Monday, October 24, 2005

George Will on Miers

Excellent as usual:
. . . Democrats, with their zest for gender politics, need this reminder: To give a woman a seat on a crowded bus because she is a woman is gallantry. To give a woman a seat on the Supreme Court because she is a woman is a dereliction of senatorial duty. It also is an affront to mature feminism, which may bridle at gallantry but should recoil from condescension.

As for Republicans, any who vote for Miers will thereafter be ineligible to argue that it is important to elect Republicans because they are conscientious conservers of the judicial branch's invaluable dignity. Finally, any Republican senator who supinely acquiesces in President Bush's reckless abuse of presidential discretion -- or who does not recognize the Miers nomination as such -- can never be considered presidential material.

Thanks to Andrew Sullivan for pointing this one out.

It ain't flat, but it's squished down a lot

Hot damn, someone gets it. Bush's simpler tax forms are a great step forward. Next step, tear down the IRS edifice.

Congratulations to Concord Band

State Class B Champions. The kids worked really hard and pulled it off. Makes a Band Dad proud.

Friday, October 21, 2005

More on the Miers nomination

OpinionJournal makes it clear why the Miers nomination is a big mistake, both politically and morally. Money quotes:
After three weeks of spin and reporting, we still don't know much more about what Ms. Miers thinks of the Constitution. What we have learned is that the White House has presented her to the country, and thrown her into the buzz saw that is the U.S. Senate, without either proper preparation or vetting. The result has been a political melee that is hurting not just Ms. Miers, who deserves better. It is also damaging the White House and its prospects for a successful second term.

Instead of a fight over judicial philosophy, we're having a fight over one woman's credentials and background. Instead of debating the Kelo decision's evisceration of private property rights, we are destined to learn everything we never wanted to know about the Texas Lottery Commission.

Instead of dividing Red State Democrats from Senate liberals, the nomination is dividing Republicans. Pat Robertson is threatening retribution not against moderate Democrats but against GOP conservatives who dare to oppose Ms. Miers. Chuck Schumer couldn't have written a better script.

Why Bush did this is beyond me, and unless he knows WAY more about this woman than he's telling, I have to believe he didn't give a damn about what direction the Supreme Court is going, or should go. He talkd a good game about "originalists," and there may be some validity to having non-judges ascend to the bench. But this still seems incomprehensible, and after three weeks of discussion, it shouldn't.

My suggestion is to pull the nomination, and come back with something supportable. It will be damaging to the President, but I think the damage has already been done. And to some degree, this is good. Conservatives are finally questioning Bush's own conservative credentials, especially in light of his support for overspending and stupid laws like the campaign finance reform measures. The debate is good, but this nominee isn't.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Cindy Sheehan: Exit, Stage Far Left

Cindy Sheehan has probably already started outliving her usefulness to the left and mainstream media, but this will put the lid on the can. When you start trashing the queen (Hillary), expect to be figuratively "disappeared."

Biochemist argues intelligent design not same as creationism

Oh really? What else can you really infer from the "scientific" concept of an intelligent creator? Interesting how proponents of this idea argue this point. From this report on the Kitzmiller vs Dover Board of education trial now going on, this is the kind of tortured, hairsplitting defense of intelligent design we're seeing.
The plaintiffs argue that intelligent design--which posits that some aspects of life, yet unexplained by evolution, are best attributed to an unnamed and unseen intelligent designer--really is a disguised version of creationism, the adherence to the biblical account of creation.

Not so, said (Michael) Behe [the biochemist from Lehigh University], during often heated exchanges with counsel for the plaintiffs during cross-examination. Creationism is "180 degrees different from intelligent design," he said. "Creationism is a theological concept. Intelligent design is a scientific theory that relies on physical, empirical, observable evidence in nature plus logical inferences."

Behe, who identifies himself as a Roman Catholic, said that although intelligent design cannot scientifically identify the designer and does not rule out a natural cause, he believes it is God. Behe is the author of 1996's "Darwin's Black Box," a touchstone of the design movement.
C'mon! If it isn't God, what else would it be? Space aliens (shades of Scientology)? A band of Angels? No, this is ultimately creationism in a lab coat. How this guy can call himself a scientist is beyond me.

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Is Bush imploding?

Oh, man ... if this is true, and I'm not sure it is (it's the anti-Bush Brits after all), I'm really disappointed. If God is really his reason for invading Iraq, when he had so many good ones, I feel used. The war is the right thing, but Bush is starting to look a little nutty to me. Between this and his pronouncements about "intelligent design," I'm worried.

Thanks to my liberal daughter Paige for finding this.

Sunday, October 9, 2005

This is the director's tower, taken just after we took off for the second time. The vertical bar-looking thing at the left is the center line of the bubble windshield. We're about 10 feet above the directors -- and climbing. Posted by Picasa

Part of the Concord Band's field show in rehearsal on their practice field. This is kind of low-res. Looks better in the actual video. Posted by Picasa

Flying high for the band

The photos that will follow won't mean a lot to most people, but they were fun to take. They're aerials taken at my son's high school, by me, from a Bell helicopter. I thought I might be scared to death, what with this being a little two-seater with the passenger door taken off, and me afraid of heights, but it was a lot of fun. Following are a couple screen-grabs from the video.

Monday, October 3, 2005

Re: Harriet Miers

I'm concerned about this nomination, but am reserving judgement. Why were other highly qualified judges, some female, passed over? The Supreme Court is too important for the President to wimp out -- but did he? Bill Kristol on Fox News, and others, seem to think so. We could all be wrong. Or not.