Conservatives can unite on topics, liberals decline comment

Over at Right Wing News, John Hawkins challenges liberals (and invites moderates and conservatives) to write a short list of universally accepted viewpoints by their partisan brethren. I wish I could say that I agreed with all of John's points.

So, my list will partially challenge some of John's ideas, and the rest will look at some other ideas.

1) In reference to abortion, I have to say that one of his ideas is absolutely terrible. By making abortion unconstitutional except in the case of putting the mother's life at risk, more questions may arise. In what situations are the mother's life at risk? This is very rare. An amendment to the Constitution, and goes against a smaller government model. What needs to happen is that abortion is described as it really is: murder. It can be tried the exact same way. In most cases, it is a clear-cut murder case. In others, it can be like death due to self-defense; if the mother's life is truly at risk, proving it should not be too hard.

2) I partially agree on the fifty-one judges call. I would further consider going back to the original role of "advice and consent"; the filibuster may be needed for particularly extreme judges. It does seem doubtful that any should make it to the Senate floor, but the possibility should not be ruled out.

3) The flat tax is an excellent idea. Not only would it give regular tax cheaters more incentive to be honest in their taxes (hard to cheat the total income one makes in a year), but it would also spur increased spending by consumers, which is good for business and subsequently good for employees.

4) The Glenn Reynolds' End to Racism and Segregation Act of 2003, taken straight from Instapundit, is an excellent idea. Affirmative Action is racism, and not only hurts caucasians (who may be denied positions they rightfully deserve), but also minorities (who are made to appear as if they were not able to acheive anything on their own).

5) National defense is, by far, strongly supported by conservatives, and should always receive an appropriate amount of funding from federal tax revenue. One reason that the United States is able to maintain the peace is the strong military. Any decrease here could be seen as a weakness by enemies, which puts the country and its citizens at risk.

6) With the identity of Deep Throat having been revealed today, it also comes to mind that we need stronger penalties for members of the beaurocracy who relase confidential information. The information on Richard Nixon may not have done much damage to the security of the United States, but W. Mark Felt had no authority to release the information that he did (interestingly enough, his decision may have been enough to allow Richard Nixon to avoid a trial, though not the stigma from his bad decision). Imagine if Felt had instead released information about the Mafia, or another internal threat. These mistakes could lead to the death of many innocents.

7) Term limits on congressmen is a good idea, though the period may be negotiable, nothing longer than 3 terms for Senators and 6 terms for Representatives.

8) A crackdown on illegal immigrants is extremely important. With the ease that many sneak into our country, terrorists would have no trouble getting in and causing some trouble.

9) A law that allows for federal revenues to be given to faith-based charities. This is not a violation of church and state (this clause, as many liberals forget, disallows a government-run church or a church-run government, not a brick wall seperating the two). By allowing for money to be given to charities of all religions, they can turn around and use the money to feed and clothe the homeless as well as evangelize.

Unfortunately, nine laws is not enough to make all the necessary changes (Hawkins did have some other good ideas, and I'm sure many more would need to be implemented as well), but I believe that many conservatives would agree with this list. I know a few would also disagree, and for that reason, I reiterate John's challenge and suggest to you all that you comment on his board.

Those on the other side, and I'm not talking about liberals

Michelle Malkin reports that a new bloggers group has emerged, and it is not your stereotypical group. The Cotillion features conservative female bloggers. Unfortunately, I have not heard of any of these bloggers yet, but I look forward to seeing what they can do. Michelle Malkin refers to them as the "Hot Conservative Gals of the Blogosphere", and I'm sure that statement is very true.

(I just hope that the trackback isn't accepted like a male in the women's room).

As I think that this blog should be watched, I'm adding a link to it on the sidebar.

A day of rememberance

I would post more on the subject, but I think that Neil Cavuto does an even better job.

To everyone, enjoy your Memorial Day and don't forget to think of those who gave you their lives for the rights that so many of us take for granted.

A Thousand Hits!

I just wanted to thank everyone who comes to The Red Stater. Even though there was a noticable drop during my recent hiatus, things have picked back up again. As the hits continue to rise, I hope to make many improvements to this blog. As it is, I have finally broken down and added a Flickr! account, so you can expect some pictures in future posts (as well as the new icon on the sidebar, a red Virginia). I also hope to delve deeper into some issues, though my hope is that this blog remains accessible to anyone; there are some great blogs out there, but I have to admit that some of them can go over my head.

Again, thanks to all (and don't worry, I won't be posting every five hundred hits I get).

Change in the blogroll

In recent weeks I've been caught up with so much that I almost missed that The Thornblog added a blogroll. So, The Thornblog link will now find its new home in the allies section. I've enjoyed the recent correspondance I've had with Allen Thornburgh, one of the three bloggers there (Pelty and Scott being the other two). The Thornblog is an excellent blog, and I for one, am sorry that I my recent neglect missed their new addition.

Big News!

