Timing is everything, and the teen who shot up Red Lake High School in Redby, Minnesota, has lousy timing.
On almost any other day, a kid who left ten dead and fourteen wounded would have been the story. FOX and CNN would be offering wall-to-wall coverage. The C-SPAN helicopter would be flying over the reservation. Columbine students from yesteryear would be on every network in the role of expert advisors, letting us know what the students of Red Lake and the citizens of Redby are experiencing.
Instead, he picked a day to lose it when Terri Watch was the only show anyone cared about. Yeah, he got the lead a few times on the newscasts, but it was Terri Schiavo the networks wanted to rush back to. After all, ten dead people is kind of tragic but one not-dead woman is heart wrenching.
Word of advice to North Korea: hold off a while if you have any plans to toss around one of your nukes in the near future. It'll be another one to three weeks before the United States can be bothered to attend to such frippery.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Monday, March 21, 2005
Attention All Geeks: Ignore This One
It no doubt is a small thing to all you teens out there who wasted countless date-free nights in the basement teaching yourself HTML and how to code viruses while looking like you're coming from Romania, but through brute force and too much trial and error I finally managed to get the postings for this blog to start at the of the page rather than after the end of the sidebar.
Considering I was born before 1982 that's not all that bad. I grew up when really technologically advanced people could get their VCR (remember those?) to do something other than play movies and blink midnight. I've always enjoyed a love/hate relationship with computers in general and software in particular. I love the opportunity to hate when systems refuse to behave themselves. That affords the chance to apply logic, skill, patience, and whenever called for brute force until the program submits and chooses to see the world my way.
It always gives in. Eventually. And best of all, no system or piece of software has ever run to human resources whining about what an unreasonable ogre I am.
One can only hope that AI, bound to be developed within my lifetime, isn't granted full civil rights. What would the children do if their PS7 demanded weekends and holidays off?
Considering I was born before 1982 that's not all that bad. I grew up when really technologically advanced people could get their VCR (remember those?) to do something other than play movies and blink midnight. I've always enjoyed a love/hate relationship with computers in general and software in particular. I love the opportunity to hate when systems refuse to behave themselves. That affords the chance to apply logic, skill, patience, and whenever called for brute force until the program submits and chooses to see the world my way.
It always gives in. Eventually. And best of all, no system or piece of software has ever run to human resources whining about what an unreasonable ogre I am.
One can only hope that AI, bound to be developed within my lifetime, isn't granted full civil rights. What would the children do if their PS7 demanded weekends and holidays off?
Sunday, March 20, 2005
More Constitutional Questions From the Schiavo Case
The deeper we wade into this matter, the messier it gets.
The language of "Terri's Bill" orders that a Federal judge must review the Terri Schiavo case from the ground up. Must? When exactly did the separation of powers come to mean that the legislative branch of government could order the judicial branch to undertake any specific action or do so in a specific manner?
At the very least, congress, this is constitutional strike two.
Then we have the matter of allegations raised that Michael Schiavo might have abused his wife and that this is the reason he wants to kill her and clean up the evidence. Accept purely for the sake of argument that this allegation is fact. If Terri's Bill prevails, and if as a result her life is preserved/cessation of non-death functions is prevented, and if as a then further result evidence is obtained that is used to convict Michael Schiavo of abuse or any other criminal act, does he get a free pass because the evidence against him was obtained through a premeditated series of unconstitutional actions?
Regardless of what the presumed good intentions are, one, or many, must always beware the law of unintended consequences.
The language of "Terri's Bill" orders that a Federal judge must review the Terri Schiavo case from the ground up. Must? When exactly did the separation of powers come to mean that the legislative branch of government could order the judicial branch to undertake any specific action or do so in a specific manner?
At the very least, congress, this is constitutional strike two.
