In this month's issue of Vanity Fair, W. Mark Felt says he was "Deep Throat." I haven't read the article, but am expecting the Vanity Fair issue in the mail any day now, thanks to ex-roommate Diana who bequeathed her VF subscription to me when she moved to Singapore.

When it comes to American politics, I seek a third option. No, I am not advocating a third party, but I am advocating a candidate who does not represent the current lines of the Republican and Democratic leadership.

America needs a president who does not buy into the Democratic mode of secularism and oppositionism. But America also needs a president who does not use the current GOP leadership's tactics of promoting government as the solution to all of our problems, no matter the fiscal cost. We need leadership that does not use religious rhetoric to injure the judiciary, the senate, and other principles of this nation's founding, and religious division for political gain.

Some in Washington saythat this filibuster debacle may represent a big victory for GOP hopeful, Sen. Allen, who took a firm stance in favor of the nuclear option. If that is indeed true, then it looks like America faces more of the same.

Two developments, one technological and one political, have the potential, when combined, to pose a major threat to the privacy of American citizens. The technology is RFID (Radio Frequency Identifcation) and the political is the Real-ID Act recently passed by Congress.

RFID tags, already used in many companies to gain access to parking garages and portions of the building, allow a card to be identified by virtue of proximity to a radio frequency reader. These are often specific to a particular venue or place of employment.

If a universal government-issued ID card becomes a reality-- which the Real-ID Act is certainly a first step towards-- and if it contains RFID, places of business or private individuals could secretly get your unique ID and create private databases with information on you, such as purchasing tendencies, health issues, etc.

The breach isn't new, but the ease and secrecy in which the breach could be carried out is unequaled.

Tensions between China and Japanare reaching a boiling point, as the Chinese oppose Japanese assession to the UN Security Council and because of bitterness regarding WWII. I say to them: get over it!

Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and drug the U.S. into war in the Pacific and we nuked two of their cities, and we both get along fine now. If we can do, why not Japan and China?

This marks the first time I've not attended the Indy500, since I first started attending in 1990. And according to this ESPN.com article, it was a memorable race.

Danica Patrick, 23, led most of the race until the end, and is destined to be the first female to receive the Rookie of the Year award. Congrats to her. Her success can only be good for the sport. But the winner, who both myself and my oldest brother predicted, was Dan Wheldon, a 26-yr old from England.

As always, the event lived up to its nickname, "The greatest spectacle in racing," with Reggie Miller waving the opening green flag and with Colin Powell driving the Corvette pace car.

correction: Danica did not lead most of the race, but led towards the end, before slipping out of first place, due to fuel concerns

Mao's Cultural Revolution in China, where doctors were forced to farm and farmers were made lawyers for instance, was a social disaster that led to the deaths of millions of Chinese. And in a nation that nearly deifies Mao it is natural that the government hide information regarding the Cultural Revolution from the people.

It is somewhat remarkable to me, then, that this great New York Times article has not been blocked here in China. It discusses a new museum in the northeast region of China that is dedicated to providing information on the Cultural Revolution. Perhaps the allowance of this museum to exist and the non-blocking of the Times article is a sign that the Chinese government is willing to come to some terms with the past.

I'd like to visit this museum if I have time.

Too funny.

From TheOnion:

Aries: (March 21—April 19)
Your lifelong love of all things zombie becomes a definite liability when former president Ronald Reagan mysteriously returns to life and is told that you wouldn't mind if he stayed at your place.

When I watched the press conference regarding the deal brokered between the 14 Senators that allowed the filibuster to remain an option in "extreme" circumstances, I asked out loud, "Where did Graham and DeWine come from?" Originally, the discussion was only between 12 Senators, six from each side. This morning's Hotline (published by the National Journal), cited a Fox News Channel report that Bush and Frist were concerned whether or not they had enough votes for a nuclear option and therefore dispatched Graham and DeWine into the negotiations. Here is what the Hotline said:

FNC's Garrett reports: "Senior Republican sources tell Fox Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and the Bush White House were worried enough about possibly losing the vote to end judicial filibusters that they dispatched two conservatives, South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and Ohio's Mike DeWine, to cut the best possible deal. The principal source of anxiety, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. Top GOP sources say it was unclear until the last minute how Specter would vote on abolishing Democratic judicial filibusters. ... Without Specter, Frist and the Republicans would have been one vote short. DeWine said uncertainty was very real."

