Wednesday, November 30

Marriage Amendment Debate

Hearings were held on the Marriage Amendment today in Madison. This fight is going to be big. Already those who want to destroy the traditional marriage have their campaign up and running along with a blog.

This is also a time for heroes. From all I've seen the Republican leadership as been tops on this issue. I'm still looking tho for the organization that will be spearheading the effort to support this amendment.

If you are married, I want you to look directly at your husband or wife and think for a moment if this is worth defending. I want you also to look at your kids to think back on your own mother and father, and see if you believe that the institution of family is worth holding dear. Would you like your children to grow up with two "mommies?" How about your grandchildren to have only two "daddies" and no mother? It is going to be up to you and the rest of the people of Wisconsin this next election. Homosexuality began as something we must all tolerate. Now some courts believe society owes them the right to have society sign their marriage certificate in approval. If you think this will never affect you, let Holland mark you a fool. It is sick to even speak what is allowed there. If anything comprises a marriage it means nothing. If anyone can get a degree from Harvard for the asking what good is it? Your marriage only means anything so long as it is protected.

Vote yes. Your family is worth it.

Liberals for Wal-Mart?

If they're big they're bad. That's the only reason I have come to see many people trash Wal-Mart. Now even some liberals are coming around on Wal-Mart. In his work "Wal-Mart: A Progressive Success Story Jason Furman calculates the tremendous benefits of Wal-Mart from the consumer to the worker and of course the entrepreneur

Productivity is the principal driver of economic progress. It is the only force that can make everyone better off: workers, consumers, and owners of capital. Wal-Mart has indisputably made a tremendous contribution to productivity. From its sophisticated inventory systems to its pricing innovations, Wal-Mart has blazed a path that numerous other retailers are now following, many of them vigorously competing with Wal-Mart. Today, Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the country, the largest grocery store in the country, and the third largest pharmacy. Eight in ten Americans shop at Wal-Mart.

There is little dispute that Wal-Mart’s price reductions have benefited the 120 million American workers employed outside of the retail sector. Plausible estimates of the magnitude of the savings from Wal-Mart are enormous – a total of $263 billion in 2004, or $2,329 per household.2 Even if you grant that Wal-Mart hurts workers in the retail sector – and the evidence for this is far from clear – the magnitude of any potential harm is small in comparison. One study, for example, found that the “Wal-Mart effect” lowered retail wages by $4.7 billion in 2000.3

Hey, and I just about lost my job to Wal-Mart, and have many friends that work there now too.

HT: worldmag blog

Crying Over Spilled Milk

Politically I can see why Cong. Green and Sen. Santorum want to keep milk subsidies, but like always a person must put principle above politics. It's long past time that we get the gov't out of milk industry welfare.

And this is....

A Christmas tree! You would think that this would be clear even to a first grader, but not so in today's PC world.

If it's a spruce tree adorned with 10,000 lights and 5,000 ornaments displayed on the Capitol grounds in December, it's a Christmas tree and that's what it should be called, says House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

Hastert, R-Ill., in a letter to the Architect of the Capitol, recommended that the annual Capitol Holiday Tree, as it has been called the past several years, be renamed the Capitol Christmas Tree.

Oh yes, and hope you all are looking forward to a merry CHRISTMAS. I pitty the poor souls who only have "holidays" and "seasons" to celebrate.

Monday, November 28

Yikes! He forgot!

Tom Cruise buys a sonogram machine to view his aaaahh.... wellllll I guess baby. Oops someone forgot big time to remind him that you don't use such a humanizing term until it's illegal to kill them.

Cruise said he did not know the gender of the child but said if he did, he would not reveal it. Walters then asked him, "So what do you see?" and he answered "a little baby."

The Worldview Clash

All I will say for now is "stunning!" (Of course more later.) But don't take my word for it, if you really wonder about the rationality of Christianity take a few minutes to read this.

My bro. Peter gets a nice nine point buck. Cool.

Click to enlarge

The Church is One Many Denominations

Most Christians readily accept the fact that the true Christian church resides in many different denominations and church congregations that may hold to slight (or even major) differences in Christian belief. But is it right? Often called denominationalism, the concept is relatively new in the Christian church. Up until maybe about the 1600s most Christians believed that there should only be one denomination and that only one denomination actually held to the proper tenants of belief and the others were heretics.

