Michael Williams -- Master of None

Kerry: I Will Not Do Math, Ever

Although the headline is deceiving, Senator Kerry insinuates that President Bush will reintroduce the draft if he's re-elected.

Answering a question about the draft that had been posed at a forum with voters, Kerry said: "If George Bush (news - web sites) were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea (news - web sites) and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld yesterday dismissed the notion of reinstating the military draft, saying that the Pentagon, if needed, can dig deeper into Reserve and National Guard forces to relieve troops deployed in the war on terrorism.

"I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft," Mr. Rumsfeld told a Washington gathering of members of the Newspaper Association of America, the American Society of Newspaper Editors and the Associated Press.

Democrats in both chambers — Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York and Sen. Ernest F. Hollings of South Carolina — have introduced bills calling for the reinstatement of the draft.

Mr. Rangel, who strongly opposed the Iraq war, said during the months leading up to it that it was apparent that "disproportionate numbers of the poor and members of minority groups compose the enlisted ranks of the military."

"If our great country becomes involved in an all-out war, the sacrifice must be shared," he said in December 2002, during the runup to the war to oust Saddam Hussein.

What's more, he apparently can't to simple math.

His voice scratchy and breaking from a cold, Kerry called the president's proposal to give workers partly private Social Security (news - web sites) accounts a windfall for financial companies and one that will cut benefits for senior citizens.

"He's driving seniors right out of the middle class," Kerry said in a battleground state rich with voters keenly watching the candidates talk about two pillars of retirement, Social Security and Medicare.

"I will never privatize Social Security, ever," Kerry said, repeating promises not to raise the retirement age or cut benefits.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan warned yesterday of a generational time bomb that will go off once millions of baby boommers retire and tax the Social Security and Medicare systems beyond their capacity.

Greenspan, a man who normally speaks in deliberate gobbledygook to calm markets, instead used blunt language about ``increasingly stark choices'' facing Americans on how to pay for boomers' benefits after they finish working and start retiring in huge numbers in coming years.

Experts said even the latest remarks from the Fed chairman were muted compared with the grim reality of the situation.

``It's much worse than what (Greenspan) is saying,'' said Laurence J. Kotlikoff, chairman of Boston University's economics department and co-author of the new book ``The Coming Generational Storm.''

Lawmakers better get their act together, Kotlikoff said. ``The country is already bankrupt. We can't wait 10 years to act.''

Stopping short of proposing specific ideas on how to plug looming Social Security and Medicare deficits, Greenspan did say time is running out ``to recalibrate our public programs.''

``If we delay, the adjustments could be abrupt and painful,'' Greenspan told a central bank conference in Wyoming.

Kotlikoff warned of possible generational resentment among the young - a resentment that appeared here already yesterday.

``I'm not going to be retired for many years, and I'm giving my money to some little old crazy person,'' bemoaned Desirea Moore, 19, of Dorchester. Moore, who works for a local insurance company, said she has about $30 to $40 a week deducted for Social Security from her paycheck each week.

``I hope when we retire we get a big check too,'' she added.

``It kind of stinks for anyone who's not in that generation,'' said Tim Jacques, 36, a North Andover resident who works at a Boston financial firm. ``We're going to be paying into the system all our working years and not getting any benefit from it. I'm certainly not too happy about it.''

Update:
And a few hours later Instapundit makes the same connection. Not that I'm dissing Glenn -- I just want more attention for myself!

01:29 PM | (4) | (0)

Judging Each Other

In a comment to my post about "Homosexuality and the Church", Lance writes:

I'm fascinated that you used the standard pharisee trick of ending the scripture post at verse 32...instead of continuing to Romans 2:1.

When the letter was written....it wasn't divided into chapters...and the letter has been arbitrarily segmented into chapters at a later date.

But I have noticed pharisees just REFUSE to quote Romans 2...in connection with Romans 1...in the same way pharisees will quote 1 cor 6:9-10 without the redemptive verse 11.

What is it that so grates on you about Romans 2? You don't feel so smug about your own 'moral superiority' when you're discussing the homosexual issue....that's what.