DeWine: "No one knows how the vote on the constitutional option would have come out. We might have won. We might have lost. If we lost, it would have been devastating for the president, devastating for the president when he tried to get a nominee up here for the Supreme Court."

Garrett: "Specter has forcefully denied reports earlier this week that he supported the nuclear option. He said again today he would not reveal his position one way or the other."

Specter: "I can do a lot better with divergent interests if I maintain as close to a centrist position as possible. And that means keeping quiet."

Garrett: "DeWine said he and Graham pressed for confirmation votes on the president's three most controversial judicial nominees, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and William Pryor. They also insisted, he said, the nuclear option remained on the table if Democrats resurrected the filibuster strategy. Conservative activists, nevertheless, have denounced this last-minute compromise, largely based on the assumption Republicans had the votes to prevail."

More Garrett: "DeWine said Frist has to keep his distance from the deal but was aware of its contours. He also said the president wouldn't have labeled the deal as progress the very next morning if he had felt undercut on judges or other legislative priorities" ("Special Report," 5/26).

...is ready to be ignored in France, regarding their acceptance of the E.U. constitution. What happened to self-determination? France? Call it China2.

So, it's my first full day and second night in China and I'm writing this post from a computer lab on the campus of the People's University of China (Renmin) in Beijing. Ironically, I can access Blogger to make posts, but Daily Contentions itself appears to be blocked.

But little does the Chinese government know that while they have blocked the website, they have allowed the man behind it to enter their nation :-) Well, they may know now if they monitor internet usage in this lab (which I doubt).

Nevertheless, I am certainly enjoying my time and have far more to report than I am able to type here. So far the delight of my stay has been the "English Corner" on the quad of the university, where Chinese students go to try out their English. When they see a westerner they flock around him or her to practice their English skills. Myself and two friends went tonight and we were the only westerners there.

With my group of 30 or so Chinese students, I, of course, deftly turned the conversation to politics, highlighting the positive aspects of a free press and independent judiciary and the role they play in America. To my delight, the students were all aware that the Chinese government censors their media, and one even criticized the government's handling of farmers' property. The conversation lasted almost an hour, but when the topic turned towards their ill-will towards Japan, I bowed out. Several promised to be back next Friday for seminar #2 :-)

Tomorrow we visit the Forbidden City. I should have updates and perhaps some photos in a few days.

My flight to Beijing is boarding, so this is going to be quick. I had a great time in Japan. Here are a couple photos: one from Yokohama, of Landmark Tower, and the other of the Japanese country-side.

China, China, China! No More China!

I love the New York Times. I love picking it up and realizing day after day that there is simply too much in each edition for me to read. I love reading articles that are not written by former third-grade teachers. I love that the international section is, by definition, thicker than the local section.

As a registered member of the Republic Party, I am well aware that openly admitting my love for the New York Times is a taboo akin to disclosing one’s heterosexuality on the East Coast. But before Ann Coulter brands me a Newt, let it be known that I customarily leave the NYT OP-ED section for the nice man that cleans the toilets in first-floor men’s washroom at work. (“Oh thank goodness, we were so worried!”) As if you need me to explain why.

Please refer to Nicholas D. Kristof’s latest propaganda piece, “China, the World’s Capital.” I know, I know: you are tired of hearing about how China is sooooo much better than the West. You do not care how many people really live there or how many babies and cell phones they do or do not have. I don’t care either (I swear), but I am persistently interested in the Chinese hysterics that are sweeping the United States (you know, “China, India, and Europe, oh my!”) Well keep your Donnas dry, Dorothy; this witch is not as wicked as she likes to think she is, no matter what Nicholas D. would have us believe.

I continue to read ‘articles’ such as this one because I seek to understand why so many intelligent Americans are marveling morbidly at a nation whose most ambitious aspiration is imitation. The Chinese are trying to be more like U.S.

Let us begin with one Mr. Kristof. First, let us all congratulate him on the fact that he knows some Chinese. Congratulations Mr. Kristof—those of us too uneducated and conservative to understand the ancient, outdated, and ungainly system of tiny pictures appreciate your willingness to provide an English translation. As for the language of the future, I have been to the future: it is called Japan, where everyone studies English and no one speaks Chinese. (Do not forget to congratulate Nicholas on his Chinese again after reading his second paragraph.)

