Big Dick Bennett does the Happy-Happy Libertarian Touchdown Dance over Theresa Schiavo’s dead body. Can’t wait to see what he has to show us when the Pope passes.

Kinda glad Dick and his buds weren’t around while my dad was in an iron lung during the polio scourge of the eary 50s.

HOLY COW! They’re doing it!

According to Iggy, the Beal vs. like, 20 Top Dog poker players, for $40,000,000 — a freaking forty-million dollar game of $100,000/$200,000 limit hold’em — is happening right now.

Warren Karp is reporting that Andy is up eight million against the corporation, as of last evening.

If Beal wins this, he has got to get the title of Greatest Poker Player Ever in the History of Ever, hands-down. One man against a team of Brunsons is just crazy. I can’t even think of a fair historical comparison — consider Bobby Fischer playing against five or six Kasparovs who can swap in and out.

I love Doyle, but I know who I’m rooting for here. And please, God, let someone be filming it with hole card cameras. I’d pay $100 for a professionally-edited DVD set of that.

My little blog-buddie, Craig Henry of Lead and Gold, is asking many of the same questions I would ask, and pointing out all the ridiculous inconsistencies that I would point out, if I weren’t swamped. Things like, George Felos being a total New Age nut with a long history in the Right to Die movement. Felos, of course, is the attorney that was bought and paid for by Michael Schiavo with the money fromTheresa Schiavo’s malpractice award. Said award was based partly on Michael’s testimony that he would take care of Theresa till the end of her days. Little did that jury know that the end of her days would commence countdown before the ink was dry on the check.

Things that should make you think hard about the Schiavo case and the ramifications of it are being posted at The Remedy, a blog at the website for the Claremont Institute. Dr. Whited turned me on to this, and for a hayseed, it’s intoxicating stuff. Almost to the point of making me wish I’d gone to school…almost.

Or, on the flip-side, you can go the old-fashioned cheap-shot way. By law, that should read “over-emotional piece of defective work”, but I’ve decided it’s some contractual thing that comes with your LIbertarian card, that you have to do a BJ-link to Reason some number of times per month.

Meantime, many good comments on my own bit of meta over-thinking at First Principles, 2. I hope to get to doing some more discussion of that, but work comes first. Just got back from a bidness trip to Central Texas, and I’m rather knackered. The bluebonnets on I-35 were a welcome, refreshing sight, and I got to spend last night drinking Shiners on the patio at Shady Grove, too. I just love that place. I was almost ginned up enough to go find Kramer and bug him, but that would have been rude with no notice. I took my colleague for a spin down world-famous 6th Street, since he’d never been to Austin before — as we are both old geezers, we did not stop. I think he was more impressed by the size of the UT football stadium and the infamous clock tower. He’s an elk-hunter, so I had to endure MOA and other ballistics discussions.

Scott Henson updates on the vehicle packing bill I talked about earlier.
It’s pending in committee, so call your rep if they’re on the committee to tell them you support it. Around here it looks like Terri Hodge, Mary Denny and Elvira Reyna.

You’ll be happy to hear, Scott, that I suggested language in my testimony on behalf of ACLU of TX to re-broaden it, and Keel agreed to it. (I think the NRA gal there was as surprised as she was happy.)

After all, if the ACLU and the NRA are in agreeance, can it possibly be bad???

Thanks for the update, Scotty.

MORE UPDATE: Big update from Scott. He makes it almost sound fun to be a lobbyist talking to politicians. It probably is when it’s about something you believe in.

It seems that I’ve failed to be totally clear about exactly what it is that’s so bothersome for me about the Theresa Schiavo case. Let me try to boil it down here:

#1. Can we agree that the Declaration of Independence formed the basis for the constitution (little c, there, lawyers & other pedants) of the United States of America? Is it fair for me to say that this is the absolute bedrock upon which we rest?

#2. Are there unalienable rights defined in there, specifically, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”?

#3. Is it not stated therein that any government that arises from that Declaration is going to be of men, and answerable to men, and specifically tasked with protecting those rights?

#4. Was there, at any point in our nation’s history, where we decided that any of 1-3 have changed? Here’s where you Constitution people can feel free to correct me.