France rejects EU Constitution.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Extension to yesterday's post on the Koran desecration

Orson Scott Card spent a bit more time thinking out where Islam is faulty on the alleged Koran desecration, as well as things the media should have done differently. While I won't endorse Card's religion (Mormonism) and don't know enough about Saladin to agree or disagree with Card's position on him, I can say that Card nails the rest of his points.

Note that this is a longer piece; it will probably require at least fifteen minutes to read, so just run through the main points if you don't have the time to spare.

Sissy

It is rare for a woman to make it today in men's sports. Generally, physical difference make it difficult for women to make it in professional sports, with rare exceptions, such as professional golf and minor league baseball. Men on the whole are just stronger, faster, and larger then women.

That makes the upcoming Indianapolis 500 all the more interesting. A 105-lb woman would not face the same physical disadvantage in a car race, only being likely to strategize differently in the race. No big deal, right? According to Robby Gordon, wrong.

Gordon argues that Danica Patrick has an unfair advantage, weighing approximately half that of most of the other racers. The light Indy Racing League cars run faster with less weight, which does give Ms. Patrick a strategic advantage. However, this is not unlike most other sports. At around seven feet, Randy Johnson has a huge advantage over other pitchers, with a lever for an arm. A 19 year old swimmer will likely have an agility advantage (though an experience disadvantage) on a 40 year old. And, let's face it, what 180 lb quarterback wants to face the prospect of a 300 lb defensive lineman charging at him?

There are natural differences that come up in sports, and opponents have to learn how adjust for them. Based on Gordon's logic, he should have just as much difficulty dealing with an opponent who weighs 50 pounds less, or 30 pounds, or even 10. Gordon's boycott of any IRL races involving Patrick is immature and paints him as a wuss.

Personally, I've never been a big fan of racing (certainly not falling into the conservative southerner stereotype there), but it gets harder to look at the sport in a positive light when some of its competitors whine like little children over a little adversity.

And the faulty polls roll on...

Problems in polling generally seem to be ignored when results are presented. While the information is completely available, anyone not familiar with statistics will miss some clues as to how a poll can go poorly.

Recently, this has happened again. A new poll seems to suggest that Hillary Clinton could win the 2008 presidential election. Hmm, this deserves further research.

It becomes obvious very quickly. The question asks how likely a voter would be to vote for Hillary, but there is no mention of any competition. While the 29% who would be very likely to vote for Hillary is probably fairly certain (probably a likely group to vote for almost any other Democratic candidate), there is a group of 24% who are "somewhat likely" to vote for her. So, Hillary would win based on these numbers; Susan Page assumes that the 24% is as good as the 29% in voting for Senator Clinton? Until another candidate is added to the equation, these numbers are meaningless.

I also question the stat that 1/3 of self-described conservatives would vote for Clinton. I wish I could say that I have an answer for this one, but all I have is a hypothesis; most conservatives refused to participate in the poll, meaning a skew from the more "moderate" conservatives. For now, I'm just going to call it a hunch that that number is faulty.

This seems to be a sort of rallying call to the Democrats, in the hopes of running Clinton in 3 years. But a few things should be remembered. Bad polls never change anything (just ask John Kerry the day after Election Day). A lot can happen in that period of time. And while I don't like negative politics, Hillary Clinton has made herself an easy target getting involved in many shady situations. She may have support now, but she is known as a very partisan candidate. The Democrats need to learn from prior elections and pick a more moderate candidate, perhaps Joseph Liberman or Mark Warner, if they want a chance at taking back the Oval Office in '08.

Koran desecration

Just a small thought. I will not make any excuses for those who mishandled the Koran, but I wonder how many times the same things have happened to the Bible (probably in particular in this case, as many make this out to be a holy war against Christianity), the Torah, or other religious texts and have not been reported.

Another new link

I've been trying to look over as many blogs on the left recently as the right (remember as I stated earlier, you can learn a lot by knowing how the opposition thinks), I encountered another Blue Stater blog to add to the list (sorry Cari, but I'm sure you knew that you would not be the sole member of this group forever). The Abysmal Kingdom of Mike, like Drunk on Democracy runs with a more personal touch, but there is no doubt that it belongs in the blue state category, particularly with the list of dead soldiers from the War in Iraq covering about half the page (I'd be interested to see a list of names of those who died in mass graves in Iraq under Saddam myself). Mike runs a site focusing on his love of art and his A-School work, and while I might be able to gain some inspiration of my own from his blog for a post, I must say that he has some very impressive pictures. Mike appears to have a lot of talent in photography and an eye for good pictures.

I know to Mike, I must seem like a bit of an extremist, but I'm sure we can find some common ground. At least reading each other's blogs might be a good start. So, give The Abysmal Kingdom of Mike a look, even if for nothing besides some fine photography.

