Friday, December 19, 2003

Fitting punishment
Did you hear the one about the guy who tried to rape a prostitute?
In one corner - the convicted rapist, weighing in at 140 pounds, and in the other corner - the prostitute, weighing in at 275 pounds.
[S]he took his knife, stripped him naked and paraded him in front of other prostitutes, after asking how many of them had ever been forced into sex at knifepoint.
Then she hauled him on down to the police station.

Thursday, December 04, 2003

The Father of Potty Parity...
has far more than just one 'baby'.

The New York City Council is currently considering a 'potty parity' bill, that would give women twice as many restrooms as men have. The Associated Press, as per usual, contains several fawning references to John Banzhaf III, who they refer to as "a public interest law professor at George Washington University Law School". Apparently, he's filed several court complaints, including the first federal-level complaint, suing to give women twice as many bathrooms as men. The AP dubs Banzhaf the "father of potty parity." I find it kind of deceptive that the AP makes no mention of Banzhaf's previous crusades, especially since they've garnered such a reputation for him.

Banzhaf might be more familiar to readers as the "father of 'it's McDonald's fault I'm Fat!'" obesity lawsuits. Perhaps you know him as the "father of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)", with DIY lawsuit kits, to help non-smokers have their smoking neighbors evicted. You might remember him as the "father of high-school soft-drink bans."

'Father of potty parity' my right buttock. He's the death knell of personal freedom and responsibility.

Thursday, November 13, 2003

A Few Reasons I Won't Send My Kids To Public School
Zero Tolerance, which posits that intent, or even the facts of a case have nothing to do with wether or not a student should be arrested, expelled, and then sent to 'alternative school.'

Stratford High School, in Goose Creek, where the cops entered the school with guns drawn, K-9s, handcuffed and searched 107 students, but found no drugs and made no drug-related arrests.

Mepham High School, where the football team are such animals, they introduced new teammates to the group at football camp by sodomizing them ala Abner Louima, while the other teammates cheered the beasts on.

My own experiences in high school, which taught me that the only way to get assistance when I was being sexually assaulted was to make as big a disruption in class as possible. I will never forgive Frau Bloomberg for refusing my pleas for assistance when Coleman Price was trying to molest me. On a near-daily basis, I would find myself having to defend my virtue from that beast while he tried to jam his greasy paw between my legs. I told him to stop, multiple times. He didn't. I went to Frau Bloomberg, explained the situation, and how uncomfortable it was making me, and asked that she move me out of arms reach. She refused. Finally, I took my mother's advice, and the next time he tried it, I stood up in the middle of the classroom, and in my shrillest voice, screamed "Coleman Price, you take your filthy hands off me right NOW!" I was lectured for 'causing a disruption', but Frau Bloomberg moved him... for a whole two weeks. At the end of the two weeks, Coleman was right back in front of me, but at least this time, he knew I wasn't such an easy target. It's a crying shame that that's the biggest thing I learned in German... but then again, if Frau Bloomberg had made even the smallest attempt to protect me while I was in her classroom, I might have learned more.

Between the news, and my own experiences, is it any wonder I don't trust public school bureaucrats?
Customer Service Tip #1
When a customer walks into your store, and asks if you have a particular item in stock, the correct answer is not "I don't know," followed by a blank stare. The correct answer is, "Let me check for you."

Sheesh. I understand that some folks figure if they just play dumb enough, people with give up, go away, or order something else. On the other hand, playing dumb 1) makes you look dumb, and 2) makes some people (like me) get snotty and tell you to go look for it. This is something to bear in mind, especially if you work in a job that accepts tips.

Wednesday, September 24, 2003

Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Women Are Stupid And Helpless
...crazy bitches to get a free pass in the state
The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that a woman can't be held accountable for helping a man violate the protective order she has against him, thereby placing women a step down on the free-will and responsibility tier. This also opens up a fun new avenue for bitter women to harrass their exes with.
Justice Paul Pfeifer, writing for the court, said it is irrelevant even if Betty Lucas had violated the protective order by inviting her ex-husband into her home, as the lower court found.

"To find appellant guilty of complicity would be to criminalize an irrelevancy," Pfeifer wrote. "We hold that an individual who is the protected subject of a temporary protection order may not be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the restrainee under the protection order."
If someone is so dangerous to you that you have to get a protective order against them, it behooves you to stay the hell away from them, or face the consequences. If you appeal to the government for protection, deliberately circumventing the government's attempts to protect you should either a) be illegal, or b) nullify the government's responsibility towards you. In a just world, a protective order would work both ways.

Unfortunately, since the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that women are too dumb to be responsible for their actions, the only consequence Betty Lucas faces is people like me pointing out what a totally irresponsible embarrassment to the female of the species she is.

Saturday, August 09, 2003

Taking a leap
AOL is beta testing a weblog system right now, and given that I'm an AOL employee, it only seems right that I should try it out. So for now, at least, any new entries to PermagrinGirl can be found at PermaGrinGirl.

It's got some nifty features. I'm particularly fond of their IMBot that will allow you to publish to your blog as easily as sending an IM. They still have some bugs to work out - in particular in formatting and html support - but the beta appears to be completely useable so far.

Cheers!
Celeste

Friday, July 25, 2003

Ta Ta For Now...
I'm deep in the middle of buying my first house. Cue stress, panic, uncertainty, confusion, fear, and hope... in that order.

So while I'm taking care of that, and trying to keep up with work, I'll be taking a break from blogging. We close August 27th, and I doubt I'll be rational again until it's all over. Once things have settled down I'll be back.

Cheers!
Celeste

Wednesday, July 16, 2003

It's all about the percentages
The Clintons have lost their request that the government reimburse them for the 3.58 million dollars in legal fees they racked up defending themselves during the Whitewater probe. The panel did say they should receive $85,312 to pay for the cost of responding to the Independent Counsel's report. The Post drags out the expected 'experts' who claim to be surprised that the Clintons lost:
The panel's decision appears to divert dramatically from past practice, according to a law professor who is a former Iran-contra prosecutor and an expert on the independent counsel law. John Q. Barrett, who was an associate counsel for independent counsel Lawrence Walsh, said federal courts have been generous in reimbursing legal bills and have avoided drawing conclusions about whether the subject otherwise would have been investigated.

"Before today, the court was generally generous and, for whatever reason, today took a dramatically different approach," Barrett said. "Many suspect a political motivation in this case. I don't necessarily subscribe to that, but it is very different."
And the Clintons are complaining about it too:
The Clintons complained through their attorney yesterday that two former Republican presidents fared much better in securing repayment of their legal bills in the Iran-contra investigation. George H.W. Bush was awarded $272,000, or 59 percent of the reimbursement he sought, and Ronald Reagan was awarded $562,000, or 72 percent of his request.
Okay, so the former presidents you're referring to received a combined $834,000 in repayments from the government. Since you're stressing the percentage of their legal bills that were repaid, here's a figure you could bring up as well: $834,000 is 23% of $3,580,000, which is the amount the Clintons are requesting from the government. The Clintons may be only getting 2% of what they asked for, but they're asking for more than four times the amount of money that was distributed to Reagan and Bush. Perhaps that has a lot more to do with the denial of their request than any shadowy political conspiracy.

Thursday, July 10, 2003

Teach your children well...
I was reading Best of the Web for today, and some twit junior college instructor thought it would be a good idea to have his students send emails to elected officials containing the words "kill the president"...
Michael Ballou, a part-time lecturer who teaches an "Introduction to U.S. Government" course at the college's Petaluma campus, intended the assignment to be an "experiential exercise that would instill a sense of fear so they would have a better sense of why more people don't participate in the political process," said Doug Garrison, the vice president and executive dean of the Petaluma campus. ...
It is appropriate to fear participation in the political process, if your participation is limited to making death threats against the president. That isn't the reason 'more people don't participate in the political process', and saying that just makes Garrison look like a dumbass. Does he think that a good 'experiential exercise' that would instill a better understanding of why women don't like to walk alone at night would be to rape his students?
Most of the 30 students in the class dismissed the June 25 assignment as a joke, but after it was repeated at a subsequent class, one student did send the e-mail to U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Napa Valley) on July 5. ...
Making a threat against the president is against the law and subject to up to five years in prison.
People like this are why I would never teach my (hypothetical) children to blindly obey their superiors.

Thursday, June 26, 2003

Getting closer to justice...
A jury took less than an hour to declare Chante Mallard guilty of murder. Now all they have to do is run her down in the parking lot and leave her on the windshield to die for justice to be served. Barring that, with any luck she'll spend the rest of her life in prison.

