Best of the Web Today - November 16, 2004
By JAMES TARANTO
Reverse Roe Effect?
Dan Haar, a business columnist for the Hartford Courant, offers an intriguing suggestion:
Ten years ago an economist and associate dean at the UConn business school floated a theory that seemed pure crackpot to many people at the time.
Connecticut could benefit, Lewis Mandell reasoned, if the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Roe vs. Wade.
He was no right-wing fanatic. Far from it. The idea is that states would be free to ban abortion if the high court overturned the landmark 1973 decision. Places such as Connecticut would keep reproductive rights intact, while states such as Texas and Oklahoma would enact strict prohibitions.
Eventually, progressive-minded folks would settle--or choose to stay--in Connecticut and other like-minded states. Since socially liberal people tend to be well educated, the ranks of technology workers and creative types could swell here. And that, clearly, would be a boon for the state's vibrancy and prosperity.
Haar proceeds to endorse the idea, saying that after President Bush's re-election, "it's not a crackpot theory anymore."
We're not sure we agree. It's doubtless true that if Roe is overturned, some women seeking abortions would travel to states where it's legal, as they did in the olden days before 1973. But it's hard to imagine that people would vote with their fetus to such a degree that they'd decide where to live in the hope of aborting future pregnancies.
Still, what if they do? In the short term, it would increase the population of states like Connecticut, while making "red" states even redder. But in the long run it'd be hard to sustain a culture that defines itself by the refusal to reproduce. They may not be celibate, but after a few generations (or the lack thereof) Haar's movers would look a lot like Shakers.
The Gift That Keeps On Giving
We're almost beginning to suspect this is a put-on, but the Boca Raton (Fla.) News has yet another follow-up on the story of Kerry supporters suffering from "post-election selection trauma," or PEST.
Mental health officials in South Florida blasted Rush Limbaugh on Monday, saying the conservative talk show host's offer of "free therapy" for traumatized John Kerry voters has made a mockery of a valid psychological problem.
"Rush Limbaugh has a way of back-handedly slamming people," said Sheila Cooperman, a licensed clinician with the American Health Association (AHA) who listened Friday as Limbaugh offered to personally treat her patients. "He's trying to ridicule the emotional state this presidential election produced in many of us here in Palm Beach County. Who is he to offer therapy?" . . .
"Rush Limbaugh has no clinical qualifications to counsel anyone," Cooperman said. "He's not only minimizing PEST, but he's bastardizing the entire psychological field and our clinical expertise." . . .
"So if anybody on the left wants some serious therapy here and counseling, I'm more than willing to offer my assistance as well," Limbaugh said on Nov. 9.
On Nov. 12, accused by Gordon of picking up the story to rub it in the faces of Democrats, Limbaugh said, "Now, my friends, I didn't do that. I reached out. I offered a hand of friendship. I offered my own counseling services."
AHA officials, listening to the taped broadcasts, described Limbaugh's tone of voice as sarcastic.
It's wonderfully refreshing to read something like this, given that the Onion has lapsed into dreary, didactic leftism. And if the Boca piece is true, it is quite possibly the most hilarious thing ever.
Weasel Watch
Jacques Chirac, the president of France, missed another good opportunity to shut up, the Times of London reports:
Chirac dealt a blow to Tony Blair's attempt to heal the wounds between the US and Europe last night by saying that the Prime Minister had won nothing for supporting the war against Iraq. . . .
M Chirac, speaking to British journalists, including The Times, soon after General Powell's announcement, revealed that he had urged Mr Blair to demand the relaunch of the Middle East peace process in return for backing the war.
"Well, Britain gave its support but I did not see anything in return. I'm not sure it is in the nature of our American friends at the moment to return favours systematically."
Unlike the French, who of course got loads of money in exchange for supporting Saddam Hussein. Whereas Chirac appears to see other countries only in terms of what they can do for him, Blair in his speech stressed common values:
I know one thing. If we were under direct threat, America would be our ally. I know that its people enjoy, as we have seen, a vibrant competitive democracy; and that in America, Hispanics, blacks, Asians and former Europeans live together, worship in their different ways and can rise from the bottom to the top in a manner we could do well to emulate. I didn't agree with Michael Moore's film. But in America he was able to make it and be praised for it. This is called freedom.
Chirac no doubt would respond that the French are free to praise Michael Moore too. Ah well, c'est la vie. We'd just like to point out these numbers (hat tip: blogger Patrick Ruffini):
Bush voters 60,515,255
Total population of France 59,900,268
Oh well, at least Frenchmen (and -women and -children) outnumber Kerry voters by a couple of million or so.
