who's your nanny?

When Fan Bias Is Irrelevant

Yes, I know this is a political blog of sorts. But I also happen to be a huge hockey fan, and a Buffalo Sabres fan in particular.

But that really means nothing when you read about someone losing a child. Sadly, the 2-month-old son of Washington Capitals goalie Jose Theodore has died.

The goalie's sister-in-law made the announcement Thursday during her show on a Montreal-area radio station. Veronique Cloutier, whose sister Stephanie is married to Theodore, did not give details.

Our deepest sympathies to the Theodore family.

The Non-Issue That Is the Gov. Sanford Affair

The mainstream media and conservative blogosphere are all over South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford for cheating on his wife, even though his personal life is none of our business.

But the fact that he's the top administrator of a state that relentlessly steals from citizens and pulls its guns on nonviolent gamblers and drug users? Eh, whatevs.

Depression-Era Divorce

I love my wife, but I'm sure I'm not the only person who's felt at times that marriage is the price you pay to spend time with your kids everyday. And even if that were the only upside, it would be well worth it.

However, those who aren't so lucky are finding that depression-era divorce is resulting in some interesting arrangements.

Man's Best Friend Could Improve Health and Wealth

My friend Lisa De Pasquale, CPAC coordinator for the American Conservative Union, makes the case today for declaring family pets as tax exemptions.

Each year millions of pet owners spend over $41 billion on the care of their pets. During tough economic times, a pet exemption could ease the tax burden for more than 80 million households. [Actor and pet lover Robert] Davi wrote, “Currently, an estimated 500,000 Americans are able to receive a tax credit for up to $3,150 for owning gas-saving hybrid cars. Many cities and states also reward hybrid owners with access to HOV lanes and additional tax breaks. Why not allow a tax exemption for pets that would reward Americans for behavior they are already doing to improve their health and well-being?”

I don't believe the state should be in business at all, so it stands to reason that I don't believe it should be in the business of influencing individuals' behavior either. However, it is always moral to take your money back from the government, regardless of why tax exemptions exist in the first place.

Given this, I particularly liked this "criticism" of Lisa's article levied by a Townhall commenter, who states in part:

Are you INSANE? You are the CPAC Director for the ACU, and you think that there should be MORE complexity to the tax code?

So called "conservatives" like you are the reason we are stuck with Obama now. Have you even READ the Constitution of the United States? How can you possibly justify your proposal?

Tax code complexity is irrelevant. The tax code itself is the necessary evil in the discussion, and if Lisa can be faulted for anything, it's for not going far enough in condemning taxation in the first place. The commenter, like most conservatives, endorses taxation -- i.e., legalized theft of private property -- by attempting to disguise his defense of the state in the minutiae of tax code "complexity."

The state is a criminal gang that keeps us enslaved in large part via taxation; as long as we submit to such coercive behavior, the state will always claim first rights to our property and we will not be free. However, even though taxes are foisted on us to control our behavior in any number of ways, it is never immoral to retrieve stolen property from a thief. And for advocating that, Lisa cannot be faulted.

Karen DeCoster on the Social Costs of Inflation

From Ms. DeCoster's personal blog:

The Federal Reserve, with its money-pumping machine distorting credit markets and interest rates, along with creating piles of debt among the citizenry, is a totalitarian and destructive force. The Fed destroys time preferences because it turns people into consumption-oriented, gotta-have-it-now debt addicts. The Fed has wrecked the housing market and turned homes into leveraged bets. The Fed has sucked people into revolving debt, student loan debt, and miscellaneous personal debt, all with the promise that the boom was never going to end. The Fed perverted the stock market, baiting pension funds, 401k funds, and personal investments, and thus has wiped out much of the wealth of American retirees and the middle class. The Fed has turned the latest generation of children into a consumption-only class who do not know of the production side of the market, nor do they care. The Fed has established a financial dependency on government that has destroyed the self-sufficiency of an entire generation. Today's bread and circuses is tomorrow's lack of saving, invention, and production. The Federal Reserve is a criminal organization and the destroyer of lives.

The latest victim of this system that takes Americans captive is the man who shot his wife and three children to death before committing suicide in Middletown, Maryland. He was $460k in debt on a mortgage and credit cards on a salary of less than $100k per year. The debt, dependency, and financial disintegration drove him insane. Here is Guido Hulsmann from one of my all-time favorite articles, "The Cultural and Spiritual Legacy of Fiat Inflation."

The net effect of the recent surge in household debt is therefore to throw entire populations into financial dependency. The moral implications are clear. Towering debts are incompatible with financial self-reliance and thus they tend to weaken self-reliance also in all other spheres. The debt-ridden individual eventually adopts the habit of turning to others for help, rather than maturing into an economic and moral anchor of his family, and of his wider community. Wishful thinking and submissiveness replace soberness and independent judgement. And what about the many cases in which families can no longer shoulder the debt load? Then the result is either despair or, on the contrary, scorn for all standards of financial sanity.

To Punish and Enslave

Yesterday, Brutus mentioned the story of NFL running back Ryan Moats and his family, who were detained and held at gunpoint by Dallas police officer Robert Powell in front of an emergency room entrance, because Moats rolled through a traffic light in his attempt to get to the hospital in time to see a family member one last time before she died.

As a storm of outrage gathered over his department, Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle called a news conference Thursday to apologize for the behavior of an officer who detained a distressed family outside a hospital emergency room.

Kunkle said Officer Robert Powell had been placed on paid administrative leave in connection with the incident last week, in which he stopped a family rushing to visit a dying mother, keeping them for 13 minutes to write a traffic ticket. The woman died before two of the family members were able to see her.

Kunkle deserves credit for apologizing to Moats and his family, but because this incident occurred ten days ago, I'm inclined to believe this is little more than damage control now that the department has been caught terrorizing innocent civilians.

Here are the specifics of the story:

Moats' mother-in-law, 45-year-old Jonetta Collinsworth, had been struggling with breast cancer. That night family members received word that they needed to hurry to the hospital because she was dying.

"You really want to go through this right now?" Moats pleaded to Powell. "My mother-in-law is dying. Right now!"

An argument followed, during which Powell lectured Moats and threatened him with arrest.

Kunkle acknowledged Thursday that Powell also drew his gun at the start of the incident.

"I understand that he admits to drawing his gun but not pointing it," the chief said.

Moats' wife, Tamishia Moats, has said otherwise.

"He was pointing a gun at me as soon as I got out of the car," she said. The video shows her pleading with him a moment, then ignoring him and walking into the hospital with her great-aunt.

This type of police behavior smacks of what my wife was put through last summer by a county cop in Maryland, albeit to a lesser degree, as she was hurrying from work to pick up my son from daycare and take him to the doctor after she got a phone call informing her that he couldn't swallow or eat. Thankfully my son was OK, but you don't have the benefit of hindsight in the midst of an emergency situation.