Wednesday, June 25, 2003

Freudian Slip?
I was scrolling through the latest national news from the AP on the Washington Post's site, and noticed the following:

U.S. Wary About Mideast Truce Reports (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:20 PM)

Dorel Recalls 1.2M Infant Safety Seats (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:19 PM)

Jurist Fights to Save Everglades Legacy (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:19 PM)

Virginia Grower Earning a Hot Reputation (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:14 PM)

N.M. Wildfire Burns Through 700 Acres (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:13 PM)

U.S. Weary About Mideast Truce Reports (AP, June 25, 2003; 1:18 PM)

Given the twisty kitten's ball of yarn that the "Road Map" has been, I personally thought the earlier headline was more accurate.

Monday, June 23, 2003

Maybe we should make the punishment fit the crime...
Chante Mallard is scheduled to go on trial today, charged with murder and tampering with evidence.
Mallard told police that her Chevrolet Cavalier hit Biggs with such force that his head and shoulders jammed into the windshield and his legs were bent over the roof, his pants tearing almost completely off his body.

Instead of stopping, police say, Mallard drove about a mile down a divided six-lane highway, the man still lodged and bleeding in the jagged windshield, then continued through town to her small yellow house in a working-class neighborhood.

She pulled into her garage, lowered the door, then sat in the car and cried, repeatedly apologizing to the man who was moaning, she later told detectives.

"Chante kept going in and out of the garage telling the man she was sorry," the police report states. "She does not know how long it took the man to die; she quit going out into the garage."
At some point after Chante quit apologizing, Gregory Biggs died from the injuries she inflicted, and then she and two accomplices dumped the body.

Her lawyers say this was merely a bad decision on her part, and that because she was distraught, she should only be punished for failing to stop and render aid.
... Tarrant County Medical Examiner Nizam Peerwani later said Biggs, whose left leg was nearly amputated, probably lived only a few hours after he was hit the morning of Oct. 26, 2001. He could have survived if he had received medical attention, Peerwani has said.
That is far more than merely failing to 'stop and render aid.' I can't think of any punishment currently in use in the american justice system that is harsh enough to address such a complete lack of humanity. I'm of the opinion that the only way to make this one right, is to have someone do unto Chante what she so callously did to Gregory Biggs.

Friday, June 20, 2003

A Good Anti-Drug Commercial
FreeVibe has actually put out an anti-drug commercial that I think is effective.

The spot opens with a younger teen picking up his older brother's wallet and talking to the camera. As he goes downstairs he says something like, "My brother started smoking pot when he was younger than I am. He didn't get arrested. He didn't turn to harder drugs. He didn't drop out of school." Kid enters a smoky basement to toss the wallet to his red-eyed, stubble-faced, much older, stoner brother sitting on the couch watching TV, and finishes his statement with, "He never really did anything. At all."

And that, in my experience, is the real danger in marijuana.
That was a trustworthy diagnosis...

Michael T. Crane, a convicted sex offender whose case made it all the way to the Supreme Court, has been arrested again, and charged with comitting another rape after his release from custody.
Crane was convicted in 1994 in Johnson County, Kan., for an attack on a video store clerk in suburban Leawood the previous year. Earlier, he got probation in 1987 for attempted forcible rape and two counts of sex abuse in Missouri.

In the 1994 case, he was sentenced to 35 years to life on his convictions for kidnapping, attempted rape and attempted sodomy. ...

As he was approaching release, the state sought to have him kept in confinement, and a jury determined him to be a violent sexual predator. The Kansas Supreme Court overturned that finding, but Crane remained in confinement while the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Last year, the court ruled in a 7-2 decision that states must prove that convicted sex offenders can't control themselves if they are to be confined after they finish their prison terms. ...

Crane, who remained in custody for more than three years after finishing his sentence, was released in January last year after doctors concluded his mental condition had changed and that he was no longer a threat.
Sounds to me like Crane simply started saying what the doctors wanted to hear. They decided this predatory animal was safe enough to be released into the wild, and sure enough, he went right back to his raping ways.

I'm sure its a great comfort to his latest victim, to hear that a team of doctors decided he was safe now.
The Kansas law, similar to those in about 20 states, allows indefinite confinement of violent sex offenders beyond their prison term if they suffer from mental abnormalities making them likely to commit similar crimes in the future. (emphasis mine)
Isn't it a given that a rapist is mentally abnormal? And considering this was not his first offense, I'd say it's also a given that he's likely to commit similar crimes in the future. This animal should never have been released.

Friday, June 13, 2003

Ewwwwwwww
From the Associated Press:
PALOMINO VALLEY, Nev. - Swarms of Mormon crickets are marching across the West, destroying rangeland and crops, slickening highways with their carcasses and leaving disgusted residents in their wake.

"It's yucky," said Amy Nisbet of Elko in northeast Nevada, where this year crickets made their first appearance in recent memory. "You drive down the street and they pop like bubble wrap."


Thursday, June 12, 2003

DVDs I own - I
Prayer of the Rollerboys - figure I'd better admit this one up front. Futuristic movie set in the United States - what's left of it after foreign companies have bought it all - about a group of rollerblading drug-dealing aryan nation wannabes in trench coats. Starring Corey Haim and Patricia Arquette. Bought it off of the super-off-brand-marked-down-budget DVDs rack at Best Buy after seeing a late showing of it on cable one night. It's awful, but somehow irresistable to me. Guess I have really bad taste...

The Slipper and the Rose - best telling of the Cinderella story I've ever seen. Excellent dialogue, costumes, and I fell in love with the musical numbers the first time I saw it... when I was around 8 years old. Really good changes from the basic story line - Cinderella actually refuses to marry her beloved Prince for the good of the country. And, of value to parents who might like intelligent scripts, but dislike exposing their children to suggestive content - I can't think of a single objectionable thing in the entire movie.

Meet the Feebles - however, is not for kids. Or the weak of stomach. Or the easily offended. If you're interested in seeing the sort of work Peter Jackson was producing before he directed Lord of the Rings, and have a taste for demented movies, this is for you. It's probably the only movie you'll ever see where a walrus has sex with a cat. It's been widely described as "the Muppets on acid." Lower kill count than in Dead Alive, but I'd be hard pressed to decide which movie is grosser.

Wednesday, June 11, 2003

So no more underage girls... what about unwilling relatives?
The Associated Press reports that David Kingston, imprisoned for felony incest, and unlawful sexual contact with a minor, has been released from prison. Not paroled - released.
The state parole board's decision to release David Ortell Kingston on Tuesday rather than parole him means the prison has no responsibility to follow up on him.

Todd Utzinger, one of Kingston's former attorneys, said the parole board's decision recognizes "he has taken full responsibility and is prepared to go on and live a crime-free life." ...

Kingston's 16-year-old wife was the daughter of his brother John Daniel Kingston, who was sentenced to seven months in jail for beating the girl after she attempted to flee the marriage. Another Kingston brother, Paul, is the church leader.

David Kingston had denied having had sex with his niece until a parole hearing last August. He vowed never again to have sex with an underage girl.

"I recognize the hurt and sorrow I have caused (the victim) and my family," he said.
Great. So Mr. Kingston has vowed to wait until they're 18 years old now. I'd be more reassured if he also vowed not to force his female relatives to marry him any more.

Tuesday, June 03, 2003

Like a dog returns to its vomit...
This is the sort of news that makes me dislike domestic violence groups:
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Even though she had an order of protection filed against her ex-husband, Betty Lucas invited him to a birthday party for one of their children.

The party soon disintegrated into fighting and police were called. But in an unexpected twist, both adults were charged with violating the protection order - her ex-husband for attending and Lucas for inviting him.

Now Lucas' appeal has landed on the docket of the Ohio Supreme Court, which must decide if people who seek a court's protection can be charged with violating their own request.
Seems fair enough to me. If you get a protective order against a guy, you're hardly deserving of sympathy if you invite him to violate it.
Domestic violence groups have sided with Lucas and say abusive people - not their victims - must be held responsible for violating protective orders. Prosecutors say Lucas should be held as accountable as anyone else who helped her husband violate a court order.
Because poor abused women should never have to take responsibility or face consequences for their actions.
Several domestic violence watchdog groups are backing Betty Lucas, saying failure to overturn her conviction sets back the justice system's role in protecting victims of abuse.

"Punishing the victim for contacting or returning to the offender does nothing to deter criminal behavior," the groups, including the Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women and the Ohio Domestic Violence Network, argued in court papers.
Whups... I was being sarcastic, up there, but it appears that the AOCBW wasn't.
"It tells the victim that she is equally responsible for the abuser's violent behavior and it reinforces the abuser's belief that his behavior is the result of factors outside his control," the groups argued.
Well yes, if you deliberately violate a court order, in order to see a man that you claim is abusive, you share the responsibility for the results. I'm of the opinion that protective orders should be worded so that they apply equally to each party. If the police aren't allowed to charge you with violating protective orders you request, there's nothing to stop me from getting a protective order against an ex-boyfriend and then violating it, calling the police, and having him carted off to jail. Once he gets out, if the order is still in effect, I can repeat the process as many times as I like. Sounds unfair? It is. If you think someone is so dangerous to you that you have to get a protective order, then you have a responsibility to stay the hell away from them.
Lucas' attorney, Andrew Sanderson, argued that Ohio law is meant to protect victims of domestic violence even if they make a bad decision about the person who abused them.