Brainwashing 101 -> Indoctrinate U

Evan Coyne Maloney (of Brain-Terminal), Stuart Browning, and Blaine Greenberg have completed their preliminary work of Brainwashing 101 (the preview of which can be seen here). For anyone who hasn't seen it, this is a great short film covering the explicit liberal bias present in the classrooms of many major universities. After presenting the short film to many schools (unfortunately not UVa yet, though I have been trying to change that) and doing more research at a number of other universities, Evan has started the process of creating the final, feature-length film, which should be in theatres by the end of the year. The film has been renamed Indoctrinate U, as Evan would be unable to resubmit the film in festivals under the old name. I look forward to this new film, and strongly suggest viewing the preview.

Democracy near death in France

Jacque Chirac apparently has confused the words 'democracy' and 'dictatorship'. This might be the biggest argument against big government to ever present itself.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Just wanted to note...

I've always been a big sports fan, particularly of baseball. Tonight, with another win, the Baltimore Orioles have brought their record to 29-16. While only about 1/4 of the way through the schedule, seeing that the O's hold a 3 game lead on Boston and a 4.5 game lead on New York (the only two teams in Major League Baseball, at least, it would seem if you watched even five minutes of ESPN) makes me extremely happy. While some of my colleagues in blogging are fans of baseball, such as John Behan (author of Commonwealth Conservative, fan of the Cincinnati Reds) and kilo (author of Spark It Up, fan of the Chicago White Sox), I just have to say that they have picked the wrong teams. Hey, what can I say, it is simply the truth. ;)

Watch for the Orioles this year. If their starting pitching plays well all year, they could steal a playoff spot from NY or Boston.

Neil Cavuto - Real Common Sense

"Common sense is not very common", Voltaire

I've seen a number of conservative blogs recently making reference to Neil Cavuto, a longtime anchor for the Fox News Channel. I can't say I understand much about what he talks about (my only economics class also happens to be my only D ever), but I can say that I have always enjoyed his Common Sense segment at the end of Your World with Neil Cavuto, and see why he has gotten a lot of focus online recently. In a world where people act like they are deserving of whatever they want, Neil can remind us that some people can be very selfish. More often, he tries to be optimistic and shows us people who are selfless. Regardless of the topic, Neil Cavuto is almost always on target.

One of these segments in particular has excited many conservative bloggers.

This is to those congressmen still freaking out about not getting more advance warning about this errant plane over Washington on Wednesday [May 11th]: Shut up.

While you were bitching, F-16 jets were flying over the Capitol to protect you. Capitol Hill Police — paid a lot less than you — were busy trying to evacuate you. Ditto the White House

Wow, blunt, but to the point. It was pitiful the way the congressmen acted; would they have acted the same way if there had been a real threat? An old saying comes to mind: Better safe than sorry.

Some other recent Common Sense segments. In one, he speaks about the liberals' mantra of the money belonging to the government.

It's a typical liberal lament: The money in the government is the government's, period.
...
Because the money the government spends comes off the sweat and equity of everyday folks who pay. And pay dearly.
...
When someone says, "It's not your money," you have every right to assume "It's not your government either."

He certainly implies one thing; the money might belong to the government, but the government belongs to us. Money would not hold the power it does if not for the citizens.

Neil can also be retrospective over things that most generally overlook. He looked back at the attempt on President Bush's life in Georgia, and wondered "what if?"

I don't know about that. I do know this: The world would be a very different place this week had that happened last week. We'll never know. We only remember when terrorists succeed, not when they fail.

Neil notes how complacent we have become in just this simple sentence.

I know I have disagreed with Neil on a couple topics, but for the life of me, I can't remember what they are. It happens very rarely. If you can, watch the last five minutes for this segment on Your World with Neil Cavuto. If not, the segment is posted (both video and text) daily at FoxNews.com. An exception has been found to Voltaire's rule.

Now, to show how far behind I fell over the last few weeks

"Pastor John" "came out of the closet" recently, confirming that his blog was a farce. I'm sure many remember that I was among the saps that fell for this blog (though I was, thankfully, shifted towards the belief that it was fake), and there were many others. This is the first time that I am posting a link to the blog, but, to keep things simple, I will post his final reply, and my response following it.

Pastor John is no more. It's been a fun ride, but as the commenters have noted, it's degenerated into nonsense.

FAQ:

Is this real?
Yes, it's almost real. For the past 5 months, I've been receiving emails from a right-wing lunatic named Henry John Divorski. I've posted many of those emails on this blog, with little more than small modifications (to make it work as a blog). As far as I know, the guy who is emailing me doesn't know I've been posting his emails.

Who are you?
I'm a gay man from Southern California who loves politics and took an interest in Virginia elections since there isn't much else going on right now. I'm an independent and don't really vote for either party regularly.

So this is real?
God you're dumb. Did you actually fall for that Henry John Divorski story? What part of "i've seen four men wrestle a mountain lion to the ground and rip off it's head" sounded real to you? That was my favorite line, by the way. Second favorite line: "these free loaders are floating up from mexico, stealing children, then trading them on the black market for illegal drugs and big sombreros." For an amusing discussion of whether this is real or not, go here.

