South Dakota Politics

Twins Beat Sox Again, again.

From CBS Sportsline:

      CHICAGO -- Jermaine Dye's two-run,       ninth-inning homer off stellar closer Joe Nathan tied the game and sent the crowd at U.S. Cellular Field into a frenzy.    

   

      What it didn't do was deflate the Minnesota Twins.    

   

      Nick Punto singled in the go-ahead run with two outs in the       11th and Minnesota pushed its wild card lead over Chicago to 1½ games Saturday night by beating the       White Sox 8-7.    

   

      "We just keep fighting. We don't get down," Punto said after the Twins       won for the ninth time in 12 games and moved within four games of AL       Central leader Detroit.    

   

      "Super Joe Nathan blew a save," Punto said. "He never does that. Some       teams might get down. We didn't."

It wasn't the prettiest game I ever saw, what with three errors.  But it was great baseball nonetheless. 

Of Chimps and Church-State Separation

I blogged last night in response to a Doug Wiken post (Dakota Today) on evolution.  In a nut shell I argued that students who have religious objections to evolution don't have to believe in the latter; all they have to do is be able to use the theory.  I explained a provisional stance with respect to Darwinian theory that I sometimes offer such students.  I wrote:

For those who do see a contradiction [between the Bible and Darwin] and therefore find evolution unpalatable, there is an alternative way of looking at it.  It is that the Creator, like an auto designer, did not start from scratch when he produced Chimpanzee and Human prototypes.  Rather, he modified a common blueprint.

Doug responded thoughtfully, and I take the liberty of reproducing some of his comment here. 

Ken,
It appears your position on evolution is moderate compared to some of the theocrats in the GOP.  Without going into detail, I tend to disagree that there is no danger in assuming that there is a grand designer running "micro evolution".  This requires faith with no observable or testable possibility. That kind of faith is part of religion, but it is not part of science even though it is possible to find scientists who have such faith.

We are not really at odds here.  My point was not that a faith in the designer can be used in interpreting biology.  I agree that articles of faith cannot be used to generate a hypothesis, let alone a theory or a research program.  Faith may be a greater or a lesser thing than science, depending on who you ask, but it is not science. 

But if I am going to teach biopolitics and sociobiology, I have to find ways of making the theory assessable to all the students.  Some persons of traditional faith have no trouble with Darwinism. In fact, I have found that Christians are often far more open minded about these questions than many Darwinists. 

Other students, however, see their own Biblical faith and Darwinian theory to be mutually exclusive.  The position I summarize above is intended to get around that problem at the outset, so we can then proceed to examine the arguments and evidence within the confines of scientific reasoning.  I have to show them first and most importantly that I do not think they are stupid for believing what they believe.  Many biologists go out of their way to give the opposite impression.  Second, I try to show them that they don't have to believe anything to use evolution as a tool of analysis.  Science is not about faith and belief, it is about propositions. 

The other danger of the attitude in relation to schools and education relates to separation of church and state. Churches and religions have benefited greatly in the US because of the separation. Attempting to blur the lines in biology classes and require government intervention to force perspectives based on faith do damage both to education/government and also endanger religion and churches.

I certainly agree with Doug in general regarding the separation of Church and state.  I'm for it.  In the classroom, my sole responsibility is present the arguments and evidence.  I am on record as opposing the teaching of Creation Science and Intelligent Design, though I believe the latter deserves some respect.  But that doesn't mean that religiously motivated ideas can or should be banished from the classroom.  The dialog (and frequently, the quarrel) between piety and philosophy, revelation and reason, has been turning the pistons of intellectual progress since well before Socrates was indicted.  Both religion and science are stronger for it. 

Let me suggest an example.  A student will frequently say in Philosophy 100 or my Human Nature course that she believes in a literal reading of the Bible.  I sometimes invite the student to consider the opening words of the Text.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Now, what does the word "spirit" here literally mean?  If "literal" implies a very strict or narrow construction, the word spirit means breath (as in the word respiration).  Does God really breathe?  If you held his head under water (I wouldn't try that), would he drown?  I don't think that Genesis intends this meaning any more than Blake (see above illustration) intends to say that God has boney knees.  It turns out to be very difficult not to conclude that the word spirit is a metaphor, capturing the force of God's presence on whatever stuff preceded creation.  I find this kind of analysis very engaging, and I find that my students usually do as well.  It does sometimes make someone uncomfortable, but comfort is not what higher education is about.