He used the analogy of Ohio's sexual assault laws, which protect victims under 18 from prosecution no matter the circumstances. Even if a teenage girl was a seducer, "We've made a societal decision that we're not going to charge that individual," Sanderson said.
There's a difference there in that children under the age of consent are held to be incapable of making their own decisions - that's why its called below the age of consent. Is Sanderson implying that women are incapable of making their own decisions, and therefore shouldn't be held responsible even when they recklessly expose themselves to a known danger? How condescending.

Thursday, May 29, 2003

This just in: Food Is Addictive
Withdrawal symptoms can be fatal!

That bastion of self-reliance and personal responsibility, John Banzhaf is at it again. Now, he's warning restaurants that they'd better start putting up warnings that food can be addictive, or face possible lawsuits.
As you and your members might already know, several courts have held that cigarette manufacturers may be liable for failing to disclose that their products might be addictive, even though the general health dangers of smoking were so well known as to be regarded as common knowledge. ... By analogy, even if all courts find that the general dangers of eating fatty and calorie-rich foods at fast food restaurants are likewise common knowledge, liability for causing obesity and its related diseases may nevertheless be premised on the theory that the public is much less aware of the addictive-like effects of many fast food than they are of the widely-publicized addictive nature of nicotine in cigarettes.

In light of these scientific studies, it may also be prudent for fast food companies to review their policies to be sure that nothing they are doing could be construed by a jury as seeking to take advantage of and/or enhance the possibly addictive properties of their foods. Changing the cooking temperature so as to increase the amount of fat absorbed during cooking, adding sugar to foods like french fries where it is not ordinarily expected, etc. might well seem to jurors like the activities of cigarette manufacturers to increase (“spike”) the addictive effects of their products.
And he's right, you know. Food is addictive. People have to eat food, or their withdrawal symptoms - stomach cramps, wasting, headaches, mood swings, and malnutrition - will eventually grow so severe as to be fatal.

I am a food addict who has several times tried to kick the habit, but my withdrawal symptoms became so bad, that I finally broke down and started eating again. I was experiencing severe stomach cramps (which some people mistakenly called hunger pangs), and such severe wasting that my weight dropped from 120lbs all the way down to 105lbs before I lost the struggle, fell off the wagon, and started eating once again. My struggle with my food addiction has lasted for a painful twenty-seven years now, and I know I am not the only sufferer. I estimate the possible food-addiction rate among U.S. residents could be as high as 100%! This a health crisis that has gone unaddressed for far too long, and I call on congress to add 'food' to the list of controlled substances, for the sake and safety of current and potential food addicts everywhere.

Tuesday, May 27, 2003

Dream Vacation
I just spent Memorial Day weekend at the Seven Foxes in Lake Toxaway, North Carolina. This was the first time I ever tried renting a cabin for a vacation before, and it was absolutely an ideal experience. Lake Toxaway is a gorgeous area, with mountain laurel all over the place, and some really beautiful parks and waterfalls. The cabin at the Seven Foxes was adorable, comfortable, clean and well stocked, and I don't think I've had better sleep in years. I felt so good at the end of the weekend, I didn't even mind the thought of going back to work... until we left the mountains and my allergies came back.

Tuesday, May 13, 2003

Keep saying it until people start to listen
Wendy McElroy has an excellent editorial on FoxNews.com called "Cut Men: Do They Not Bleed?" that I think bears repeated reading.
It cannot be overstated: Most men are good, hard-working human beings who love their families and never raise a hand in violence. Because their decency is not sensational, they are ignored by media and politicians who focus instead on men who rape or otherwise give their gender a bad name. A better reaction is to hold the decent men closer to us and value them more.
The vast majority of men I know are upstanding, honorable, decent people who believe in doing the right thing. As a woman who likes being one, a world without men in it, or a world where men have been turned into timid, flaccid, stubbly versions of women, is truly awful to contemplate. Three cheers for men!

Thursday, May 08, 2003

Eminent Domain, by any other name, is still Stealing
The Associated Press carried an article today titled "Cities Seize Private Land for Development". It's important reading for homeowners, and anyone else who believes in the rule of law and respect for property rights.
The first time the city of New London, Conn., seized Pasquale Cristofaro's home, it was to make way for a sea wall that never materialized. Instead, private medical offices sprouted over the backyard plot where Cristofaro once grew tomatoes, squash and grapes.

Three decades later, when the city wanted to raze another Cristofaro family home to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices, the 77-year-old Italian immigrant dug in and fought back in court.

"When they came to take my house from me a second time, I feel sick," said Cristofaro, whose grandchildren now live in the home he bought in 1972. "It's not right, to take it for a business. The United States of America is supposed to stop this."

Bitter disputes are playing out across the country as city leaders eager to improve their economies condemn homes and small businesses - not for highways, airports or other public projects, but for private development.
This is not a new problem, but one that finally appears to be gaining some well-deserved attention. The Institute for Justice recently published a report documenting eminent domain abuses, which can be found here on their website. James Bovard has been writing books exposing eminent domain and asset forfeiture abuses for years. Yes, just about anyone's land could be more valuable to the state if it were in the hands of a private business, but that doesn't make stealing it from the rightful owner right. Not unless you're living in a communist country.

A more lighthearted, but no less effective look at the unfairness of private property seizures can be found in the movie, The Castle. It's suitable for anyone, gently amusing, and really drives the point home.

Wednesday, April 30, 2003

It's good for He, but not for Thee...
Just as it would leave a bad taste in my mouth to hear a member of the ADL call for racial profiling of blacks, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth to hear someone simultaneously defend one perversion while condemning another. I normally respect James Taranto of Best of the Web, but yesterday's top post, titled "Look for the Union Label" just pisses me off. Mr. Taranto is okay with gay marriage, but nearly goes into hysterics in his attacks on polygamy
Echoing Santorum, Kurtz raises the possibility of a "slippery slope" leading from same-sex marriage to polygamy. But one can easily draw a distinction. The widespread practice of polygamy would have great social costs. It would distort the sexual marketplace by creating an undersupply of marriageable women. (Polyandry, the practice of women having multiple husbands, is too rare to be worth discussing.) The result is the creation of what Jonathan Rauch calls a "sexual underclass" of "low-status men" whose prospects for marriage are virtually nil.
First, the practice would have to be wide-spread in order for it to have any sort of the affect on the 'sexual marketplace' - which, by the way, is an awful term for love relationships. Second, what makes you think that women the United States over would be clamoring for a slot as 8th wife?
What has fueled the issue of polygamy statewide as well as nationally is the case of a 16-year-old girl who stumbled into a remote gas station in northern Utah this summer.
This summer? The case actually happened in May of 1998, by my math a good five years ago. Not that the actual date counts so much except that its sloppy reporting.
Covered with fresh bruises on her legs, arms and buttocks, authorities said the girl had run seven miles through the night, fleeing her father's belt and the future he had ordained for her: marriage to her uncle, and life as his 15th wife.

The teen-ager's 911 call has resulted in a charge against her father, John Daniel Kingston, a leader of a wealthy but secretive polygamous clan based in a Salt Lake suburb. Rowenna Erickson, a Tapestry member who left the clan in 1991, said that incest, child marriage and birth defects were becoming more frequent in the clan, which numbers about 1,500 people. . . .

Ms. Erickson said that John Daniel Kingston had fathered 10 children with a half-sister and that the 16-year-old girl who fled was his eldest child. Identified only by her initials, M.N., she testified in late July in court here that last fall she had been secretly married against her will to an uncle, David Kingston.

It's easy to understand why polygamy would lead to child abuse and incest, especially in relatively small communities. If the supply of marriageable women is severely restricted because a large number of women are married to a small number of men, then it's not surprising that men would turn their attention to underage girls.
Say What?? If you're going to make that argument, then perhaps you should present data that actually shows something like that going on. Instead, you paint a story of a male patriarch abusing his power to force a non-consenting child to marry a man who already had 14 wives. This is like me claiming that single men are more likely to rape and kill pregnant women, and using the Laci Peterson case as my evidence.
As for incest, the practice of polygamy creates huge numbers of close relatives. The Times cites the example of the late Wilford Woodruff Steed of Colorado City, Colo., who when he died in 1994 left six wives, 43 children and 235 grandchildren. In 1990 Colorado City had a population of 2,426, which means that those 235 grandchildren--all of whom are either siblings, half-siblings or first cousins--were nearly 10% of the town's population, and a higher proportion of their peers.
I'm not sure how this is supposed to be a bad thing, unless there's a local ordinance prohibiting marriage to anyone outside of the town. They aren't living in Antarctica, and it doesn't take a seven day trip by mule-drawn buggy to get to the nearest settlement. So there are a lot of relatives around.... bet that means the women in the town hardly ever have trouble finding a trusted babysitter.