What was the point of this blog?
I'm constantly amused by the use of the phrase "the homosexual agenda" by politicians on the right. I wanted to satirize this phrase and get a good laugh out of it. A couple of my friends contributed to this blog and stepped out of character occasionally - that's why it's a bit uneven towards the end. I ran out of jokes, too.

Are the comments real?
Many of the comments are fake. For example, the comments that said "TAKE THIS DOWN NOW!!" were written by me. Some of the comments were pretty offensive. That's another reason why I'm quitting while I'm ahead. I don't want this to turn into some sort of HQ for Christian bashing or racism. I'm fairly religious (Lutheran) I'm strongly opposed to such talk.

Why did you post on my blog? Why didn't you just stick to yours?
I never would have received as many hits as I did if I didn't post on your publicly available blog. It got up to about 3000 a day for a while, then slowed down as my jokes became lamer. Oh well. Many of you who visited me may never read this. Special thanks to Dailykos.com, Mydd.com, FreeRepublic.com, and patriotboy.blogspot.com for directing traffic to this site.

Well Virginia, take care, and enjoy repressing homosexuals! We don't mind it, actually. Most of us get a kick out of it.

Posting someone else's e-mails without their knowledge? I won't make any excuses for someone blaming all the evils of the world on homosexuals. However, posting all those e-mails without his permission is classless. While Henry might have said all these things to others anyway, the e-mails were written and intended for you only.

You also fooled many people into thinking that this site was real, extremely dishonest. I know, you say that those who believed it are "dumb" (I myself must claim to be "dumb" then as well), but we'd be dumber to think that you weren't intending to fool anyone.

Perhaps you were trying to prove something about those on the far right. But you also proved something about yourself; you are not trustworthy, which is just as bad as someone who discriminates against others. You, a Lutheran, a Christian (as you claim) should know that dishonesty is wrong, even if you don't feel the same way about homosexuality.

I'd say I'm angry at you, but I simply have too much pity on you to be mad.

Can I prove that he was out to get conservatives? Absolutely not, but "Pastor John" did prove himself, in many areas, to be a hypocrite. I also can say that, yes, I am actually a bit mad. I know, I'm breaking one of John Hawkin's cardinal rules:

23) Avoid blogging angry. It may save you a lot of grief.

What is the lesson from all this?
1) A blogs purpose is usually to gain interest from those on one side politically, or convince members on the other. A blog that isolates those on both is either fake or not worth reading.
2) "Pastor John" is correct in one area; controversy brings hits. However, it doesn't always mean reliability.
3) Be careful who you believe in blogs. There are plenty of honest bloggers out there who are not deceptional.

In the future, I will remember these lessons. I will also take Mr. Hawkin's 23rd hint more seriously as well.

Apparently, stating that evolution is a fact connects church and state

In Cobb's County, stickers claiming that evolution is a theory, not a fact, have been ordered removed from textbooks. What's worse, those who sued over the stickers claimed a connection between church and state.

Going back to my last post, I suggested the likelihood of other theories regarding the Earth's climate changes. Science runs greatly off of theory; law is incredibly difficult to prove because even one exception will disprove the law. Thus, theories often are run as absolute; while more study could prove it false, there is nothing conclusive doing so now, making it hard to bury bad theories. Global warming is taken as fact; this could be a local event, where global cooling is actually the reality, or a cyclical climate (suggested by a number of studies but always ignored) holds.

Likewise, evolution is seen as undeniable. Six parents sued to have the stickers removed from the textbooks, believing them to support a connection between church and state. Even if one disregarded religion (which I believe will always hold an impact on the lives of many people), a number of other ideas could come up for the origin of life. Perhaps Earth was seeded by alien life, perhaps evolution was not based on environment and random changes but on how long since the prior evolutionary change, or something completely different even. Now, obviously, all these theories are bad, but there is little to falsify any of them either. They could all be wrongly explained as if they were law. Now, what if evolution is wrong? Supporters of this theory get their feathers ruffled when creationism is even suggested; shouldn't they get just as mad about evolution if they found it disproven?

My guess: probably not. Despite this, schools should get back to the true meaning of theory and explain theories as strongly supported ideas, but not known to be the undeniable truth. It is not necessary to teach about creationism. But describing evolution as unfalsifiable could close out the true origin, and perhaps even the meaning, of humanity.

Global warming produces thicker ice on poles?

These days, environmentalists don't even know what they are talking about anymore. Any newly found research can further prove global warming, even when complaints in the past have utilized arguments to the contrary. Now, global warming leads to an increase in snow fall in Antartica.

I'm sorry. Didn't many environmentalists say that global warming would make the ice caps thinner? Again, "science" depends only on one theory, rather than exploring other possibilities.

More changes to the blogroll

Well, I've begun the process of adding some links to blogs on the other end of the spectrum. Drunk on Democracy is run by a fellow Wahoo. More a personal blog (though also including a number of politically oriented posts), it does have a tilt far from mine. Still, Cari, the only poster there, has some interesting insight (I noticed, in particular, a bit of coverage on the Student Council President, which I had a number of qualms with). Give it a look; one of the best ways to debate those you disagree with is to see how they think.