I'm personally disposed to like the denominationalism concept but that matters little. "What sayeth Scripture?" Is the only thing that really matters.

I don't find much support for denominationalism in Scripture. From the early church in Acts down through the Epistle letters the assumption is that there is only one true church that holds to the same doctrine and beliefs. Sure you might argue that some of the gentile churches might have had a structural difference, but there was nothing approaching, say baptism, or Free Will that separated the church. Of course I don't think the answer is to mandate that the state accomplish a unity, but I do think it is right to pray for a unifying of the church in understanding true Christian doctrine.

Friday, November 25

Wisconsin's Own

Blog General who resides over at Brainpost has just entered Iraq. Make sure to check back often and find out how he is helping out our freedoms.

Wednesday, November 23

In Everything Give Thanks?

Often when asked what we are thankful for we struggle to find something off the top of our head. Not Martin Rinkart. As this article suggests, Mr. Rinkart's heart was able to overflow with thankfulness to God in the midst of the deepest tragedy.

How can a hymn overflowing with thanksgiving be written in the midst of prolonged death and destruction? This hymn's context is one of the more dramatic in the annals of congregational song.

Martin Rinkart (1586-1649) was both a musician and theologian, educated at Eilenburg and St. Thomas School in Leipzig, studying theology at the University of Leipzig. He served both as a cantor and deacon in the Lutheran Church.
Rinkart was a voluminous hymn writer -- an art that combined his musical and theological training.

The city of Eilenburg was particularly hard-hit during the devastation wrought by the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648). When the Swedish army surrounded the city, thousands of people sought refuge behind the city's walls.

Though historians today suggest the rate of death was generally between 15 and 20 percent due to armed conflict, famine and disease, the conditions in Eilenburg suggest an even higher casualty rate.

Eventually Rinkart became the only minister left in the city, presiding at times over as many as 50-60 funerals a day -- nearly 5,000 in all! Among those who died was his wife.

Yes, in every thing give thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you (I Th.5:18). So what are you thankful for?

Tuesday, November 22

Alito Roe AND Politics of Confirmation

If the issue of Abortion was pulled front and center in the debate over Alito's confirmation I believe he still would be confirmed. Of course I don't think that it should, but many liberal groups sure would do it if they thought they could pull it off. But like I've noted they're not. Well the country as a whole may still not see the contradiction in Roe and want to see it overturned the matter might be different if we apply it on a state by state level. I can't seem to find polls on the subject, but from information like this and an understanding of how many states voted for a prolife president, I think we can conclude that there are more senators coming from prolife states than pro abortion states. The result is that if Roe became the central element of the debate, the pressure on the senators would be to confirm Alito rather than reject him. Thus, we probably see the prodeath side not wanting to engage in an Alito and Roe debate.


Hotel Information

1. about the window in the guest room: It isn't possible that it is possible to open a window at the guest room (On the safety).

2. about the laundering: The wash becomes a finish the evening tomorrow at the front desk until 7 o'clock at night of the day.
(It becomes the evening tomorrow in the morning even if it has).

Sound a little funny? It's an example of some of the instructions that are translated into English in foreign countries--especially in Japan and China. My sister got a kick out of finding these when she visited Taiwan. You can find more at They are really funny, but on second thought, it is really quite similar to what my Spanish often looks like if I ever try and write in it.

HT: bogus gold

Better Movies

Can the right, and even more so Christians, take back the giant of Hollywood? If Hollywood is driven by the $$$s some say yes.

HOLLYWOOD HAS been chattering nervously about bad box office this year. Film attendance is down a wrenching 12% from 2004. Here's an easy fix: The more culturally and morally conservative movies Hollywood makes, the better its returns will be.

HT: World mag blog

Bumped Comment

Alice said:

An example of Dr Chiang's writings is at Science meets Religion. You can comment directly to Dr Chiang on his article at Gary Chiang Blog

Judy Johnson For Senate

Judy Johnson is running for Minnesota State Senate today. If any of you are over there in the district please get out and vote. As Judy Johnson for senate and her website indicate she is the type of legislator every place of government needs. She has experience as a successful mayor of Plymouth. She is committed to protecting life, marriage, and keeping taxes under control. I've been interested to see that she has also embraced the education and conservation full-heatedly while urging education to be kept at the local level and a conservation mindset where nature is used but not horded.