But Taranto isn't one of those "marriage means one man, one woman!!!" freaks...
By contrast, it's hard to imagine any great social harm arising from official recognition of same-sex unions. Just about anyone who would consider "marrying" someone of the same sex is outside the ordinary marriage pool anyway; for the vast majority of heterosexuals, the idea of a same-sex union is entirely (if you'll pardon the expression) unnatural.
Since when did affirmative action come to sexual relationships? And does that mean that if the population ratio swung to 75% female, you'd change your mind?

Homosexuality, polygamy and incest all carry societal risks. Anal sex brings with it a greater risk of disease transmission. Polygamy brings an increased risk of close-interbreeding and forced marriages (although I'm of the opinion that a lot of these problems would be mitigated were polygamists not forced underground.) Incest brings with it an increased risk of reinforced bad recessives and birth defects. It pisses me off to hear people claim that while anal sex and gay marriage should be legal, polygamy should not. Likewise, I find it irksome to hear polygamous groups rant about the unnaturalness of homosexuality. Wether its the Beehive or a gay bathhouse, you're all on the fringe. Instead of clamoring for special treatment for your kink, while arguing against equal protection for others', it seems to me you'd accomplish a lot more if you argued that consenting adults should be able to enter into whatever relationship they please.

Whichever way the Supreme Court rules, I'm fine with it. My kinks are legal. I just think that perhaps homosexuals would have firmer ground to stand on if they didn't react to other fringe groups the way a southern Baptist would to them.

Monday, April 28, 2003

Always good advice
Clayton has an excellent series of posts on How to Become Wealthy (scroll up for parts 2 and 3). All of it is advice that is obvious to me, now, but I sure wish someone had told it to me back when I first moved out of my parents' house, and got four credit cards. There is one point he makes that hadn't occurred to me so far, that especially bears repeating:
You must find out where you are spending your money, and either reduce spending, or increase income. ...however, remember this: an extra dollar earned, because of federal, state, and Social Security taxes, is typically $0.55 to $0.65 more in your pocket. A dollar reduction in spending, however is $1 towards solving your budget problem.
The entire series is smart advice, and recommended reading for anyone who isn't already rich.

Wednesday, April 23, 2003

What's so wrong with comparing homosexuality to polygamy?
All sorts of people have their panties in a twist over the Santorum interview, where he infamously stated:
"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything," Santorum said in the interview, published Monday.
So far, of the posts I've seen regarding the issue, my favorite has to come from Rand Simberg. He writes, in part:
Now it's clear from context and his history that he thinks that not only is there something wrong with all of those things, but that he also thinks that they should be therefore illegal, and that not allowing laws against consensual gay sex shoves us down the hill on a slick road to perdition. That's not a position with which I agree, but I don't see any comparison of that to wistfully dreaming of a return to Jim Crow. I assume that, to the degree that the objectors have a sincere objection (disregarding the simple political and partisan opportunity), it is his lumping homosexuality in with the other things, unless they're proposing to make them all legal as well (no doubt some of them might).
To me, that's the most interesting thing about this case. I wrote in his comments section (I've only added html tags here):
"Santorum does indeed appear to be against any non-procreative heterosexual sex. That's fine with me, since he won't be the one deciding wether or not states can make other sex illegal - that'll be the Sup Ct.
What bothers me is the outrage everyone is expressing because Santorum compared homosexuality to incest, adultery, bigamy, etc... The impression I'm getting here is that the folks upset with Santorum are upset because he lumped homosexuality into activities these people think are wrong. In other words, their tolerance for homosexuality does not extend to tolerance for polygamy or other alternative relationships. If so, why not? Polygamy in particular has a far longer history of social acceptance (at least in other cultures/religions) than homosexuality has had.
Incest - I understand the genetic concerns incest raises, but defective babies are not created only by sister/brother or mother/son pairings. If the prohibition against blood-related consensual adults having sex is only due to the risk of birth defects, why have we not also made it illegal for people who know they will have defective children to breed? And if no offspring results from the pairing, why is it wrong? (Before anyone jumps on my case for that - I don't think its the governments' business to decide who has babies and who doesn't...smacks too much of nazism to me.)
I disagree with Santorum's stance, but I agree with his statement. If the Sup Ct rules, based on the 'right to privacy', that the states cannot make laws prohibiting homosexual sex, then they shouldn't make laws prohibiting other sexual relationships between consenting adults."
I'm tempted to say that those folks upset over Santorum's comments - because he compared homosexuals to bigamists, polygamists, etc - are no more tolerant than he is.
Prosecuting people for the IRS's own stupidity
The Washington Times reports that:
A Richmond father and daughter have been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of conspiring to defraud the government and filing a false tax return that claimed a $500,000 refund for slavery reparations, the Internal Revenue Service said yesterday.
I won't argue that claiming a half-a-million dollar refund for slavery reparations is illegal. There is no 'slavery reparations' fund. Robert and Crystal Foster definitely attempted to defraud the IRS. What I want to know is how dumb is the IRS that they got away with it, even for a little while?
The IRS has included slavery reparations on its list of the "Dirty Dozen" tax scams the agency has urged taxpayers to avoid. Efforts by the IRS and the Justice Department to shut down tax scams based on slavery reparations and similar claims have resulted in a 97 percent drop in the claims in recent years.
     According to the Richmond indictment, released Monday, Mr. Foster and his daughter received a tax refund of $507,490.91 from the IRS on Oct. 29, 2001 — the largest refund paid by the government that year. The claim was based on Miss Foster's contention that she and other blacks suffered harm because of slavery and its aftermath. ...
The IRS approved Miss Foster's refund, and she received her refund check after answering a letter from the agency on the identity of her investment firm. According to the records, she said it was the "U.S. Department of Treasury, Black Capital Investments."
     IRS officials said although no such firm exists, the refund check was issued anyway. Later, when the agency realized its mistake, the IRS filed a civil lawsuit in November 2001 to get the money back from the Fosters and others to whom money had been paid.
Personally, I'd be much more interested in finding out that whoever was dumb enough to issue a half-a-million dollar tax refund for 'slavery reparations', has been fired, and blacklisted from ever working in the tax/accounting business again.

That's what truly disturbs me about this story - the IRS is so incompetent they shelled out half-a-million dollars from a fund that they knew - and widely advertised - did not exist, to a woman who claimed less than four thousand dollars in income that year. What the Fosters did was wrong, but their crime only serves to highlight the IRS' much worse incompetence.

Thursday, April 17, 2003

Beating the horse some more...
Dancing With Dogs manages to sum up a lot of my disgust with the current feminist movement and perceptions of women in general.

Growing up, it was annoying enough for me to hear men make stupid assumptions about me based on the fact that I was a girl. I find it infinitely more horrible for self-proclaimed feminists to blandly state that women are more emotional, empathic, better listeners... to have another woman automatically consign me to a passive, peaceful role really sticks in my craw.

Maybe I am a better listener than the average man. Maybe I am more emotional than the average man. That doesn't make me any more peaceful than the average man. I wear pink. And I'm willing to shoot to kill. I don't think the two are incompatible.

I listened to the reports of tyranny, torture, rape, and support for terrorism coming out of Iraq. I felt a great sadness for the Iraqi people, and a great anger for my own people.

The result? Fervent support for a military invasion of Iraq. And you won't hear a peep out of me if we go into Syria or Iran afterwards. I want the world to be healthy "for children and other living things", and I think the way to do it is to defeat any country that would threaten us or our own.

That's the way this girl feels.
Interesting reading...
I happened to find The Ranting Rationalist through American RealPolitik. He has good stuff to read.

Wednesday, April 16, 2003

Simply put, They Can Dish It Out, but They Can't Take It
Eugene Volokh makes some thoughtful comments on the ethics of boycotts.
So, here's my narrow proposal: We should indeed resist claims that private boycotts and firings violate the First Amendment -- those claims are legally incorrect. We should also resist the assumption that the First Amendment provides proper ethical and moral standards for the behavior of private actors; sometimes, as with private universities, it might, at least to a large extent, but sometimes it doesn't: If you want to say the Nazis were right, you have the First Amendment right to do that, but I'll kick you out of my house, and generally won't do business with you. But we should also look behind the erroneous claims of First Amendment protection, and take seriously the deeper arguments that generally underlie such claims -- the arguments that it is indeed unethical and in the long run harmful to try to economically retaliate against people in certain ways based on certain kinds of speech. And perhaps this inquiry might eventually give us some sense of what the right ethical and pragmatic guidelines should be here.
This is a nice enough sentiment, but I think its entirely misplaced. The problem here is that the very sorts of people loudly complaining of censorship and '1st amendment violations' now, are also the sort of who have no qualms about applying the same tactics to groups they don't like.