I never tell my students what to believe.  I do try to convert them.  I would convert them to the practice of asking questions, proposing answers, and testing those answers in broad daylight.

Toriiiiii Hunterrrrrr!

Twins beat White Sox, to take the wild card lead. 

The Twins' offense looked like it may be unable to overcome the rough start by Radke -- that is, until the sixth inning. A four-run inning by the club would quickly swing the momentum.

Nick Punto started the scoring by delivering his first home run of the year, a solo shot off White Sox starter Javier Vazquez. True to his form, Vazquez seemed to fall apart a bit in the sixth, as he gave up a two-out single to Michael Cuddyer before he was pulled.

Justin Morneau then singled off Neal Cotts before the Sox brought in David Riske to face Torii Hunter with two outs and two runners on base. And on the first pitch, Hunter delivered for the Twins as he belted his 20th home run of the year over the right-field wall to put the Twins up, 4-3. It was Hunter's fifth home run in his past seven games.

Jason Bartlett delivered a two-out RBI single in the ninth to score the winning run for the Twins in a 5-4 victory over the White Sox on Friday night before a crowd of 35,931 at U.S. Cellular Field.

I note that the Sox attendance was considerably smaller than the crowd that showed up in the Metrodome last Sunday, when I and my family were there.  Twins fans are better people than Sox fans.  That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. 

Chimps and Republicans

Doug Wiken at Dakota Today has this gem:

Aug 23, 2006

**Despite example Republicans to the contrary, scientists find human-chimp differences.  Scientific American site reports Nature findings indicating significant differences between humans and Chimps. 

That's a good joke.  I found nothing objectionable in this post.  Indeed, I take it that Wiken and I agree about Darwinian evolution.  I would note however that the biggest obstacle to teaching evolutionary theory is the fact that so many Darwinists, not to mention political liberals, go out of their way to make people feel stupid for not believing in it.  I think this is unnecessary and counter-productive.

I teach a course on the political and social implications of Darwinian theory.  To students who are reluctant (or who simply refuse) to believe in the theory, I point out that scientific theories are instruments to be used rather than articles of faith.  It is true that human beings and chimpanzees share about 98% of their genes.  The most elegant explanation for this is that Doug and I are distant cousins of every chimpanzee alive today.  Somewhere in the past we and the chimp have a common ancestor.  That's good enough for me.  I see no contradiction between that idea and Biblical faith. 

But for those who do see a contradiction and therefore find evolution unpalatable, there is an alternative way of looking at it.  It is that the Creator, like an auto designer, did not start from scratch when he produced Chimpanzee and Human prototypes.  Rather, he modified a common blueprint.  Once that idea is accepted, at least as a working model, then one can focus on micro-evolution, which concerns modifications within an existing species.  . Since Macro-evolution (the emergence of new species) is micro-evolution across longer spans of time, one loses nothing by adopting that point of view. 

French Kiss-Off Reconsidered

Perhaps realizing that you can't surrender unless you first field an army, the French have decided to deploy 2,000 soldiers to Southern Lebanon after all.  The L.A. Times describes the appalling behavior of our "allies." 

REACTING TO UNIVERSAL DISMAY at his irresponsibility, French President Jacques Chirac on Thursday belatedly pledged a total of 2,000 soldiers for the expanded United Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon authorized by the Security Council on Aug. 11. It's still a stingy commitment, but the hope is that it may galvanize other European nations to follow suit after two tense weeks in which French dithering threatened to turn the deployment of peacekeepers into a march of folly.

What was so exasperating about France's initial offer of only 200 new peacekeepers (engineers, at that) was that it was France, in an unusual entente with the U.S., that spearheaded the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1701, calling for deployment of a 15,000-member United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon to help that nation's army police the cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah fighters.