#5 Are we not witnessing, right now, in the case of Theresa Schiavo, a usurpation of those rights from #2 by the government from #3? To wit, the judicial branch of the state of Fla. is denying a woman her right to Life.

#6. It then falls to the people to stop that, and we do that through our other employees — the legislative branch and the executive branch — by whatever powers they have.

So…before we talk feeding tubes, water-headed pinatas, Rule of Law, equal protection, extraordinary measures, theocratic Republican takeovers, Right to Life, facts in finding, Culture of Death, or any other fucking stupid red herring you might wish to drag across the path…tell me where I am wrong. Personally, I don’t think you can do it, but I’m willing to read, especially if you have some links.

Personally, too, I wish Jeb Bush had rolled the Florida National Guard tanks, and taken the lady to a hospital, and resuscitated her. To protect her innocent life, of course, but secondarily (if that’s a word), to get two questions onto the table: do states’ rights mean a damn thing in 2005 America, and are we still guided by the lights our Founding Fathers lit for us 225 years ago? If you want to blast me for turning Theresa Schiavo into a symbol for other goals, don’t bother. I’m well aware of what I’m saying, and I don’t believe that it dishonors her in the least, no more than it dishonored any other regular American who stood up and made us think hard about our country and make changes to the way we were running things.

After beating up a little bit on Scott Henson, proprietor of Grits for Breakfast, for his wrong-headed thinking about a fake news story coming out of the Supreme Court, I now owe him major props for doing the right thing and endorsing a gun law that would allow any Texan to carry a gun in his car (all necessary disclaimers about felons and court orders and blah-blah understood) without the requirement that he/she be travelling between counties, as it stands now.

I think it’s a crying damn shame that such a law was ever on the books in the first place, and I’m glad to see that there is at least the possibility that it can be rescinded. Let me tell you why. My father and my grandfather were small businessmen in what were cash businesses at that time - groceries and hamburgers. Each of them would, as a matter of course, have hundreds or thousands of dollars on their persons at just about any time, day or night. Maybe coming home from another 14-hour day, maybe going to the night deposit, maybe bringing back a change order. Each of them carried a pistol, usually on the front seat next to them, because it was dead-easy to figure out who James or Jesse were, and that they might have some significant amount of cash on them at literally any time, and to knock them over. Carrying that gun with them, and making sure everyone knew, kept both of them safe; neither one was ever carjacked or robbed of their day’s receipts. Back in those days, it was understood by the police that these men were on a mission of commerce, and they would let them slide with these minor infractions of the gun laws. Many’s the time they were stopped by DPD with that gun on the seat, but the cops either knew them, or they were smart enough to look at the printed deposit slip and the gargantuan wads of cash, and send them on their way.

Now, today, I am a (weekend) small businessman, and I often find myself in exactly that situation…hundreds or thousands (OK, one time it was more than a grand, but I’m working on it) in pure cash. I’ve got two options — deposit cash in the night deposit (not on your life), or leave it sitting in an uninhabited house until I get back on a weekday to make a teller deposit. I absolutely do not want to put it in my truck and tote it back to Dallas unarmed, because today, the coppers stop you and there ain’t no letting you slide. Even though I’m in the right, travelling between counties, the last thing I want to do is set off one of the many small-town Deppity Dawgs that are on my route home by having a .45 in the seat next to me. Cops these days are nothing like the benevolent LEOs that worked my dad’s and granddad’s beat. They scare me, frankly. But if this law passes, at the very least that means I’ve got two laws on my side, which might just cool off Patrolman Hothead enough to let me get on about my business.

Important to note, too, after busting on his ACLU affiliation: this law is most likely contra the ACLU’s official position. If they have one, of course…the ACLU has not been known to stick it’s nose into 2A issues. But…Scotty’s running cross-ways to his employer, and I respect a man that can take a position publicly that goes against his paycheck. That’s admirable.

So, now, Scotty — what do we, the big dummies, need to do to make sure this law is passed? Your advice is appreciated.

I learned, in the space of about four hours, that Captain’s Quarters and Daily Pundit have disappeared from Google searches. There are reports that other blogs have, as well, including the execrable Duncan Black. Two things leap to mind:

1) They are combing their databases and about to launch an experimental Blog Search option. Which, you know, why not just do their standard soft launch that slowly leaches out from the digerati?

