New Blog R U Next

After watching Terri Shindler Schiavo die over 14 days at the hands of our Governments both Federal and the State of Florida I started a Blog dedicated to her memory and to exposing the culture of death that killed her. The Blog R U Next asked that most basic question when dealing with a State out of control R U Next, Am I Next. The answer is to quote Shakespeare "not in the Stars but in ourselves". My desire is that R U Next be a group Blog. If you would like to post on R U Next leave a comment telling me how to get in touch with you and I'll put you in the group that may post.

I've Been Working out of Town

I've been out of town for ten days or so making some money which my wife appreciates. When I'm in town blogging isn't my first priority especially since no one seems to be reading based on comment activity. If you read We're Open All Night please comment so I can tell. Meanwhile I'll keep writing for my own pleasure. Wish I was Jim Gerrahityy at NRO or one of the Powerline Guys. Maybe someday.

Maybe We Should Be More Like the Gouveneur

"Gouveneur Morris's political quiescence during this period ...[the first decade of the nineteenth century]... sprang from a cheery pessimism. He thought the affairs of the nation were in the hands of incompetent men with bad principles, and this made him easy of mind and light of heart." Richard Brookhiser thus describes the State of the Founding Father who penned the Constitution in his book Gentlemen Revolutionary.

Some who don't like the outcome of America's last exercise in Democracy conducted November 04,'04 are trying to move to Canada. Others are ranting or seeking therapy for election selection trauma. These people (and all of us) could take a page from the Gouvenuer's book. His was a time when the Vice-President Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton in duel over politics. Politicians were bludgeoned with walking sticks on the floor of Congress. The Gouvenuer (sort of like the Donald [trump] kept his equilibrium by trusting in the people and providence. He had faith in the new Democracy which was the U.S.A..

Two Hundred years later we can see that this Founding Father's faith was not missplaced. The "incompetent men with bad principles" such as Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison managed to muddle through without wrecking the country. Shouldn't we have more faith in our political institutions, our Constitution and our people. Right now my side is winning but I grew up in a country that was controlled by a Democratic Congress for forty years. President JFK and v.p. LBJ were put in office by the phantom voters of Mayor Richard Daily's Chicago, or so some of my parent's more partisan friends maintained.

I assume that I will see the day when the Democrat's are back on top at least for the short run maybe put in office by the phantom voters of Seattle Washington or Milwaukee Wisconsin*. When that happens I plan on taking my lead from the Govenuer. Maybe the Dems would like to try it today.

* as reported today in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

"Citywide, for instance, there were 277,535 votes cast in the election, yet only 269,212 people recorded in the computer as voting, a gap of about 8,300.

The 7,000 figure has been used, since the 1,300 registration cards that couldn't be processed have not had voter names entered into the computer system."

Evangelicals aren't for the environment??

Powerline is reporting that Bill Moyer's gave a speech defaming former Interior Secretary James Watt by claiming Watt gave Testimony to a Congressional Committee to the effect that we could destroy all the trees because Christ was about to return. This slander was perpetrated in order to support the argument that Evangelicals (Moyers calls us Fundamentalists not surprisingly) don't care about the environment because we await the imminent return of Jesus. Apparently the Washington post picked up the slander and republished it claiming that Mr. Watt "famously " made the remark implying it was well known that the Secretary made such a remark before a committee of Congress. Secretary Watt called Powerline to disavow the story. In the past Secretary Watt would have little recourse except to go to the MSM and hope for the best. Now he can turn to Time Magazine's 2004 Blog of the Year for recourse.

Bill Moyer's is an ordained minister with a degree from Seminary and ought to know better but the idea that Biblical world view is inconsistent with protecting the environment though wrong is not new. In 1974 as a student teacher teaching a ninth grade biology class I was subjected to a man on a pull down screen telling me, and worse my students, that Genesis required man to have dominion over the earth which he interpreted as pillaging it. This man in a red plaid shirt indicated that the right approach was that of the Native American many of whom practiced slash and burn agriculture moving and destroying the forest as their corn and tobacco crops ravaged the soil. Mr. red plaid shirt was wrong about Native Americans and about Genesis which calls for stewardship of the earth. Bill Moyers continues in that legacy.

[update]Feb. 07,2004 noon EST according to Powerline The Washington Post has made an appropriatte correction.