1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.

1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3 Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4 When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

In Romans, God isn't absolving us of our responsibility to discern right from wrong -- in fact, the first chapter of Romans contains a huge list of sins and condemns them all. No, what God is saying is that we as individuals are not fit to hand out punishments and condemnation to other people based on our perception of their wrongdoing (interestingly, Romans 13 explains that this is why God establishes governments). Nor are we to create our own definitions of evil based on our personal preferences. (For instance, it would be wrong for me to declare that wearing white pants after Labor Day is evil, since as far as I know God couldn't care less what color pants anyone wears.)

Jesus elaborates on this a bit in Matthew 7:

1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

In Matthew 18 Jesus speaks a bit about correcting evil within the church, and this passage also lines up with what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 5.

15 "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

1. We must not base our evaluations of right and wrong on our own preferences, but only on what God has commanded. Sometimes we like to veil our preferences and claim that we're following God when we're really just using him as an excuse to do what we want, so we must be on guard against this pitfall.

2. When dealing with another's sin, we must first make sure that our motives are right and that we're not acting out of pride but rather with compassion. We must also make sure that we're not guilty of hypocrisy. Our primary goals should be correcting the wrong actions and repairing the person's relationship with God.

3. It's always wise to seek counsel from others before making any judgements. By seeking advice we can help ensure that the first two principles are met and that we're not fooling ourselves. Acting as a group also adds human authority to any accusation and can help convince the listener to take the matter seriously.

And finally, if we're quick to correct ourselves then we won't need to worry about being judged by others.

12:04 PM | (1) | (0)

Presidential Debates

It looks like there are going to be a lot of rules for this year's Presidential debates, and that's fine with me. Does it decrease the spontaneity? Sure. Does it decrease the chance of that the candidates will whip it out? Yeah -- that provision was specifically requested by the Democrats. So the debates won't be as exciting as they could be, but I guess that doesn't really bother me. In undirected debates there are innumerable opportunities for the participants to play games and manipulate the process, and adding rules to prevent abuses seems like a good idea.

What I would like to see, however, is a format that allows the candidates to speak directly to each other rather than just to the audience. I'd like the debates to be more confrontational on the issues, and I'd like the rules to prevent games with the process.

11:00 AM | (0) | (0)

Overthinking

It's absolutely phenomenal how much mental energy I can devote to overthinking the simplest things. I meet some girl and suddenly I must analyze every minutiae and divine what they all together mean -- as if gestures are tea leaves and glances are constellations that can predict the future if I just think hard enough. How absurd. Especially considering how poor human observation skills and memory are and that most of what I see in my mind is distorted and unrecoverable.

It's pointless, and so I won't do it. Such ruminations are a barren tree that will not -- and cannot -- bear any fruit. Mental ghosts that taunt and tease but have no substance. Only time and patience will creep through reality and reveal the future, one second at a time.

12:30 AM | (0) | (0)

Kerry Admits the UN is Hopeless

CNSNews posts a summary of President Bush's remarks to the UN today, and right below it is a response by Senator Kerry.

"People everywhere are capable of freedom and worthy of freedom," President Bush told the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday. "The proper response to difficulty is not to retreat - it is to prevail. The advance of freedom always carries a cost - paid by the bravest among us." President Bush said the United States "will stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq until their hopes of freedom and security are fulfilled." ... In his speech, President Bush proposed the establishment of a Democracy Fund within the U.N. "This is a great calling for this great organization," he said. "The fund would help countries lay the foundations of democracy by instituting the rule of law, independent courts, a free press, political parties and trade unions." He urged all other nations to join the U.S. in contributing to the Democracy Fund.

The same day that President George W. Bush addressed the United Nations on the subject of Iraq, his Democratic challenger Sen. John F. Kerry criticized Bush for living in a "world of fantasy spin" instead of a "world of reality" when addressing the current conditions in Iraq. ... "After lecturing them instead of leading them to understand how we are all together with a stake in the outcome of Iraq, I believe the president missed an opportunity of enormous importance for our nation and for the world," Kerry said, calling the president's credibility into question.