Adding insult to the situations that the Moats family and my wife experienced is the fact that they were harassed over minor traffic infractions, which exist primarily to raise money for the state in the first place. But for his troubles, Moats got a gun in the face and an extended detention even though Powell knew a peaceable family was simply trying to get to a dying relative.

Forget the fact that emergency situations morally excuse the obligation to observe petty traffic laws; the state isn't even legally required to assist you in times of crisis. But that matters not. The authorities are here for our protection and our protection only; please move along.

SUNY Geneseo Student Found Dead after Party

In a story that hits close to home, Geneseo State University student Arman Partamian was found dead last Sunday morning in an off-campus house, hours after apparently drinking a significant amount of alcohol the day before.

Why is this personal? Partamian was enrolled at my college alma mater and was also "pledging" my old "fraternity," the Order of the Orange Knights -- better known as PIGS -- when he died.

I use the quotes above because PIGS is a social organization, not a fraternity; and to become a member you partake in orientation, not pledging. Given this tragic situation these are relatively meaningless details, but I wanted to point out the distinction because I will revisit this point later. In short, the PIGS aren't "Greek" -- their motto, "We don't care if you don't like us," is proof positive of that -- and Geneseo is the only college in the country where you'll find them.

Alcohol-related college deaths always tend to bring the holier than thou out of the woodwork to condemn the "irresponsibility" and "recklessness" of our youth, and if this statement by Geneseo president Christopher Dahl is any indication, there's a good chance most of the fraternities and sororities at Geneseo will increasingly find themselves in the administration's crosshairs from now on:

We strongly condemn irresponsible organizations that ignore the expectations and values of the College, recruit students like Arman and then encourage behavior that puts their lives at risk. We will continue to do all that is legally within our power to eliminate the detrimental influence these renegade organizations have on our students and community.

As the president of a state university, Dahl obviously is required to worship at the alter of political correctness, but with all due respect, he can save the melodrama. For starters, he's the president of a college; if he wants to run an institution filled with mature conformers, maybe he should consider working for the Key Bank down the street instead.

Furthermore, what's worse: voluntarily joining a social club whose members like to drink, or serving as the top administrator of a public college that exists largely at the expense of coerced taxpayers? Mr. Dahl may want to be careful if he's looking for a moral debate.

And, seriously, "renegade organizations" that "put lives at risk?" President Dahl runs a small Division III school in rural upstate New York. If this hyperbole is the type of rhetoric one can expect to receive from a university president in response to off-campus weekend parties, I'd love to see how he'd react if he actually had to deal with real campus hooligans who, say, set whole communities afire and destroy private property after big football or basketball games.

Arman Partamian's death is nothing short of a tragedy, and my thoughts are with his family and friends. But the reality of the matter is that these unfortunate incidents are the exception. Clearly this fact doesn't make any alcohol-related death easier to bear, but there's not an organization on campus -- Greek or otherwise -- that sets out to do tangible harm to its pledges or any other student who attends an open party. These interactions are the epitome of voluntary association between consenting adults, as students join fraternities and sororities knowing full well that they may face hazing rituals and be subjected to ridicule.

Which brings me to my final point. I've read a couple reports that refer to the PIGS as a "drinking club." Yes, if you meet a PIG, there will be no confusion as to what one of his favorite pastimes is. It's not peculiar to find him bent over a garbage can in the I.B. at 2 a.m. on a Thursday night, or even standing behind an "enemy" DK or Omega to have his back outside the bar when punks from R.I.T. roll into town looking for a fight. Nor, incidentally, is it uncommon to find him volunteering for any number of charity events, from wheelchair basketball games to Big Brothers/Big Sisters to memorial golf fundraisers.

The reason I distinguished the PIGS from the Greek fraternities on campus is because the PIGS actually take pride in not behaving like the typical frat, which generally is known to demean its pledges by forcing them to engage in any number of denigrating, ritualisic activities throughout campus. Personally, I've always regarded this as a virtue and an exhibition of good character -- the same type, by the way, that the PIGS look for in potential members and obviously found in Arman Partamian, who spent some of his free time as a volunteer EMT with the Geneseo fire department.

Though the "littles" may be required to take part in various organized drinking activities before they get their jerseys (signifying official entry into the organization), the PIGS tell all interested parties upfront that they will be treated like equals during orientation; they simply want all their prospective brethren to have fun, hang out together, and get to know everyone in the organization as they create bonds and friendships that will last a lifetime. The fact that alcohol is involved is secondary; you don't become a PIG if you don't like to drink.

If President Dahl and his fellow critics really want to take productive measures to mitigate the potential for "binge drinking"-related student deaths, perhaps they could advocate the abolition of tyrannical laws that encourage fraternity parties in the first place by preventing young adults from drinking legally in bars and restaurants.

Or maybe instead of alienating his own students by castigating them as evil reprobates -- the vast majority of whom graduated at the top of their respective high school classes -- Mr. Dahl could accept that fact that most college kids are going to drink and work within that construct to try to form partnerships with them that could somehow reduce the potential for tragedy.

Then again, maybe there's just not an "answer" here. As difficult as it is, maybe you just have to accept the fact that sometimes people make mistakes and that accidents happen.

These are sad days in Geneseo, but blaming the PIGS or fraternities in general for decisions individuals make misses the point and tarnishes the memory of Arman Partamian, who from my vantage point made a choice to join an organization that welcomed him and made him happy.

There will always be critics and second-guessing, and there are few words to comfort parents who've lost a child. But if I may, I'll offer just one thought: If you have a son the state and its accomplices consider a "renegade," that in itself is a badge of honor and you should be damned proud.

Arman Partamian, rest in peace.

Schlussel: American Parents Worse Than Al-Qaeda

Debbie Schlussel pens a nice little rant about how America is headed down the crapper because some "selfish," "irresponsible" parents allow their young children to watch R-rated movies. Following a screening of the new Friday the 13th movie, she writes:

Al-Qaeda murdered 3,000 Americans on 9/11. That was an outrage. But thousands more American parents--who are merely sperm, egg, and womb donors--are doing to this country what Al-Qaeda could never do. These American parents have voluntarily turned their kids' minds to mush--kids who will still be around, who will "grow up," and who will continue to add to America's decline.

My childhood was riddled with various iterations of Friday the 13th. From 1980 to 1989, when I was anywhere from six to 16 years old, Jason slashed his way through Crystal Lake (and apparently Manhattan), and I don't remember my parents ever "letting" me watch any of them. (Of course, when I was 13 I wasn't even allowed to watch Top Gun, which was actually rated PG-13.) But I knew plenty of kids whose parents did, so I'm not sure there's much empirical evidence to support the argument that today's families are much different than yesteryear's in this regard.

You really have to read Schlussel's entire article to appreciate it, but her flair for the melodramatic notwithstanding, it's clear from Schlussel's "Country First!" comments that the prominence of the American state should be our highest priority. Not freedom, family, or a higher being -- the state is the ultimate authority.