Then we have the matter of allegations raised that Michael Schiavo might have abused his wife and that this is the reason he wants to kill her and clean up the evidence. Accept purely for the sake of argument that this allegation is fact. If Terri's Bill prevails, and if as a result her life is preserved/cessation of non-death functions is prevented, and if as a then further result evidence is obtained that is used to convict Michael Schiavo of abuse or any other criminal act, does he get a free pass because the evidence against him was obtained through a premeditated series of unconstitutional actions?
Regardless of what the presumed good intentions are, one, or many, must always beware the law of unintended consequences.
Saturday, March 19, 2005
The Constitution of the United States: Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."
The Senate of the United States, and tomorrow the House of Representatives, are rushing headlong to pass a bill of attainder in the Terri Schiavo case.
Make no mistake. Just because the purpose of the bill is not overtly punitive, by the public statements of Senators involved this bill is being passed exclusively for Terri Schiavo and pertains to no other human being on the planet. It is, de facto, a bill of attainder.
What is Congress' game here? Do they hope to pass an unconstitutional piece of legislation, buy the time to get the feel-good result on Terri's behalf and then when it is later struck down under judicial review say "Aw, shucks. We didn't realize that."? Oh, and since the legislation was invalid to begin with they aren't saddled with any of those pesky precedents that would require endless weekend sessions passing bills on behalf of every little constituent in similar straits.
That's a little disingenuous even for political pros playing at the level these guys are.
I want Terri to die, and to do so with all possible haste and comfort. Not that either of those are likely in the immediate future for her. Please don't misunderstand. I wish her no personal ill will. Until this matter is resolved by her death, Terri Schiavo will continue to be nothing more than a human yo-yo trapped in an emotionally charged struggle. Perhaps when she is gone, more reasoned debate can craft a policy that reflects our collective desires and accounts for the rights of the minority to be preserved as well. Which is the purpose of constitutional governance in the first place.
A cynic might also pause for a moment to wonder how much of Congress' concern is based on outrage that a redneck judge in Jerkwater, Florida, told them where to get off with their subpoena ploy and then had the Supreme Court tell them to take a hike when they complained their feelings had been hurt.
News flash to Congress, and many others in this case: You don't always get the answer you want in life. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make it wrong, and certainly doesn't justify changing the rules in hopes of getting what you want.
Make no mistake. Just because the purpose of the bill is not overtly punitive, by the public statements of Senators involved this bill is being passed exclusively for Terri Schiavo and pertains to no other human being on the planet. It is, de facto, a bill of attainder.
What is Congress' game here? Do they hope to pass an unconstitutional piece of legislation, buy the time to get the feel-good result on Terri's behalf and then when it is later struck down under judicial review say "Aw, shucks. We didn't realize that."? Oh, and since the legislation was invalid to begin with they aren't saddled with any of those pesky precedents that would require endless weekend sessions passing bills on behalf of every little constituent in similar straits.
That's a little disingenuous even for political pros playing at the level these guys are.
I want Terri to die, and to do so with all possible haste and comfort. Not that either of those are likely in the immediate future for her. Please don't misunderstand. I wish her no personal ill will. Until this matter is resolved by her death, Terri Schiavo will continue to be nothing more than a human yo-yo trapped in an emotionally charged struggle. Perhaps when she is gone, more reasoned debate can craft a policy that reflects our collective desires and accounts for the rights of the minority to be preserved as well. Which is the purpose of constitutional governance in the first place.
A cynic might also pause for a moment to wonder how much of Congress' concern is based on outrage that a redneck judge in Jerkwater, Florida, told them where to get off with their subpoena ploy and then had the Supreme Court tell them to take a hike when they complained their feelings had been hurt.
News flash to Congress, and many others in this case: You don't always get the answer you want in life. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make it wrong, and certainly doesn't justify changing the rules in hopes of getting what you want.
The Best of Times, and the Worst of Times
Terri Schiavo is the focus of a debate that is leaving not only this nation but even individuals torn between themselves. My wife, and no doubt many others, have expressed vehement outrage and indignation at what the "other side" has been saying. The problem is, she has felt just as strongly supportive and dismissive of both other sides in this matter.