We're not sure how to say "bait and switch" in French, but that is the only way to describe a sequence of events in which France's foreign ministry promoted Resolution 1701 as an adequate mandate for French and other international forces, only to have the French defense minister publicly criticize the mandate as "fuzzy." In a televised speech, Chirac suggested that he was dramatically increasing France's commitment because the U.N. had clarified the rules of engagement for the force, which, according to a document circulated last week, would allow peacekeepers to use deadly force in self-defense, to protect Lebanese civilians or to help the Lebanese army block weapons from coming into the country.

This sounds like an attempt to paper over differences within the French government. Resolution 1701 already said that the expanded U.N. force could "take all necessary action … to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind."

Because of its authorship of the resolution and its historical ties to the region, France was the presumptive leader of the peacekeeping force, but Italy now has a stronger claim to that responsibility. In any event, European foreign ministers meeting today in Brussels need to make up for lost time in assembling and dispatching the peacekeepers. Europeans love to complain about the United States acting unilaterally in the world, but those complaints will ring awfully hollow if they can't step up and do their part.

Progress in Iraq

Daily Dispatch:  "In a recent poll, more Iraqis, who live in Iraq, say Iraq is headed the right direction than Americans who merely watch TV reports about Iraq or read newspaper reports about Iraq."

Woster Weighs In

Kevin Woster of the Rapid City Journal weighs in on Schwangate:

Did you see the news out of Sioux Falls earlier this week? Mayor Dave Munson has a new chief of staff - at $98,000 a year.

Actually, it’s $98,758.40. But who’s counting? (Sniff. Sniff.)

Well, me for one. Bill Harlan for another.

See, the new chief of staff for the state’s largest city is Jodi Schwan, a 26-year-old reporter for KELO-TV.

I don’t know Jodi, but people tell me she is a solid TV reporter, a bright and likable young woman expected to be good for the mayor’s office and its communication with the outside world.

Based what I know about news reporters’ salaries (sniff, sniff), I’d guess Jodi will be enjoying about a tripling in salary to go to City Hall. That puts her in the same salary neighborhood as Harlan and me - if you either add our salaries together (with a bit of Denise’s thrown in), or simply define “neighborhood” as roughly the size of the North American Continent.

I’m not saying Harlan and I are jealous. We’re seasoned journalism pros - if you define “seasoned” as old enough to be useful in carbon dating. (Kranz, you know what we’re talking about…)

Anyway, Bill and I aren’t about to get upset about little things like unfavorable salary comparisons.

Besides, we don’t have time to be jealous. We’re too busy sprucing up our resumes to send to Jim Shaw.

Meanwhile, Back in Baghdad

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plain,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your Gawd like a soldier

Or so wrote Kipling, about earlier Middle Eastern adventures. That's what I call poetry.  Maybe Bush should be reading Kipling instead of Camus.  Or maybe not.  A few hours spent in Rudyard's company gives a hint of how much the balance of power has shifted in favor of modern, Western armies.  In Kipling's day the British people learned of the annihilation of whole armies weeks after the fact.  These days we learn of the death of three soldiers within the hour. 

It looks as though the threat to security in Iraq has shifted from the insurgency, which has been increasingly marginalized, to the Shiite death squads which are supported by Iran.  David Ignatius, in RealClearPolitics, has an eyewitness report on the struggle to neutralize this menace. 

Gen. John Abizaid made headlines three weeks ago when he told Congress that civil war was a possibility in Iraq. Yesterday he went into two of Baghdad's most dangerous neighborhoods to see whether a new U.S.-led offensive against the death squads and insurgents is making any progress.  Abizaid invited me and a CBS reporter to join him on this journey into the heart of the Baghdad battle zone. In what follows, I want to draw a picture of what we saw.  ...

Even Abizaid, who as head of U.S. Central Command has overall responsibility for the troops here, had to admit in his congressional testimony that the trends were going the wrong way. Baghdad was being terrorized by Sunni insurgents and Shiite death squads. More than 1,500 people were murdered in Baghdad in July, a daily average of 52 victims a day. The level of sectarian violence was so high that many wondered whether Iraq wasn't already in a civil war.  . . .

In response to sectarian violence, the U.S. redeployed forces to Baghdad, which it could easily do since the rest of the country is quiet.  Ignatius describes the result.