When I first read Kristof’s article, I guessed he was just one more journalist who, after having spent a week (maybe 10 days) gallivanting about China, felt that he, too, needed to remind the American people that our arrogance and myopia will soon spell our downfall in the wake of an imminent, flawless China. They also enjoy reminding us how well-traveled they are. “Look,” they say, “we’ve been to the Palace Museum and can tell you about ancient Chinese scrolls. We spend our free time roaming around ancient Asian capitals and speaking to ancient Asian common people.”

Imagine my surprise when I browsed to Kristof’s biography and found, to my horror, that Nicholas D. has studied in Taipei and served as NYT bureau chief in Hong Kong and Beijing. Furthermore, he and his wife won a Pulitzer for their reporting on China's Tiananmen Square democracy movement, and together they have written a book about China and another about Asia.

You should know better, Nicholas! You should know that peasant-woman Wang Ruina’s opinion does not qualify as reliable economic forecast.

You should not be afraid of Hao Wang just because his family owns a computer and his grandchildren study in what they call a university. My family owns four computers, my grandparents can sign their names, and if the Haos’ are learning anything, it is only because ignorant Westerners like myself are willing to teach them and to teach their teachers.

You should know that New York City is not doomed because a few Chinese residents of Kaifeng do not eat pork. I have never been there, but as I understand it there are many Americans in New York that do not eat pork, either.

Yes, the Chinese economy is growing at an incredible rate. But as Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria points out:

There are many who criticize China's economic path. They argue that the numbers are fudged, that corruption is rampant, that its banks are teetering on the edge, that regional tensions will explode, that inequality is rising dangerously and that things are coming to a head. For a decade now they have been predicting, "This cannot last, China will crash, it cannot keep this up." So far at least, none of these prognoses has come true. And while China has many problems, it also has something any Third World country would kill for—consistently high growth.

China is still a Third World country. The Chinese conduct themselves like a Third World people. The fact that so many First World governments and their citizens are paying attention is a testament to the proficiency and downright prescience with which the Communist Party of China has been managing (or in many cases, choosing not to manage) the development of a 1.3 billion-person economy. No matter how long the CPC is able to keep this awe-inspiring circus afloat, however, a people whose government makes their daily decisions for them will never be able to challenge the West, the United States, at the international level.

The ring master, no matter how adept, will never be at the same level as the audience he is trying with so much effort to impress. It is the lions, tigers, and bears we are keeping are eyes on, and from where I sit, it does not appears as if they are going to desire, or that they are going to be able, to shake off their muzzles anytime soon.

I live in Jilin City, the Flint, MI of China. If you want to better understand this country and its people, I will be happy to show you around. Otherwise, take a few minutes and read Zakaria’s “Does the Future Belong to China?” an excellent analysis of China’s rapid rise to prominence, the consequences it is having for the developed world, and the conclusions that can be drawn at this time. Pay careful attention to unabashed defaming of French President Jacques Chirac on page six.

Stop emailing Kristof’s articles to your friends and family. Stop reading the New York Times Op/Ed section. Stop poking fun at those of us who enjoy reading the rest of the paper.

A deal has been reached between fourteen Democratic and Republican Senators regarding the judicial filibusters that have been taking place, and everybody wins! Well, everybody except for liberal interest groups, but they didn't help the Democrats in '04...but I digress.

Under the deal, seven Democratic Senators and seven Republican Senators, signed a "memorandum of understanding" in which the Republican Senators will vote against any nuclear option brought to the floor if the Democratic Senators vote for cloture, except in cases of "extraordinary circumstances." However, if the GOP Senators think that the Democratic Senators are not acting in good faith, they can switch their vote and vote for the nuclear option.

As Dan Balz of the Washington Post points out, the immediate effect of this deal is that it means that at least three of the nominees who have been blocked for years will make it to the appellate courts, while at least two will not. Beyond that, without a total ban on judicial filibusters, as the nuclear option would have guaranteed, the president will not have such a free hand in selecting a Supreme Court nominee. Bush also will be under pressure from the moderates to work more cooperatively with the Senate on judicial nominations or face rebellion from at least some of them. However, the deal will truly be put to the test when Bush gets the opportunity to nominate a new member to the Supreme Court and perhaps even a Chief Justice.

Im at an internet cafe so Ill make this quick. Im here safe and sound in Japan but I was sad to see the news of the Pacers loss. Next year will be interesting, but without Reggie Miller, things will just be different. Ive never known the Pacers without him.