Or was this story a hoax? If not, how is such a thing defensible if disinviting Robbins and Sarandon is not?

Likewise Gore's defense of the Dixie Chicks, which is truly hypocritcal given his support for musician boycotts in the past. Or have he and Tipper made up with 2 Live Crew?

If you don't want people to tell you, loudly, that they think you are a twit and not worth their hard-earned cash, then don't tell them, loudly, that their country sucks and their president is worse than Hitler. If you can't resist opening your big yapper and spouting off about 'the issues', be prepared for a negative response.

Wednesday, April 09, 2003

The Spider isn't the writer he used to be...
Aaargh.... it's always a disappointment to have someone you thought was smart prove you wrong. But that's what just happened to me. I was reading Transterrestrial Musings, which linked to Spider Robinson's ridiculously shallow and irrational op-ed in the Globe and Mail. When I was 13 or so - and still tickled pink over puns - I liked reading Robinson's books. After reading his op-ed, I couldn't agree more with the first sentence (emphasis mine):
I want my money back. War, plague and pestilence (think SARS) -- this millennium sucks.
Because, after all, 3 years into the thousand we have still to go is sufficient time to declare a verdict.
... whining about how wonderful things were before Bush was elected cut ...
Peace in the Mideast seemed just around the corner, thanks to the patient diplomatic efforts of a well-informed, articulate and creative U.S. president. Was poor taste in mistresses a sensible reason to replace him with a man who's proud to tell you foreign affairs are something he himself is never ever going to have, swear to God? Whose idea of diplomacy is smiling while delivering an ultimatum?
Lot's of people, you twit, or have you never heard the phrase, "diplomacy is the art of saying nice doggie until you can find a big stick"? And in case you're suffering from short term memory loss, in the United States, presidents only serve two terms. It not like we ousted Clinton just when he was finally about to lobby his way into a nobel peace prize, as some sort of cruel joke. We had elections. He couldn't run, because he'd already held the office for eight years, and his designated successor was such an uncharismatic, pathological liar, that Bush was able to win the presidency despite being depicted in the press as a retarded playboy. Gore sucks so bad, that as bad as you think Bush is, he couldn't beat Bush. Blame Clinton for not training his vice-president better than that.
In 1993, Arab terrorists tried to -- get this! -- blow up the World Trade Center. Of course, they failed ludicrously. Terrorists usually did; they were figures of fun, bearded buffoons who squabbled and shot ineffectually in all directions in films. They couldn't even take out a satirist: Salman Rushdie toured at will. The only modern terrorists to have taken a significant number of lives on U.S. soil were white, male Americans -- specifically, Timbit-Brain McVeigh in Oklahoma City and the FBI in Waco;
Arab terrorists were figures of fun? Tell that to the Israelis. And be sure you leave that part about U.S. soil in there, because without it, your argument falls apart. Arab terrorists failed at bringing down the trade towers once, but they succeeded in their attempts in Beirut, Dahran, on the USS Cole, at two U.S. embassies... apparently Robinson feels that we should only take terrorism seriously when it happens at home. If our people die overseas, that's no big deal.
Musicians and writers were optimistic. Multitrack recording had just stopped requiring hundreds of thousands of dollars of machinery and expertise; the sound quality of consumer playback had just reached perfect. Publishing books suddenly no longer absolutely necessitated printing 25 paper copies in the hope of selling one, and writing them no longer required a (shudder) typewriter;
But now that Bush is president, we've all had to revert to phonographs, party line telephones, and the Guttenberg press. Oh, mourn our lost progress, lost dreams, lost technology, now that Bush is president.
The Internet was going to make us all rich. 'Nuff said;
Just about everyone on Earth understood that the United States would never, under any circumstances, first-strike a weaker opponent. It had just proven it by allowing the Soviet Union to surrender;
I think that merely proves that we were engaged in a rather long and uncomfortable standoff with another nuclear armed power. And maybe I'm suffering from short-term memory loss too, but I don't recall the Soviet Union either a) formally declaring war on the United States, or b) formally surrendering to the United States.

... whining about British Columbia's social welfare system deleted ...
The U.S. seemed poised to legalize medical marijuana. Or rather, individual states still entertained the delusion that they had the power to do so, merely because the Constitution said they did and their citizens voted for it;
You could board an airplane in under two hours, carrying nail clippers;
Oh, how I long for those days... when people were allowed to perform their personal grooming on an airplane. But then again, those were also the days when islamist terrorists armed with boxcutters were capable of taking over an airplane and using it like a missile.
There seemed to be so little to worry about, we had time to worry about nothing at all. Anybody remember Y2K, when our biggest fear was that at the stroke of midnight on Jan. 1, 2000, our term papers would be lost and Revenue Canada would forget how much we owed?
We were living in the Golden Years, for a while there. Instead of savouring it, making sure that half a century of that kind of forward progress would continue, we decided, for a minute, that it was safe to coast. We yammered about the End of History, and invented "reality TV." We thought we could afford to let dimwits take the reins of power. How much damage could they do?
Everything was perfect when the democrats were in office. The was no such thing as terrorism. There was no such thing as a recession. Our entire country was so doing so well, we thought it would be funny to elect a 'dimwit' for president because, 'how much damage could they do?' So I guess it's all our fault. Now we have a war in Iraq (that started 12 years ago), a recession (that had started before the republicans took the presidency), and fighting in the middle east (that's been going on for centuries).
I choose to believe that the true Golden Age lies always ahead of us, never behind. But some years, it's harder than other years.
I know how you feel. When the U.N. security council was busy arguing about wether or not we needed a second resolution to go into Iraq, things looked grim to me, indeed. But Bush has proved his mettle, and the Iraqi people are dancing in the streets, celebrating their newfound hopes for freedom. I'm looking forward to a future Pax Americana, with a democratic middle east, and hopefully the fall of communism in the far east.

The future might be looking bleak to you, but to anyone who loves liberty and freedom, it's looking bright indeed.

Tuesday, April 08, 2003

Sucking blood from a stone
The Washington Post carried an article from the AP today, headlined: States Fear They'll Lose Tobacco Money.
State leaders from Vermont to California, hooked on annual payments from their landmark settlement with the tobacco industry, are worried a multibillion-dollar court order against Philip Morris might keep them from getting their next check. ...
In 1998, four tobacco companies agreed to settle states' claims for smoking-related health care costs by paying them $206 billion over 25 years. Philip Morris, the largest in the group, pays about half the settlement, which covers 46 states.
Recently, a Madison County, Ill. judge awarded $10 billion in a class-action lawsuit alleging that Philip Morris misled smokers into believing that "light" cigarettes are less harmful. Philip Morris must post a $12 billion bond before it can appeal the judgment - equal to the amount of the award plus $2 billion in legal fees. ...
"Philip Morris USA's net worth is south of $12 billion," said William Ohlemeyer, Philip Morris vice president and general counsel. "We only have so much money. If the judge requires us to put it all in Madison County, we wouldn't have enough to make the master settlement agreement payment."
Philip Morris has asked the judge to lower the bond to between $1.2 and $1.5 billion, an appeal supported by the attorneys general of 37 states and territories.
Wall Street analysts say Philip Morris isn't blowing smoke about its inability to pay.
"I do not believe Philip Morris USA has the ability to post the bond of $12 billion," said Martin Feldman of Merrill Lynch. He suggested bankruptcy was a "real option" unless the bond is reduced.
The uncertainty is already disrupting state budgets. New York, Virginia and California, for example, have postponed plans to sell bonds backed by money from the tobacco settlement.
I derive a certain amount of glee from this, namely because I always thought the tobacco settlement would cause the states trouble eventually. Well here they are. They succeeded in blackmailing big tobacco into handing over billions of dollars in protection money to the states, but the states - instead of protecting their meal ticket - acted like sharks in a feeding frenzy, passing out multi-billion dollar judgements to people who made themselves sick from smoking, as if Phillip Morris had their own private printing press for U.S. currency. Turns out they don't. Looks like the generosity of our courts is going to end up cutting into the state's take. This means a lot of worthy programs might get cut:
Kentucky uses settlement money to diversify its tobacco-based agricultural economy, while Kansas puts the money into an education trust fund. Indiana earmarks the money for children's health insurance, prescription drugs for poor seniors and anti-smoking programs.
Vermont has already spent the $13 million it expects from Philip Morris on Medicaid services and tobacco and substance abuse programs. And Washington has spent its anticipated $53 million on health insurance for children, immunization programs and other public health needs.
If Philip Morris falls short, states may have to cut those programs deeply, cut other programs or raise taxes - not a popular option during an economic downturn.
Of course, you could argue that the billions agreed upon was actually supposed to go to paying for the health costs of sick smokers, and that a number of the states are patently not spending their money on that. You could alternatively argue that the states crusade against big tobacco was intended to put big tobacco out of business, and in that case, this is good news, even if the states are crying crocodile tears about it now. Or you could realize that the tobacco settlement was never about public health or compensating sick smokers or even punishing evil - it was a mugging. In any case, I can't feel any sympathy for states that are whining about Philip Morris' precarious financial position now.