At the moment, I'm unsure what to title the set of links for those who have a different political orientation from myself. Right now, it is called Blue Staters (which may not be entirely accurate for links that could be posted there in the future). I would certainly take any suggestions that could be given there.

I'm Back!

Well, after a fun (but exhausting) week, I'm finally back in the real world, and ready to get back into the swing of things. It appears that I missed a lot, but I'll see if I can catch up on things.

- Newsweek had a report shortly before I left about an alleged desecration of the Koran. It did not take long for the truth to be revealed. Again, the left-tilting media thought they had some big news that could devestate the American military. Just like with Rathergate, Newsweek did not check their facts, and later found (far too late) that these allegations were not true. Unfortunately, Newsweek now has blood on their hands. This should be a harsh lesson for the media; their partisan motivations have led them to be inaccurate, and now people have lost their lives. Absolutely shameful.

- Human cloning is allowed in South Korea. Great, one Korea believes it's leader is a god, and now the other wants to play god.

- Former teacher Letourneau is preparing to wed the former student she had raped. What's worse, people put attention around it as if it were a great thing. Entertainment Tonight is certainly proving itself to be little more than a tabloid.

- Finally, some good news. Anti-Castro protests are being staged in Cuba. The communist regime in Cuba has indoctrinated its people for years that Castro is a great man, and it is good to see that there is still a shade of democracy there.

- Big mistake by the media overseas. Pictures of Saddam clad in nothing more than his underwear were published by The Sun (of Britain). This shows that there is a serious flaw in the security of America's prison system. This needed to be revealed, but solely to the United States government. There may also be a backlash from the Islamic terrorists, who will use this as an excuse to attack more Americans. Finally, questions have risen about whether these photos violate Geneva conventions. This certainly seems doubtful, but as the question has been raised (no doubt starting with the purported MSM), it will persist, being used to mess with the perfectly legal and neccessary trial of Saddam Hussein.

- Good news in entertainment seems to come in threes. Star Wars: Episode III has a big opening weekend, Spiderman 3 has added the funny Topher Grace to its cast, and X-Men 3 has added one of my favorite actors, Kelsey Grammer of Frasier fame, to the cast to play Beast (a perfect fit I'd say).

Okay, I think I've caught up with a lot of the biggest, recent news. In the next week, I'll get back into the flow of things and this blog should get normal updates for most of the summer. Thank you for having patience with my busy schedule.

Retreat

I know these long breaks without posts must be getting old, but I again must take one. I will be on a retreat for the next few days. I hope to be posting again when I return on Friday, the 20th. Until then, I wish you all well, and promise that it will be a while before the next such period.

Abortion may put future children at risk

A report from the Telegraph has posted a report that may become very controversial in the coming weeks. Abortions may put the mother's next child at risk. This development could show that thousands, or even millions more children have been endangered beyond those aborted.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

It's official

The apocalypse is upon us. (Free registration for New York Times required)

Hypocrisy #3

PETA, the same organization that stands outside KFC restaurants giving out buckets of fake blood to scare away customers, has recently been found to put thousands of animals to sleep over the last five years. Hmm, guess you can only do that if you join PETA now.

Hat tip to Michelle Malkin.

These Are The Voyages...

For nearly forty years, the adventures of the starship Enterprise (whether it is the NCC-1701, NCC-1701 D, or NX-01), starship Voyager, and space station Deep Space Nine have intrigued many viewers. After an 18-year run that started with the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Encounter at Farpoint", Star Trek began a hiatus last night with the final episode of Star Trek: Enterprise. Anyone familiar with Star Trek knows that the future portrayed is, unlike many science fiction stories, an optimistic one. Earth lives in peace with many other worlds as part of an intergalacitc Federation. Everything is bright and sunny, right? Not quite. While some malevolent forces exist, so to does a more liberal society. The Federation is a socialist government, running without money (highly unrealistic, particularly when one has to deal with a Ferengi), homosexual relationships are believed to be as natural as being heterosexual, and religion is all but eliminated. So what kind of conservative watches Star Trek?

This question is, quite simply, irrelevant. Star Trek is very idealist. At the same time, it does not entirely stray from looking at conservative viewpoints. While the preference runs for peace (as it should in all cultures), Starfleet, the interstellar navy and exploratory group of the Federation, still allows for self-defense and, when absolutely needed, war.

Prefer your leaders strong and intellgent? Look no further than the captains. As role models should, they generally use good judgment (though, perhaps Kirk should become a one-woman man). They allow no nonsense from their crews, and never put themselves before those who need to be defended.

If you love tradition and honor, look no further than the Klingons. Want capitalism? The Ferengi take laissez-faire to a whole new level. Obviously, all of us have an interest in politics, of which the Cardassians are experts.

While there are some that argue that Star Trek is a show for liberals, I like to believe that there is something in it for everyone. Star Trek can inspire debate, but should also not be neglected for its entertainment value. If you haven't watched an episode (or haven't watched one in a while), keep a lookout for them. There will be plenty of reruns to keep any viewer happy.

