Funny how the warnings of demographers are laughed off, while the warnings of climate scientists produce immediate calls for action.Go figure.
If those are the facts, what should we infer? Being on the list of minority law professors served her interest in advancement, but the claim was weak and potentially embarrassing, so it was deleted... after she achieved what was the ultimate advancement (to Harvard Law School)? I'm just guessing. Do you have a more apt inference? In any event, it's a question that goes to honesty.And, here is the link to the original article Professor Althouse was commenting on—from The Volokh Conspiracy.
If anything, under the presidencies of Clinton and Obama, the Democrats have become more of a status-quo party.This means The Republicans either return to their "me too" ways of the 50s, 70s and 70s or they take a stand. I think the two authors are correct when they say:
The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics.The TV News Staff person who gave the Republicans the color red was prescient.
The post-McGovern Democratic Party, by contrast, while losing the bulk of its conservative Dixiecrat contingent in the decades after the civil rights revolution, has retained a more diverse base.I don't feel bad about the Dixiecrats going away. They held up equal rights efforts for a century, before President Lyndon Johnson had his way with them. But, if those chaps went away, from where is the great diversity coming? Is it those Socialists Rep Allen West mentioned? Confusing.
If you had to make a law defining what constitutes a crime with respect to the treatment of a dead body, how much leeway would you give to the new widowers and widows?I thought that was a funny comment, in a twisted sort of way.
My first question would be "why is "necrophilia" illegal anyway"?
Is it because there's no known way for the deceased to express consent?
I don't know how things go on a mountainside in Colorado, but isn't it conventionally "till death do you part"?Then there are all those questions about the right to privacy. Privacy should not be too quickly dismissed. Just because "A" wouldn't do something doesn't mean we should have a law preventing "E" from doing it.
CURRENT GROUND ASSIGMENT POLICIES RESTRICT THE ASSIGNMENT OF WOMEN SERVING IN AN OPEN PRIMARY MOS (PMOS) TO CERTAIN UNITS IN THE GROUND COMBAT ELEMENT (GCE). THE EXCEPTION TO POLICY WILL ALLOW US TO BEGIN ASSIGNING ACTIVE DUTY, UNRESTRICTED, FEMALE COMPANY GRADE OFFICERS, GUNNERY SERGEANTS, AND STAFF SERGEANTS IN THEIR CURRENT PMOS' TO ARTILLERY, TANK, ASSAULT AMPHIBIAN, COMBAT ENGINEER, COMBAT ASSAULT, AND LOW ALTITUDE AIR DEFENSE BATTALION STAFFS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE OUR RESEARCH EFFORT. FEMALE MARINES POSSESSING AN ADMINISTRATION, LOGISTICS, COMMUNICATIONS, SUPPLY, OR MOTOR TRANSPORT MOS MAY BE ASSIGNED TO THE ABOVE UNITS AS PART OF THE NORMAL ASSIGNMENT PROCESS DURING CALENDAR YEAR 2012.Is there a limit to who we allow in the military? Regards — Cliff
Regards — Cliff
Romney’s father, George—who served as governor of Michigan and was a member of the Nixon cabinet and also a presidential candidate—was born in Mexico in 1907 to a family of American Mormons who fled to Mexico when the United States government cracked down on the practice of polygamy. George Romney’s parents were in a monogamous marriage, but Mexico was the last bastion for the practice of plural marriage in the Church of Latter Day Saints. (The church has since expressly prohibited the practice.)Born in 1907? A century ago. A monogamous marriage? The Governor of the Great State of Montana is really reaching here.
But, it is really worse than that. Governor Schweitzer is from the "Party of Choice", except when it isn't. Does he not remember reading about, in school, the Edmunds Anti-Polygamy Act of 1882? People of faith were arrested and imprisoned for doing what they thought was right. Some went into exile rather than submit to the tyranny of the Federal Government.