Wednesday, April 02, 2003

Digging Himself a Deeper Hole
A man is charged with attempting to hire a hit man to kill two teenage girls before they could testify at his trial on charges he sexually assaulted them. ... Hackel said Kokowicz, 54, wanted the slayings carried out before his April 22 trial on charges of criminal sexual conduct and providing drugs or alcohol to minors. He is accused of having intercourse with an incapacitated 16-year-old and fondling a 17-year-old girl at his home in Eastpoint, police Detective Neil Childs said.
In the new allegations, Kokowicz faces two counts of solicitation of murder and one count of intimidating or threatening to kill or injure a witness.
I could wish that there weren't people this dumb living in the United States, but then again, when a criminal is as obviously retarded as this twit is, catching him is easier.

Tuesday, April 01, 2003

Thank You, Lisa Lozano
My new swimsuit by TNA was delivered yesterday. I don't think TNA officially stands for Tits and Ass, but that's definitely what gets showcased in their designs, and boy am I happy about it. I have never had a bikini that fit so well or looked so damn good. Now I can barely wait for summer to start.

And the folks at Swimwear Boutique made shopping for it mighty pleasant. They've definitely gained a repeat customer.

Friday, March 21, 2003

Nothing makes 'em madder than the truth
The Associated Press reports that some students at University of Maryland are upset over an editorial cartoon that appeared in their college newspaper.
Students picketed a college newspaper and demanded it apologize for a cartoon that said an American peace activist who was run over by an Israeli bulldozer was stupid.

The publication, The Diamondback at the University of Maryland, refused to apologize, citing the First Amendment.
Good for you, guys! Don't back down.
The cartoon, by student Daniel Friedman, showed a woman in front of a bulldozer. The label contained the dictionary definition of "stupidity," and added another way to define stupidity: "Sitting in front of a bulldozer to protect a gang of terrorists."

More than 60 students protested after the cartoon appeared Wednesday morning.

"You wouldn't see cartoon in the newspaper making fun of 9-11 victims. You wouldn't see a cartoon making fun of a suicide-bombing victim," protester Setareh Ghandehari said.
Of course you wouldn't, except maybe in a place like 'Palestine'. But Rachel Corrie's death doesn't deserve the same respect. Rachel wasn't an innocent civilian just minding her own business who - oops! - got run over by an evil Israeli bulldozer. She was an American flag-burning, pro-terrorism, Palestine supporter, who was killed - accounts of how, vary - attempting to interfere with a military operation to reduce terrorist activity. I'll make fun of any anti-war protesters who get themselves shot trying to break in to military bases for 'civil disobedience', and every human shield that survives Operation Iraqi Freedom, too.
My Eternal Gratitude
For all those folks in the armed services - both those I personally know, and those I haven't had the chance to meet yet - from the bottom of my heart:

Thank you for your honorable and courageous service. May you bring freedom to the Iraqi people, and then come back home to us, safe and sound. I wish all of you the best.

Wednesday, March 19, 2003

The Disloyal Opposition
So Sen. Kerry underwent surgery to remove a wart from his eyelid. Too damn bad he didn't bother to have them take the beam out at the same time.

Friday, March 14, 2003

Contraband Bliss
I just received a case of Kinder Eggs in the mail. You can't get them in the U.S., because the FDA has determined that Americans are too dumb not to just go ahead and swallow the plastic egg containing the surprise that's inside the chocolate egg. I grew up in Germany though, and for me, they are a tangible reminder of happy childhood times. The milk chocolate shell is yummy, and the little toys inside - most of them assembly required - are neat.

If anyone else in the U.S. misses Kinder Eggs like I do, Kinder Eggs.com is there to help.
Please read Lileks today
This is just brilliant
On the radio today I heard an interview with Liev Aleo, who intends to be a human shield as soon as she can scrape together the plane fare. She believes that Saddam would be dissuaded from his path if we just talked things out - as though a deficiency in conversation has led us to this point. It would have been just another argument of the sort we're all sick to death of hearing, but she's ready to go. She'd hop a plane today. As an American, she believes her place is outside the chain-link fence of an Iraqi electrical substation. She doesn’t think she’d die; she believes that the presence of the human shields would shame the military into calling off the war. You can say, well, fine; you want to be red paste on the side of a transformer outside an Iraqi military base, it’s your life. But my God, it’s so much more than that. The host asked how her parents felt, and she admitted that they were nervous.

c'mon.... follow the link and read it all.
Falcon Flies Free
I am extremely disappointed that Christopher Boyce, the traitor popularly known as "The Falcon" is going to be released on parole. I've posted why, over on Winds Of Change.
Yearning for warmer weather...
Listened to The Danny Morris Band - Storm Surge on the way into work this morning. There is nothing like hearing "Swing With You Baby" to get me in the mood for summer weather and some dancing.

Thursday, February 27, 2003

Good bye, Mr. Rodgers
I grew up with Mr. Rodgers' Neighborhood.
My deepest condolences go out to his family.

Thursday, February 13, 2003

Granola...
Was listening to Dynamite Hack on the way into work this morning, and I just can't resist posting the lyrics to their song "Granola," which could easily become my anthem.

For those of you who aren't familiar with the band, they're the goofs who covered "Boyz in the Hood". I find the entire album worth listening to.

guys like you are always so entertaining
"i can't help myself ", she said
"i'm crazy for that smile"
then she'll drag me down
with her friends to their demonstrations
well i have to share my girl with her cult life
don't call me apethetic
'cuz i don't believe the hype
cuz it's people who believe in things
that are always taking lives

and it's ok that you want to take some
time away from me
it's all about karma, alien invasions,
chakras and crystals and reincarnation
just let me leave the left behind

guys like you are always so entertaining
"we're just good friends" she says
"he's so deep and involved"
but me? well she drags me down,
never ever lets me out
well i've seen all i care to hear
of what with me is wrong
man your soul is rotten,
but your teeth are pearly white
everything that comes from you is a fake
or a lie

and it's ok that you want to take some time away from me
it's all about karma, alien invasions,
chakras and crystals and reincarnation
just let me leave the left behind
let's go

and it's ok that you want to take some time away from me
it's all about karma, alien invasions,
chakras and crystals and reincarnation
just let me leave the left behind
left behind..cha cha cha

If you've gotta have political music, I'll listen to this over rants about freeing cop-killers any day.

Monday, February 10, 2003

Getting a little hectic here...
That would be work, and my personal life, which are combining to make it exceedingly hard for me to post regularly.
Apologies to anyone who has sent me an email, and hasn't received a response.
Just as soon as I've got the job back under control, and the laundry done, I'll be back.

In the meantime, for the serious-minded, I suggest you swing on over to Winds of Change for thoughtful and timely commentary.

If you're in a lighter frame of mind, I'd suggest ScrappleFace: New Fairly Unbalanced. We Report. You Decipher" for some of the sharpest satire I've seen in ages.

Friday, January 31, 2003

Progress on Countermeasures for the U.S. population
This is nice to hear:
Federal health officials say a compound long used as the artist's pigment Prussian blue could be an important antidote to a "dirty bomb" attack, and they are calling for drug companies to quickly seek permission to manufacture some...

FDA's unusual declaration removes a significant burden from any company considering making Prussian blue pills – they wouldn't have to prove it's a safe or effective treatment. Instead, interested manufacturers merely would have to prove they can properly brew the right dose, steps FDA drug chief Dr. Janet Woodcock called simple for any pharmaceutical company.

Currently, there is only one commonly available medication for protection against radiation, a drug called potassium iodide that people who live near nuclear reactors often keep on hand in case of an attack or accident. It has just one use – to prevent thyroid cancer by shielding the thyroid gland from exposure to radioactive iodine. It blocks no other type of radiation, and protects no other body part.
How many feminists does it take to suck the fun out of everything in life?
Today's Best of the Web had some funny comments to make about the National Organization of Women's 'Feminist Superbowl Adwatch'.
The self-styled National Organization for Women has finally gotten around to posting its reviews of Super Bowl ads, which, as we noted, it had promised to do Monday. NOW has managed to perpetuate two derogatory stereotypes: of women as perennially late, and of feminists as humorless.
It's tempting to just leave it at that, but...