And a suggestion for other Star Trek fans, check out Right Wing News. John Hawkins loves Star Trek (though he rarely posts about it). Right Wing News was the first blog that I started reading, and it still remains one of my favorites. I'm sure many of you will agree that it is good as well.

New link

There is a new link in the allies portion of the blogroll, Spark It Up run by kilo. I like what I see from his blog (except for his choice in baseball teams, though I will give him that the White Sox have beaten my team, the Orioles, twice in a row, a good feat considering they are the top teams in baseball). kilo updates fairly regularly, just giving a little bit about how he feels for the topic of the day. Give it a look.

Finals are over

Expect a rather sizable update this afternoon or evening. I hope to be able to cover new links, the cancellation of Star Trek Enterprise and how Star Trek fits into my political viewpoint, and hopefully some other things. Why such a large update? I'll be on another hiatus as I'll be on a retreat. When I get back in about a week, the Red Stater should return to regular updates.

Apologies

To anyone who has been hoping for more posts here, I apologize. Like Waldo Jaquith, I have been in the middle of the exam period. Unlike Waldo's exams at VT, the University of Virginia has let the year run long, and my exams will not be over until this Saturday. I will also be on a retreat the following week, isolated from any computers.

So, what I will do is try to do a major update this Saturday. After that, I can't guarantee another update until the following Saturday. I will try to add more to the blog throughout this week, but they will only be short pieces. To anyone who has come here regularly, keep up with the Red Stater for the rest of the week. This summer may free up some time for me (a job will take time, but not as much as homework), so it is my hope that I will be able to dedicate some more time over the next three months to this blog.

In the meantime, I'd suggest going to Sic Semper Tyrannis and Commonwealth Conservative. Also, check out the blogroll at CC. Lots of good blogs there (many I still have not yet gotten a chance to read, perhaps some of you guys can point out some of the best ones to me?).

Update on student suspended over phone call

The issue has been remedied. While he handled the situation poorly, the student will be allowed to finish off the year and avoid summer school. With any luck, he'll learn to handle these situations better and his mother won't ground him for too long.

Mothers, be warned. Calling your child can get them suspended.

Sad that news like this was reported so close to Mother's Day. A high school junior in Columbus received a call from his mother. This was far from the normal phone call though. His mother is stationed in Iraq, and is only able to call him once a month. She was fortunate enough to be able to call him during the day this time, but she caught him on his cell phone while he was at school. A teacher asked him to hang up. Unfortunately, the student handled the situation poorly. While this may have deserved a punishment, what he got was far too much; suspension through the end of the school year and a later call from his mother (left as a message a few minutes later), scolding him for hanging up on her (presumably, she didn't know the situation at the time).

I understand fully the need to maintain discipline and show consistency, but this is a situation that deserves an exception. One's family always should be allowed to trump the rules set up by the school. This is not to say that parents should be calling their kids on their cell phones during school hours. Responsible parents know that they should not disturb their children during school. But some circumstances limit how a parent contacts their child. In situations such as these, the school system should be more accomodataing, and work through them on a case-by-case basis.

Unfortunately, this situation could also put this student into summer school; he's struggled with grades all year, and while he has been improving as the year has gone on, this suspension could cost him all of his recent hard work. It is irresponsible for the school to apply this punishment at this point in the year, and should suspend the punishment until the beginning of next year.

I'd prefer not to go into this on Mother's Day, but this was, in part, good news. To many people, their mothers are still very important. Happy Mother's Day to all.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Centrist? Non-partisan? Moderate?

In vector mathematics, values are given in many different dimensions. While most practical uses of vectors work in two or three dimensions, vector mathematics can extend to an indefinite number of dimensions. For a vector to equal 0, each component (the value in each dimension) must equal 0. In other words, a vector of 3i-3j does not equal 0.

What does this have to do with politics? There is no such thing as a political moderate.

Most social and political issues are binary; that is, you can either support it or not. Take abortion for example. Many who favor allowing abortion like to call them selves pro-choice advocates. There is no point in trying to fool others. They certainly aren't against abortion, so all that leaves is being in favor of it. There may be different degrees in amount of support, but unless someone just does not have an opinion on the matter, they cannot claim to be anything but partisan.

Then, let's say we take an issue like President Bush's original Social Security fix. Again, someone can be in favor of it or not. Taking these two issues, there are four possible viewpoints. So, being in favor of the Social Security fixes and abortion, or the opposite might be seen by some as "moderate". But is it really, or is it just having viewpoints which are still partisan, though on different sides? Just as in the vector of 3i-3j, differing political viewpoints do not add up to zero. Add in hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of other issues, and acheiving moderation simply is not possible.

"Moderates" take issue with people on either side for different issues, but rarely, if ever, do they take issue with the viewpoints of both sides. A moderate, by definition, would be different from those on both sides. If you are looking for someone with a true moderate viewpoint, find someone who has no opinions.