If you can, please get out and vote Judy Johnson for state senate.

I became so interested in this campaign that I even went up yesterday and helped out for a day.

Saturday, November 19

A Saturday Laugh

Man! (and womyn??), these are funny!

The Top Politically inCorrect Words and Phrases for 2005:

1. Misguided Criminals for Terrorist: The BBC attempts to strip away all emotion by using what it considers neutral descriptions when describing those who carried out the bombings in the London Tubes. The rub: the professed intent of these misguided criminals was to kill, without warning, as many innocents as possible (which is the common definition for the term, terrorist).

2. Intrinsic Aptitude (or lack thereof) was a suggestion by Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard, on why women might be underrepresented in engineering and science. He was nearly fired for his speculation.

3. Thought Shower or Word Shower substituting for brainstorm so as not to offend those with brain disorders such as epilepsy.

The Whine Response

Hoping to elect themselves by promoting deficit spending, the Dems put up a stink about the cuts to big gov't spending:

Democrats dissented, with one eye on the 2006 elections.

"The Republicans are taking food out of the mouths of children to give tax cuts to America's wealthiest. This is not a statement of America's values,"

Look I admit it. Well this move is hardly more than a token cut, if the federal gov't returns to stable spending levels and reduced taxes to jump start the economy, some people now on the gov't dole might be left in need. And so the Dems will try and smear those who voted for this bill.So here is my challenge: If anyone reading this blog knows of anyone who is left in need because of these cuts to gov't programs in my area, please let me know. I would love to be able to help them out with the assistance of my church. I'm not against helping out the poor; it's just that the gov't is a blunt and ineffective tool to do the job.

Deficit Spending Slashed. Where's Kind?

Kudos to the Republican leadership on some long overdue spending cuts. If we ever want to keep this economy going and keep our gov't from pushing all it problems onto credit cards this is the type of leadership we need. And after all the complaining about deficits by Dems, where are their votes? Especially where is Kind's vote?

Look at what he was saying in 2003:

"As a member of the House Budget Committee, I am deeply concerned by the record-breaking deficits occurring under this Administration's fiscal stewardship. The combination of increased government spending and lost revenue due to tax cuts has left this nation with a gaping budget hole that will stifle future growth and place massive burdens on our children and grandchildren."

Now, step up to the plate Con. Kind. Stand up to some of the pork your party wants to protect and vote for the fiscal responsibility that you seem to think is such a huge problem.

I'm quite sure that Paul R. Nelson would have voted for fiscal responsibility. It's time we vote for our children and a responsible gov't instead of Kind's pork protection projects.

Wednesday, November 16

Feingold Before the War

"With Regard To Iraq, I Agree, Iraq Presents A Genuine Threat, Especially In The Form Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological, And Potentially Nuclear Weapons. I Agree That Saddam Hussein Is Exceptionally Dangerous And Brutal, If Not Uniquely So, As The President Argues." (Sen. Russell Feingold, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10147)

And I'll refrain from saying that Russ LIED men died, 'cause at least with this quote he didn't. He made the most responsible statement reasonably possible with what the intelligence community knew.

Paul R. Nelson Launches Blog

Paul R. Nelson the congressional candidate for Wisconsin 3rd district now has a blog up and running. It's basically the campaign's weekly update. (Disclosure: Yes, I've been helping out Paul R. Nelson with contacting the blogosphere.)

For those interested in who Paul R. Nelson is, here are a few more things I have been learning.

On the stem cell research issue, Paul R. Nelson rejects a First type of approach to funding embryonic stem cell research when there is so much promising research being done on adult stem cells.

When asked about term limits, he came out swinging against McCain/Feingold's campaign finance deform saying that he would be happy to vote for "election reform that gives the challenger a fighting chance."

In my contact, I would describe Paul R. Nelson as a no frills family man committed to common sense actions in Washington. He may be new to the political arena but he has a firm grasp on the basics rights that Americans hold dear. If you want more information go look at his website, and consider signing up for his campaign updates.