The Governor thinks most women in the United States find polygamy an abomination, and I think he is correct in his judgement. Personally, I am against the practice. That said, out across the Globe hundreds of millions of people agree with the practice. But, here in these United States the practice only exists underground or on TV shows.
In sum, this is ancient news, about a way of life (Mormon Mexican Colonies) that died with the Mexican Revolution—a way of life created, in part, by persistent hostility to a new idea by the people of the Northeastern quarter of our nation.
It is time to move on.
Regards — Cliff
Regards — Cliff
Once our babymaking days are over, fat is stored in larger quantities and also stored more centrally, where it is easiest to carry about.Makes sense to me. "Preservation of favored races in the struggle for life" and all that.
That way, if times get tough we can use it for our own survival, thus freeing up food for our younger relatives.
Blogging is the most important thing that unimportant people do.Brilliant! Just Brilliant! As I noted in a comment on the Left in Lowell thread:
Mr Bill Taupier has defined democracy in the digital age. As Citizens we must communicate amongst ourselves and not just accept what our betters tell us. Even if we disagree, as is happening on this thread, we are making Democracy live and not just doing as our betters tell us. And, because this is a Democracy, they aren't really our betters anyway, but just fellow Citizens.If Governments, Federal, State or Local, move to control that messy thing called the Internet, then we should resist such actions with all our might. Politically I am a little different from the Left in Lowell writers (this is Right Side of Lowell, after all), but I learn from them and on some issues I join them. In a time when newspaper numbers and circulation is falling, Citizen Journalism becomes ever more important. BLOG ON!
Good on you, Mr Taupier! And thank you for that insightful comment.
In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,Dangerous.
With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:
As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
While God is marching on.
Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of American life.Mr Limbaugh used this as a lead to a story in the 3 April issue of The Daily Mail, where a team of three woman and two men concluded that the availability of men in an area was correlated with the percentage of women in high paying jobs.
They said this means that when men are scarce in a particular area, women, and particularly less attractive ladies, may decide they need to provide for themselves with a well-paid career.But, while this is all interesting research, supposedly done by trained scientists, in my mind it brings up a bigger and more important issue. Have we figured out the impact of women moving from home to work on men less able to get jobs and what happens to them?
The researchers carried out several experiments to come up with their startling argument. The first looked at the number of eligible men in an area, which they called the 'operational sex ratio'. After collecting data from across the US, they found that as the number of eligible men in a state decreased, the proportion of women in highly paid careers rose. In addition, the women who became mothers in those states did so at an older age and had fewer children.
| MEN | WOMEN | |
| EMPLOYED | 74,507,000 | 66,906,000 |
| Participation % | 69.9 | 57.7 |
| UNEMPLOYMENT Rate | 8.9 | 7.7 |
| Num UNEMPLOYED | 7,323,000 | 5,580,000 |
| NOT In Labor Force | 35,156,000 | 53,133,000 |
… the greatest enemy commander to face Britain, lauded for his spirit of endurance against the odds and the enormous impact of his victory.To qualify as a candidate in the final round you had to have been a field commander, so thus Adolf Hitler wasn't in contention.
Matthew Hughes of London's Brunel University said that Rommel and Napoleon were both great operational commanders but they ultimately achieved nothing on the political level.I am not sure that is quite fair to Bonaparte, who gave much of Europe and Louisiana the Napoleanic Code. Not that this was a good thing.
Airport security in America is broken. I should know. For 3 1/2 years—from my confirmation in July 2005 to President Barack Obama's inauguration in January 2009—I served as the head of the Transportation Security Administration.This isn't the first such call. Airport security is like policing Wall Street or the Commodities Markets. Lots of rigid rules give a false sense of security.
Unrest is simmering in some quarters of the Washington news universe regarding changes in the way the Department of Labor (DOL) manages its pre-release media “lockups” on sensitive data like weekly jobless benefits and unemployment.Plus some. I note in passing that each paragraph in the block quote is one sentence long. Does that seem strange to anyone else?
For years, journalists participating in the lockups have shown up at DOL at the appointed time, then entered a limited-access area to receive the new data and prepare news stories for release as soon as official embargoes end.