As we entered Amiriyah in the late afternoon of a 115-degree August day, the streets were almost deserted. When the cleanup began, the area was cordoned off and then searched house to house by U.S. and Iraqi troops. People live behind their gates; through the metal fences, you can see well-tended gardens, despite the trash in the alleys. Surprisingly, perhaps, there was little resistance. People were fed up. In the two weeks since the crackdown began, there has been a 44 percent decline in violent attacks compared with the previous month and an 83 percent drop in murders.  . . .

We stopped a few minutes later at Abbas Mosque, a small Sunni shrine. Sheik Khaled Mohammed al-Ubaidi, dressed in a knitted white prayer cap and a long white robe, came out to greet Abizaid. The general asked if security had improved and the sheik answered: "Thank God, yes!" Now that U.S. forces are going after Shiite death squads, he said, Sunnis here "understand the Americans are serious about the rule of law." (In the past three weeks, the U.S. military has killed about 25 death squad leaders and captured more than 200, according to Thurman.)

The cleanup has brought a similar respite to Doura, the second neighborhood we visited. You can still see the pieces of red tape on the front gates of each of the homes that were swept. The murder rate has fallen by 83 percent in August, compared with the 30 days before the crackdown began. For Baghdad overall, the murder rate has dropped 41 percent this month.

What does the new battle of Baghdad tell us? I'm still mulling the answer, but my sense is that it's something we already knew: With enough troops and aggressive tactics, American forces can bring order to even the meanest streets. But it's only the Iraqis themselves who can stabilize these neighborhoods permanently.

Ignatius is concerned that the Iraqi government is not in fact or in appearance involved enough in bringing order to the capital. 

As was not the case during the Vietnam war, the current anti-war movement is largely innocent of any sympathy with the hostile regime, or the insurgents, let alone with the death squads.  There are exceptions on the radical left, but pretty much no one I know on the anti-war side really wants the insurgents to win.  But being anti-war does put you in the awkward position that any bad news bolsters your case, and any good news has to be qualified.  "Yeah it's great that so many men and women voted, but . . ."   

I have never endorsed the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq, but I have been persistently optimistic about the chances of democracy in Iraq.  This may well make me look like a fool in the long run, but just right now it allows me to give a hearty cheer to a small victory. 

College kids get brains, no soul

This essay by philosopher Thomas Hibbs is about as accurate a description of university life as I have seen.  I recommend it especially to those of you who have kids just entering college or about to enter. What does it profit a nation to gain the world, yet lose its soul?  HT to Joe K.

Keep Digging, TNR

I subscribe to The New Republic, a venerable liberal magazine.  It's generally smart and informative and puts the best foot forward for the liberal cause.  I don't agree with them much, but it is good to keep one's self intellectually honest.  A vice many political observers have is that they believe their own side's press.  As is amply displayed by all sides of the South Dakota blogophere, some folks have the tendency to blithely repeat the talking points coming from their side's various spokesmen.  Our side is always right and their side is always wrong; portray your side in the best possible light, and the opposition in the worst light.  One cure for that is to read the smart people on the other side, and The New Republic qualifies for the left. 

That's why it is so disappointing to get the recent email update from TNR editor Franklin Foer.  What's in this week's TNR?  A scandal mongering article (registration required) on Duke Cunningham's wife by sleaze author Kitty Kelly.  Oh, and an important piece about poker in Washington.  These articles go well with a recent TNR piece on Washington's "first wives club." This from a magazine founded by Herbert Croly and Walter Lippmann? What's next?  A dating column from Ted Kennedy?  How about Hillary Clinton on this Fall's fashions?  Which hand bag is carried by progressives who are "in the know"?  Really TNR, where's your dignity?

McGovern

Eleanor Clift of Newsweek sat down for a Q&A session with George McGovern, where the discussion was primarily about the war in Iraq.  Be sure to give it a read.

Also, don't forget the grand opening of the McGovern Library in Mitchell, which will be held between October 5th to the 7th.  I drove past the library a few days ago and progress is coming along swimmingly.

Lieberman/Pluto in "08!