Tuesday, November 15

Conservative Check

Every conservaitve should be ashamed of being out done by Cong. Kind on this one. His office sends out a press release to offer its services to (of course) help people get on the gov't dole. But where are the conservative gov't officials' offices? Why aren't they out there helping those in need find help that isn't from the gov't?

More Litmus Testing

Alito has been subject to a storm of litmus testing on the abortion issue over his questioning of the reasoning involved in the Roe decision (see more in post below).

Ted Kennedy said these "extreme statements ... are deeply troubling." Read: Alito has been weighed on Kennedy's own scale of the limits of abortion (i.e., right up until it can take its first breath) and found to not hold that view.

Meanwhile Cornyn also points out that even thoroughly dyed liberals continue to find the reasoning in Roe as clear as a DQ mudslide shake.

Are we all of a sudden going to start saying that a judge is not qualified unless he believes every Supreme Court decision is supernaturally inspired faultless fact? If that's the case we have about eight (I don't know about Roberts yet since he has not ruled on enough cases) Supreme Court Justices who are not qualified to sit on the bench either. How many think that Scalia has never criticized a Supreme Court precedent or that John Paul Stevens has never overruled one? Your heads in the sand. I really wish that the reality disconnect between appointee and Supreme Court justice would end. The question is: Is Alito qualified? Will he uphold the Constitution in its original understanding as law written in granite? Since the answer is yes to both, the senators' vote should also be "yes."

Hey Schumer! Remember Ginsburg?

Sen. Schumer is all mixed up over the fact that Alito told the Reagan adminstration that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." He said that it was "the strongest statement we've seen from a nominee on this very controversial subject for a long time."

First off, there is a big difference between a judge saying these things and a guy looking for the assistant attorney general's job saying them. Reagan was prolife so it was no wonder he would put down that he would be willing to argue this position for the White House.

Second, where is Schumer's memory? Ginsburg was not afraid to say that she supported abortion. Did that surprise or concern Schumer then? If you are wanting a more recent example of someone taking a strong stand on the issue what about Pryor? “[T]he worst abomination in the history of constitutional law" is no lame statement on abortion

Monday, November 14

EC Truth

What never seems to get talked about:

Proponents of the morning-after pill contend that it "prevents pregnancy" and therefore does not cause an abortion. However, they tendentiously define the term "pregnancy" as implantation of a fertilized egg, as opposed to scientifically defining "pregnancy" as the fertilization of an egg.

The fact is that so-called "emergency contraception" can work in three ways: to suppress ovulation, to inhibit the mobility of sperm, and, if fertilization occurs, to irritate the lining of the uterus so that a newly conceived child is unable to implant in the womb, thus starving and dying.

If we could quite avoiding the real issue of whether this is a person or not we might get somewhere in the debate about preborn life.

Being Articulate

I don't think the guy who bought this knew the tale about the emporers new clothes. I could think of much better things to do with $24 million than this stack of junk. Or as this blogger says,

As I stare at it, I’m almost certain my son made something similar when he was 4.

I made him put away the blocks before he went to bed. That’s right, I could have sold the heap for millions, but I didn’t know better. I’m an idiot.

I had no idea my son was a building block genius. That his was a masterpiece just waiting for a Sothesby auction and a few zillionaires who have long since tired of things recognizable in the world of art.

Click to enlarge

HT: Beyond the news blog

Winter Storm Coming Thru!

Check out what our forecast is over at noaa. Or see what the driving conditions are around the state.

Yipeee! I always have loved a good winter storm. It must come from the full five years of winter I missed while I lived down south.

Americans: We like Alito's Abortion Stand

The NYT is reporting, that in essence, Planned Barrenhood et al. destructive views on the destruction of preborn life is out of the "mainstream" and that Alito's decisions relating to abortion are favored by most Americans. This just goes to prove that Americans aren't as dumb as Planned Barrenhood thinks they are. It also shows that it is time for those who do support life to go on the offensive and fearlessly declare that all peopled are endowed with the right to live.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 - A coalition of liberal groups is preparing a national television advertising campaign against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. that seeks to move the debate over his selection beyond abortion rights and focus instead on subjects like police searches and employment discrimination, several leaders of the coalition said.