The system insures that major news organizations get the data as soon as possible and allows journalists covering the release get a jump on providing analyses and opinion about the data.
But Carl Fillichio, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis’ top communications advisor, circulated a memo earlier this week to interested media informing them that everybody is being required to re-submit their credentials requests.
The BLS has a spotless record of maintaining data integrity and insulation from political pressures to manipulate data content or release timing. Solis and Fillichio are said to be quietly resisting efforts in Congress to shift control of the lockups to BLS.Yes, the Bureau of Labor Statistics is a professional organization.
MONDAY, APRIL 16THT0 be honest, Raoul Wallenberg needs to be honored and in addition I am glad to see Rep Alcee Hastings moving to recognize the great Lena Horne.♠ But, the schedule is set so that the Congresscritters can fly back to DC on Monday morning, unless they live a long ways off.
On Monday, the House will meet at 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m.
Legislation Considered Under Suspension of the Rules:
1) H.R. 3001 - Raoul Wallenberg Centennial Celebration Act (Sponsored by Rep. Gregory Meeks / Financial Services Committee)
2) H.R. 1815 - Lena Horne Recognition Act (Sponsored by Rep. Alcee Hastings / Financial Services Committee)
3) H.R. 4040 - To provide for the award of a gold medal on behalf of Congress to Jack Nicklaus in recognition of his service to the Nation in promoting excellence and good sportsmanship in golf (Sponsored by Rep. Joe Baca / Financial Services Committee)
4) H.R. 2453 - Mark Twain Commemorative Coin Act, as amended (Sponsored by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer / Financial Services Committee)
On April 2nd, 2012 [GSA Administrator] Martha Johnson resigned as the head of the GSA after a scathing report detailing outrageous government spending on a training seminar in Las Vegas.Here is a bit more of a writeup. Frankly, while the President appoints, with the advice and consent of the Senate, the Administrator, I think the GSA scandal is a "Washington" thing and not something inherent in the Obama Administration.
The Militia Act argument doesn’t work at all. First, as Elhauge admits, it’s justifiable under the Militia Clause, not the Commerce Clause. The Militia Clause empowers Congress to provide for arming, training, and disciplining the militia, and the cash-strapped first Congress chose to “provide for” arming them by requiring adult males to own guns. This method of arming the miltia existed under the common law and, indeed, in Anglo-Saxon history going back at least as far as the seventh century, so it was hardly a stretch.Note that it is Anglo-Saxon and not Anglo.♥
No, panned in the reviews, not sure,...No messing around.
As of April 13, 2012, Lockout has received generally mixed and negative reviews.On the other hand, Fifty Shades of Gray has been panned by the literature sevants, but is Number 1 on last week's New York Times Book Review list. The book started out digital and then slowly went into print, but along the way it went viral. Blogger and Law Professor Ann Althouse blogged about it in early March (on my wife's birthday). Tuesday a week ago the Barnes and Noble in Burlington received a case (a case) of the book in the AM and they were sold out in two hours.
Burke, who owns an appraisal business on Merrimack Street, said he decided to get into the race in part to protect government programs that help people and do away with those that waste taxpayer dollars.Yes, Mr Nangle has been in a long time. Surprisingly, in the first primary, in 1998, he beat out folks who are now heavyweights, including Bill Marin and Rita Mercier. From The Sun Blog:
"I see it as an issue when they're talking about cutting Meals on Wheels but are going to expand free cellphone programs," said Burke, who lives on Andover Street. "They're taking things away from the needy because other programs are being exploited."
Burke is running in the 17th Middlesex District, which consists of part of Lowell and Chelmsford. The district has been represented by Nangle, a Lowell Democrat, since 1999.