"Today's Washington Post carries this straightforward correction:

A Feb. 6 article quoted James G. Watt, interior secretary under President Ronald Reagan, as telling Congress in 1981: "After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back." Although that statement has been widely attributed to Watt, there is no historical record that he made it.
The online version of the original story by Blaine Harden now includes the correction above the story"

Thoughts on Society and the Bible

I have been thinking that before I continue my posts on the President’s proposals for Social Security or any specific policy I want to share with you some thoughts on the underlying framework for my analysis of any political or social question. At least part of my thinking about society in general and the role of government in particular is based (like Martin Luther in his defence at the Diet of Worms [and we think the Adkins diet is restrictive]) on the Bible and reason. I am not a Bible scholar though I read it regularly. I rely on what I call Christian orthodoxy for some of what I believe the Bible teaches. As to reason I rely on common sense, to the extent I’m blessed with common sense, and logic as taught in the University, Law School, Court Rooms, and Streets of this good old USA as I have experienced them.

I have been told ( by a Lawyer from the Christian Legal Society I think but can’t provide further attribution) and believe that God ordained four Institutions: The Individual(Gen 1:26), the Family(Gen 2:24), the Church(Mat 16:18), and the State (Rom 13:1). Each institution has a set of responsibilities in society which God has ordained for it to carry out and for which it is best suited, Ideally society works best if the institution that has responsibility for a function performs that function or is in control of it. Some of these functions are, control of the individual, the raising, nuturing and education of children, care of the elderly or disabled, protection of the individual, and the guarantee of certain God given rights pertaining to said individual, This list is not exhaustive it is sufficient for starters. I welcome comments on these thoughts and I will expand on them so keep watching this Blog. Remember We’re Open All night.

Thoughts on Social Security part I

President Bush is pressing toward his Ownersip society by asking Congress to fundamentally alter the structure of Social Security for the "younger worker".
Basically the presidents proposal would allow younger Americans to choose not to pay up to 4% of the 7 1/2% they now pay in Social Security payroll tax. Instead they would put that 4% into an account that could be invested in relatively conservative investments. When the worker retired he would (presumably although I have not seen this spelled out yet) recieve less Social Security benefit but would have that benefit supplemented by payments out of this account. How the reduction in payroll taxes paid would effect potential disability or survivor benefits is unclear. I plan several posts on this subjcct. My initial thoughts:
At first it would seem to be a bold step taken by President Bush to touch the "third rail of American politics" and that impression is bolstered by the knee jerk reaction of the seemingly all powerfull AARP (a group I refuse to join because of their selfish and bullying politics). Actually it is a brilliant move for aeveral reasons.

1. President Bush can't be hurt by this proposal because he never has to stand for reelection.
2. Even if the proposal is defeated now the try will put him in good stead with History. Social Security must eventually be changed or die and it only gets tougher later. If the President fails he will get the credit for trying when that failure puts Social Security in an untenable position in future years.
3. If the President is sucessfull it will reduce the power of the welfare mentallity that says we must suckle at the teat of the Federal goverment for our security

It's been a while, I'm Back

It has been a while since I posted on We're Open All Night(WOAN). I killed my other blog "Right Hand Clapping" so that I could concentrate on WOAN. I am going to try to post every day in case anyone ever reads this. I know My youngest daughter reads it every once in a while. For her and the rest of my readers if any I'm back.

Brief thought's on the election

George W. Bush, our president, has won reelection. The prayers worked praise God. I believe they worked not because God is on our President's side but because W works every day to be on God's side. One of my friends remarked on how contentious the election was. My response follows:

It is contentious out there and strident and shrill especially on the left. God calls us to be gentle in spirit and voice, our conversation always seasoned with salt, and always ready to give a reason for the hope that is with in us. These principles conquered the Roman Empire.
They can win America too.

The "Election Market" and W part II

Here is a break down of the price of a contract for President Bush to win State by State as of 11 p.m. October 21, 2004. Perhaps more interesting than what the money on the overall race is saying is what the money bet on the State by State races reveals. You see,Tradesports.com also lets you buy contracts State by State (only for W. not for Kerry) so if you think W will win New York you can buy a contract indicating that out come and if he does win NY you get paid $100. You may buy that contract for around $5 on Tradesports Presidential election market. A Bush to win contract for Indiana or Alabama will cost you over $95. I applied the collective wisdom of the market to the electoral college by giving W the electoral college votes of any State where the Bush to win contract costs over $50 and Senator Kerry the electoral college votes of any State paying less $50. As of 11 O'clock PM Oct. 21. W wins 286 to 254.W can even lose the State selling closest to $50 but above $50, Iowa at $55 with 7 electoral votes and still win the Neccesary 270. Bush would win 279. I have posted the state by state again as of 11 PM EDT below:States Electors Tradesports R or D$to buy K ( W to win )Alabama 9 97 RAlaska 3 97 RArizona 10 91 RArkansas 6 84 RCalifornia 55 06 DColorado 9 82 RConnecticut 7 06 DDelaware 3 09 DDist. of Col. 3 02 DFlorida 27 64 RGeorgia 15 96 RHawaii 4 08 DIdaho 4 97 RIllinois 21 08 DIndiana 11 96 RIowa 7 51 RKansas 6 95 RKentucky 8 95 RLouisiana 9 94 RMaine 4 18 DMaryland 10 08 DMassachusetts 11 03 DMichigan 17 21 DMinnesota 19 38 DMississippi 6 98 RMissouri 11 84 RMontana 3 97 RNebraska 5 96 RNevada 5 77 RNew Hampshire 4 40 DNew Jersey 15 18 DNew Mexico 5 37 DNew York 31 05 DNorth Carolina 15 88 RNorth Dakota 3 98 ROhio 20 58 ROklahoma 7 97 ROregon 7 18 DPennsylvania 21 29 DRhode Island 4 4 DSouth Dakota 3 97 RTennessee 11 94 RTexas 34 98 RUtah 5 98 RVermont 3 05 DVirginia 13 89 RWashington 11 08 DWest Virginia 5 82 Risconsin 10 58 RWyoming 3 97 R(270 Votes are needed to win.) Total 538 W = 286 K = 252:

The "Election Market " and what it has to say about W's chances

There are at least 3 online markets where you can "bet" on the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election. The bets are placed by buying futures contracts for either Kerry or Bush at a price between $1 and $100 determined by the market which fluctuates much as any futures market. When the president is determined (hopefully by Nov. 3) the winner's contract will pay $100 the losers contract will pay $0. Today for example you can buy a contract for Bush on October 19 at 11 o'clock EDT for about $59 or a contract for Kerry for about $41. This means the collective wisdom of the market favors a Bush win at the time cited by roughly 59%. I have been watching Tradesports.com an internet market out of Ireland with the bank of Dublin holding the money and presumably dispensing the money to the individuals holding the winning contracts after election day . You can get in on the action or just watch at Tradesports.com. If like me you can't make head or tales of the polls being put forth or you don't trust the pollsters here is a way to tap the collective wisdom of the market where said wisdom is derived from people putting there money where there mouth is.

Perhaps more interesting than what the money on the overall race is saying is what the money bet on the State by State races reveals. You see,Tradesports.com also lets you buy contracts State by State (only for W. not for Kerry) so if you think W will win New York you can buy a contract indicating that out come and if he does win NY you get paid $100. You may buy that contract for around $5 on Tradesports Presidential election market. A Bush to win contract for Indiana or Alabama will cost you over $95. I applied the collective wisdom of the market to the electoral college by giving W the electoral college votes of any State where the Bush to win contract costs over $50 and Senator Kerry the electoral college votes of any State paying less $50. As of 11 O'clock Oct. 19 W wins 286 to 254. (More later)

Welcome

Welcome we're open all night. Not really but that is how I answer the phone much to the chagrin of my daughters (actually I suspect they like it) and I thought it might be a good name for my first blog. The way my sleep patterns are I may be posting at any time so the name is appropriate. You of course may comment all night also.


Long ago "Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel" was as true a statement as was ever written and even more so when it came to the big 3 networks cBS, NBC, and ABC. Now thanks to the internet the arguments with the ink by the barrel (ibtb) guys are continuous, and even won on ocassion by the Pajamahedeen who dare to take on the ibtb guys and the 3 Bs . Witness Rathergate! I hope to be one of these Pajamahedeen (although I don't own pajamas and will be creating my posts in blue jeans and a t-shirt or sweat shirt). I look forward to the struggle.

Amazing Paragraph in W.P.

In a Washington Post article on their recent poll is this amazing paragraph:

"The Post tracking poll shows Bush leading Kerry 50 to 47 percent. ... But the survey suggests that Kerry continues to claim a large lead in key battleground states. In these 13 states, Kerry held a 53 percent to 43 percent advantage among likely voters."

The story doesn't say which are the "battleground states" but if both these things are true President Bush must be ahead in NY and/or California, highly unlikely, or have hugh majorities in the South and non battleground midwest i.e. Indiana. Can the two sets of numbers in the quoted paragraph be reconciled?