From the Washington Post:

The solar system now has only eight planets, an international group of astronomers announced today, after taking a vote to demote Pluto from planetary status.

The move came after years of scientific and public debate, and three quarters of a century after scientists first announced they had found a ninth planet at the outer edges of the solar system.

The Man from Planet X is going to be unhappy with us.

James Fallows Critiques the War on Terrorism

James Fallows is no friend of conservatives, nor are the editors of the Atlantic Monthly who put Fallow's article "Declaring Victory" on the magazine's cover.   You  need a subscription to view its contents.  Fallows interviewed sixty experts on terrorism and national security.  Here is a sample:

Any assessment of the world five years after 9/11 begins with the damage inflicted on “Al-Qaeda Central"—the organization led by bin Laden and al-Zawahiri that, from the late 1990s onward, both inspired and organized the worldwide anti-American campaign. “Their command structure is gone, their Afghan sanctuary is gone, their ability to move around and hold meetings is gone, their financial and communications networks have been hit hard,” says Seth Stodder, a former official in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

David Kilcullen, an Australian army officer [who] commanded counter-insurgency units in East Timor, [and who] recently served as an adviser in the Pentagon and is now a senior adviser on counterterrorism at the State Department . . .  says, “The al-Qaeda that existed in 2001 simply no longer exists. In 2001 it was a relatively centralized organization, with a planning hub, a propaganda hub, a leadership team, all within a narrow geographic area. All that is gone, because we destroyed it.” Where bin Laden’s central leadership team could once wire money around the world using normal bank networks, it now must rely on couriers with vests full of cash. (I heard this point frequently in interviews, weeks before the controversial news stories revealing that the U.S. government had in fact been tracking international bank transfers. Everyone I spoke with assumed that some sort of tracking was firmly in place—and that the commanders of al-Qaeda had changed their behavior in a way that showed they were aware of it as well.) Where bin Laden’s network could once use satellite phones and the Internet for communication, it now has to avoid most forms of electronic communication, which leave an electronic trail back to the user. Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri now send information out through videotapes and via operatives in Internet chat rooms. “The Internet is all well and good, but it’s not like meeting face to face or conducting training,” says Peter Bergen, author of The Osama bin Laden I Know. “Their reliance on it is a sign of their weakness.”  [My emphasis]. 

Or consider how someone might brief Osama on his current situation.

The Taliban were dispersed, and al-Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan were dismantled.” Al-Qaeda operatives by the thousands have been arrested, detained, or killed. So have many members of the crucial al-Qaeda leadership circle around bin Laden and his chief strategist, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Moreover, Jenkins’s briefer warns, it has become harder for the remaining al-Qaeda leaders to carry out the organization’s most basic functions: “Because of increased intelligence efforts by the United States and its allies, transactions of any type—communications, travel, money transfers—have become more dangerous for the jihadists. Training and operations have been decentralized, raising the risk of fragmentation and loss of unity. Jihadists everywhere face the threat of capture or martyrdom.  [My emphasis].

The consensus of experts is that the well-organized, powerful, and international organization that Osama bin Laden managed to build up before Bush became President has been smashed to bits. No reasonable person could argue that we are not safer for that.

This does not mean, of course, that the war has been won.  Fallows goes to great lengths to wave flags of caution and to argue that we could let victory slip through our fingers in any number of ways.  He is, to say the least, no supporter of the war in Iraq.  Many of the experts cited have their quarrels with the way things have been done, as experts tend to do.  But the battle since 9/11 has been an overwhelming defeat for al Qaeda.  Only someone of flamboyant and invincible ignorance could say that "the Bush administration isn't serious about fighting terrorism."  Or put differently, if Bush could accomplish this without even being serious about it, he is a greater genius than either Chad or I suspect.

Schwangate

A few days ago Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson appointed former KELO journalist Jodi Schwan to the city's Chief of Staff position.  According to an informal Argus Leader poll, 75% of people agreed that Munson is paying Schwan too much, who is receiving $98,000 a year to run the biggest city in South Dakota.  Also, check out this cartoon noted by SDWC.

UPDATE:  Comment of the day on Schwangate:

I think this is a conspiracy!