Revenge of the Sith was very very good. Much better than Episodes I and II. The acting, particularly that of Hayden Christenson, was better but still not all that stellar. The action was non-stop though and well-done. The plot, philosophy, and politics of the movie though put it a step above the other new movies and makes it rival the old ones. It deserves its opening gross.

Im limiting my access to news and politics, but I am keeping track of the judicial nomination business in the Senate. Looks like a cloture call on Tuesday and unless a compromise can be reached by then... the nuclear/constitutional option.

Your faithful blogger travels abroad during the next 6 weeks, first to Japan for a week and then to China for 5 weeks. Never fear, I'm hoping to blog some from there, hopefully with photos. But nevertheless, my blogging frequency will not be what it currently is, so to ensure continuity, I'm opening up guest blogging during the entire period.

I've updated the logo to reflect the "travel" status of the blog and you may also notice that I eliminated the search field in the upper right. It didn't work, because IU (who host's my blog) blocks site crawlers like Google. Maybe in the future I'll be able to get it working.

-lds

I'm going to see Star Wars: Episode III tonight at midnight, before I have to hop on the plane. The movie's been getting solid reviews so I look forward to it. Also, we will get to see Luke Skywalker, the hero of the original trilogy, conceived, and if I correctly garner from the preview, born.

...is an American company: Bayoil, based in Texas.

The company purchased oil from Iraq directly or indirectly paying Saddam Hussein $37 million in kickbacks, from 2000-2002. They then sold the oil to American refineries. According to a Senate subcommittee report, Washington knew of the oil purchases, though it seems unclear how much they knew.

It seems like everyone was willing to turn a blind eye to the corruption of the UN Oil-for-Food Program, even some in the U.S. as we prepared to go to war with Iraq.

Rush Limbaugh has decided to podcast his radio program, but only to his website's premium members. This is a smart move and it shows that Rush is attuned to the latest in technological developments.

But what is podcasting, you may ask? Well I'll tell you. A podcast is not live. A podcast is a "broadcast" via a download of an audio program to one's iPod or other mp3 player.

So, if I wanted to make a Daily Contentions podcast, I'd simply record the audio on my computer, convert it to .mp3 or similar format, and then place the link prominently on the page. Each time I made a new program, I'd update the link. Anybody who would want to listen to my podcast could then simply download the file and listen to it at their leisure during the day.

But I don't see myself podcasting any time soon.

Sigh. I'm exhausted by arguments that really aren't arguments at all. In other words, when is a "debate" merely semantics rather than substance? People arguing "past each other"....

Two examples come to mind, in this late (really freakin early) hour. First, I was witness to a debate tonight (last night) about the Indianapolis Colts playoffs loss to the New England Patriots. The debate was over the question "Was the offense or the defense at fault for the Colts' loss?"

Of course, this is a ridiculous question. When you lose, both your offense and defense did not perform as necessary to win the game, and thus they both are at fault. A subsidiary question, and the point over most of the debate centered, was whether the offense or defense played out of their character for the season. Of course, neither side realized that they were arguing for different questions.

Another example is the recent Newsweek Koran flushing story. The question this time around is whether or not Newsweek "caused" the deaths in the riots in the middle east. "Caused" is a loaded term to be sure. The easy answer is that conditions, due to American policy and middle easy realities beyond our control, were ripe for riot but also that the untruth published by Newsweek was the necessary catalyst that set these specific events in motion.

To try to simply an answer to such questions is fruitless and results in unnecessary voluminous debate.

Think about it...

Jogging isn't an easy routine to keep up, but stop doing it regularly and it's much more difficult to start doing it again. Same thing with taking the right path in life.

Richard Cohen has a tremendous column against the death penalty, in the Washington Post. In fact, I'm not sure I have yet to read anywhere such a brilliantly subtle blending of the common sense and moral arguments against the death penalty. I can't pull out any power quotes from the piece, because there are too many. [thanks to Kristine Lam for the link]

By the way, now that the NYTimes has decided to push its columnists into obscurity by requiring readers to pay for its Op-Ed section starting in September, I might have to lean a bit more on the WaPo opinion section. Though I'd say it's been hands-down better than the NYTimes Op-Ed for some time now.