Overcooked
National Journal's Charlie Cook argues that the 2004 election was far from "transformative" and hints that John Kerry might even have won if only he'd been someone else:
I still question whether Kerry got any votes that just about any other Democrat challenging Bush under these circumstances wouldn't have also gotten. Some of his defeated rivals for the Democratic nomination might have done a better job of communicating a compelling economic message in Ohio and Iowa.
Of course, if they'd done a better job of communicating a compelling economic message in Iowa, Kerry might not have won the Iowa caucuses! Anyway, didn't the Democrats overwhelmingly vote for Kerry because he was "electable"? We suspect the truth is closer to what Winston Churchill said about democracy: Kerry was the worst available candidate--except for all the others.
What Would We Do Without CNN Reporters?
"CNN Reporter: Kerry Not Public's Cup of Tea"--headline, Palm Beach (Fla.) Post, Nov. 16
The World's Smallest Violin
"Scores of soon-to-be-unemployed Democrats fear that their party's electoral defeat could hinder their ability to find work on K Street, a traditional safe haven and source of employment for Capitol Hill staff," reports the Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress: "At a time when many Democrats are anxious about their ability to earn a living, some even fear that a conspiracy to blacklist aides to certain Democrats, such as Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), could be afoot."
Crossways
Yesterday we noted a photo of a U.S. serviceman with a rosary hanging from the gun on his tank, and we jokingly suggested that some would complain that it violates the separation of church and state. We should know better than to joke. Here's an actual letter to the editor of the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal from one Patty Sommer (third letter):
Your front-page photo of the soldier with the rosary hanging off his or her gun shocked and appalled me. I have been against the war in Iraq from the get-go, but I don't think anyone in this country has ever tried to justify it on religious grounds. The image just gives fodder to those who would characterize this war as another Christian crusade against Muslims.
While I hesitate to criticize our troops, that soldier should not have displayed a religious symbol on his or her weapon. Certainly his or her commanding officer should not have allowed it. Absolutely, the Wisconsin State Journal should not have published it. As an American, I am disgusted. As a Catholic, I am outraged and offended. My religion has nothing to do with President Bush's war.
The repetition of "his or her" makes this self-parody even funnier.
Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union announces that it has intimidated the Pentagon into agreeing "to end direct sponsorship of hundreds of Boy Scout units, which require members to swear religious oaths, on military facilities across the United States and overseas."
The ACLU press release quotes the group's Adam Schwartz: "If our Constitution's promise of religious liberty is to be a reality, the government should not be administering religious oaths or discriminating based upon religious beliefs." But of course, the government was doing no such thing; the Boy Scouts are a private group. If you don't like what they stand for, don't join them.
The ACLU used to be so committed to free expression that it would even represent Nazis and Klansmen seeking to express their views. But apparently they draw the line at the Boy Scouts.
How'd Arafat Die? His Aides Want to Know.
"The medical dossier of Yasser Arafat can be released if eligible parties such as his family demand it, France has said, after Palestinian leaders asked for a full report on his death," Reuters reports from Paris.
The Israeli paper Maariv, meanwhile, reports that "the [Israeli] defense establishment has been examining the possibility that PA Chairman Yasser Arafat had died of AIDS." Israel Insider quotes Maariv as saying that the possibility of AIDS is "much more than speculation"--though the phrase doesn't appear in the English-language version of the report.
Arafat is in stable condition after dying in a Paris hospital.
Say What?
"NBC Says Marine Shot Dead Wounded Iraqi Prisoner"--headline, Reuters, Nov. 15
The Rate for Infants Is Much Higher
"Birth Rate for Young Teens Lowest Since 1946"--headline, Reuters, Nov. 15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Costs File Assault Charges Against Wholesale Prices
"Wholesale Prices Jump on Energy Costs"--headline, Associated Press, Nov. 16
Hey, Really, Thanks for Sharing
"Smart Shares His Love of the Organ With Others in Brookings"--headline, Curry Coastal Pilot (Brookings, Ore.), Nov. 13
Dear John
Friday is World Toilet Day, the culmination of the World Toilet Summit, sponsored by the World Toilet Organization. The WTO's Web site describes the summit, which begins tomorrow:
Benefit from an interesting mix of plenary sessions covering in-depth situational studies and invaluable experiences from not less than 25 international and local speakers on Tourism, Design, Maintenance, Water Conservation, and Challenges and Considerations of the Toilet Code of Practice!
That's the kind of can-do attitude we admire! These people don't just sit around wasting their time. But as hard as it is to hold in our enthusiasm, and as much as we'd like to go, alas, we are going to have to pass, for the summit is all the way in Beijing.
Maybe next year they could hold it closer to home, here in New York. We're not saying it has to be in Manhattan, mind you; we could make it to Flushing. |