Exactly what does the level of violence in a commercial have to do with feminism? Or how many fat people there are? Or the 'diversity' of a commercial? Is it that feminism has mutated from a cause that strove for equal rights for women, to a grievance machine that is satisfied with nothing less than equal outcomes for everyone? Do they really want to live in Harrison Bergeron's world?

For instance, one of the ads that ended up on their 'Worst' list, was "Terry Tate: Office Linebacker"
#72: Reebok — Linebacker Terry Tate roughs up the office
"Bad use of diversity. Stereotype of African American being used for his muscles in a position where he should be using his brains."
I can't quite see how this ends up as a feminist complaint, given that it has nothing to do with depictions of women. And it's hilarious.

I expected feminists to get their panties in a twist over Budweiser's "she'll look like her mom in 20 years" commercial, but it was greeted with howls of laughter at my house.

Tuesday, January 28, 2003

Willfull Stupidity: Seattle City Council
SEATTLE -- The City Council, in reacting to the obvious security vulnerabilities exposed by the recent sniper attacks originating from the Seattle area has cracked down on illegal immigration in the area.... no, wait, that would be sensible. Actually,
The City Council has barred police and other city workers from asking about the immigration status of people they deal with. The ordinance, which was approved 9 to 0 Monday, makes two exceptions. One is for anyone police have "reasonable suspicion" to believe was once deported and has committed a felony. The other allows police to assist federal agents as required by law.
This would be fantastically outrageous, if it weren't for the fact that the cops will hardly be effective, for so long as the INS is in the habit of just letting illegal aliens go.

Still, it's disappointing to see the City Council prove the definition of a committee: an organism with two or more heads and no brain. To me, this is about the same as if the city voted to make Pi = 3.

Wednesday, January 22, 2003

Is This A Case of Misery Loves Company?
I'm really not sure why veterans' groups have their panties in a twist over the following statement by Donald Rumsfield:
"If you think back to when we had the draft, people were brought in . . . without choices," Rumsfeld said. "Big categories were exempted: people who were in college, people who were teaching, people who were married. . . . And what was left was sucked into the intake, trained for a period of months, and then went out, adding no value, no advantage, really, to the United States armed services over any sustained period of time because the churning that took place, it took an enormous amount of effort in terms of training, and then they were gone."
What's so offensive about stating that conscripting men into service isn't the best way to build an army? Are these folks really yearning for the good old days of the Weathermen, the SDS, Kent State, and fleeing to Canada? Maybe it's that misery loves company. It is the only reason why I can see anyone supporting the conscription of unwilling troops, when even our own Department of Defense says it doesn't need it, and wouldn't want it.

Friday, January 17, 2003

You call this 'awry'?
The AP has the following headline Virginia Bank Robbery Goes Awry, but from a reading of the article, I'd say the robbery ended just right

Police said the suspect, 61-year-old Edward Butler Blaine, fled on foot after beating on the car window with a piece of wood. Bystanders then began to chase him, police said.
When the bystanders caught him, Blaine tried to shoot them, but instead shot himself in the leg, Caroline County Sheriff Homer Johnson said. One of the men also shot him as they continued to struggle.
(bold emphasis mine)

As Instapundit is fond of saying, "a pack, not a herd". Robber attempts to make off with the loot, bystanders chase him down, and thanks to Virginia's more sensible laws regarding firearms, when he tried to shoot at them, one of the bystanders was able to shoot back. So robber doesn't get away, ends up in jail, thanks to civic minded, armed citizens.

If this is awry, I'd rather not be aright.
Real Monsters Come In All Sizes...
Size Small: Police said a group of fifth-graders tried to poison a schoolmate by putting pills, glue, lead and chalk in her drinks. ... Investigators declined to elaborate on why the group allegedly targeted the 11-year-old. ... "They said that they didn't like her and that they wanted to hurt her," school principal Sally Edwards said Thursday. ... "We certainly feel they knew right from wrong because they conspired as a group. Some had reservations and didn't participate. Others participated knowing what the consequences could be," Lauricella said.

Size Medium: A judge dropped felony charges against four men accused of videotaping fistfights and humiliating acts involving homeless people and selling the tapes they called "Bumfights." ... The judge's ruling followed a five-day preliminary hearing involving testimony from men on the tapes who said they were paid for their performances, some saying they were given $5 and $10 bills. Two said they did not remember if they were intoxicated.

Size Large: A U.N. inquiry confirmed systematic cannibalism, rape, torture and killing by rebels in a campaign of atrocities against civilians in the forests of northeast Congo, with children among the victims, U.N. authorities said today. ... The report cited 117 instances of arbitrary executions between Oct. 24 and 29. It cited 65 cases of rape, including the rape of children, 82 kidnappings and 27 cases of torture. ... "The testimony given by victims and of witnesses was of cannibalism and forced cannibalism," including people made by rebels to eat members of their own family, Tome said. ... Atrocities found by investigators include the removal and consumption of hearts of infants, small girls killed and mutilated, "people executed alive before the members of their families, and the rape of children," Tome said.

Thursday, January 16, 2003

Targeting the wrong deep pockets
Some of the families of the sniper-attack victims are suing Bull's Eye Shooter Supply of Tacoma; store owners Brian Borgelt and Charles Carr; Bushmaster Firearms Inc. of Windham, Maine; and sniper defendants John Allen Muhammad and Lee Malvo.

Perhaps a lawsuit against those responsible for the sniper attacks is in order, but I don't think that the plaintiffs should be suing Bushmaster Firearms, and unless the store can be found to have sold the rifle illegally, I don't think Bull's Eye Shooter Supply should be named either. If they're going to target those responsible for the attacks, the lawsuit should name the Nation of Islam for preaching an anti-american, racist ideology to Muhammad.

But then again, this isn't really an attempt to punish those responsible, it's another attempt to put legal gun manufacturers out of business, and further restrict law-abiding citizens access to arms.
What's the difference between a lawyer and a whore?
Eugene Volokh has some good reasons why it is unfair to compare a lawyer to a 'two-bit whore'. He makes good points, all of them, but he forgot the biggest difference between a whore and a lawyer:
A whore stops screwing you when you're dead.

Wednesday, January 15, 2003

Waxing Gibbering Loon
The Best of the Web today featured a bite at an editorial published in the New York Times by Peggy Loonan. They had some fun with her name, but I made the mistake of actually reading the editorial. Her primary complaint is that the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action Leage is changing their name to Naral Pro Choice America, to remove the 'abortion' from their name. She thinks its a big mistake, and thinks that Naral's alliance building strategy has harmed the pro-abortion movement...

In the process, the forging of alliances with such lawmakers and voters on their terms, rather than on the terms of what should be every woman's right, has only helped put in place more barriers to abortion. According to an annual Naral review in 2002, in the last 15 years 21 states have passed measures requiring mandatory waiting periods, 43 have adopted parental involvement laws, 28 have imposed limits on public financing and 28 have passed regulations intended to put abortion clinics out of business.

PermagrinGirls's translation:
· Much like purchasing a gun, some states have adopted a mandatory waiting period before you can have an abortion. In each case, the state worries that you're planning on killing someone, so they think it's a good idea to make you cool off a bit and think it over first.
· If you're under the age of consent, in some states, you'll have to let your parents know you're knocked up before you can get an abortion. Just like you have to have your parent's permission to get a tattoo or a piercing or a drivers license if you're under the age of 18.
· Some states have decided to impose limits on how many free or discount abortions they'll provide. Gosh. How cruel of them to make you pay to fix your own damn mistake.

In the end, though, I found that I had to agree with Ms. Loonan - pro-abortion groups should not remove the word 'abortion' from their names. To refer to them as "pro-choice" misleads people into thinking that these groups support other choices than abortion.

Update: From my tone, you might gather that I'm anti-abortion. Actually, I believe that anyone who wants an abortion should be able to have one; I just don't want one for myself, and I dislike the idea of paying for someone elses'. I'm also of the opinion that, given the plethora of birth control devices available in the U.S., abortion really oughtta be the last resort.

Tuesday, January 14, 2003

Sometimes I'm Serious, Too
Note the new link on my sidebar to Winds of Change.

"This blog's focus will be world events and the future we're creating, with frequent side-trips into the worlds of business, technology, and religion.
Our team aims to elevate debate by being thoughtful, substantive, and ahead of the curve." - Joe Katzman

Somehow, I was lucky enough to be invited to share space over there, so I'll be keeping PermaGrinGirl going, but any thoughts I've got regarding the intel community and national security will be posted on Winds of Change as Celeste Bilby. Judging by the initial posts, I'm hardly a reason to visit, but there's excellent commentary and information from Joe Katzman, Trent Telenko, MuslimPundit and Armed Liberal.