Look at all the former KELO reporters with ties to city government.

It's a plot to officially change the name of Sioux Falls to Kelo-land, thus making Kelo-land an actual place with real people.

Kranz

Note that David Kranz, the dean of the South Dakota political reporters, finds it vitally important to chase down Senator Thune in Brookings and ask him about the death penalty issue, but he doesn't bother to ask Senator Johnson and Representative Herseth the same question.

Washington Update at SF Chamber Meeting

While in the state for the August recess, Senator Thune met with the Sioux Falls Chamber on Tuesday to discuss various issues that will be addressed when Congress reconvenes next month.  The Argus Leader reported on the meeting, article available here.  Here is an excerpt:

When Congress returns to session in September, the Senate might try again to pass legislation that fell short of attracting the 60 votes necessary to avert a filibuster, Thune told the Chamber group. Included are measures to open more of Alaska to oil and gas exploration, a medical malpractice reform bill, and a proposal that failed just before the close of the Senate session in which a minimum wage increase and extension of tax cuts such as the state and local sales tax deduction were bundled with a reduction of the estate tax.

Thune also said he will reintroduce a bill to use as much as $20 million in penalties collected from automakers whose vehicles do not meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to help gas stations pay for installing E-85 fuel pumps. The bill Thune introduced with Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., has broad bipartisan support, he says, but it was sidetracked just before the Senate session closed when at least one anonymous Democratic senator refused to allow it to come to the floor.

Another blogger on the Schwan appointment

Rant-a-bit by Scott Hudson presents a less than supportive position on Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson's chief of staff appointment here.  A note to readers, he presents his position with flagrant frankness here.

Campaign Finance

On the 21st, the Argus Leader editorialized a bit about campaign finance and reforming the system in the state.  Here's the editorial.

Unfortunately, they missed an interesting story about campaign financing and the Democratic money funnel that involves our state Democratic Party.  Jason Heppler has extensive coverage of the topic here.

The Diaper Deficit at General Motors, Ireland, and the Democratic Party

I have been fascinated by demographics of late, in large part because of my interest in biopolitics.  A couple of articles whet my appetite.  Malcom Gladwell writing in the New Yorker argues that the worker's pension system that big auto and big steel developed is doomed to failure by the dependency ratio. This is the ratio of currently producing workers to those not working but drawing benefits.  When GM, for example, began its growth it hired a lot of young, productive people.  Inevitably those workers get older and retire, and the dependency ratio swings against the company.  The dependency ratio is now crushing many companies, who simply cannot support their pension obligations. 

The rational alternative would be to distribute the burden across many companies, so whoever is currently employing younger workers could help pay for the pensions of older ones.  This was rejected in the past because it looked too collectivist for the tastes of corporate managers.  I don't know enough to say for sure, but Gladwell's argument surely looks compelling. One half-hearted cheer for collectivism.

Of course the same thing happens to countries.  Ireland's economic miracle, Gladwell argues, is due to the legalization of contraception. 

In the past two decades, for instance, Ireland has gone from being one of the most economically backward countries in Western Europe to being one of the strongest: its growth rate has been roughly double that of the rest of Europe.  . . .

In 1979, restrictions on contraception that had been in place since Ireland’s founding were lifted, and the birth rate began to fall. In 1970, the average Irishwoman had 3.9 children. By the mid-nineteen-nineties, that number was less than two. As a result, when the Irish children born in the nineteen-sixties hit the workforce, there weren’t a lot of children in the generation just behind them. Ireland was suddenly free of the enormous social cost of supporting and educating and caring for a large dependent population.

Wealth that would have been spent on raising a lot more kids could instead be plowed back into the economy, and used to raise the standard of living for those lucky enough to be born.  Of course, if Gladwell is right, this means that Ireland has eaten its seed corn.  When the current population of Daugherty's and Cohans gets old, there won't be enough younger workers to support them.  This is as bad a long term deal as GM's pension plan, only without a larger country to bail Ireland out.  Europe certainly will be in no position to help, being far down Ireland's path.

Arthur Brooks in The Wall Street Journal has a similar caution for America's Democrats.