03:40 PM | (0) | (0)

Taking Candy From a Baby

I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on TV, and unless I'm mistaken it's illegal for political candidates to take contributions from minors. According to section 318 of the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002":

Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by section 101, is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:

"PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY MINORS

"SEC. 324. An individual who is 17 years old or younger shall not make a contribution to a candidate or a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party.".

Kerry campaign donors apparently come in all sizes. He told Philbin and Ripa that a woman in New York gave him $385 that her 8-year-old son had raised selling homemade campaign buttons, and a 6-year-old in Philadelphia handed over a plastic container with $685 he had earned selling homemade campaign bracelets.

Update:
Or not! I'm told that provision was struck down by the Supreme Court last Fall in McConnell v. FEC. See, I told you I wasn't a lawyer. Still, even though my accusation was essentially wrong, shouldn't we focus on the key issue of how John Kerry employs child slave labor to finance his campaign?

10:01 AM | (7) | (0)

Murdering Gays is Wrong

Eugene Volokh is calling on Christians to publically condemn Jimmy Swaggart for saying:

I'm trying to find the correct name for it . . . this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. . . . I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died.

For my complete view on the matter, please see my earlier post titled "Homosexuality and the Church". Mr. Swaggart is old enough and supposedly mature enough that he should have attained a certain level of humility -- God says that we're all evil and that the punishment we earn for our evil is death. No homosexual is any more evil than I am, and no saint is any less evil. Humility is realizing that we're all fallen, and that only God's grace can save us. We can't earn it and we don't deserve it, but he gives it to us freely when we ask for it because he loves us.

11:19 PM | (7) | (2)

John Kerry Earns Fourth Purple Heart

John Kerry Earns Fourth Purple Heart

07:57 PM | (0) | (0)

Too Many Side Projects

I've gotta go with the standard blogger excuse for not posting: I've been too busy. For some reason I've decided to take on another side project (buying some rental properties in the South Bay) and it's eating up a lot of time right now. But really, what's in the news other than CBS itself? I don't have much to add to that discussion. However, I do have an interesting idea about John Kerry's little-known fourth purple heart and I'll be posting about that later this evening.

04:12 PM | (0) | (0)

Kerry's Military Records

Near the end of a CBS/AP story that does a pretty good job of explaining the memogate debacle there's a bit of complaining about President Bush and the full release of military records.

Meanwhile, a federal judge has ordered the Pentagon to find and make public by next week any unreleased files about Mr. Bush's Vietnam-era Air National Guard service to resolve a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Associated Press.

The White House and Defense Department have on several occasions claimed that they had released all the documents only to make additional records available later on.

11:35 AM | (1) | (0)

Democrats Not Ready for Prime Time

I don't think John Kerry understands what it means to be president.

While Bush has been campaigning as the best candidate to deter terrorists and protect the nation, Kerry portrayed him as out of touch with the situation in Iraq.

"With all due respect to the president, has he turned on the evening news lately? Does he read the newspapers?" Kerry said. "Does he really know what's happening? Is he talking about the same war that the rest of us are talking about?"

Meanwhile, House minority leader Nancy "Pansy" Pelosi wants us to surrender to whomever is handy.

"It's clear that this administration didn't know what it was getting into, or else they grossly misrepresented the facts to the American people," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California. "In either case, staying the course is not an option."

01:04 AM | (6) | (2)

Affect and Effect

Effect and affect are two of my favorite words to use properly. Both can be used as either a noun or a verb but they are not in any way interchangable, as this usage note explains.

Affect and effect have no senses in common. As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of “to influence” (how smoking affects health). Effect means “to bring about or execute”: layoffs designed to effect savings. Thus the sentence These measures may affect savings could imply that the measures may reduce savings that have already been realized, whereas These measures may effect savings implies that the measures will cause new savings to come about.

01:32 PM | (3) | (0)

Catholics, Voting, and Abortion

I'm not a Catholic, but I wholeheartedly agree with Archibishop John J. Myers' voter's guide with regards to pro-choice candidates.