HERE'S THE order of finish in the 1998 Democratic primary that Nangle won. Many forget how close it was: Nangle, 1,268 votes; Martin, 1,048; Geary, 978; Rita Mercier, 817; Karin Theodoros, 766; Scott Consaul, 291.In the General Election Mr Nangle beat Republican Karen Simao, a recent graduate of American University, in DC. Another time he was opposed by both a Republican and a Libertarian and then by a Republican alone, but he managed to poll well in each case. Part of it is that he is a very likable person.
expressing or intending to promote a particular cause or point of view, esp. a controversial one: a tendentious reading of history.But, even so, a good test of one's understanding of what the People are thinking, as understood by Pollsters.
And cartels have oceans of money for corrupting enforcement because drugs are so cheap to produce and easy to renew. So it is not unreasonable to consider modifying a policy that gives hundreds of billions of dollars a year to violent organized crime.This blog has been saying that drug cartel violence is coming north of the border. It will be like prohibition, only worse. What should we do? What do you think?
One of those regions in America, M.R. had said, trying to describe her background to her astronomer-lover who traveled more frequently to Europe than to the rural interior of the United States, where poverty has become a natural resources: social workers, welfare workers, community-medical workers, public defenders, prison and psychiatric hospital staffers, family court officials—all thrived in such barren soil. (p 31)And perhaps that respect can spread to Blogger Jack.
The Mansur family of Lowell, Massachusetts, spring from Robert Monsieur, a French Huguenot, who came to Charlestown, Massachusetts, at an early day, he being known there as the "Crazy Frenchman", his vivacity and unusual way being in such contrast to the Puritans. The same soon became anglicized as Mansur, and his descendants were found all over the United States. Robert Monsieur married Elizabeth Brooks, June 6, 1670, according to Charlestown records, and it is known he was living in 1678. The line of descent from Robert Mansur, the founder, is through his son, John Mansur; his son John (2) Mansur, who settled in Temple, New Hampshire; his son William Mansur, born in Temple; his son, Stephen Mansur, born December 8, 1773, his son Stephen (2) Mansur; his son William Gage Mansur, born in Lowell, Massachusetts.I am thinking Mansur street is named after some Frenchman. Not a French-Canadian, but one of those people who came to the Massachusetts Bay Colony within forty years of its founding. One wonders to what degree his Huguenot background disturbed the Puritan balance in the area. Since he wasn't run out of the colony, one must assume not much.
Along these lines Reuters has now constructed the “Cordray Index,” which shows how the onslaught of federal regulation as well as the continued struggles of the retail banking system to work off bad debt has created a boom time for alternative lenders as consumers have been pushed into these products. Of course, the response of regulators to increased consumer use has been predictable, albeit tragic–to try to take these options away from people (which will, of course, simply push them further down the chain of products). The logic turns conventional economics on its head–so when we see increased demand for this product we are supposed to think that consumers are worse for using it instead of available alternatives? I don’t get why the ordinary rules of economics don’t apply in this market–it seems to me that increased demand for a product is generally evidence of consumer satisfaction relative to other available choices.Have I recently mentioned the War on Arithmetic?
There is no good way to reliably predict the future in these markets anymore, except maybe by being privy to the desires of an ever-decreasing number of centrally connected power players. Companies still need guidance, but if rational analysis is nearly impossible, is it any wonder that executives are asking for less of it? What they are asking for is something, well, less productive.I quickly picked up on the point of the author, Mr Eric Garland, that increased Government Regulation, amongst other things, was distorting the markets.
... a society in which acts of aggression, violence, intimidation, and force are absent. In common language usage, "civil society" also implies peaceful and respectful as opposed to belligerent, tyrannical, or oppressive.Mr Zakaria also notes a lack of economic pluralism.
A Peruvian scholar, Hernando de Soto, has done excellent research on this subject and in a series of books asks "Why, in countries where the people have strong entrepreneurial instincts, does democracy and capitalism struggle so?" Anyone who has been to the Middle East can testify that the people on the street have hustle -- the whole Arab Spring series of revolts started when a street vendor was hassled by police.Democracy doesn't come about because a few people wake up one morning and say to themselves that they should vote for the government this time, rather than have a coup. It comes about through a slow evolution that includes respect for people and respect for property.