Simply put, liberals have a big baby problem: They're not having enough of them, they haven't for a long time, and their pool of potential new voters is suffering as a result. According to the 2004 General Social Survey, if you picked 100 unrelated politically liberal adults at random, you would find that they had, between them, 147 children. If you picked 100 conservatives, you would find 208 kids. That's a "fertility gap" of 41%. Given that about 80% of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents, this gap translates into lots more little Republicans than little Democrats to vote in future elections. Over the past 30 years this gap has not been below 20%--explaining, to a large extent, the current ineffectiveness of liberal youth voter campaigns today.

Alarmingly for the Democrats, the gap is widening at a bit more than half a percentage point per year, meaning that today's problem is nothing compared to what the future will most likely hold. Consider future presidential elections in a swing state (like Ohio), and assume that the current patterns in fertility continue. A state that was split 50-50 between left and right in 2004 will tilt right by 2012, 54% to 46%. By 2020, it will be certifiably right-wing, 59% to 41%. A state that is currently 55-45 in favor of liberals (like California) will be 54-46 in favor of conservatives by 2020--and all for no other reason than babies.  [My italics]

Now I wouldn't put a big stake on this, but political scientists have long known that large population trends are a better indication of the political future than anything else.  Democrats would not be a viable party today if not for the concentration of people in Democrat-friendly cities.  But recently the greatest population growth has not been in cities but in exurbs, population centers disconnected from big down towns.  And the exurbs have been voting Republican.  Demographics is really interesting. 

A Wee Bit of Yellow Journalism from Newsweek

Here's the current cover of Newsweek. 

This is a clever piece of work.  By putting the airliner plot in a list ahead of two pieces of bad news, they make an anti-terrorism success look like a defeat.  It is certainly reasonable to argue that we are not on balance safer since 9/11.  George Will has argued that the "law enforcement approach," i.e., concentrating on security at home without mucking around in the Middle East trying to promote democracy, is the most effective strategy.  He may be right.  But surely the increased security since 9/11 is to be credited for preventing this plot.  It bears mentioning that the U.S. has not suffered another attack since 9/11.  The Newsweek cover is yellow journalism.

Minnesota

The St. Paul Pioneer Press looked at the political dynamics in the very Blue state of Minnesota and determined they're leaning towards the GOP:

The national scene seems to portend Democratic gains in governorships and Congressional seats, possibly leading to Democratic control of Congress. Low job approval for President Bush and Congress result from a familiar litany of problems — endless conflict in Iraq, high energy prices, anxieties about international turmoil and ongoing domestic controversies over immigration and health care.

Democrats, however, have not quite closed the deal with American voters. Surveys reveal them as unpopular as Republicans. Democrats have yet to present an appealing alternative to the GOP agenda. It will be up to individual Congressional candidates — in Minnesota, most notably Senate aspirant Amy Klobuchar and 6th District House candidate Patty Wetterling — to make the case for change. So far, their national party has not carried that argument with likely voters.

Running directly contrary to this national current is the favorable trend for the GOP in Minnesota state politics. This trend is of recent vintage. Part of it stems from growing GOP party identification in the state, detected in a recent Star Tribune Minnesota poll. In addition, a peaceful state legislative session, a budget surplus, improved economic growth and job creation all help Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty and GOP state legislative candidates.

Covert Enemies

Michael Barone:

These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders -- and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II -- and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect.

Of course, this distorts history. We are taught that American slavery was the most evil institution in human history. But every society in history has had slavery. Only one society set out to and did abolish it. The movement to abolish first the slave trade and then slavery was not started by the reason-guided philosophies of 18th century France. It was started, as Adam Hochschild documents in his admirable book "Bury the Chains," by Quakers and Evangelical Christians in Britain, followed in time by similar men and women in America. The slave trade was ended not by Africans, but by the Royal Navy, with aid from the U.S. Navy even before the Civil War.

Nevertheless, the default assumption of our covert enemies is that in any conflict between the West and the Rest, the West is wrong. That assumption can be rebutted by overwhelming fact: Few argued for the Taliban after Sept. 11. But in our continuing struggles, our covert enemies portray our work in Iraq through the lens of Abu Ghraib and consider Israel's self-defense against Hezbollah as the oppression of virtuous victims by evil men. In World War II, our elites understood that we were the forces of good and that victory was essential. Today, many of our elites subject our military and intelligence actions to fine-tooth-comb analysis and find that they are morally repugnant.