Cardinal Ratzinger stated that a "Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of a candidate's permissive stand on abortion." But the question of the moment is whether a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion candidate for other reasons. The cardinal's next sentence answered that question: A Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion Catholic politician only "in the presence of proportionate reasons."

What are "proportionate reasons"? To consider that question, we must first repeat the teaching of the church: The direct killing of innocent human beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal, is homicidal, gravely sinful and always profoundly wrong. Then we must consider the scope of the evil of abortion today in our country. America suffers 1.3 million abortions each year--a tragedy of epic proportions. Moreover, many supporters of abortion propose making the situation even worse by creating a publicly funded industry in which tens of thousands of human lives are produced each year for the purpose of being "sacrificed" in biomedical research.

Thus for a Catholic citizen to vote for a candidate who supports abortion and embryo-destructive research, one of the following circumstances would have to obtain: either (a) both candidates would have to be in favor of embryo killing on roughly an equal scale or (b) the candidate with the superior position on abortion and embryo-destructive research would have to be a supporter of objective evils of a gravity and magnitude beyond that of 1.3 million yearly abortions plus the killing that would take place if public funds were made available for embryo-destructive research.

Frankly, it is hard to imagine circumstance (b) in a society such as ours. No candidate advocating the removal of legal protection against killing for any vulnerable group of innocent people other than unborn children would have a chance of winning a major office in our country. Even those who support the death penalty for first-degree murderers are not advocating policies that result in more than a million killings annually.

12:04 PM | (3) | (0)

God's Side

Hey terrorists, if Allah is so great then why don't yet let him do some kidnapping and beheading for a while? Or is it possible that you aren't really in line with what he wants you to be doing? Maybe the reason you're expending so much effort for so little gain is that God is working against you. Theory is fine and good, but when it doesn't work in practice then it may be time to reconsider.

11:16 AM | (0) | (0)

Peer Reviewed Intelligent Design

A friend pointed me to an article in The Scientist about a controversy surrounding the publication of a paper about intelligent design in a peer reviewed biology journal.

The publication in a peer-reviewed biology journal of an article which sounds themes often heard in discussions of "intelligent design"–a theory one critic calls "the old creationist arguments in fancy clothes"–has drawn criticism from the members of the society that publishes the journal, and from others.

In an article entitled "The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories," which was made available online on August 28 by the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Stephen Meyer concludes: "what natural selection lacks, intelligent selection–purposive or goal-directed design–provides." Meyer is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, which, according to its Web site "supports research by scientists and other scholars developing the scientific theory known as intelligent design." ...

Richard Sternberg, a staff scientist at the National Center for Biotechnology Information who was an editor of the Proceedings at the time, told The Scientist via E-mail that the three peer reviewers of the paper "all hold faculty positions in biological disciplines at prominent universities and research institutions, one at an Ivy League university, one at a major US public university, and another at a major overseas research institute."

"The reviewers did not necessarily agree with Dr. Meyer's arguments but all found the paper meritorious, warranting publication," Sternberg said.

04:05 PM | (0) | (0)

Why I Don't Like Animals

This is the kind of stuff that reminds me why I don't like animals.

Tyler's friend, Ian Carmichael, heard screams, rushed from his apartment and jumped on the dog's back. He tried pulling Tango off by its collar. At the same time, Nathan Lezniewicz, ran to the scene with a machete and kitchen knives.

The men furiously stabbed the dog while its teeth were clenched on Tyler's arm, Maynard said.

The dog, bloodied and with a knife in its torso, released Tyler's arm and ran up to the third floor. But it immediately came back downstairs, cornered Troup and bit his arm.

And no, pets aren't the same as say, guns. Guns don't have to be constantly monitored to make sure they don't kill people, whereas animals do. Guns act predictably, whereas animals don't. If you carry a gun, lose it somewhere, and the the person who finds it then uses it to kill someone, well, you're an idiot but you shouldn't be criminally liable. If you walk your dog and it runs away and kills someone, you should be prosecuted for second degree murder.

03:32 PM | (7) | (0)

Texas Hold 'Em

Gotta bone up on my Texas Hold 'Em strategies for game night tomorrow. I even ordered a suitcase of chips!