I'm not going to argue that the parent who drags her seven-year-old to a horror flick should be in the running for Mother of the Year, but neither will I pretend that she and her ilk could even come close to doing as much damage to this country as the powermad wingnuts in the nation's capital who drive it into the ground with their wealth-destroying "bailouts," wars for empire, calls for national conscription, and catalogs of taxes, regulations, and mandates that stifle free trade and eventually extinguish our will to take financial risks as the fiscal exsanguination continues along.

So, Debbie, you keep bitching and moaning about all the "trashy" welfare moms and dads who drag their crying tots to a free movie; I'll keep worrying about all the sharp-dressed criminals who rob us in order to encourage that lifestyle in the first place.

To Denis and Trish

Four years already.

 

Lovers of life. Lovers of scotch. No wonder we got along so well. I'll be drinking to you tonight.

Rest in peace, my friends.

New Jersey Abducts Adolf Hitler and Sisters from Home

Remember when 3-year-old Adolf Hitler Campbell made the news last December when Wal-Mart honored a customer request to write the little boy's name on a birthday cake?

Well, he and his sisters are in the spotlight again. This time it's because they've been kidnapped by the state of New Jersey. For their "own good," no doubt.

Sgt. John Harris with Holland Township Police was asked to escort staff from the NJ Division of Youth and Family Services to the Cambell’s home in Holland Township, N.J. last Friday.

Harris said they had come to investigate a complaint related to the Campbell’s three children – Adolf Hitler Campbell, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell.

In the end, the agency chose to remove the children from their parents’ care, but they assured Harris it was not because of the children’s names.

“They assured me that removing the children had nothing to do with their names or the birthday cake incident. There were other factors that we were not privy to,” Harris told NBC10’s Doug Shimell Wednesday.

Yep, nothing to do with their names. Nothing at all. Promise.

(Thanks to John)

The Race-Conscious State

The L.A. Times runs a touchy-feely article today about how multiracial families see themselves in a "mixed" Barack Obama.

I appreciate the struggles that blacks and other minority groups in the U.S. have faced, but it's important to realize that most of this hardship is a product of state-sponsored racism, discrimination, and bigotry.

"I totally feel proud that [Obama's] a black man and he's mixed," Maile Winograd said of Obama. "I identified with him so much. What he went through as a biracial person, I went through. And my son must look at Barack and say, 'He looks like me.' That's a good thing. A very good thing."

It's part of human nature to identify personally with people who are similar to us. Like when you feel that inexplicable connection to the random stranger on the highway who has a decal of your favorite sports team on his bumper, or a sticker of your college alma mater running along the bottom of his rear window. Still, there's something disconcerting about people who will vote for someone simply because he looks like them.

More:

For the parents of multiracial children, Obama's rise has been a vindication of sorts, a presidential rebuttal to a society that has not always been kind to their offspring, labeling them "half-breeds," "tragic mulattoes," "mutts," "mixed nuts," according to Susan Graham, the white mother of two multiracial children and the founder of the California-based Project Race, a 17-year-old nationwide group that advocates for a multiracial classification on all school, employment, census and other forms.

So where's the problem really lie here? With "society" or with an all too racially-conscious state whose existence rests largely on its ability to foment tensions between many different identity groups within that society, and therefore seeks to continually obtain more power to "solve" any number of "crises" for us?

Identifying with Obama is one thing; voting for the man solely because of his racial identity, however, is perverse, and clearly helps to explain how our complete ignorance of policy results in the election of politicians who continually rob us of more and more liberty. Whereas the state sees race in all it does -- those census forms, or school and job applications -- most people, as the election has essentially proven, see America.

Individual racists and bigots are ignorant and disgusting, but alone they can do very little harm to anyone. The state, on the other hand -- comprising armies of attorneys, police, military personnel, weapons, and concentrated power, all of which is claimed forcibly through taxation -- is very dangerous and leaves all sorts of carnage in its wake. Barack Obama is merely a cog in this machine and a representative of the very government that has from the beginning existed at the expense of our rights.

The "government" did not end chattel slavery in America; slavery ended despite the government, as a direct result of the hard work and many personal sacrifices of untold numbers of abolitionists and other individuals who protested this evil. And even today, while we may no longer wear the manacles, we are all slaves to the state in one form or another, as our democratic institution routinely allows the strong to rule the weak -- the majority is legally permitted to assert its will about a minority that stands in opposition.

As long as we live under the decrees of our elected rulers we will never be free, and the racial makeup of the despot who sits atop the throne hardly makes a difference at all.

One boy in the Times's story complains, "I always check 'Other' on my college applications," alluding to the fact that he's unable to find a box that represents his specific heritage. Well, I'm what passes for white in most circles, but I always check "Other," too. Because it's none of the state's damned business what I "am."

The very existence (and requirement) of these forms illustrates the state's commitment to racial division in the first place.

Thanksgiving

I suppose I'm thankful that CBS at least came up with Patrick Warburton for its man-in-the-street reporting for this year's parade as opposed to...well...who knows, but all I'll say is that I would've been a heckuva lot more thankful if they'd stuck with NPH!

I'm also thankful that the Buffalo Sabres broke a five-game losing streak last night, though I'm pretty confident they won't waste much time starting another one.

And of course, I'm thankful for my friends and family, especially my son, Biggie Smalls, who's 1 going on 15; and for fantastic artist and new friend, Chris Ayers, who's inspired me to pick up the drawing pencil for the first time in -- yikes -- 17 years (!).

In fact, here's the product of a couple hours and a sixer of Sam Adams Pale Ale last night -- from a photo of Biggie Smalls when he was about two weeks old. Go easy, it's been awhile.

     

Happy Thanksgiving!

The War on Obesity

According to this AP report, restaurant kid's meals have too many calories. In other surprising news, scientists have found that when they drop objects off buildings, they fall down rather than float. I'm not an expert in the food business, but it seems to me that the reason why fast food exists is because that's what people want. From the article:

"Parents want to feed their children healthy meals, but America’s chain restaurants are setting parents up to fail,” CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan said in a statement. “McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC, and other chains are conditioning kids to expect burgers, fried chicken, pizza, French fries, macaroni and cheese, and soda in various combination at almost every lunch and dinner.”

Is there a rule at fast food restaurants that children must eat only selections from the Kid's Menu? Will parents be kicked out of the restaurant if they dare purchase a salad for their children? Will the real parents who actually take full responsibility for the upbringing of their children please stand up?

Just about every fast food restaurant has healthy selections. For instance, at Wendy's you could buy a Chicken Grill Sandwich, a side salad with no-fat dressing, a plain baked potato, and water for about 625 calories. Ditch the sandwich bun, and lose another 120 calories. I could go to just about any fast food place in the country and put together a healthy meal. The reason: I have actually taken the time to learn about nutrition and more importantly, I apply discipline in my choices. I realize this may sound a little boastful, but the point I'm trying to make is that it takes time to learn about healthy eating and perseverance to endure the temptations of very tasty, but very fattening food. I plan my meals for the week and anticipate any evenings where I may have to eat out. This takes a lot of work; even more if you have a family. But such virtues cannot be coerced through the violence of the State.

If health advocates really wanted to help people become accountable for their own bodies, they should advocate an end to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. These programs have socialized the costs of being unhealthy. If people had to pay out-of-pocket for doctor's services, they would have to weigh, no pun intended, the costs of being unhealthy with the benefits of being healthy. Right now there are no real costs to being unhealthy.

Should We All Learn Spanish?

Obama thinks we should.

There is no sensible reason for the state to dictate or even suggest which language(s) its citizens should speak. Left free, people will communicate in manners that allow them to fulfill their needs.

My 9-month-old attends daycare in the home of a bilingual lady who's originally from Spain, and I think it's great that he's exposed to her accent, cultural mannerisms, and the bits and pieces of the Spanish language she shares with him. It reminds me of when my grandmother would teach me words in Croatian when I was a kid, and I think it would be great if my son could learn a dozen languages.

But that doesn't mean everyone agrees with me, or that they or their children need to learn anything but English. Suggesting that there's a legitimate role for the government to play in the acquisition of particular non-English languages is no different than the notion that the state should limit our national language to English.

Whether you lean liberal (and, generally speaking, think children should be more culturally aware) or conservative (and think everyone should speak English if they live in the U.S.), there is one thing you can do that will, interestingly, see to it that your particular preference is met: advocate for the abolition of the domestic welfare-warfare (police) state.

Opening the country's borders to peaceful immigrants will expose everyone to as many cultures and languages as you and your children can handle. Further, eliminating welfare subsidies will ensure that immigrants and American citizens alike will speak English in the workplace. Because the vast majority of Americans speak English, workers would have to learn English if they wanted to hold down a job -- much like Irish, Italian, Polish, Yugoslavian, German, and Croation immigrants did in the early 20th century.

And because no one would be able to sit at home and collect a government check, the only immigrants who'd be here in the first place would be supporting themselves, just like you do. (If at this point you'd still have a problem with immigrants, that means you're a bigot and we have another discussion on our hands entirely.)

See? You get the government out of your life, you get the government out of your language by default. Sounds to me like it's a win-win. At the very least, you should be able to rest easy knowing you can spend your nights watching Deal or No Deal instead of paging through Barack's mandatory Spanish guide and prepping for your next test.

But it all starts with you. If you fail to vote for freedom, don't be surprised when the tyrants come calling to steal more of it.

But Y'All Keep Putting Your Faith in the State

This is only one of the many, many, many, many, many reasons my child(ren) will never attend public schools.

(Thanks to Wolf.)

Turning a Blind Eye to the State

Literally.

In an inspirational story out of Washington State, Georgenne Harvey, blinded as a teenager as a result of a congenital eye problem, ignored suggestions from doctors to institutionalize her handicapped grandson, Nicholas, in order to raise him from a baby with the help of friends and neighbors.

"Nicky," severely disabled after suffering abuse as an infant at the hands of his biological mother's boyfriend, has graduated from Federal Way High School with the Class of 2008 with Grandma and other loved ones by his side.

Elvis Has Left the Building

Via my friend Wolf, I learn today that Sweden has so few socioeconomic problems that the government has nothing better to do than sit around all day and regulate baby names.

State-Sponsored Child Abuse

The Salt Lake Tribune's Julia Lyon deserves an award for highlighting the government child abuse tragedy in Texas, where state officials continue to incarcerate 465 women and children who belong to the FLDS church.

Lyon reports the lies, deceit, and outright inhuman treatment to which these poor detainees are being subjected, and quotes mental health workers who are appalled by the actions of government agencies in dealing with the captives.

A boy estimated at age 3 walked along a row of cots asking for someone to rock him after he was separated from his mother, one employee wrote. Two CPS workers trailed the youngster taking notes but not helping him. His brother, age 8, eventually took the child into his arms and sat with him in a rocking chair.

Government is pure evil. The inane concept of engaging in wholesale child abduction (abuse) under the guise of "protecting" children from theoretical abuse is almost too perverse for words.

The Sordid, Wretched, Self-Serving State

I know that title could apply to just about anything the state wraps its tentacles around, but today it applies to government child care services, regulatory entities that certify and monitor daycare centers.

Yesterday I picked my son up from daycare -- we use a stay-at-home mom who runs a small service from an immaculately clean house -- and his caregiver informed me that a county "child care" supervisor had informed her that she'd been written up for a supposed incident that took place a couple weeks prior, and that she would have to meet with a director regarding licensure, etc.

What was this horrendous incident for which our daycare provider was reprimanded? On the day the government worker made a surprise home visit, she left a two and a half-year-old to play by himself while she answered the door. The only child she was watching that day was apparently "neglected" for the entire half-minute it took our daycare provider to indulge this twit, and she maintains the boy was in her line of sight the entire time.

Let's just say I think this entire fiasco is B.S. I know some people reflexively believe the government is responsible for monitoring these types of situations because parents aren't in other people's homes or daycare facilities to keep an eye on their kids -- you'll no doubt be told about that one child in the news who was killed or abused by a home daycare provider (despite government regulations, no doubt) -- but not only do I think these regulatory bodies are unnecessary, I don't for a minute believe a government agency can protect kids in the first place.

For starters, most teachers and social workers will tell you it's almost impossible to remove legitimate child abuse victims from their home environment. Because child service agencies usually have to announce visits and follow many other bureaucratic twists and turns (thankfully, I would argue, when it comes to the state), the kids who are in the most dire situations are usually the ones who never get help anyway. In short, I believe there are kids who need help; I just don't think it's the government's job to provide it.

So what usually happens instead? The government spends the balance of its time harassing and terrorizing perfectly normal, caring parents and daycare providers.

If the government wants to nitpick daycare services, perhaps it could pay a visit to the commercial center we used for a few months, only to exercise our free market right to withdraw our business because they often violated the Maryland law requiring at least one caregiver for every three infants. (For the record, I don't believe this should be a law in the first place because parents are perfectly capable of determining what type of service they prefer/can afford, but this happens to be one I would demand regardless.)

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if these tax-funded child care monitors don't even have kids of their own, but if they do, they know that babies put up all sorts of flags when they're not happy. Without belaboring this point too much, my son rarely ate and would cry all the way home when we picked him up from his former daycare. Whatever the reason(s), he wasn't happy. Thankfully, our current lady's service is like night and day compared to those other guys.

These days I can't remember picking up my son after work and seeing boogers in his nose, dirt on his face, poop in his diaper, or a rash on his crotch -- problems all when it came to the last place we used. But apparently this matters not; it only matters that some government parasite can show up unannounced and make a chump case out of nothing at all.

So for her trouble, our daycare provider gets to worry that her license will be yanked and that she'll be thrown out of work; notwithstanding the fact that parents who pay for her services will have no daycare for their kids when she has to take the day off to fight these inane accusations, and they could potentially be robbed of her services altogether at the hands of the state -- all because of something that amounts to little more than a power trip. And, it bears asking, how well is the state "protecting" children if it throws kids out of the hands of a loving caregiver?

Obviously, I'm hoping everything works out here and my wife and I don't lose the best daycare option we've found yet. In reality, this is most likely all just part of the state's quest to collect yet more revenue from taxpayers, this time in the form of a nice little fine, which will undoubtedly (and rightly) be passed on to customers.

There is much more to discuss here than just this issue, as I could explain why licenses and certifications are largely worthless, but you get the idea. However, to take just this one example, who cares if daycare providers are "licensed"? It's nothing more than a way for the state to make money to fund busybodies to harass the rest of us under the pretense that they're providing some "service."

If one bona fide child abuse victim is helped as a result of government regulations, it's hailed as an amazing success and used as fodder that simply justifies rounding up the innocent under the state's umbrella of tyranny on the off-chance they'll "save" someone else. But here's the kicker: Any daycare provider who harms a child via negligence can be sued, either civilly or criminally, regardless of whether she's licensed or not. What's next? State-sponsored spying on grandmothers who watch their grandchildren during the day?

Like anything else, the market will do a better job of protecting children than any government agency ever could. Parents free to make decisions about their child's welfare on a daily basis are much more qualified to pass judgment than some government hack who comes around twice a year. As it stands, we're left to watch as the state continually proves that all it's really good at is destroying that which makes us happy.

Invasion of the Baby Snatchers

Though a relatively extreme case, this sad story in Arlington County, Virginia, is yet further proof that all property -- even the life of a child -- ultimately belongs to the state.

Janie's Got a Gun

A 14-year-old girl has been sentenced to probation after killing her father with a shotgun to end years of sexual abuse.

This is an interesting case, as it seems to fall in that libertarian gray area. The important distinction is whether this little girl committed patricide to prevent immediate harm -- that is to say, physical invasion of person or property -- or whether she killed her father, say, when he was asleep and incapable of mounting an attack.

Killing to prevent imminent physical harm is entirely moral and reasonable; killing in the absence of immediate danger, however, is not.

Based on the tenor of the article, it doesn't appear that the girl shot her father to prevent an impending attack; if she were an adult, she would not be entitled to argue self-defense. However, I actually think the court got this one right, but only due to the fact that we're dealing here with a child -- whose capacity for reason naturally pales in comparison to that of an adult, not least when taking into consideration a further diminished mental state as a result of such horrific abuse.

I can't say I'd necessarily adhere to moral restraints if I ever found out any adult physically harmed my child, but as an adult I'd be willing to accept the consequences coming my way. In the case of this little girl and her father, I'd say that on both sides justice was reasonably served.

To the Kitchen, Bitches!

Debbie Schlussel takes on the topic of alimony in her latest article and produces some pretty laughable conclusions.

She begins by arguing that feminists don't really want true "equality" -- that while they want alimony from their ex-husbands following a divorce, they balk at the responsibility of paying it out if their exes made less money than they did while they were married. "They want male benefits," Schlussel writes, "but not the panoply of duties and disadvantages that come with them." I can't say that I necessarily disagree with that assertion.

However, Schlussel claims that it's the fact that men are receiving alimony payments in the first place that constitutes the real problem. She writes:

[...] the increase in the number of women paying alimony to their stay-at-home or less wealthy husbands is a stark symptom of sickness in America. The disease is the blurring of the gender roles. More and more men are rapidly becoming women. And more and more women are rapidly becoming men. No, I'm not referring to sex changes, but to gender roles. It's not a good thing that there are more and more men who are Mr. Moms and more and more women who are the sole or primary breadwinner in the relationship.

More...

If you are the major breadwinner, you are "the man." You have the power. The other person is reduced to the female role. That's simply the way it is, despite what Gloria Steinem might say or how she wants it to be. Men are hard-wired as hunter gatherers. When they are reduced to the homemaker and Mr. Mom role, it's degrading and emasculating, despite what they might claim. They simply don't have the respect of their female spouse that they might think they have. It's emotional wimpitude.

Schlussel sure has an odd way of defending men. Maybe it's because she's pushing forty and isn't married or because she's got a law degree and an MBA, but her complaints smack more of self-loathing than concern for American culture. Weird, but I was under the impression that equality means that men and women will have equal shots at a career. And if and when they decide to marry, sometimes that means making difficult decisions on the homefront. Well, tough.

My wife makes more than I do, and now that we have a six-month-old to take care of, I'd give anything to be able to afford to "reduce" myself to "Mr. Mom" so we wouldn't have to send him off to daycare everyday (it also doesn't hurt that I hate my job). Nor do I feel "emasculated" because my wife is technically the "primary breadwinner" -- perhaps because our standard of living and our ability to provide for the little man would decrease dramatically if either of us gave up our respective incomes.

Schlussel defends her views by citing the story of some "wimpy" schmuck who quit his job to help his wife move up the career ladder, only to find she didn't appreciate his efforts and divorced him, leaving him to file for alimony. I don't know that we have to read into this too much. Maybe it wasn't the gender roles that were the real problem; maybe his wife was just a whore.

She also notes that women with MBAs are more than twice as likely to get divorced than men with MBAs, and the research is similar for law and medical degrees. Schlussel asks:

[...] is this a good thing for America--men put in the position where they are now the wives, asking for alimony? And women becoming the men, where they put their husbands in the position of giving up their masculinity--their livelihood and career--to advance that of their wives?

I fail to see how this is a problem for "America." If anything, it's a concern for married couples themselves. Why I should care whether you get divorced or not is beyond me. And by the way, my wife has an MBA, but if I end up divorced, it'll probably be because I can be an asshole, not because my wife needs me to find a job with better pay.

Some people might actually argue that one is more of a man to give up a career for his wife than he is if he simply expects her to forgo the opportunities her own education has provided. Anyone will eventually become frustrated if they think their mate -- whether man or woman -- is just along for the ride, content to sit at home all day and be taken care of while the other is off paying the bills. But there's more to a marriage than just making sure the water and electricity stay on.

Funny, but judging by everything Schlussel's arguing, it's actually the men that realize that.

The Westin Rocks

You may recall that the blogging was a little light last weekend, but I had a good excuse. I was taking advantage of free food and booze in Annapolis Friday and Saturday night for my brother-in-law's wedding.

I do a fair amount of complaining on this blog, so I figured I might as well talk about something positive for a change. Because I can't think of much in the way of good things to say about the government, you might already have guessed that this story is about a private corporation. We always seem to focus on the things companies do to screw us over, but rarely do we stop to appreciate it when one of them goes out of its way to make us happy. Enter the Westin.

After we dropped the dog off at the kennel Friday afternoon, the wife, Biggie Smalls, and I all headed to the Westin Annapolis to kick off the festivities. When my wife checked in to the hotel, she was told that we only had a room for Friday night but not Saturday, even though we obviously booked two nights -- three months in advance.

If you know my wife, that's about all you need to tell her before she runs all striped-ass ape over your shit. Amazingly, though, she remained very calm and asked the desk clerk what he would have us do the following day. He said we'd have to pack up all our stuff and move to another room -- and if you've ever had a five-month-old in tow, you know that would just be a blast.

Perplexed, my wife asked why the guest who supposedly was also booked in our room Saturday night couldn't just be assigned a different room, telling the clerk that we simply wouldn't be shuffling between rooms mid-weekend -- while either drunk or hungover and before or after a wedding and reception, no less -- and explained that he had to make things right.

We've all played the "the customer is always right" game, and I'm here to tell you it works about half the time at best (even when you are right). So you might imagine our surprise when the clerk came back and handed my wife three keys to the presidential suite. Stunned, my wife told the guy he certainly didn't have to go that far, but he insisted and said, "We have to make you happy."

Oddly enough, he really didn't. It seems companies all over the place remain in business even after I've decided never to solicit their services again (I've boycotted McDonald's for years now that their non-real-fat food tastes like tofu, and look me up before you hire Middleton Manor Farms to lay your sod). But this was pretty cool, nevertheless. Check out some of these pictures:

Biggie Smalls chillin' prior to rehearsal. This is the bedroom (with bath), which is the size of a normal room.

View from the bedroom (this whole place goes about 2000 sq. ft.).

Just for good measure, the living room dog-legs into empty space with an office desk.

It really kind of sucked that so much of our weekend was spent outside this room doing all sorts of wedding things, because I definitely could have just hung out in here all weekend. We basically slept in the bedroom two nights and that was it -- though that's pretty much the best part because the Westin has the Heavenly Bed.

Every employee I met at this hotel was cordial and helpful, and everything was clean. The wedding reception was actually held in the main ballroom, and the food and service was top-notch, as well. All in all, I'm pretty sure I'd stay in a $700-plus a night room for less than $200 any night of the week.

And as handsome as I looked all weekend, Biggie Smalls stole the show with his little onesie tux.

Better a Teenage Slut Than a Government Whore

A Colorado state lawmaker apparently isn't too happy with teens who engage in premarital sex.

"In my parents' day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are," Republican Rep. Larry Liston said during a GOP legislative caucus meeting in Denver. "There was at least a sense of shame."

Liston continued: "There's no sense of shame today. Society condones it ... I think it's wrong. They're sluts. And I don't mean just the women. I mean the men, too."

Liston defended his comments, saying that teens who can't afford to have children can have them anyway because they can expect the government to pay for them.

Yeah, I suppose it would be too hard to actually grow a sack and criticize state lawmakers for handing out welfare subsidies to any and all takers in the first place.

Worst Date In History

I wish the title were referring to some botched evening with a hot chick back in the day, but unfortunately, today marks the third sad anniversary of the night two of my best friends were killed in a car accident.

Denis and Trish, RIP.

Sound This Out:

GED

Does Freedom Stand a Chance..

..when people who should know better are willing to cash it in for a little temporary comfort?

My wife and I took our one-month-old son to breakfast this morning with my in-laws, and the topic of secondhand smoke came up when someone asked if smoke from the bar would waft into the dining area and bother my son.

For the record, I wouldn't necessarily want my baby exposed to extended or concentrated amounts of cigarette smoke, and I noticed very little in the air when we walked into the restaurant. However, my sister-in-law (whom I love dearly) asked rather nonchalantly when Maryland was "going smoke-free," indicating her preference for the state smoking ban that will take effect in February 2008.

I have a problem with the idea that "Maryland" will "go" smoke-free, given that a more accurate account would be to say that a cabal of legislators is forcing private restaurants and bars in Maryland to ban smoking lest they face extensive fines and harassment from the government, at the point of a gun if necessary. But I have a much bigger problem with perfectly intelligent people who apparently just don't care that the state has absolutely no business dictating the terms of use of private property. Indeed, no one forced me to patronize this establishment earlier today; I could have just as easily chosen to leave if I thought the atmosphere in the dining room posed any danger to my child.

Sadly, my sister-in-law even made the oh-so-common comment that she doesn't really care about the immorality of the state's smoking ban -- or any tyrannical legislation, for that matter -- so long as it doesn't impact her.

Ah.

I continue to be amazed by people who believe that empowering the government to trample "other" people's freedoms somehow exempts them from the consequences of such heavy-handedness. Indeed we are all "other people" to those who invariably will have enough clout to convince the state to seize the things we ourselves hold dear.

Aww..

What other pet could be this loyal?

[Via Radley Balko]

Technology

I love it, but can anyone figure out all the functions on digital cameras today?

Here's a video I took of The Boy Friday morning by accident as I attempted to take a picture.

Welcome to the World

Took the last couple days off, but I've had a pretty good excuse. I've been at the hospital since early Friday morning with my wife, who gave birth to our first child, a boy, at 9:12 a.m. They say we should be heading home before noon today, when I will officially begin trying to cope with the reality of getting four hours of sleep a night, if I'm lucky. But I have a feeling it'll all be worth it.

Married to the State

Texas Republicans prove that social engineering isn't just for liberal Democrats anymore [emphasis mine].

AUSTIN — Marriage and family counselor Tim Louis says a new law rewarding couples for taking pre-nuptial classes — and penalizing those who don't — has gotten an unfair rap from critics.

The law, House Bill 2685 by Rep. Warren Chisum, a conservative Republican from West Texas, prompted derisive comments from opponents last spring who called it the worst sort of government intrusion.

It calls for couples who take an eight-hour "successful marriage" course approved by the state to get a free marriage license, with those who don't paying a doubled fee of $60.

It's one thing for government to offer incentives to people in order to effect changes in behavior, but implementing punitive measures when they don't comply is paternalism, plain and simple. But it's even worse when such laws are little more than handouts to rent-seeking businesses.

"The exciting thing about this bill is it creates demand," said Louis, a senior vice president at Family Services of Greater Houston. "I suspect there will be a lot of interest in people offering this particular type of service where before there was no demand for it."

Gee, you think?

[HT: BOR]

Carl Fowler, RIP

I never knew Carl's last name until now. What a terrible way to finally find out.

Anyone who attended or even visited SUNY Geneseo, my alma mater, probably met Carl at some point. Back in the day (we're talking late-'80s/early-mid-'90s here), Carl was easily the most recognizable bouncer at the immortal Inn Between, the most popular bar in the small, upstate New York college town.

Shaven-headed, big, and gruff, you'd have thought he ate babies for a living when you saw him -- especially if you were trying to pass by him as an underclassman with your fake I.D. But if you ever took the time to get to know Carl, you already know he was one of the kindest people around.

I never knew Carl too well until I was a senior and grad student at Geneseo -- after all, I spent more than my fair share of time at the bar -- but I feel privileged to have known him on a first-name basis. You could always count on Carl to be up bright and early on that Saturday morning in late September, smoking the pig at the I.B. for my fraternity's annual alumni weekend pig roast. He even helped my wife look for me back in 2002 over alumni weekend when I lost her at the bar on the very first night (I know, I know..don't ask how that happened).

Everyone who knew Carl has his or her own memories, which is why hearing the tragic news just now that he died five days ago is difficult to bear.

From his obit:

Fowler, Carl W.
Mt. Morris: Carl W. Fowler, age 37, of 12 Barone Avenue in Mt. Morris, died unexpectedly on June 29, 2007, in the Scranton, PA area from injuries he sustained in an automobile accident. Carl was born August 6, 1969, in Rochester, the son of the late Eugene C. Fowler and Marilu (Orlando) Fowler. He had been a lifelong resident of Mt. Morris. He graduated from the Mt. Morris Central School in 1988. He had been employed by Adonnino Brothers as a bus driver/me-chanic for 16 years, and had been employed there for 19 years, S&S Limousine of Leroy, where he had been driving for 3 years, and the In Between in Geneseo for 19 years. Carl was a member and Past President of the Living Stream Hose Co. of the Mt. Morris Fire Dept. He was an Eagle Scout, having attained that rank in scouting during his formative years. He was a member and supporter of Ducks Unlimited, an avid hunter, fisherman and enjoyed his 4 wheeler.

RIP, good buddy.      

   

Happy Birthday, Christina!

Before I forget, I want to give a "Happy Birthday!" shout out to my sister Christina, who turns thirty-two (!) today.

And she's my little sis. It seems like it was only a few years ago that she was chasing me through the house and beating me up.

We Make China Blush

Gay marriage activists in Washington State are looking to beat their opponents at their own game.

OLYMPIA, Wash. - An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.

Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.

WA-DOMA spokesman Gregory Gadow says that if social conservatives oppose gay marriage on the premise that same-sex couples can't procreate, then it stands to reason that straight couples who can't or won't have children shouldn't be able to marry, either.

I don't know about you, but that sounds like some pretty airtight logic to me.

For purposes of full disclosure, I'll admit that I was once simply confused about where I stood on the issue of gay marriage. As a result, I haven't written about it much at all. But as someone who could find merit with the views of both sides, I've always been opposed to a constitutional ban out of respect for the preservation of federalist principles, while at the same time acknowledging that there are plenty of traditional families that are anything but ideal.

I've never thought that life as we knew it would come unglued if homesexuals were allowed to marry or if, say, Rosie O'Donnell was allowed to adopt children. Just the same, I used to accept the argument that the human tradition of thousands of years of heterosexual marriage must have come about for some reason. That is, until I stopped to consider that even today it's pretty much traditional practice in the Middle East to imprison, torture, and kill homosexuals.

So it's from this starting point that I've been able to refine my position through additional reflection and an increased awareness of the importance of property rights, and it's basically this: It's none of my damned business what two consenting adults want to do with one another as long as they do no harm to me or anyone else.

I do not oppose same-sex marriage, though I no more endorse same-sex marriage as I do opposite-sex marriage, inasmuch as it exists today where we empower and encourage the state to sanction and govern our relationships. The initiative now being pushed in Washington is merely a logical extrapolation of the perversity and indignity of allowing the state to declare some consenting adults law-abiding while others are assigned criminal status.

I'm of the opinion that same-sex marriage would practically cease to be an issue anyhow if only we'd rid ourselves of the tyrannical income tax, where gay couples are denied the same tax benefits as straight couples. It's the same old tired refrain: We're afforded the luxury of enjoying the property we've earned or the friendships we've made only after the government has imposed itself upon us.

Ideally, I'd love to see the WA-DOMA argue outright the inherent injustice of government oversight of marriage, if only because passage of its current initiative would empower the state to regulate our lives even further. At the same time, however, I'm not sure its proposal hasn't already exposed the absurdities we can expect with such governance. For this we owe the WA-DOMA a debt of gratitude.

Remembering Friends

Today isn't even over yet, and already it's been a significant one. It's Milton Friedman Day, in honor of one of the country's most influential economists. We also learned that Kentucky Derby winner Barbaro, who shattered his hind leg at the Preakness last year, was euthanized this morning after failing to recover fully from injury. And on a more positive note, today marked the first day Buffalo Sabres forward Tim Connolly skated hard on his own, free of post-concussion symptoms on his long road to recovery following a brutal, potentially career-ending hit during last season's playoff series against Ottawa.

But all of this pales significantly in comparison to something else that happened on this date. Two years ago today, Jan. 29, 2005, two of my closest friends were killed in a car accident.

Lt. Cdr. Denis G. Tri, 37, and his fiancee, Tricia K. Goken, 35, died on their way home from dinner in Leonardtown, Maryland. According to the St. Mary’s County Sheriff’s Office, Denis hit an icy patch on Hollywood Road near Dorsey Park, lost control of his car, and crossed the center line where he was struck by an oncoming pickup truck. Denis died instantly, and sadly, Trish shortly thereafter.

Ironically, we hadn't seen Denis and Trish for a couple weeks after hanging out with them two weekends in a row at my house to watch the NFL playoffs that year; both from Minnesota, the two were die-hard Vikings fans. It was Saturday. My wife Amie and I had just gotten a new puppy from the pound the day before so we decided to go introduce him to Denis and Trish. We knew they'd both be home because they were spending most of their free time remodeling an old house Denis had bought on Solomons Island a year earlier.

As we pulled up, I saw Trish in one of Denis's green flight suits, sledge hammer in hand and giving the business to part of the house that had to be torn down. We spent about a half-hour with them before letting them get back to work, and told them we'd be at the Chinese restaurant down the street later on for dinner if they were interested in joining us. They had already made plans to do dinner with my brother- and sister-in-law that night, and it was the last time we'd see them alive. I still don't think I've grasped how surreal that entire moment seems now.

I knew Denis for almost six years at the time. Though he was closest with my wife's sister and her husband, Denis and I had a unique relationship. He was pretty much the only person who was ever really interested in discussing politics with me or just talking about current events. Now, I have a handful of friends who'll put on a happy face and read my stuff if I send it to them, and a couple actually look forward to it. But Denis was different. He would always make it a point to read my articles and critique them for me. And he's the only person I've known who on more than a few occasions would wake me up at 8:00 a.m. on a Sunday morning all excited about a great new article idea.

Another thing that Denis and I had in common was our fascination with economics, or more precisely, the free market and capitalism. Denis was the one who turned me on to the writing of Ayn Rand, and was one big reason I've come to the realization that I'm actually a libertarian and not a conservative, as I'd previously thought for years. Denis probably read non-fiction books more frequently than I did, and he was my benchmark when I looked for vindication of a particular political viewpoint. In short, Denis was brilliant, and if he agreed with you, you were probably right.

That's not to say Denis ever admitted he was intelligent or a step above most of us, however. Indeed, he was probably the most modest person I've ever met, and that's saying something considering some of my friends are the most down-to-earth, successful professionals one could meet. I remember one of our first meetings. He was married to a girl named Amy at the time and they had joined us at my in-laws' house for a party. He told me he was a Tomcat pilot here at the Pax River navy base, and I said something to the effect of, "Boy, you have to be pretty smart to do that." Denis just looked at me with his trademark smirk and said, "Eh, I get by."