The possibility that Judge Alito could vote to narrow abortion rights has dominated discussion among both supporters and opponents of his nomination. But Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice and one of the leaders of the coalition, said a poll commissioned by her organization showed the potential to attack Judge Alito on aspects of his record that had received less attention.

In addition to the alliance, a liberal legal group that focuses on judicial nominations, the coalition includes the abortion rights groups Naral Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood, as well as People for the American Way, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Sierra Club.

Last week, the alliance released results of a poll that highlighted elements of the judge's record unrelated to abortion that the liberal groups say could have greater resonance with moderate voters.

Update: ben in the comments said that the title was a contradiction. My response is in the comments as well.

Stop Stealing Dirt!

I often find it surprising how those who deny the existence of God steal most of the fundamental structure that God created and then use that structure to defend the non-existence of God. They don't understand the position they start out in without an assumption of the existence of God and the creation he created. Without God you have to start out with NOTHING, and many don't understand what NOTHING means. Allow me to at least partially explain.

First of all, those who deny God steal dirt. There is a story told about a conversation between Nietzsche and God. Nietzsche looked over at God and said "I can create man just as well as you can." God said, "Ok go ahead and try." But as Nietzsche stooped down and began to mold a man out of some clay God thundered down, "get your own dirt!" Every last materialistic explanation of the universe starts out with some sort of matter or dirt. That's stealing. If you really believe that God did not create the universe you have to start out without one particle of dirt. Nothing means no dirt.

But dirt is not all materialist steal. Assumed in every aspect of their creation out of the dirt is the assumption of universal physical laws that direct the course of the universe. Nothing means no laws of gravity, no laws of thermodynamics, no E=mc2.

Then there is time. This universe would not have had to have succeeding moments in which we are only able to exist in "now." God exists in the past, present, and future, and is not controlled by time. Christians believe that God created time. Nothing means means no time. Nothing means you cannot exist in either the past, present, or future, because such options are not available to you.

Materialists also steal reason and knowledge. That thoughts and events can be analyzed, perceived, and rejected or accepted is a fact that materialists steal but does not exist in the state of nothing. When we say nothing it does not only mean physical but conceptual concepts that are often taken for granted or stolen by those who deny God. There is an acceptance of reality or the knowledge of some sort of truth even though these qualities are not apart of the essence of "nothing".

Man has said in his heart there is no God, yet the very way, the very tools, the very examples that they use to prove this is stolen from the God himself they are out to disprove. They keep stealing dirt. They don't know the definition of NOTHING!

Saturday, November 12

Carter: Abortion bringing down Dems.

Carter comes out and sez that the abortion issue has been hurting the Democratic party.

Carter said leaders in the Democratic Party have hurt it because of their insistence on a rigid pro-abortion stance within the party and for party leadership positions.

"I have always thought it was not in the mainstream of the American public to be extremely liberal on many issues," Carter said, according to a Washington Times report. "I think our party's leaders -- some of them -- are overemphasizing the abortion issue."

Carter said his party lost the 2004 presidential elections and lost seats in the House and Senate because it failed "to demonstrate a compatibility with the deeply religious people in this country. I think that absence hurt a lot."

Democrats must "let the deeply religious people and the moderates on social issues like abortion feel that the Democratic party cares about them and understands them," he said, adding that many Democrats, like him, "have some concern about, say, late-term abortions, where you kill a baby as it's emerging from its mother's womb."

The recent election of a Dem. guv. in Virginia who at least calls himself prolife supports this view as well. Perhaps being endorsed by NARAL and NOW is not such a PC thing.

Friday, November 11

President Responds

Today the President responded to his critiques about the reason we went to war:

THE PRESIDENT: "While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs. They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. Many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: 'When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.' That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.

"The stakes in the global War on Terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who send them to war continue to stand behind them. Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our Nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory."

Monday, November 7

Airplane Tickets

Side Step is the best place that I have found. It's a search engine that searches all the sites for the best prices. If anyone else has a suggestion let me know. Wondering why I'm looking for airplane tickets? I'll let you know soon.

Understanding Strict Constitutionalists

Powerline guys write about it in the Washington Post. For those who really want to understand who an "activist" and constitutionalist" judge is this is the place to go.