Well, I told myself I would not engage in any 2008 presidential speculation until at least 2006. But I couldn't hold out that long; I just couldn't.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton is the obvious standout. But as time progresses and other Dems' name recognition increase, that race will tighten. Insiders are saying Mark Warner could give her a run for her money. Evan Bayh is a dark horse too, methinks. The biggest threat to Hillary is her electability in the general election, and to what degree Democratic primary voters will prioritize that. Oh yeah, and then there's Joe Biden... hmm.

On the Republican side, things are a bit more interesting-- okay, vastly more interesting. Count Giuliani out. He's pro-choice. Ditto to Mitt Romney I believe. John McCain? Too old and too anti-establishment to get the nod. Senator Allen, from Virginia, is seen as the top contender by insiders, and his youth, vigor, evangelicism, and southern air all make him a tough candidate.

Chuck Hagel might be able to stake a middle position between Giuliani and Allen. Hagel's from the heartland and can appeal to the "morals" voters while at the same time appeal to some Republicans like myself who are a bit disenchanted with certain elements in the party who seem willing to sacrifice an independent judiciary at the alter-- and yes, that's the exact imagery I meant to use there.

Oh yeah, and Hagel's story of coming home to America from the Vietnam War and turning himself into a self-made millionaire is imminently inspiring.

This Reuters story is small, so here is the whole thing:

BEIJING (Reuters) - A freak blizzard and sand storm killed 15 explorers in mountainous remote northwest China on Friday, the Xinhua news agency said on Monday.

More than 70 explorers, hired by a company connected to oil giant China National Petroleum Corp., were working in Haixi prefecture in Qinghai province, bordering Tibet, when they were hit by a "heavy snowstorm, rainstorm and sandstorm simultaneously," Xinhua said. "Fifteen explorers were found dead and 13 others injured in the snowstorm which was unlikely to happen once in a century," an unnamed local official was quoted as saying.

Rescue and investigation efforts were continuing, Xinhua said. [emphasis added]

Note to self: do not travel to the mountainous northwest of China...

Senator Frist could call a vote on Priscilla Owens as early as Friday, setting the stage for the so-called nuclear option to end the Democratic filibuster of judicial nominations. Whether or not he will do so that early is yet to be seen, as Republicans have several items in the Senate which could be delayed or stalled to death by Democrats, such as the Bolton nomination and the highway bill, if Frist pulls the trigger.

What is also yet to be seen is whether or not Frist has the votes. Indiana's own, Senator Lugar, has said he is opposed to ending the filibuster, but has not committed to voting against the leadership. At least a couple other senate Republicans are in this camp. Meanwhile, Sen. McConnell says the leadership has the votes.

Meanwhile, Frist had an editorial in today's copy of USAToday, on which ABC's The Note called it powerful but I call it obtuse. Of course, what The Note failed to recognize as significant is not the mere fact that Frist wrote an editorial, but that he did so in USAToday and not in the NYTimes or the WaPo or in the WSJ. His writing was certainly much closer to the level of USAToday, and this was an obvious attempt to appeal to middle-America.

A new survey regarding journalism is to be released today by the University of Connecticut Department of Public Policy. According to its results, journalists seem to 'enjoy' about the same compassion from the public as lawyers. The results may be dismaying to journalists, but they should also be cause for some introspection. So without further delay:

• 43% of the public say that journalists have too much freedom
• 14% can name "freedom of the press" as a 1st Amendment guarantee
• 60% think reporters show bias
• 22% think the government should be allowed to censor the media
• 40% think the media does a good job with accuracy
• 53% think that stories using unnamed sources should NOT be published at all

Newsweek says Koran desecration report is wrong...

Oh no worries, at least the story didn't have any impact... Oh wait.

Scientists are making progress in developing a vaccine against nicotine addiction, which could be released possibly within 6 months to help cigarette smokers stop smoking.

This sounds like a pretty cool idea, but as always I see pitfalls as well. While I find no problem with immunizing against chemical dependence, such as against nicotine, what if we tried to immunize against other addictions? Parents may want to give their baby a vaccine against fast food, or a wife might want to immunize her husband to curb his sexual appetite. Well you get the idea.

The key will be to limit such immunizations to chemical dependence.

We learn more about the health risks of abortion, every few months it seems.

Doesn't it make sense to hold the abortion procedure to the same standard as surgical procedures? But this isn't the case in many states, where abortionists need not fully inform their patients of the risks of the procedure and where abortion clinics are not subject to the same regulation as say a doctor's office.