2) They’re making a political statement of sorts. I don’t know what it would be, if Duncan’s really gone, since the Google boys are decidedly librulz.

Bottom line, though — they are now a public company with many, many stockholders. They built their company by being totally blind about what is returned when you click Search. Many, many stockholders bought their stock because of that. I would expect many, many stockholders would be very unhappy if that is to suddenly change.

Further, they are selling their AdSense program to ad buyers for the very same reason. And they get me, Mr. Free Billboard, to work with them on that. All reports are that AdSense is an extremely profitable line of business. Would it be as profitable with any kind of restrictions on basic Search? I reckon not. Restrictions always kill commodities, and you can hardly move upmarket with something that is so easily duplicatable.

Of course, I suspect that this would not be the first time that a lefty completely ruined a good business model because of his politics. I suspect that because I am just too lazy to go Google it.

One Sunday morning long ago

The Reverend Donald Sensing’s Easter sermon. In case you’re an unchurchable heathen blogger like me.

This is the one Sunday a year that I truly miss going to church and listening to a sermon. Well, I miss going more often than that, but it’s strongest today. This is the core of my faith, as it is with all my Christian brothers and sisters.

Thomas Sowell: Killing Terri Schiavo: Part II

The liberal line, both in politics and in the media, is that Congress somehow behaved unconstitutionally. All federal courts except the Supreme Court are created by Congress. The Constitution itself gives Congress the authority to define or restrict the jurisdictions of federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
[...]
Another important issue is whether self-government in this country will live or die. Judges who ignore the laws passed by elected representatives are slowly but surely replacing democracy with judicial rule. Meanwhile, the media treat judges as sacrosanct and any criticism of them as almost blasphemy.

Can’t add much to that…

Got it from Sullivan…

One of the self-appointed defenders of small-government Republican conservatism exhibits his utter cluelessness about his political religion:

1.) Convene a national panel of medical and legal experts, and by experts, [ed: a wagon-load of horseshit about experts deleted]

2.) Congress can then adopt those in something that will no doubt be named “Terri’s Law,” and can establish that when these terms are used in legal documents such as living will, they are given the full authority of the federal government.

3.) Marriage falls in the domain of state law, so something needs to be done to get the states to adhere to this law. Not an unfunded mandate, but an incentive to folow. Congresscritters can think of something, I am sure.

4.) Mandate that the legal and religious advice price be provided for a modest fee. There is no reason, once these things are in place, that a lawyer and your religious leader and a medical provider of choice can not sit down with a couple and hash this out in an hour or two for under a few hundred dollars.

God save us from the academic pinhead faux conservatives. All that’s missing is a tax on whisky or tobacco to fund it. If you locked 10 liberals in a room for eight hours, they might could come up with a worse plan than this, but they’d have to work on it.

As if you needed another dose of meta hot-air, right? This came up in an email convo I’ve been having:

if the state were trying to kill a death row murderer, of course, and he had suffered such representation, you can imaging how the left would be howling.

but in this case, it’s just kill kill kill kill.

I don’t get their passion for killing this woman. it’s bizarre.

My response:

I think the passion comes from the desire to isolate the judges and make them impermeable and unassailable on these civil law issues. Let’s face it — if they can stay strong and kill someone because of hearsay (which they’ve now done), then there’s NO issue that isn’t fair game for state courts. And it is so easy to find a loophole in the rat’s nest of laws out there, then find a bright-boy to try it, and then convince one guy to rule in your favor. Much, much easier than it is to convince your fellow voter-citizens. And if they fail to convince, well, they just go back and file another case next week.

Imagine Soros-type money involved in this, along with unwitting actors like: the ACLU, lots of hippy-dippy law school students with time on their hands and access to the greatest law libraries in the world,
academic bozos providing “expert” opinion, &c. Maybe I’m a paranoid wingnut, or maybe it’s not obvious, but it’s plain as day to me.

And that’s where I think all these Rule-of-Law Republicans are being so short-sighted that they’re now cross-eyed. I don’t think I’m paranoid, because all you have to do is listen to the lefty rhetoric and how it changes overnight. Fifty fookin’ years of trashing states’ rights without a fare-thee-well, and just this week they discovered the joys of federalism and the notion of individual rights? Give me, and 290MM other Americans, a break. I know a bluff bet when I see one, son.

