class of Platonic rulers out of there.

And as a rhetorical loaded question smear, I present:

Which of these categories does Gray Davis fit into?

I am going to use that as a clip if I ever get interviewed for a job as a professional journalist.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Buy That Man a Guinness

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that Anheuser-Busch has decided not to contribute to Missouri Governor B. Holden’s re-election campaign because he vetoed the concealed carry bill. The legislature, of course, overrode that veto, but seems that August A. Busch III is a sportsman and a citizen concerned with his personal security and he’s in a punishing mood. Anheuser-Busch as a whole supports candidates like it sponsors sports teams, that is, it gives money to all of them. Except, now, B. Holden.

Title this lesson Beer Baron with Bling Bling Likes Bang Bang, Bye Bye Billy if you like.

Let it be said that I was so pleased with the story that I almost bought a sixer of Budweiser tonight to reward Anheuser-Busch for its stand, until I realized that I cannot drink it and that the other attendees of El Guapo’s mixer-sixer party this weekend would beat the bud out of me if I contributed an Anheuser-Busch product while drinking their ten-dollar-a-six-pack contributions. Skull Splitter, anyone? Not me, thanks!

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Nationalize the Groceries!

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports on the hardships caused by the closings of Kohl’s Food stores (not affiliated with the expanding Kohl’s Department stores, and neither of which are affiliated with Senator Herbert Kohl, but it’s a long story):

Fifteen years ago, Mary Brown sought out a senior housing apartment in a neighborhood where she could shop, offering stores she could reach by walking.

That option disappeared in August when South Milwaukee, a community of 21,000, lost its only major grocery store – the Kohl’s Food Store on S. Chicago Ave.

It’s bad enough that the closing, one of 23 Kohl’s supermarkets that were shut down, now means a trek to another city – Cudahy’s Pick ‘n Save or Potter’s Piggly Wiggly in Oak Creek – to fulfill a basic need for food. [Emphasis mine]

Insert klaxon sound here. So closing this grocery, which could not make money, has left seniors without the means to fulfill a basic human need, soon to be a basic human right, that is, a grocery store within two blocks of your home, whether it can survive as an ongoing concern or not.

The obvious answer is Foodicare, a new program designed to keep everyone well stocked, or at least give them the ability to fulfill their basic human need without crossing municipal borders and paying sales taxes somewhere else.

I may sound a little snarky, but I empathize, I really do. I mean, to get the really cool exotic beers, I cannot go the Casinport Schnucks. As a matter of fact, I have to go all the way to Creve Couer, to the Dierberg’s, a drive of ten minutes!

Once Foodicare becomes law, and I have given up work since taxation levels will have reached such heights that I will have to pay money out of my own pocket to hold down a job, there will be booze within walking distance, and I’ll never have to be sober again! Which will qualify my to serve in government, or at least to write violinic pieces in the paper about grocery stores closing and the hardship that presents the glitzing customers.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

Remember, They’re Men of the People

Not that I want to harbor grudges, but remember that Bill Clinton and Al Gore are champions of the working man and the middle class as opposed to the Republicans.

Bill “I never had a nickel until I left the White House.” Clinton, who obviously thinks that the $250,000 annual salary accruing while he lived, traveled, and ate free for eight years is a living wage.

Al “I think I will spend $70 million on a cable network” Gore.

Hell, you don’t even feel my upper middle class pain, much less the pain of my friends still working for $10 an hour in their thirties. So go smeg off, you class armchair generals.

(Gore post seen on Drudge.)

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

And Two Minutes for Charging

A tragic accident occurred in Atlanta. A promising young hockey player, just a year or so removed from Rookie of the Year and scoring a bucket of goals in the All Star Game, runs his Ferrari into a wall at 80 mph. It’s not as tragic as it could have been; he’s only got a broken jaw, but his passenger is in critical condition with a fractured skull. They’re lucky to be alive, and with any luck they’ll remain so.

But here come the prosecutors….

Atlanta Thrashers star Dany Heatley was charged Tuesday with reckless driving for veering off a road and slamming his sportscar into a wall at about 80 mph — a crash that left him with a broken jaw and teammate Dan Snyder critically injured with a skull fracture.

Heatley was also charged with serious injury by vehicle, a felony, and three other misdemeanors — driving too fast for conditions, driving on the wrong side of the road and striking a fixed object, according to the police.

Striking a fixed object?

Once again, the legislators in their attempts to do something! about crime have given prosecutors bolts of felonies and swatches of misdemeanors to properly accessorize every ill event. Instead of double jeopardy, we have a larger charge accompanied by an exploded view of its component parts. Common sense would indicate that reckless driving comprises driving too fast, leaving your lane, changing lanes without use of the directional signal, and then striking a fixed object, or maybe just narrowly avoiding a fixed object which is a undoubtedly a lesser charge. But before the myopic eyes of the law, these are all crimes in and of themselves.

Kind of like when an estranged husband shoots his wife and gets murder one, using a gun in the commission of a murder, using bullets in the commission of a felony, disturbing the peace, and failure to pay future child support. Slap enough coats of felony on anything, and it will look guilty.

So in addition to having to live with the emotional consequences of his actions, Heatley’s now eligible for a Gordie Howe length career in the penal hockey league. Prosecutors will say that these tough laws will make kids think twice about believing they’re immortal and driving fast. Because kids have already discounted their own deaths and the crippled and crushed bodies of their friends and have have dismissed the deterent within those threats; a couple years in jail? That’s real to the young.

Criminey, the first person to run for office with the stated goal of eliminating three quarters of our redundant and superfluous laws earns my indentured servitude. I am getting tired of having my personal attorney preceding me everywhere and identifying each and every infraction I might commit and running the complex multiplication necessary to determine my total sentence if I jaywalk and cross outside a designated crosswalk at the same time while walking an unlicensed bike.

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories