Stop the Bleating!

Me Spidy

  Your results:

You are Spider-Man

Spider-Man 95% The Flash 70% Green Lantern 65% Superman 60% Supergirl 45% Robin 35% Hulk 35% Wonder Woman 30% Batman 25% Iron Man 25% Catwoman 20%

You are intelligent, witty, a bit geeky and have great power and responsibility.

Click here to take the "Which Superhero am I?" quiz...

(HT Bainbridge)

Penis Pump Judge

The trial of the judge who allegedly used a penis-pump seems very odd to me. I have appeared in one courtroom and been in a few more - and in all of them, the judges bench was fully covered, so you could never see the judge's legs. So I am not sure how anyone would have seen the judge expose himself. This begs the question, then, if no one can see you - can you be charged with indecent exposure? Perhaps the judge acted in bad taste, but to charge him criminally seems far reaching.

The State against its people

It is illegal to share milk with anyone - it is illegal to do good deeds without big brother's approval - even when you want to obey the state, the state will try to trick you to fine you and make you feel like a bad person.

Supremacy Clause II

Ted Frank (who BTW we are honored to have visit and comment on our blog) comments on my post quibbling with his post at Point of Law, where he stated:

    ...

    But that doesn't mean that inferior courts get to disregard superior courts. The Alabama Supreme Court is inferior to the U.S. Supreme Court, and doesn't get to pick and choose which Supreme Court opinions to adhere to. That's the way it works under our Constitution.

My co-blogger responded quite well to his comments, so I will simply add a few thoughts.

First of all, I am not sure why Ted had to say "our Constitution" as opposed to just "the Constitution".  I am not sure what consitution you believe you are under, but I can assure you that in the South the Constitution is alive and well. In fact, we take the Constitution quite seriously, that when the US Supremes make a mess of things, we actually take notice. We take action. We say take your Yankee, big government-Federal government enabling-states' rights trampling-child killer loving-constitution and shove it.

Second "The Alabama Supreme Court is inferior to the U.S. Supreme Court." I am sure the Alabama Supreme Court would appreciate hearing about their inferiority. Who made them so inferior? Not the constitution as far as I can plainly read it - only the Supremes themselves. So what gave them the right to do that? They just did it.

What happened to the age of reason when these truths are self-evident? What happened to the era of natural law and judges applied the laws of the creator instead of this new nihlistic era of personal whimsical preferences making law? What makes Justice Kennedy so special (he wrote Roper which is what started this discussion)? In fact, when Justice Kennedy engaged in the blatantly unconstitutional use of foreign judgments to justify his personal preferences and his tinkering with the ability of states to protect its citizens, what made his decision so special?

Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with the supremacy of the US Supreme Court over other federal courts and for that matter State Supreme Courts over their inferior courts. That is because those courts are in their own system. But what I object to is the US Supreme Court telling state courts what they can and can't do. Yes, I understand that is how our jurisprudence has evolved - but that doesn't make it right. It doesn't make it right and it doesn't mean that those who dare to think outside the box somehow are violating the Supremacy clause. Their fidelity to the constitution is much more genuine and sincere than any statist's claim of following the Supremacy Clause.

Justice Parker may not have won the election- but had he, he would have been a force to reckon with. He would have been a judicial hero not seen since the days of Chief Justice Spencer Roane. Alas, we can only keep waiting.

What an idiot

Click on the video link to see what I mean.

The State against the people

What businss does customs or for that matter the state have deciding what medications a person can carry?

Misc.

Fr. Tucker has some recent posts pointing to interesting articles.

First up, this one from the WaPo:

Americans are far more socially isolated today than they were two decades ago, and a sharply growing number of people say they have no one in whom they can confide, according to a comprehensive new evaluation of the decline of social ties in the United States. . .

Compared with 1985, nearly 50 percent more people in 2004 reported that their spouse is the only person they can confide in. But if people face trouble in that relationship, or if a spouse falls sick, that means these people have no one to turn to for help, Smith-Lovin said.

"We know these close ties are what people depend on in bad times," she said. "We're not saying people are completely isolated. They may have 600 friends on Facebook.com [a popular networking Web site] and e-mail 25 people a day, but they are not discussing matters that are personally important." . . .

Smith-Lovin said increased professional responsibilities, including working two or more jobs to make ends meet, and long commutes leave many people too exhausted to seek social -- as well as family -- connections: "Maybe sitting around watching 'Desperate Housewives' . . . is what counts for family interaction."

Robert D. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard and the author of "Bowling Alone," a book about increasing social isolation in the United States, said the new study supports what he has been saying for years to skeptical audiences in the academy. . . .

I'd have to say that the study's findings hold true in my case, for exactly the reasons identified by Smith-Lovin.

Then there's this Townhall.com article by Walter Williams, which discusses -- among other things -- Karl Marx's virulent racism.  Fr. Tucker comments, "racism doesn't seem to mix too well with all that equality that Communists always talk about."  Yes.  Isn't that always the way with Communists, though?  The reality never matches the talk.

The other day I heard the old Phil Collins song, "Sussudio," from his 1985 release, No Jacket Required, on one of the local, er, "oldies" stations.  Considering that it was released when I was in high school, I don't know how it could possibly be considered an "oldie."  But in any event, hearing the song reminded me that in the twenty-one years that I've been listening to that song, I've never found a satisfactory answer to this one essential question: What the hell kind of name is Sussudio?  It's always sounded vaguely Japanese to me, but perhaps that impression arises, through some some inscrutable chain of subconscious reasoning, from the samurai vs. ninjas vignette in the video for "Don't Lose My Number," which also was on No Jacket Required and was easily my favorite song on the album.  (And by the way, that video is, in retrospect, one of the funniest takedowns of the entire genre ever made.  Of course if you were born after 1975 or so -- or prior to about 1967 -- you probably won't get most of the references.)

Soledad O'Brien

She is emerging as my favorite interviewer. She comes off kinda cutesy and non-threatening, but then she persists in asking her questions. Watch how she kept asking Springsteen and watch him try to laugh his way out. She didn't go completely after him, but I guess she could see the Boss wasn't going to answer.

How the Saudis View Iran

Memri has this interesting clip from Saudi TV where they discuss nuclear proliferation in the region. Fascinating knowledge of history by the first Saudi commentator and excellent rebuttal to a caller by the second. Two interesting quotes:

    Dr. Anwar Majed 'Ishqi, director of Middle East Center for Strategic Studies: If Iran obtains a nuclear bomb, many Arab countries will race to obtain nuclear weapons. I'm not saying Iran must not have nuclear weapons – not because of the Shiite-Sunni issue, but because this poses a danger for the entire region

    ...

    Dr. Wahid Hamza Hashem: I disagree with Abu Amjad, my dear friend and brother, on this issue. He said: "From a pan-Arab perspective"... From the Arab perspective he must not accept Iran having nuclear weapons, because this would mean Persian superiority over the Arabs. Secondly, he said that if Iran obtains nuclear weapons, there would be a balance of power with Israel. I do not agree, because Iran's goal is by no means to confront Israel, but rather to confront the Arab countries, and especially the Gulf countries.

Florida is an evil state!

Is it me or is Florida the number three state to harbor terrorists (after Iraq and Afghanistan)? What is going on down there. They don't even sound like regular muslim Jihadis - more like Branch Davidian Jihadis.