The "Wink wink, nudge nudge" campaign

Waldo Jaquith has pointed something out to me. My earlier post covered the perception that Jerry Kilgore is gay. Whether or not this has to do with Kilgore's accent seems to be the question that keeps popping up.

What has not been addressed is whether this matters. Jerry Kilgore is married with two children. Does Kilgore sound effeminate? Perhaps to some. But not all will feel this way. There may be many that perceive Kilgore's "effeminate" voice as an accent. This probably will not be a threat to Kilgore. It appears that the first ones to take notice of Kilgore's voice were liberals, or at least the first ones to call attention to what they perceived. But it will become apparent very quickly that this is a question that did not need to be asked. This "wink wink, nudge nudge" tactic is nothing but dirty, negative politics, and if this question ever hits the mainstream, it'll be outed as such very rapidly. Until someone can unequivocally prove that Jerry Kilgore has performed a homosexual act, or at least give a better excuse than "he sounds gay", this question needs to be laid to rest immediately.

UPDATE 4:45 PM: Waldo Jaquith has tried to seperate himself from this subject. After writing this post, I found that he had posted something similar. While I doubt that Jaquith will be voting for Kilgore, I applaud him for taking the high road here.

In today’s Cavalier Daily, columnist Mike Slaven does a fantastic job of critiquing the meaning, origin, ethics, and effects of this week’s dust-up over Kilgore’s voice. His best point — and I agree strongly — is that the Kaine campaign ought to have nothing to do with any buzz about Kilgore’s speaking style. It’s beneath him, and it’s beneath a proper campaign. Secondarily, I very much agree with his point regarding claims that Kilgore is gay: it’s not just morally wrong for Democrats, but it’s plainly factually wrong, what with his being married with kids.

Dirty skies, global warming. Cleaner skies, more global warming?

Somehow, the global warming fears have grown even more ridiculous. Hat tip to Drudge Report.

Five Hundred Hits!

Not even a month after adding the counter to my blog, The Red Stater has registered hit number 500 (not counting hits before May 11th, that is an average of 25 hits per day). The counter currently reads at 512 hits. I just wanted to put a quick post out to thank everyone who has hit my blog with a link, become a regular reader, or simply has hit this blog once. Now, I need to get back to studying for my first exam tomorrow morning, but I promise to update again after that, tomorrow afternoon or evening.

Why don't pictures like this win Pulitzer Prizes?

Michelle Malkin has a very moving picture posted. Makes one wonder how liberals get away with calling the men and women in the armed forces "butchers".

Flip-flops are the preferred style of the Left

Will Vehrs at Commonwealth Conservative (John Behan is busy with work and has asked Will to cover his responsibilities) has linked to a Richmond Times-Dispatch editorial covering regional referenda. Today, Tim Kaine believes that they show a lack of leadership, but four years ago, he believed that they were "enlightened policy". Perhaps my opinion is biased by the outcome of the 2004 presidential election, but I don't think that Kaine's strategy will work too well.

Only thirteen years old?

Fox News reports that a thirteen-year old girl in Florida has been granted permission to seek an abortion. How many things are wrong with this?

- A girl, barely a teenager, has engaged in sex.
- She has made the choice to have the abortion herself, greatly unaware of the ramifications at her age (she is currently under state custody).
- She gives as a reason that she cannot support a child. This is true, but the state can take on responsibility of her child.

Unfortunately, state law is not allowed to interfere with her choice. But one has to wonder how a child is given the final decision on this. By now, it is too late; the procedure was scheduled for yesterday. Hopefully, Florida legistlators will respond to this and change the law accordingly.

Atoning for a mistake I have made

I have had a history of being naive on some things. The Virginia Republican is one of them.

Allen Thornburgh of The Thornblog has pointed out to me something that I have just thrown out. The Virginia Republican is too far out there to be real. I have played right into the Virginia Republican's hands, and I am now among the jokes on his blog.

Unfortunately, there is little that can be done about this. Like a number of other Virginia bloggers, I can't change what he says there and, even if I comment there to defend myself, Pastor John (the given name for the only author of the blog) can just delete it. There is only one thing I can do, and that is to renounce any connection to the Virginia Republican. He is free to post whatever he wants on his site, but I can guarantee that his use of my words will be inaccurate of what I am trying to convey.

Specifically to Pastor John, I will ask that you not post here anymore unless it is relevant to the conversation and serious. Any other posts will be deleted and you will be banned otherwise. In particular, no apologies in later posts. If you are serious and not demeaning, I will have no reason to do so.

To everyone else, this will not be standard procedure for me; I prefer to keep things like this private. However, this situation necessitates full attention. Virginia Republican's attempts may be damaging to blogs from true Virginia Republicans. To you all, I apologize for allowing this to go as far as it had. To keep this from going any further, this post will not allow comments, in the hopes that people will follow the commenting rules and that this whole situation will just be left in the past.