If you're like me, you convulsed a bit when you read this NYTimes, Newt Gingrich, and Hillary Clinton three-way.

CYOAS is a given at pretty much any organization, and the affliction certainly is no stranger to our federal government bureaucracies. The problem is that in a business upper level management knows the peril of CYOAS and they hold people accountable for gross incorporation of it, while in a bureaucracy, upper level management incorporates CYOAS too.

The U.S. Border Patrol seems to be the latest case-in-point. Supervisors at a post in southern Arizona ordered their agents to reduce the number of arrests they were making of illegal immigrants crossing the border. Why would they do such a thing, you ask. Simple. They didn't want the Minutemen volunteer border patrol to look good. I'm speechless.

power - n. 1. the ability to do something or act in a certain way, esp. as a faculty or quality; 2. the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events


Think about it... If nobody has power, then nothing gets done. The Democrats, with their current infatuation with obstructionism, should take that lesson to heart. They have deluded themselves into thinking that obstructionism IS power. But it is not. It rests not on a philosophy to accomplish an agenda, which might entail obstruction of CERTAIN Republican items, but upon a blind non-selective zeal to merely take away Republican power.

And in splendid masochistic irony, their tactic which was designed to gain power against the Republicans, has amounted to a fundamental miscalculation of the political calculus governing this nation and a REDUCTION of their power in the government.

The Democrats really need a President to get them out of this rut.

My first year of law school is over and complete!

... resumes today at 4 p.m. after my last law school final for the semester.

After that time today, coherence will be optional ;-)

I ganked these from the Corner. What better way to end the first year of law school than with a bunch of Ronald Reagan quotes. Seriously.

"Here's my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose."

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

"Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong."

"I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandment's would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress."

"The taxpayer: That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination."

"Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

"If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."

"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program."

"I've laid down the law, though, to everyone from now on about anything that happens: no matter what time it is, wake me, even if it's in the middle of aCabinet meeting."

"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first."

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

"Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are many rewards, if you disgrace yourself you can always write a book."

"No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women."

I love NYTimes columnist Nicholas D. Kristoff a lot and agree with him probably 80% of the time, but after reading this column over the weekend and this column today, Kristoff is in a free fall on my "wow this guy makes really intelligent points" scale. I could not have disagreed more with his opinion. I understand that the AIDS crisis is especially bad in third world countries and the use of condoms would be of great help to said countries and while I think it is ignorant for the Catholic church to insist that condoms do not prevent the spread of the HIV virus, people such as Kristoff are wrong to insist that the Church allow the use of condoms to curb the spread of HIV.

Kristoff insists that in not allowing Catholic missionaries to give out or encourage the use of condoms in countries with an AIDS epidemic, Pope Benedict XVI and the Church is irresponsible and possibly even sadistic. In addition, he points to the fact that many Catholics (especially in third world countries) are ignoring the Church's teachings as an argument for the Church to reverse it's ban. However, he, along with many intelligent people do not see the larger picture. Or perhaps they do see it but they still don't understand. Or in actuality, they know, they understand and they choose to ignore it completely and not even inform the readers.

The Catholic Church teaches that sex is an intimate act which should always be open to the possibility of procreation. That is why the use of birth control is forbidden. Allowing the use of condoms to prevent the spread of HIV would lead the Church down a slippery slope. If HIV now then what about other STDs that can be prevented by using a condom, and then what about using birth control to prevent known child defects? And then what about other forms of birth control? It's not as if the Catholic Church does not also speak as strongly against pre-marital sex and promiscuity, they do. There is nothing hypocritical about the Church's stance on this issue.

Kristoff argues that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is ignoring the growing HIV problem, by clamping down on missionaries in third world countries who pass out condoms or encourage their use. Ignoring would be to do completely nothing, but the missionaries within the Church have to stay within Church doctrines. One of the main appeals of religion is the prospect of eternal happiness. Missionaries need to teach those afflicted with HIV that the pain they experience in this world will lead closer to God and eventually to eternal happiness. Yes, I am talking about celibacy. I posted about the values of sacrifice earlier so I won't repeat myself. In this interview with the Washington Post, Cardinal McCarrick says,

We live in a world where people are afraid of absolutes. The living of the world say, "I'll love you till next Wednesday." And that has had its effect on marriage, on religious life, on the priesthood. People are afraid of making commitments that are absolute. And I think the only way they will begin to be able to review that in their minds is if they are conscious of God. And if you are conscious of God, then you don't mind doing the absolutes, because he is the absolute friend.