When conservatives say that we want "conservative" judges, or "strict constructionist" or "constitutionalist" judges, what we mean is pretty simple: We want judges who won't make stuff up. We want judges who won't view the Constitution as a mirror in which, at every turn, they see reflected their own opinions and policy preferences. We want judges who will play it straight, read the Constitutional or statutory text (our text, not foreign ones, which the court has relied on in cases like last session's Roper v. Simmons , which held execution of juveniles to be unconstitutional), and apply it as fairly as they can to the individual case before them.

If that were all, liberals would be left with little to say. But there is one thing more: The corollary of the proposition that judges shouldn't make up stuff that isn't in the Constitution or laws is that judges also don't have the discretion to ignore language that is in the Constitution or the laws. Thus, the interstate commerce clause must be recognized as a limitation on Congress's power to regulate the economy, as Judge Roberts noted in the case of the "hapless toad." The Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws can't be ignored every time a public university wants to prefer some applicants over others, based on race. And the Second Amendment's guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms can't be treated as if it got repealed somewhere along the way.

Thursday, November 3

Painful Truth

Planned Parenthood has gone hysterical over the Fetal Pain Bill that tells women that there is evidence that there child would feel pain in an abortion.

Women expect their physicians to provide them with sound information about all medical options and treatments. AB 321/SB 138 threatens the doctor-patient relationship by mandating doctors tell women medically incorrect, misleading, and unproven statements about abortion in an effort to coerce and shame women. This bill allows politicians to act as physicians, and removes a physician's ethical obligation to provide accurate, comprehensive information to patients.

Note that the bill doesn't even say that the child WILL experience pain, just that there "is evidence." And the evidence is quite compelling.

Yet the fact that young babies feel pain is much more apparent than a study in a medical journal. It might be hard to scientifically prove that I experience pain each time that I hit my finger with a hammer, but do you need a rocket scientist to tell a Mom when her baby is hurt let alone try and convince her that we don't know for sure if her baby will experience pain if you tear it apart limb by limb or stab it in the back of the head with a pair of scissors?

Take a look at what they do for preborn children: they stick them in an incubator and on the softest blanket. Why? Do you think it is because they are sensitive? I would like to ask Planned Barrenhood: If I smashed a 30 week old babies hand with a hammer do you think they would feel pain? Why would a child inside the womb be any different? But they know the connection and they want to hide it: If the baby inside a mom feels pain its probably a unique human being.

No RA Bible Studies

We get so caught up in some of the penumbras of the Constitution often we violate the obvious. The freedom to express your beliefs is something we must protect...and not take for granted.

MILWAUKEE (AP) — The University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire is reviewing the legalities of its policy banning resident assistants from leading Bible studies in their dorms, a spokesman said Thursday.

The university’s associate director for housing and residence life sent a letter last July to several resident assistants who had been leading Bible studies.

Deborah Newman said in the letter that if the studies continued, students might not find them “approachable” or might fear they’d be “judged or pushed in a direction that does not work for them.” Newman added that resident assistants who persist in holding Bible studies would face disciplinary action.

Update: FIRE has responded. This as well.

FIRE also pointed out a 2004 article in UWEC’s student newspaper in which the Office of Housing and Residence Life praised an RA who for three years in a row staged the controversial feminist play "The Vagina Monologues" as an official "residence hall activity.”

This praise came despite the RA’s acknowledgement that "with the Vagina Monologues ... she [did not have] as much time as she would have liked for her wing.” UWEC has failed to respond to FIRE’s letter.

"UWEC’s position that leading a Bible study is more likely to make students uncomfortable than leading a controversial play like 'The Vagina Monologues' simply doesn’t hold water,” noted FIRE’s French. He continued, "The First Amendment doesn’t end with a Bible study or with 'The Vagina Monologues' — it guarantees a student’s right to perform both.”

"While RAs have a responsibility to be approachable to students, this cannot extend so far as to bar their own religious or political expression,” added FIRE Director of Legal and Public Advocacy Greg Lukianoff. "No state institution has a right to demand that others not hold any beliefs or engage in any expression that might possibly be offensive.”

Hat tip: family

Wednesday, November 2

Alito's Groody "Strip Search"

Powerline does a wonderful service by analysing the Doe v. Groody decision in which Alito (it is said) "voted to authorize a strip search of a ten-year-old girl.