On a lighter note, give The Thornblog a look. Along with The Salt Lick, it is being added to the blog roll. They both look like great blogs and I look forward to keeping up with both of them.

Apparently, UVa now can police the internet

Over the last couple weeks, there has been an outcry over a couple posts at The Facebook (for anyone not familiar with this website, it allows for students, alumni, and faculty from schools all across the nation to connect with friends and display personal information like major and favorite quotes). These are certainly questionable additions; they are groups that members can join on the site that marginalize women of Asian heritage. I am usually the first person to question calls of stereotypes, but I have to agree that these groups are inappropriate. The Facebook does not allow for racism on its site, and with a message sent to the webmasters, these groups would likely be disbanded.

However, this very simple action was not taken. Instead, Daisy Rodriguez, the assistant dean for Asian/Asian-Pacific-American students called the students responsible in to discuss it with them. Last time I checked, none of the faculty at the University of Virginia had domain over the internet. While the "officers" of these groups may need to make a change in their viewpoints, it is not the responsibility of the university to enforce something like that.

I usually do not agree with the Cavalier Daily Lead Edit, but they hit the nail on the head on this topic.

Any time the administration embarks on a crusade to appease offended students, they risk falling down a very slippery slope. There are any number of facebook groups which are potentially offensive[sic] to any number of people, not to mention daily words and actions; should students be hauled before a dean every time a peer is insulted?

UPDATE 10:30 PM: I found reason to bump this post up to the top of the blog. Not an hour after I posted this, I already saw my first comment. This comment has been deleted from the comment section, and I will not share it because it is far more disrespectful than anything covered in this post. I have defended Pastor John. the author of the offending comment, a couple times before, even though his blog runs on a far-right wing tilt, much further than I would ever dare to tread or even consider. However, these sort of posts will not be allowed. Consider this a warning for now John; I will not allow comments like this, and any similar comments from here on out will get you banned. You can say anything you want on your blog, but I will not allow comments like this on mine.

The changes just keep on coming

In an effort to maintain anonymity, I have changed my pseudonym to CR UVa. This is a pseudonym that I have used at a number of blogs in commenting, representing that I am currently a College Republican at the University of Virginia. To those who have seen (and remember) the name I have used before, I will request of you, on the honor system (this should certainly be confirmation of the fact that I am a Wahoo) to not use my old screen name, but refer to me using this one in the future. I understand that the URL of this blog may still defeat this purpose, but it should not be a dead giveaway to anyone except those who already know me. Thanks in advance to you all.

Another new link and more on the accusation of Jerry Kilgore's sexuality

New links may be added on a regular basis for a while, as
1) I am reading more blogs regularly, and as I feel that some of them are good, I will accordingly add them to my links list, and
2) Other's will add me to their blog lists, where I will either add a blog to the allies list or move it there from the links list (sometimes, this may not be immediate as I won't always know when I'm added to someone else's blog list). This may be altered over time, if I find blogs of different political affiliations adding me to their link lists; in that case, I may set aside a new set of links on the sidebar.

That said, I have found a new ally, in Norman of One Man's Trash. A fellow Virginian, his blog looks good. I would suggest as a first read this post from his site. It is an excellent post, covering the complaints over Jerry Kilgore's complaints about Tim Kaine and the Democrats implying that Kilgore is gay. I have said before, myself, that I think Kilgore is using this topic properly, trying to show that many of the Democrats who get angered over stereotypes perpetuated against the left do not react the same way towards the stereotypes that are pointed out on the right.

Of particular interest are comments made by Waldo Jaquith. If you are unfamiliar with him, he is liberal blogger who failed at two attempts to be elected to the Charlottesville City Council. On Norman's blog, Jaquith stated

Try as I might, I still haven't found anybody making fun of Kilgore's southern accent, Kaine supporter or otherwise.

(he refers to Kilgore's Southern accent that, to some, sounds effeminate, and has helped perpetuate the stereotype that Kilgore is a homosexual). Interestingly enough, Norman did some research into this subject, hoping to find some people who have. At MyDD, he found a post covering it, from December, and Mr. Jaquith, interestingly enough, posted to it. It gets less believable when it can be seen that Jaquith commented directly about it, and there is no dodging the bullet for Jaquith when it becomes obvious that he even stated the following.

People hearing him speak for the first time are often shocked, to the point at which they don't even pay attention to what he's saying, because it seems so very obvious that he's a gay man. I can't say whether he's gay or not, but I can say that he exhibits all of the stereotypical traits of an effeminate gay man, and that will not play well in Virginia.

Perhaps Jaquith just doesn't consider himself "anybody".

Picking the next president

The hot topic these days seems to be who is going to run in 2008. Many names are already being thrown out, among those Senator George Allen of Virginia for the Republicans and Senator Hillary Clinton of New York for the Democrats. While I certainly have my personal preferences, I see no point in playing psychic. The 2008 candidates are already working on building name recognition for themselves; they are already planning on running. But a lot can change in three years. When the time arises, I will almost certainly join the frenzy, but for now, I will leave the predictions to other blogs.