Although he is speaking of religious vocations, this can still be seen in many of the problems people deem the Catholic Church to have, especially those not familiar with Catholicism. But instead of nodding our heads or being defensive about people like Kristoff, we should be offensive and proclaim the Gospel, as Cardinal McCarrick says, and bring the Gospel back into our culture.

Using brain-imaging technology, Swedish researches have produced a study of how human brains from people of different sex-- and sexual orientation-- react differently to different sexual scents. The results add increasing evidence dismantling the notion that homosexuality is a choice, rather than an orientation.

The scientists extracted natural pheromone chemicals from men (testosterone based) and women (estrogen based) and released them near their subject while monitoring brain activity.

When women were exposed to the female scents, their smell regions lit up in their brains. But when men were exposed to the female scents, their hypothalamus, a region which governs sexual activity, lit up. The vice versa was true with women being exposed to male scents.

Interestingly, and not really unexpectedly in my opinion, gay men reacted to the female scents as other women do, and they reacted to the male scents as women did.

In other words, gay men's brains reacted sexually to same sex scents, without any volition or choice to do so.

Michael Jackson will be acquitted

In a story supposedly developed by Roll Call yesterday, and followed up on by Rush Limbaugh (how I found it), 6 senate Republicans led by Trent Lott are considering brokering a deal with 6 senate Democrats led by Ben Nelson.

The deal would break with the GOP leadership's vow to break the filibuster with the nuclear option and with the Dem's leadership's vow to filibuster certain of Bush's circuit court nominations. One of our nation's time-tested virtues, compromise, again rears its ugly head in the senate. That 'ugly' part was sarcasm, btw.

Here's how it would work. The 6 Republicans would agree to vote against the nuclear option, thus killing it, if the 6 Democrats agree to vote in favor of cloture and in favor of a floor vote on a particular 4 of the 7 circuit court judges that have previously been blocked by the Democrats.

Note, this is by no means a done deal at this juncture. Nevertheless, I'm cursing myself for not seeing the possibility of it earlier. Also note, I would not been a day late on this story if it were not for having a final yesterday. They just get in the way of everything :-)

Well, this is just one of countless reasons... [video]

Watch the whole thing I command you. At least it will show you some real hardlicking splitting-edge television news journalism.

Under Tony Blair's leadership, the Labour Party in Britain won a majority in an unprecedented third consecutive term last week. However, the party also saw its majority slimmed by 96 seats, and some people are predicting Blair will be forced by his party to step down within the year.

How likely is he to do that? Well, my yankee political predictive abilities are about as effective in the U.K. as the Chinese ancients' method of divining was at predicting the weather and other events in 2000 B.C.

30 of the 100 MPs contacted by the UK Times said they favored Blair to step down within a year, but Blair has already stated his intention to stay a full term, and has ample time to secure his majority block in the party. For some historical perspective:

Downing Street sought to play up the election result by reminding MPs Labour had never won three successive terms in office, that Thursday’s majority was bigger than that won by Margaret Thatcher in 1979, and that Howard’s Tories had won fewer seats than Michael Foot in 1983.

I eat very little fast food, but I just don't like the idea behind this.

I chose this tongue-in-cheek post title for reasons that will become apparent in the telling of this little drama, which pits mega-corporation versus mega-church.

The story begins with Microsoft, a company that was an early adopter of equal benefits for its employees in same-sex unions, supporting a proposed gay rights law in its home state of Washington. The bill would have extended many of the same benefits that married couples enjoy in housing, financial, and employment areas.

Suddenly, without giving a reason why, the company changed its stance on the bill to "neutral" a few weeks ago. Ken Hutcherson, a pastor of a nearby protestant mega-church (a term I find abhorrent and will never use again on this blog) takes credit for changing the software giant's stance by threatening a nationwide boycott of their products.

According to this CNET interview with Hutcherson, MS CEO Steve Balmer said the decision had been made before company officials met with Hutcherson. "Hutch" says this is a flat out lie and added: "If I got God on my side, what's a Microsoft? What's a Microsoft? It's nothing... God plus Hutch is enough."

Just a couple days ago and a week after the CNET interview was published, Microsoft reversed it's position and Balmer has strongly reaffirmed his company's support for gay rights legislation.

Hence the title of this post.