Therein lies the struggle that most of us are ultimately dealing with on the deepest levels.
Almost every one of us quake in horror at the thought of being kept alive with no brighter future than the prospect of being prevented from dying.
Unless she really isn't a rutabaga.
Or unless aggressive treatment would truly offer some realistic hope of a meaningful recovery.
How can you possibly countenance starving and dehydrating a thinking, feeling human being to death?
Unless she really is a rutabaga.
Unless she really is little more than warmer than room temperature flesh too stupid to die.
The biggest problem here is that both sides of the debate are highly impassioned in their positions. Facts are copious, but offered by the presenter with such passion and slant that the average political campaign seems clear cut and uncontested by comparison. Information is available to all of us, but truth is only known to those intimately involved. And even for them, it is easy to believe that mutually exclusive truths exist.
Terri Schiavo is a witless pawn in a debate with ramifications for all of us that dwarf her puny individual life and death drama. Puny at least in the grand scheme of six billion other humans sharing her planet. Puny in the absence of 24x7 wall to wall media coverage and pontification.
Whether she is aware now, will soon be in a place where she can be aware, or if as some assert awareness after death is a bunch of pull the covers over your head feel good mumbo jumbo, perhaps she and we can all take some comfort that Terri's life, and more importantly the nature of her death, will have contributed to a better understanding for each of us what quality of life and the options and means of leaving life or clinging to it signify.
Perhaps too, it will encourage more of us to have the compassion for our loved ones to write a living will. To make our wishes clearly known in advance so that family, friends, and strangers with divergent agendas and world views needn't fight over our not quite lifeless bodies.
Anyone who doesn't care enough to take an explicit hand in charting the course of their own future lacks any legitimate standing to take part in determining how the existence of another adult human being should be continued or curtailed.
For a substantial portion of the population these truly are the best of times. And the worst of times. And perhaps that is the sort of contradiction that establishes the most productive of times for all of us.
Therein lies the struggle that most of us are ultimately dealing with on the deepest levels.
Almost every one of us quake in horror at the thought of being kept alive with no brighter future than the prospect of being prevented from dying.
Unless she really isn't a rutabaga.
Or unless aggressive treatment would truly offer some realistic hope of a meaningful recovery.
How can you possibly countenance starving and dehydrating a thinking, feeling human being to death?
Unless she really is a rutabaga.
Unless she really is little more than warmer than room temperature flesh too stupid to die.
The biggest problem here is that both sides of the debate are highly impassioned in their positions. Facts are copious, but offered by the presenter with such passion and slant that the average political campaign seems clear cut and uncontested by comparison. Information is available to all of us, but truth is only known to those intimately involved. And even for them, it is easy to believe that mutually exclusive truths exist.
Terri Schiavo is a witless pawn in a debate with ramifications for all of us that dwarf her puny individual life and death drama. Puny at least in the grand scheme of six billion other humans sharing her planet. Puny in the absence of 24x7 wall to wall media coverage and pontification.
Whether she is aware now, will soon be in a place where she can be aware, or if as some assert awareness after death is a bunch of pull the covers over your head feel good mumbo jumbo, perhaps she and we can all take some comfort that Terri's life, and more importantly the nature of her death, will have contributed to a better understanding for each of us what quality of life and the options and means of leaving life or clinging to it signify.
Perhaps too, it will encourage more of us to have the compassion for our loved ones to write a living will. To make our wishes clearly known in advance so that family, friends, and strangers with divergent agendas and world views needn't fight over our not quite lifeless bodies.
Anyone who doesn't care enough to take an explicit hand in charting the course of their own future lacks any legitimate standing to take part in determining how the existence of another adult human being should be continued or curtailed.
For a substantial portion of the population these truly are the best of times. And the worst of times. And perhaps that is the sort of contradiction that establishes the most productive of times for all of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)