The answer, de Soto says (and you can see it between the lines of Zakaria's article, below), is that dictatorships and oligarchies fail to safeguard basic property rights that people need so they can own things with clear title. He points out that in Western, capitalistic societies, the right of property ownership is so entrenched that we don't even notice the right to own land, a car, our house. But in many societies, for example Egypt, that is not always so clear-cut, and small businessmen who can't get clear title to property, or where the processes to get clear title are cumbersome and subject to graft, are not only unable to borrow money for expansion -- a fundamental business principle in Western economies -- but are also subject to having their property confiscated at any time by the government or someone who can buy influence to close them down. So the economy stagnates. Our own founders recognized the basic relationship of property to democracy, and it was an eye-opener to me when de Soto reaffirmed that in modern terms.
IMHO, anyone who seriously studies insurgency or instability ought to read de Soto's work. He began it as a counter to the "Shining Path" movement in his homeland, and it is fundamental to understanding why economies -- and democracies -- have a hard time taking root in some places.
Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.The Affordable Health Care was passed by a strong majority? How soon they forget.
The President’s remarks were fully consistent with the principles described herein.I guess he had to say that, didn't he?
The key to a Romney victory is not to defeat President Obama; that would be a byproduct. The key is to make the case that the Blue Social Model is truly dead, that a new model is urgently needed and to present the first rough draft of what the new model might look like. Points one and two are an open-and-shut case.♠ Point three is much riskier, obviously, but will (over time and with repetition) sharpen the points of difference. Vote for Obama and surely sink. Vote for Romney and at least there’s hope.The best line in the article was "The war against arithmetic is also a war against the young." There it is, the best candidate for campaign catch phrase—"The war against arithmetic."
I'm independent, moderate, and pragmatic, and I voted for you in 2008 because I thought I saw those qualities in you. I still see those qualities in you, but the you that has those qualities is one of two Obamas, and the other Obama — Radical Lefty Obama — is a person I will not vote for.Nice debate in the comments.
Mr. Obama all but threw down the gauntlet with the justices, saying he was "confident" the Court would not "take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."Fifth Circuit Judge Jerry Smith directed Federal lawyers to provide a three page, single space paper on the Government's position:
"I would like to have from you by noon on Thursday -- that's about 48 hours from now -- a letter stating what is the position of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, in regard to the recent statements by the president," Smith said. "What is the authority is of the federal courts in this regard in terms of judicial review?"I am not sure I buy into "passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress".
Yes, Che was ruthless and fanatical and sometimes murderous. But was he a murderer? No, not in the sense of a serial killer or gangland assassin. He was one of those rare people who are prepared to push past ethical constraints, even their own conscience, and bring about a greater good by doing terrible things.So, there you have it; political compromise is good, unless you are someone like Mr Guevara (Che), or maybe Bill Ayers. This is a warning to all you Republicans. It is your job to compromise. It is, apparently, those others who should stand pat and may kill for what they believe. That said, I think that what Mr Guevara believed was a delusion, an emotional response to facts on the ground, an emotional response that impinged on the rights of others.
Whether morally justifiable or not, there is something admirable in that -- pure principle in a world of shabby compromise. Maybe this is why Che remains such an icon, both in image and idea.
NBC doctoring the 911 call, ABC denying Zimmerman's injuries. Awful.For those of you who missed this, Rush covered it today. I don't often cite Rush, but today the irony is too good to pass up.
I'm complimenting the NYT for doing the right thing now, but I acknowledge — and thought about this as I wrote the original post — that it may have ulterior motives along these lines.Then she quotes another commenter:
The NYT walkback is strong evidence of a losing narrative. They don't abandon their cherished narratives easily. If they thought continuing the narrative would be helpful rather than hurtful to the liberal cause, they would still be running it on page one with daily assorted op-eds.Ouch! Somewhere in this post Ms Althouse slipped in an indirect reference to the NYT reference to the shooter as a "white Hispanic".