I was concerned about this decision but by looking into the case I can only applaud Alito's decision.

Parental Notification Passes

Now a minor must receive the same permission to get an abortion just as she must receive a parents consent in every other area--field trips, surgery, ear piercing, taking over-the-counter medications at school, and every non-emergency medical procedure.

Common sense unless this means less biz for you.

AB 175 passed the Assembly today by a vote of 62-35. A few Dems were brave enough to find the light and anger their fringe: Staskunas, Krusick, and Ziegelbauer. All Republicans voted for the bill. Good for all of them.

Tuesday, November 1

Kohl and Feingold on Alito


“Evaluating a nominee to the United States Supreme Court is a responsibility I take extremely seriously. The country deserves a thorough examination of Judge Alito's record and views, and I look forward to participating in that process. Because Supreme Court justices can have a uniquely significant impact on our country for years, even decades, I will have to be satisfied that this nominee has the highest level of ability, integrity, objectivity, temperament, and fairness before I will vote to confirm him.”


The nomination of Judge Alito to replace Justice O'Connor will be crucial to determining the balance of the Supreme Court for decades to come. This balance currently keeps the Court in the mainstream of American thought and is what upholds many rights that Americans take for granted. Accordingly I will give Judge Alito's record and judicial philosophy the most careful scrutiny in the weeks ahead.

I will not prejudge this nomination. I look forward to meeting with Judge Alito privately and to the public hearings where he will present his views on the law and the important constitutional issues facing our country.

I am planning to reconvene the bipartisan task force of distinguished Wisconsin legal minds and community leaders that gave me their best advice and counsel during Chief Justice Roberts' nomination. I look forward to working with them again.

At least neither of them talked about his "heart". Kohl's statement is way too political. Feingold's is really top-notch all the way around. I expect to hold him to it.

The Diversity Card

Silly number two (see below for the first): Alito doesn't help the courts diversity. Look at the MJS Ed. again:

Another minus is that the nomination lessens the court's diversity....

In losing a woman, the court with Alito would feature seven white men, one white woman and a black man, who deserves an asterisk because he arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America.

It's little of Bush's fault that this is the case. He's only chosen two of the justices. Furthermore, in his appointments he has been very openly eager to elevate justices regardless of their color, race or gender. And the Democrats haven't helped. They have filibustered many appeals court justices that the MJS would say would help give a court diversity. In fact some have noted that if the Democrats hadn't filibustered people like Miguel Estrada he might be the nominee today. Unless the President was purposely ignoring a specific class or person, there is no reason to fault him for racial or gender discrimination. If Alito or Miers were picked or looked over because of their race or gender then there would have been a problem. It is just way to simplistic to say that because Alito is a white guy Bush must have discriminated in favor of him. I believe the case for discrimination is actually much higher in the case of Miers in the present political climate...but of course I haven't found a liberal yet who would be able to think or be brave enough to say so.

The Balance Card

You hear the liberals saying over and over again that we need balance on the court. Ya know, a moderate for a moderate, an O'Connor for an O'Connor. How silly.

First, it is completely political to think that the court is divided "conservative" and "liberal" even though that might be the reality. Second, to have a court mixed up on every last issue as the Rehnquist court has often been, creates judicial chaos rather than distinct settled justice. Third, historically, the President chooses someone he believes upholds the Constitution, not someone in a similar mold to the last judge (See Clinton's trade of Ginsburg for White). Fourth, if you really want to look at balance, if Alito is placed on the court and if you attempt to politicize the court by splitting in "conservative" and "liberal" you will create a court with four liberals, four conservatives, and one swing vote (Kennedy). In this sense Alito will create balance.

But, again, shouldn't we be looking at his qualifications more than the "balance" court?

Thomas Thinks White

Best of the Web pointed out today that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel thinks it knows how blacks think and that Supreme Court Justice doesn't think black.

In losing a woman, the court with Alito would feature seven white men, one white woman and a black man, who deserves an asterisk because he arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America.

This smacks of racial demeaing through and through. They are in essence saying that while white or other races may be able to think independently, blacks have to think black, to be an "asterisk free" or genunie black. Let all good men who think that all are created equal revolt!