Bob...?

Are you okay...?

Do you think it's alright...

... to leave the boy with Uncle Ernie?

State 29 rightfully defends Ed Fallon (did I just write that...?) in Fallon's effort to enforce reasonable restraints on convicted sex offenders.

29 and Fallon are right on this one. Reactionary legislation is seldom good legislation - and this law seems to confirm that.

Not only that, Reka Basu was right in this column. And this gets to the heart of the matter. A drunken 19-year old who drops trow at a drunken party (where a minor happens to be) is not even on the same planet at that animal that snatched a toddler at the Des Moines Public Library and took her to the men's room. Given no other brushes with the law, the former should get a fine and severe talking to about his deportment.

The latter...? Tree. Rope. Human Waste. Some assembly required. Okay, we'll give him a fair trial and 1 appeal first.

This mess is another unintended consequence of "Zero Tolerance" nonsense. This, combined with a state legislature that wants to score political points - I mean, who's going to argue for "sex offenders"? - leads to law that is poorly thought out and unworkable.

Okay... I'm gonna say it. I disagree with Fallon on many issues. But man, he sure seems to have a rare combination of guts and integrity.

Hail to the Chief

Seattle's former chief of police has some common sense words on prohibition. Namely... it DOESN'T WORK!

I don't favor decriminalization. I favor legalization, and not just of pot but of all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, meth, psychotropics, mushrooms and LSD.

It's a shame repeal won't happen in our lifetimes. The amount of wasted money and human capital from the War on Drugs is staggering. What's that old saying about the cure being worse that the disease...?

Go read it.

Readers Respond to Doak's Silliness

Dick's vapid piece urging John Kerry (who by the way served in Vietnam...) to sue the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has gotten some good replys.

From today's Letters to the Editor:

Include media in lawsuit

Maybe the Swift Boat Veterans would welcome a John Kerry libel lawsuit. In fact, maybe the Swift Boat Vets should sue Kerry for libel. A good airing of Kerry's military service and his behavior after returning may be just what this country needs.

Unlike you, I believe a libel suit that would have a far greater chance of success would be the Bush campaign vs. Kerry campaign, CBS News and Dan Rather.

I agree, an educated citizenry is important. I just don't trust you to do the educating.

-Steve Weltha, Winterset.

Lawsuit could determine truth

Here I am, a lifelong Republican, agreeing with Register senior editorial columnist Richard Doak, who urges Sen. John Kerry to sue the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth for libelous statements regarding his wartime service in Vietnam ("Kerry Can Serve His Country Again: Sue the Swift Boat Vets," Oct. 10).

Maybe such legal action will require Kerry to make available full disclosure of his service records, including his medical records and the actual reports he submitted describing his actions in a particular engagement that now seem to be in question. Likewise, the Swift Boat Vets would be required to make available their records.

As I recall, the Swift Boat Vets invited a libel suit by Kerry during the heat of the campaign, but none was forthcoming. I wasn't there in Vietnam, where the disputed actions took place, and I am rather sure Doak wasn't either.

Absent on-sight verification, who really knows whether Kerry "puffed up" his reports and/or exaggerated his injuries? A court action could put all the facts on the table, and the public could determine who was libeled.

-John M. Ropes, Mason City.

Good on ya guys!

No Justice - No Cookies!!!

This is what the Des Moines Register came up with to tell us about the civil rights crisis in Iowa:

In 2003, Shade alleged that a recruiter with the Girl Scouts of Moingona Council of Des Moines discriminated against her granddaughter, Brianna , because she is black. Shade's complaint says the recruiter repeatedly ignored the black family to attend to whites. Her case languished for nearly two years at the Des Moines commission, which she described as a "farce" and a "waste."

What's the answer you ask...?

I don't know... maybe more public funding? Whatever it costs. We can't let these atrocities stand.

If a complaint against the Girl Scouts is all the DMR can come up with, more than anything else the article tells me that we've made trememdous progress in this country over the last 40 years.

And this was their headline front page story. Yeech.

Theatre Blogging

Angels in America got a great review from Bruner in the Register. Looks like Todd did a an excellent job on a complex and difficult play.

I'm really looking forward to seeing it next week.

Rush to Judgment

Okay, I can't believe I'm linking to Rush Limbaugh. But hey... this piece is pretty darned good.

For decades conservatives have considered judicial abuse a direct threat to our Constitution and our form of government. The framers didn't create a judicial oligarchy. They created a representative republic. Our opposition to judicial activism runs deep. We've witnessed too many occasions where Republican presidents have nominated the wrong candidates to the court, and we want more assurances this time--some proof. The left, on the other hand, sees the courts as the only way to advance their big-government agenda. They can't win national elections if they're open about their agenda. So, they seek to impose their policies by judicial fiat. It's time to call them on it. And that's what many of us had hoped and expected when the president made his nomination.

I'm not concerned about the Miers nomination because I'm a social conservative. I'm concerned because I fear that she will be use her seat on the court to be an activist.

The Founders created a system that is imperfect, but works. That system was slow to respond to a rapidly changing society in the first two-thirds of the 20th Century. There was unfinished business from the 19th - slavery. In an understandable rush to clean up our embarrassing mess - but unwilling/unable to do it by the rules, we contracted the SCOTUS to put a hit on Jim Crow. To paraphrase the Dixie Chicks - Jim had to die. But, by cheating the system and not forcing THE PEOPLE through their elected representatives to clean up the mess, we opened a Pandora's box. The judiciary has become something it was never intended to be. And the stage was set for Roe v. Wade.

Sure, there are unprincipled social conservatives that want to use the judiciary to legislate their religious beliefs. They are short-sighted and are conservatives in name only. Real conservatives do not jigger the rules to get their way. They change the frippin' rules.

Most of the time, tried and true systems - like our little ol' Constitutional Republic - are more important that immediate outcome. The more noble or humane the outcome, the more tempted we will be to skirt the rules. We do so at our peril.

Our Constitution is imperfect, but it WORKS. A pox on those on the left AND THE RIGHT who crap all over it to promote their agenda.