I guess you could say that. You'd never even know what Denis did for a living unless you came right out and asked him. And I didn't even know until the day of his memorial service that he'd graduated first in his class in Test Pilot School. His career came to its tragic end as aide to Adm. Walter "Wally" Massenburg at the Patuxent River Naval Air Station.

What I didn't know until my wife and I started spending more time with Denis and Trish was that they dated 20-something years ago in high school, after which time they went their separate ways to pursue their life goals. However, after all those years apart, fate and circumstance brought them back together again, and they planned to make Solomons their new home after they married and finished remodeling their house.

Though I only knew Trish for a relatively short time, it didn't take long to realize what kind of person she was. She was a carbon copy of Denis. Vibrant, funny, full of life. Her personality was as addictive as any drug you could find. Before she moved to Maryland, Trish was a script supervisor for the hit TV show Alias. I learned she landed the job after chatting with someone affiliated with the show whom she just happened to sit next to on a flight. After talking with Trish for about ten minutes, you probably would have hired her too.

At Trish's viewing in Minnesota, I noticed a nice flower arrangement (lilies, I think) with a card expressing condolences from "Jennifer, Ron, and Michael." The Feb. 9 episode of Alias was dedicated, "In Loving Memory of Tricia K. Goken 1969-2005." I'll never forget the story I heard regarding this tribute, and I'll always have a little place in my heart reserved for actress Jennifer Garner because of it. Rumor has it that ABC wanted to put the kibosh on the Alias crew's plans to honor Trish, ostensibly out of some odd concern that if they did it for one person they'd have to do it for everyone. Apparently, Garner would have none of it and went straight to Disney, telling ABC's ownership that, yeah, it was gonna happen. And it did. Trish obviously made an impact on just about everyone.

I can't believe it's been two years already. They say you don't know what you've got till it's gone, but with Denis and Trish, I think most people knew what they had. That's some powerful stuff.

Rest in peace, my friends. I'll be drinking to you tonight. As usual.

Markets In Everything

Even in sluttily-clad dolls, it seems, about which Kirsten Powers was none too happy about during a recent trip to FAO Schwarz.

Just feet from the Etch-A-Sketches and paint-by-numbers were dolls dressed in garter belts, bustiers, fishnet stockings and high heels. "Ella" was in a teddy; "Justine" in an evening gown with her breasts overflowing. Cleavage and lingerie were the order of the day.

As small children filed by, I felt myself panicking, wanting to cover their eyes or steer them away, as if they were going to be exposed to something they weren't meant to see. Never mind that they were the target audience for these hyper-sexualized dolls. I was, after all, in a toy store.

A 4-year-old girl was mesmerized by one of the dolls with the flowing cleavage. Next to her was another doll wearing just a black bra and panties, set on a mini sofa, with legs splayed. The girl's father mindlessly pulled her away, seemingly unconcerned.

Kirsten seems nice (she certainly looks nice), but perhaps the reason the father she mentions was evidently unconcerned about these new dolls is because he knows good parents can pull their kids away from them, just as he did and Kirsten herself undoubtedly would have done.

Expressing opinions about products in the marketplace is obviously what drives demand, but hyperventilating over the things we find repugnant does little but encourage the Nanny State to butt in and lay waste to them, despite the fact that they're apparently consumed by others who find them appealing.

Not to mention, if toy stores struggle to sell these dolls (exhibited here on Kirsten's blog) and shun more consumers than they attract because of them, you can bet they won't be on the shelves for long. Either that or another store will pop up right across the street that sells everything but these little call girl replicas (hereafter known as The Most-Requested Toy On Every 10-Year-Old Boy's Wish List This Christmas).

Even if you don't believe me, there is little evidence supporting the idea that these new dolls -- or other "undesirables" like video games, gambling, alcohol, or pornography -- will lead to America's "cultural decay," as former Cato Institute analyst Radley Balko explains in a recent essay. As he tells it, most of our "problems" are "afflictions of prosperity," which "much of the world would still consider itself fortunate to have."

Read the entire piece. And if you must, just avoid FAO Schwarz.

"Supernannies" to the Rescue

Forcing parents to attend nursery rhyme classes apparently isn't enough for Britain's Tony Blair. In what has to be the most appropriately-titled program in Nanny State history, the PM's now planning to add a contingent of 80 "Supernannies" to a program to aimed at "stamp[ing] out anti-social behaviour."

[Blair] said "an overwhelming majority" of people would welcome outside assistance.

"This should be no surprise given the huge popularity of all those television programmes in which experts help parents with their problem kids," said Mr Blair

"So I don't believe any Government, particularly one determined to tackle anti-social behaviour, can ignore parents' cry for help."

Mr Blair said he wanted experts appointed in 77 areas, adding: "The nanny state argument applied to this is just rubbish. No-one's talking about interfering in a normal family life.["]

Ah, so the only families affected by this are the ones who will beg and plead for government intervention. Don't bet on it.

I don't disagree that there are far too many people who welcome nanny-state meddling in private affairs. After all, that's how these politicians get elected in the first place. I may be misinformed, but I don't recall our television programs -- I assume Blair is referring to shows like "Nanny 911" -- being driven by the state.

Well, yet.

[HT: Nick Gillespie]

Most Important Sporting Event Ever?

Last night marked the first NFL game played in the New Orleans Superdome since Hurricane Katrina, a game that virtually has been given Super Bowl-like attention in recent weeks. For example, in anticipation of last night's contest, ESPN columnist Michael Smith wrote:

This game is about life and death. I honestly cannot think of a more important sporting event. Ever. You try. The Saints are coming home to a building thousands actually called home during the flood.

Well, Kevin over at BfloBlog decided to give it a try and pretty much nailed it:

I honestly can’t think of a more important sporting event. Ever. Really? You know who I think it’s most important to? The media conglomerate of Disney/ABC/ESPN that is dragging out U2 and Green Day (Green Day, really?) and the Goos (Goo Goo Dolls) to push those ratings up, up, up. And in no surprise, the article calling a Monday Night Football game the most important sporting event ever (I wonder what Jesse Owens thinks of that bit of hyperbole, or even Jackie Robinson for that matter?), appears on ESPN.com. In a complete coincidence, the game will appear on ESPN. Howzabout that?

It will be a great show, but it won’t change the fact that many residents of New Orleans are still displaced, still struggling, still poor. But if you put a flashy enough band-aid on it maybe nobody will look too closely. I hope the residents of New Orleans take some small solace in the fact that the NFL with all it’s powers can get the Superdome rebuilt in time to host a football game, but I also hope that our cheerleading media doesn’t gloss over the myriad of issues still facing New Orleans, it’s surrounding areas, and it’s many displaced residents.

Ouch.

Sounds of 9/11

If the significance of 9/11 has somehow escaped you these past five years, here's a good refresher from the pen of Peggy Noonan, who can turn words into pictures like few others.