Monday, January 13, 2003

First they came for the smokers....
Now, the city of Bend, Oregon has proposed rules that would ban stinky people from being on the city bus.

As a pack-a-day gal, I can't help find a secret, malicious bit of enjoyment from this, given that I've had to tolerate scolding and lectures about my 'nasty, filthy, anti-social' habit from women who thought that cheap cologne was a suitable substitute for soap and hot water.

The next time you see someone doing something you find obnoxious, and think to yourself "that should be outlawed," keep in mind the person behind you is probably thinking the same thing about you.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Is how I feel about sex education. There's been some interesting interplay between Instapundit and Clayton Cramer regarding condoms, their reliability, and wether or not we should be encouraging kids to use them.

Clayton makes some interesting comments regarding the size of the HIV virus, and the size of pores in a condom, that I hadn't considered before. My objection to the constant pushing of condom use was that, in terms of preventing pregnancy and STDs, it really isn't all that effective. If I'm facing the possibility of an abortion, or 18 years of indentured servitude, I want birth control a damn sight more effective than 88%. In addition, while the latest study I've seen shows that condoms help reduce transmission of HIV, the same study also said that they couldn't judge the effectiveness of condom use in reducing the spread of other STDs, including HPV. Given the almost talismanic status that people have been giving condoms, that's some tough news to hear. HIV isn't the only incurable STD out there, after all... herpes and HPV aren't fatal, but they'll be with you for the rest of your life.

I think that attitudes towards sex (including when you're considered ready to have it) are much like religious beliefs - best taught by the family, not the state. Basic anatomy and reproduction should be taught within the classroom. Information on birth control and such should be available in health clinics for those precocious kiddies that just can't keep it in their pants, but I don't think the schools should provide birth control. I think one of the indicators of your readiness for sex is wether or not you've got the guts to buy a pack of condoms on your own.

If schools must insist on teaching sexual howtos, then I'd appreciate it if they would hammer in the following points:
- Always take care of your own birth control, unless you want to be a parent. This means not trusting statements like "I'm on the pill," or "I've had a vasectomy."
- You can catch all sorts of nasty diseases from having sex, wether or not you're using a condom, and some of them are incurable. Picture yourself with a wart on the end of your dick for the rest of your natural born life before you have sex with someone whose 'cleanliness' is not verified. You can still get genital warts if you're wearing a condom.
- Other people are crazy, so even while you might be ready to have sex, you stand the chance of opening up all sorts of misery for yourself if you pick someone who isn't ready yet. Picture an unbalanced 15 year old sending you hate notes written in her own blood and waiting outside your house at night for months on end before you 'coax' your new girlfriend into putting out.

Thursday, January 09, 2003

Say the Chickens of the world, "Please, don't help."
The Center for Consumer Freedom linked to this little gem of an article describing a recent ELF raid in Britain that was just as successful as I would have expected it to be...

The raid took place at the Norfolk Cottage eggs farm in Poole during the early hours of New Year’s Day. Activists broke into a barn expecting to find battery hens kept in tiny cages; instead they discovered 7,000 free-range birds, which panicked at the noise and the light of the intruders’ torches.
The result was a stampede in which scores of birds were crushed and suffocated beneath a mountain of feathers.
Martin Elliott, the farmer, found the carnage the following morning along with the messages “unhappy New Year to U scum” and “no excuse for animal abuse” sprayed on the walls.


I guess the 'no excuse' part doesn't apply to idiotic attempts to 'free' birds with brains the size of peas. What's next? Human rights groups 'liberating' mental hospital inmates?
Someday, I'll take my kids on a European vacation...
The other night, I caught the last half of "National Lampoon's European Vacation." There's one scene, when the family arrives in Germany, and dad makes some sappy reference to the "motherland," and his son replies, "but grandma and grandpa are from Detroit," (or something like that)... I turned to my boyfriend and said, "Someday, I'm going to take my kids on a tour of Europe, and I'm going to tell them, 'Look kids, this is Europe. These countries sucked so badly that your ancestors had to escape and make a new life in the U.S., and aren't you glad they did?'"

I was reminded of this when I read RealPolitik's thought for the day.

Monday, January 06, 2003

Reverse Boycotting
So PETA has announced that they're boycotting KFC.

PETA said it wants an end to "crude and ineffective electric stunning and throat-slitting" of chickens, and called for improvements in the conditions under which the chickens are raised. The organization said the birds should be allowed more space.

Well... dammit! I'm one of those people who would usually rather have their eyeballs gouged out with a wooden spoon before going to a fast food joint, but this makes me want to head right over to the nearest Colonel's and buy myself the largest bucket of crispy style chicken they've got.

Considering that of the 2,103 companion animals PETA 'rescued' in 2000, it euthanized more than 1,300 of them, I can't really find PETA's moral authority for demanding that Yum foods give better treatment to their chickens.

While several dozen shelters in Virginia have adopted a no-kill philosophy, PETA has not.

Ingrid Newkirk's defense of PETA's 'kill most of them' policy is telling:
"It sounds lovely if you're naive," Newkirk said. "We could become a no-kill shelter immediately. It means we wouldn't do as much work." Newkirk said PETA goes into bad neighborhoods and rescues animals that are unadoptable.

That's a real howler, considering that PETA's funding is in the tens of millions of dollars each year, but that: PETA spent less than $3,955 of its $12 million in fiscal year 1995 and $6,100 of its $10.9 million in fiscal 1996 for shelter programs, according to its nonprofit tax forms filed with the IRS. In contrast, PETA sent $70,500 in 1995 to Rodney Coronado, a convicted arsonist and avowed member of the domestic-terrorist group called the Animal Liberation Front. Coronado served a five-year federal prison sentence for a 1992 animal-rights-related firebombing at Michigan State University. (source)

Thursday, January 02, 2003

Easy points...pissed off citizens
Such is the power of the blogosphere, that I heard about this story in my own home area, from a man living in Tennessee.

Instapundit thinks that the practice of Fairfax county police raiding bars and giving public drunkeness tickets is tacky. I'd call it worse than tacky, but I can't think of a single word that conveys my disgust over such paternalistic tactics effectively.

I remember working late shifts at the Amphora in Vienna, and the police would come in, head to the smoking section, and card every patron in the smoking section who appeared to be under 30, to combat underage smoking - which may be a problem, but ranks far lower on my list of society's ills than child rape.

I've talked to a lot of policemen who work in this area, and I don't think the police are doing this because they're smallminded, petty, jackbooted thugs who enjoy grinding the defenseless populace under the heel of authority (although I've certainly met a few who do); the police do cigarette and 'public drunkeness' raids because the police in this area work on a point system. You don't have to have a certain quota of speeders, or robbers each month, but you do have to get a certain number of points, and the number of points you get varies based on the type of crime. If all you have to do is garner a certain number of points, you could just set up a speed trap in a school zone for the day, and have all the points you need to make for your entire month in one day. That's an actual example.

DEA raids medical marijuana distributors in California, instead of going after states that think they have a pot problem. BATF concentrates on legal gun dealers, operating in the open, instead of concentrating on getting guns out of the hands of criminals. The police in Fairfax county spend their time raiding peaceful bar patrons, but won't chase down a drunk man driving a stolen vehicle that rear-ended me in the busiest pedestrian district in Alexandria (but I'm not bitter). As long as there is small time shit out there for the police to futz around with, that's what they'll do - because it is easier, and safer, than going after violent criminals who leave behind victims.

I don't claim to know how to fix it, but I have some ideas. If you've gotta keep a point system, fine, but weight the scoring so that there is strong incentive for the police to go after crimes that have victims first - say 1 point for any traffic violation versus 1000 for a rape. Perhaps some simplification of the law would be in order too. Right now, there are a whole lot of laws on the books that go unenforced - unless the cop is in a pissy mood. Witness the 'gentleman's 10' - the commonly held belief that a cop won't ticket you unless you're doing better than 10 over the limit.

When I was contracting to the government, one of the many jobs I did involved teaching analytical risk management to security professionals in the intel community. What we were trying to do - sadly, pretty much in vain - was hammer through these government types' heads that, given the world we live in today, with the myriad threats we face, and the limited budget we have for security, you have to prioritize your threats, and apply countermeasures effectively.

So... is public drunkeness one of the greatest threats Fairfax county faces today? If you think "yes", raise your hand and I'll come over and hit you on the head with a hammer because you are a retard. In a county that has seen everything from gang-related shootings, and fundraising for islamic terrorist groups, to a 12 year old boy attempting to form a prostitution ring, I'd place even the drunkest patrons of our local bars near the bottom of the list of threats. So.... a little prioritization, please.