HERE’S PROOF UPDATE: Coming through with flying colors is Jim Bob Wolcott, last referenced in these pages on November 3 or thereabouts, when he asked for instructions on how to tie a noose. So he could kill himself, see? Because Bush won the election? Never mind…ancient history. To everyone’s relief, Jim Bob did not follow through, but instead sank into a deep Blue (heh) funk for a few hours. He emerged on the other side with a completely unmasked hatred of anyone owning a Bible or a gun AND a voter registration card. “There’s never going to be an easy way to adjudicate these matters, and it would be characteristic of Republicans to pack something as Lifetime-cable sounding as “Terri’s Law” with all sorts of mischief.”

He didn’t go on to say “So don’t even try to do something democratic like passing a law, you lousy Jesus-shouters! Leave my judges and my courts alone!” because he really is a very talented writer, practically the next Mencken.

NB: I completely forgot to put up the link to Steve Sailer that kicked off the email…shame on me, as it’s central to the point.

The combination of Easter Weekend, and all the bible-thumping over the Schiavo case has driven another bright boy insane. Bennett is now on the American Taliban bandwagon.

Why won’t all you Christians just go inside and stay off the teevee? There are very important issues for the adults to hash out by such deep thinking American luminaries as Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, and Pat Buchanan. And Chris Matthews!

It reminds me, in a way, of my mom bitching about the Apollo missions bumping her “stories.” Makes me go cross-eyed for a second.

HER BODY, MY SELF : What’s In It for Michael Schiavo?

I guess he’ll be able to buy that nice house his common-law wife has probably been bugging him about for years. It doesn’t take a telepath to imagine the pillow talk at Michael Schiavo’s house: “We’ve got two kids and she’s still hanging on! You and that lawyer better get cracking. We’ve got college to think of and need at least five bedrooms! It’s a great time to buy. What’s the matter with you? Get me my down payment or I’m out of here. And I’m taking the kids… You said you’d get rid of her years ago and we’re still in this dump I never liked…”

Oof. Anybody making book on whether that happens or not? This guy is a frikkin’ folk-hero to the Loony Left and no small number of pinhead conservatives, but he’s an absolute Godhead to the goofy Libertarians. Europe loves him, too, I bet. Wouldn’t shock me a bit to see him abscond and become a Euro, for that matter, and without the common-law.

Found it at Craig Henry’s joint…

From, as KW put it, the Claremonsters:

In theoretical terms, this is a conflict between the separate powers of Florida government, as the judicial and executive branches have different opinions about what the Florida constitution requires. But in practical terms, Terri’s life hangs in the balance: If the Florida supreme court prevails, she dies. If Governor Bush prevails, she lives. It is a mistake to believe that the courts have the ultimate say as to what a constitution means. Every governor is bound by oath to uphold and protect his state constitution. In the case of Florida, the constitution Mr. Bush pledged to defend declares that, “All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty…” If the governor believes that he and the Florida legislature possess the constitutional authority and duty to save Terri’s life, then he is bound by his oath of office to do so.

James Madison remarked in the 51st Federalist that “auxiliary precautions” — constitutional mechanisms such as separation of powers and checks and balances — are necessary for limiting the power of government, a means for the end of protecting rights. But, Madison also reminded us, “a dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government.” The Florida constitution echoes Madison when it states in Section 1 that, “All political power is inherent in the people.”

The “auxiliary precautions” of Florida government — in this case the Florida supreme court — have failed Terri Schiavo. It is time, therefore, for Governor Bush to execute the law and protect her rights, and, in turn, he should take responsibility for his actions. Using the state police powers, Governor Bush can order the feeding tube reinserted. His defense will be that he and a majority of the Florida legislature believe the Florida Constitution requires nothing less. Some will argue that Governor Bush will be violating the law. We think he will not be violating the law, but if he is judged to have done so, it will be in the tradition of Martin Luther King, Jr., who answered to a higher law than a judge’s opinion. In so doing, King showed respect for the man-made law by willingly going to jail (on a Good Friday); Governor Bush may have to face impeachment because of his decision.

In taking these extraordinary steps to save an innocent life, Governor Bush should be judged not by the opinion of the Florida supreme court, a co-equal branch of the Florida government, but by the opinions of his political superiors, the people of Florida.

Exactly…