10:18 AM | (0) | (0)

Mean Lefties

Don't worry, Sophia Parlock, I know how you feel.

I'm sure if you were bigger you would have flipped out and chopped off some heads like I did. I hope you remember this day when you're older so you can look back and laugh at how pathetic and desperate the neanderthal-Americans became before they faded into oblivion.

Update:
Then again.... Interesting stuff.

09:42 PM | (9) | (4)

Dire Pre-War Predictions That Didn't Come True 2

Maybe I don't fully understand this AP piece citing an intelligence report's claims that Iraq's future is bleak, but it doesn't make any sense to me.

A highly classified National Intelligence Estimate assembled by some of the government's most senior analysts this summer provided a pessimistic assessment about the future security and stability of Iraq.

The National Intelligence Council looked at the political, economic and security situation in the war-torn country and determined -- at best -- the situation would be tenuous in terms of stability, a U.S. official said late Wednesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

At worst, the official said, were "trend lines that would point to a civil war." The official said it "would be fair" to call the document "pessimistic."

The intelligence estimate, which was prepared for President Bush, considered the window of time between July and the end of 2005. But the official noted that the document, which spans roughly 50 pages, draws on intelligence community assessments from January 2003, before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and the subsequent deteriorating security situation there.

The estimate contrasts with public comments of Bush and his senior aides who speak more optimistically about the prospects for a peaceful and free Iraq. "We're making progress on the ground," Bush said at his Texas ranch late last month.

This looks like a non-story to me. See here for more dire predictions that didn't come true.

06:02 PM | (0) | (0)

Adult Access to Public Schools

Robert Maranto asks "why are public schools closed to the public?", but he fails to mention what is, to me, a key consideration.

This occurred to me when, like any good parent, I called the principal's office at my local public elementary school to check it out before sending my son. Alas, despite spending $20,000 per child, our school had trouble returning three phone messages left during normal business hours. On my fourth try I reached a live person, and had a brief conversation:

"Hi, I'm Bob Maranto. I'm a parent who lives in [your school's] attendance zone. My son will be old enough for kindergarten next fall. He's actually right on the edge, so he could go next fall or the following fall, and I was wondering if I could come visit the school sometime."

"We don't have any visiting this year," the administrator replied. "We're doing construction and a lot of things are going on."

"Could I watch a class in session?"

"No, even when there's no construction you could not watch a class."

"Well, could I meet my son's teacher?"

"No, the teachers are busy teaching all day and then they go home."

As we used to say when I was in government, this is customer service worthy of the Internal Revenue Service. It also corresponds to playground gossip about this school, which has test scores lower than nearby schools.

A mere five months and 22 phone calls, faxes, and e-mails later--to the superintendent, school board, principal, and various other "public servants"--I was allowed to visit my son's likely school. Someday, I hope to watch a class.

But must it be so hard? Why not open public schools to the public?

We deal with a similar situation with our kids at church. For safety reason we do our best to keep non-approved adults out of the areas where we run our children's programs, including parents. It's not that we have anything to hide, it's that we think it's wise to keep strange adults away from our kids. We take safety and security very serious, and soon we'll even be running background checks on all our workers before they're allowed to work with children. We're always happy to show the parents what we're doing, but we escort them (and any visiting adults) rather than just let them wander around alone. When someone complains (and some do) we just remind them that the measures are in place to protect their child.

03:21 PM | (7) | (0)

Really Busy

I take a couple of days off and it gets really busy. I'm around, and I haven't forgotten about you all.

02:48 PM | (0) | (0)

Forged Memos and Delusional Meglomania

I'm sure many other blogs are all over the forged memo story, from every angle, but let me just briefly point out Dan Rather's delusional meglomania and blatant partisanship.

"I know that I didn't type them," Knox said of the Killian memos. "However, the information in there is correct," she said, adding that Killian and the other officers would "snicker about what [Bush] was getting away with."

Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic." If Knox is right, Rather said, the public "won't hear about it from a spokesman. They'll learn it from me."

"If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night. "Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "

01:00 AM | (0) | (0)