People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Sunday, March 13, 2005

An Accident Waiting To Happen

With regard to this ongoing AP news item:

Ga. Suspect Could Appear in Court

Monday DULUTH, GA. (AP) - A suspect in the deadly courthouse shootings of a judge and two other people surrendered without a struggle as law enforcement officials surrounded him, just hours after he led authorities on a massive manhunt in the Atlanta area.

Brian Nichols, 33, waved a white cloth and turned himself in Saturday, but not before police say he killed an immigration agent and held a woman hostage for hours in her own apartment.

Prosecutors said Nichols could appear in federal court as early as Monday to face a charge of possession of a firearm by a person under indictment, the charge authorities are using to keep him in custody while they investigate the slayings.

The search for Nichols ended Saturday when law enforcement officials surrounded the apartment where the suspect was hiding. He had held a woman hostage there. (
Moments ago, I heard some "expert" on Fox News describe the problem that started the murder spree as involving "a small guard trying to protect a large suspect."

For God's sake. It was a WOMAN! A 51 year-old FEMALE deputy. A 6'0" 200 pound rape suspect in Atlanta was being escorted (without handcuffs) into a courtroom by a much smaller woman armed with a (holstered) handgun.

I'm surprised we don't read more stories like this one.

I'm reminded of a segment on COPS a few years ago that was filmed in Cleveland. A grandmotherly police officer arrived at a saloon/pool hall in response to a call relating to a fight. This woman - who was better suited to stamp your library card as you check out a book - proceeded to "arrest" a large drunken man who had no intention of being handcuffed. It was so pathetic to watch this guy throw the elderly woman around the room as she kept saying, "You're under arrest! You're under arrest!"

If he had wanted to, he could easily have pounded the officer into a bloody pulp. Fortunate for her, he simply resisted her attempts at subduing him. But you could tell he had no fear of her. Eventually backup was called and other (male) officers cuffed the drunk and dragged him off to jail.

There are times when this sort of thing needs to be addressed head-on. In Atlanta, a deputy was totally outmatched by a suspect who was accused of committing a violent act. She was heavily armed. Conditions created in this situation called for her to simply hand the (alleged) rapist her weapon, and to invite him to shoot her - and a judge - and a court stenographer - and a fellow deputy - and a federal customs agent. Outraged by the way I word this? You should be.

I've also heard experts suggest that the authorities in Atlanta erred in this case by allowing the female deputy to guard the prisoner by herself. The implication is that she should have had another deputy (meaning a male deputy) there with her.

But isn't that the real problem? In order to achieve some quota of male to female law enforcement officers, we find ourselves in a situation where the females have to be "accompanied," sucking up scarce resources. For no good reason.

We live in this dreamworld where we pretend that all women who wish to be police officers are somehow going to perform like Cagney and Lacey. The result is an invitation to mass murder.

You may not want to read this - you may even be appalled that I would bring the subject up - but I encourage you to confront the obvious:

There are bad people out there who, if given the opportunity, will kill. We gave Brian Nichols the opportunity.Posted by Hello

Jane Pauley Mercifully Dispatched

This was only a matter of time:

'Pauley' Pulled Over Low Ratings

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - "The Jane Pauley Show" will call it a wrap next month. NBC Universal Television Distribution confirmed Friday (March 11) that the first-run daytime talk show hosted by the former "Today" and "Dateline NBC" anchor will end production by the middle of April, though original episodes will run through early September. "Jane Pauley" was last year's most high-profile talk show debut as NBC Uni sought to develop a talk show franchise that would serve as the late-afternoon bridge between entertainment fare and local news on its owned-and-operated (O&O) outlets, much as "The Oprah Winfrey Show" does for the ABC O&O station group.

"Jane Pauley" launched with mediocre ratings and was never able to build momentum with daytime viewers. In a statement, NBC Uni TV Distribution said it is "proud of the quality work Jane, the producers and the entire team at 'The Jane Pauley Show' have put forward this season." (link)

I watched about 15 minutes of this show once. It was a segment in which Pauley interviewed her sister(!?). It was more excruciating than going through a prostate exam. Her attempt at cloning Oprah's show was destined to fail.

Back to the drawing board.

A Tax On Toilet Paper?

It is good to know that we don't have all the (Democrat) idiots living here in Virginia. Remember the good (Democrat) state delegate who introduced legislation a month ago making it illegal to wear slacks that exposed one's butt crack? That genius became an overnight international laughingstock.

Now we find out that the state of Florida has their own (Democrat) knucklehead.
Florida Lawmaker Proposes Toilet Paper Tax

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- The Florida Legislature is flush with novel ideas.

One state senator's latest involves a way to pay for wastewater treatment and help small towns and counties upgrade their sewer systems. He says in Florida you should pay as you go. Al Lawson, a Democrat from Tallahassee, is proposing a two-cent-per-roll tax on toilet paper. (
I opposed the impeachment of President Clinton because I felt the fools that elected him deserved to live with him and his antics. Every day of their lives.

Same here.

Just as I enjoyed, to no end, the jokes, the feigned anguish, the morally outraged spouse, the morally outraged - and yet supportive - media, and of course Monica's blue dress, I enjoy - and even celebrate - the fact that there are people out there who laid aside the bottle of Mad Dog 20/20, went to the trouble of stumbling into a voting booth, and electing doorknobs like these (Democrats).

They certainly deserve each other.

We Still Have Unions?

This snippet in the Detroit News doesn't reflect well on the venerable United Auto Workers.
Marines driven out of UAW lot
The union says Marines in foreign cars, displaying Bush stickers unwelcome.
By Eric Mayne, The Detroit News

DETROIT -- The United Auto Workers says Marine reservists should show a little more semper fi if they want to use the union's parking lot.

The Marine Corps motto means "always faithful," but the union says some reservists working out of a base on Jefferson Avenue in Detroit have been decidedly unfaithful to their fellow Americans by driving import cars and trucks.

So the UAW International will no longer allow members of the 1st Battalion 24th Marines to park at Solidarity House if they are driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers.

"While reservists certainly have the right to drive nonunion made vehicles and display bumper stickers touting the most anti-worker, anti-union president since the 1920s, that doesn't mean they have the right to park in a lot owned by the members of the UAW," the union said in a statement released Friday. (
Besides the (essential) fact that our Marines are in Iraq dying for the UAW members' overpaid, underworked, and grossly gelatinous asses, how does the average person even know anymore what a foreign car is? Toyota makes cars in Georgetown, KY. Volkswagon makes cars in Marion, OH. Mercedes in Alabama. Mitsubishi in Illinois. And a number of "traditional" American brands, like Chevrolet, make some of their models in Canada.

The UAW is a dinosaur. It is showing here that it continues to sink further into irrelevance and goofiness.

Answers To The Most Perplexing Questions

George Will asks a question.

I have the answer.

In an article outlining the positions of the two political parties as they pertain to the issue of Social Security (in the New York Post this morning):
Democrats have no reform ideas but they have a slogan — "Fix it, don't nix it." The spectacle of adults chanting such childishness is embarrassing, especially because their chant mimics their slogan about the government's system of racial preferences, "Mend it, don't end it," meaning: change nothing.

Republicans of the "starve the beast" inclination — those who aim to slow government's activism by reducing government's revenues — might relish the thought of Social Security's rendezvous with 2011. At that tipping point, the Social Security surplus begins to shrink.

Today, the government is partially funded by that surplus of Social Security tax revenues over outlays, a fact disguised by politicians talking rot about Social Security being an "insurance" program with a "trust fund" in a "lock box." But between 2011 and 2016, Social Security outlays will exceed revenues by $32 billion, and the sums will rapidly increase during the cascading retirements of baby boomers. These sums must result in increased borrowing, or cuts of other government activities, or both.

"Starve the beast" Republicans can live with this. But what are Democrats thinking? (
They're thinking this is the ticket to allow them to regain power, George. The fact that the United States government will begin the rather rapid process of implosion beginning in 2011 doesn't bother them one whit. Democrats intend to drive Republicans from the White House and from Congress - and then blame them for the Social Security mess.

Now you know.