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

Sunday, February 08, 2009


Ah, the imagery.

From this morning's Roanoke Times, in a story about a local politician:

"Christiansburg -- Any evidence of Jim Vanhoozier's path to winning a seat on the town council can probably be seen on the bottom of his shoes."


His path led him through a pig sty?

Traipsing through the cat's sandbox?

Cow plop? Dog turds?

Do we really want to think about what's on the bottom of this guy's shoes?

Fact? Or Opinion?

Let's see - Who, What, When, Where, How. That's a journalism thingie.

This, however, is an advocate's thingie.

In a news item appearing in this morning's Washington Times (see "Va. Assembly drops plastic bag ban"), we get this startling bit of "information:"

"The bills sought to curb the use of the plastic bags because they litter roadsides, get stuck in trees and choke or strangle animals that eat or get tangled up in the bags."

I think I've seen a plastic bag - a long time ago - stuck in the limb of a tree. And nobody can argue with the fact that they litter roadsides. But I want to see the study that has proven the "fact" that grocery bags get stuck in the throats of animals. And references to anything appearing on Peta's website don't count.

"We have to stop strangling the little animals!"

Sounds like something some idiotic Democrat would exclaim. But a journalist?

Judge a Man By the Friends He Keeps

Terry McAuliffe, Democrat, wants to be our governor.

And when hell freezes over he'll have a pretty good ... well, no. He still hasn't a prayer. And the baggage that he carries with him - see above - surely won't help.

Photo courtesy of the Washington Times.

Seems Odd, But ...

I'll have to think about this bit of news:
Va. bill would ban weapons' destruction
By Dena Potter, Associated Press

Richmond - Localities that hold gun buybacks would be prohibited from destroying the weapons under a bill that a House of Delegates committee approved on Friday.

The bill submitted by Delegate Mark Cole, Fredericksburg Republican, which cleared the House Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee on an 18-4 vote, would require localities to sell the collected firearms to licensed gun dealers. It also would require the localities to pass an ordinance in order to hold a buyback program. [link]
I'm guessing that the intention is to nudge localities into giving up on the goofy notion that paying (dearly) for weapons "to be taken off the street," with many, many more being put on the street each day in Wal-Mart transactions, making them understand that it is a fool's mission.

But, based on the buy-back program's history, do we really care whether the junk - the cheap, often inoperable, usually crumbling firearms - that is turned in by poor schmucks in need of cash, "guns" purchased by liberal, boneheaded police chiefs around the state, do we care whether that junk is put back on the market? Who'd want them?

Anyway, the House of Delegates goes on offense against these morons. And, though they may have more important issues they could be dealing with, that's always a good thing.

Let 'Em Have it, Fellas

We were treated recently to a Roanoke Times editorial about the Virginia Tech Massacre (and, correspondingly, about another more recent incident), an editorial in which "some ignorant voices around campus" were accused of having seized upon "irrelevant" facts so as to feed their "xenophobic" tendencies. Asians, the Times rightly told us, were not the issue. Their ethnicity was irrelevant.

I'll now hold my breath in anticipation of the denunciation that is sure to come from that same high-minded Roanoke Times of the New York Times for bringing up another irrelevant fact about the Virginia Tech Massacre to further its twisted political agenda:
The Virginia Tech Betrayal
New York Times editorial

Richmond lawmakers have callously rejected a gun control proposal sought as a memorial to the 32 students slain in the Virginia Tech massacre. Once more, state senators proved more beholden to the gun lobby’s propaganda and campaign money than to public safety.

The measure, sought by Gov. Tim Kaine after the 2007 campus spree, would have reined in the unfettered sales of lethal weaponry — from backwoods to battlefield guns — at weekend “sportsmen’s shows.” [link]
I encourage you - and Dan Radmacher at the Roanoke Times - to read the entire editorial. Nowhere is there a mention of THE RELEVANT FACT THAT THE VIRGINIA TECH MURDERER DIDN'T PURCHASE HIS HANDGUNS AT A GUN SHOW - or at "sportsman's shows," whatever they are, the same gun show industry that Governor Kaine was targeting. That, you see, would have made the paper's argument IRRELEVANT.

Go ahead, Dan. Let 'em have it. Make 'em squeal.

Instead ...

... the Roanoke Times this morning has decided that guns and taverns are a "potentially dangerous mixture."

Without referencing Marshal Dillon or any Hollywood movie, prove it.

Prove it!

It Begins. Again.

The Washington Post hammered relentlessly at then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for "politicizing the justice department" during the Bush years. I wonder what the boys there will have to say about this act - "unintentional" so they say - of political sabotage by the Obama justice department:
New G.O.P. Chairman Defends Payment to Sister
By Eric Lipton, The New York Times

Washington — Michael Steele, who was recently elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, paid a Maryland company run by his sister more than $37,000 for work related to his 2006 Senate campaign, a payment that Mr. Steele’s spokesman said Saturday was entirely appropriate.

The spokesman issued a statement in response to an accusation included in a confidential federal court document that Mr. Steele’s sister had done no work to earn the payment.

Vickie E. LeDuc, a spokeswoman for the United States attorney’s office in Maryland, said Saturday that the office had unintentionally given the document to The Washington Post, which first reported the accusation. Ms. LeDuc would not say if Mr. Steele or his sister was the subject of an investigation. [link] [my emphasis]
How does one in the U.S. attorney's office "unintentionally" hand over a document to a (highly partisan) newspaper? Incompetence or an unlawful act. You decide.

The Post's hit piece can be found here: "Steele's Campaign Spending Questioned."

Feminists Are Such Deep Thinkers

Kathryn Jean Lopez makes note of the fact that a Washington Post columnist favors a woman's unrestricted right to control her body ...

... as long as that body doesn't produce a lot of children.

Then Ellen Goodman wants the bureaucracy to step in and take charge.
The Suleman Fourteen

As I've noted, this octoplet story is a mess (in part because we are). It's also fascinating. Here Ellen Goodman, of it's-a-woman's-right-to-choose fame, wants to make sure fertility doctors start saying "no" to women more often. [link]

In that column Goodman writes:
Infertility treatment for an unemployed, single mother of six? Eight embryos in one womb? There must be a proper word in the medical literature to describe this achievement. I think the word is "nuts."

We are far more rigorous about accepting people for adoption or foster care than for fertility treatments. But shouldn't there be limits?
The answer to her question, and the issue of whether the mother is "nuts," are beside the point.

Is there anyone out there who doesn't understand that the applicable phrase that feminists, like this dingbat Goodman, use is actually: "It's-a-woman's-right-to-choose-abortion. Anything beyond that is the responsibility of the state."