We have always had our covert enemies, but their numbers were few until the 1960s. But then the elite young men who declined to serve in the military during the Vietnam War set out to write a narrative in which they, rather than those who obeyed the call to duty, were the heroes. They have propagated their ideas through the universities, the schools and mainstream media to the point that they are the default assumptions of millions. Our covert enemies don't want the Islamo-fascists to win. But in some corner of their hearts, they would like us to lose.

The Death Penalty in South Dakota

The regional blogosphere has devoted a lot of attention, and reasonably so, to the approaching execution of Elijah Page.  I have hesitated to post on this because I am very ambivalent about capital punishment.  Were I a legislator (be afraid!) and the question were before me, I would probably vote for abolition.  But that's not a campaign promise. 

I do note that most of the common arguments against the death penalty are very weak.  Here is a list:

People who are pro-life on abortion should be opposed to taking life by execution.  The problem with that is that the condemned criminal has committed a crime, whereas the unborn cannot be guilty of anything except cell division.  So pro-life, pro-capital punishment folks are not involved in any contradiction.  All legitimate penalties are based on the concept of moral responsibility.  If you respect my rights, you deserve that I should respect yours.  The system of justice is built on that foundation. 

If murder is wrong, then the state should not murder a murderer.  The problem with this, as lawyers would say, is that it proves too much.  You could as easily say: if kidnapping is wrong, then the state should not incarcerate kidnappers.  The problem is that murder implies unjust killing, and this begs the question.  The state of South Dakota, like any other state, can legitimately do a lot of things that would be crimes if done by private individuals. 

Execution denies the human dignity of the condemned person.  This was Justice Brennan's favorite, but it is obviously wrong.  We don't put dangerous dogs on trial, we just put them to sleep.  The trial and penalty process are the most robust recognition of the humanity of the accused.  We treat such a person as morally responsible, which is more than we do for any other sort of creature. 

The death penalty is racially (or otherwise) inequitable.  Wrong again.  Outside the South in the earlier part of the last century, the death penalty has been amazingly race neutral.  You were a little more likely to be executed for a similar crime if you were white than if you were Black.  It's true that execution was more likely if the murderer was Black and the victim white than vice versa, but  the latter is very rare and the former is more likely to be the kind of crime (armed robbery) that is most likely to earn the death penalty. 

So what about arguments in favor of execution?

The death penalty makes juries more careful.  Juries are a lot more likely to condemn an innocent man to a long prison stretch than to death.  It has been almost impossible to find a single case where an innocent man was put to death. 

The death penalty saves lives.  Yes.  Murders who are given life sentences often go on to kill other people.  Sometimes it's other prisoners, and sometimes it's people on the outside when, in spite of the law's intent, they are released. 

The death penalty is life affirming.  Again, yes.  Precisely because we value innocent lives we think that murders sometimes deserve to die.  A man who kills two teenagers and then calmly finishes their McDonald's meals ought to die precisely because life is precious. 

So why am I ambivalent?  Mostly because I think the Supreme Court has made such a mess of the process that it is simply too expensive and complicated for most states to bother with.  I also think there is something wrong when we only execute people who really want it.  Lastly, I am sympathetic to Professor Schaff's argument for mercy.  There are so many occasions where we have to kill people, maybe we should put it off when we have a choice.  I am also sympathetic to the culture of life argument.  Maybe Mr. Page deserves to die.  Maybe saving his life gratuitously makes us a better people. 

On the other hand, Governor Rounds has more to think about than this.  He has to decide whether to overrule the decision of juries.  He is disinclined to do so, and on grounds of democracy that is the right decision. 

Munson's Appointment

In regard to the previous post about Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson's appointment of Jodi Schwann as the city's Chief of Staff, I'd heard rumors of her being placed in this position for a few weeks now.  I'd heard other names as well, but as details of the position evolved, Schwan, a now ex-KELO reporter, became the frontrunner.  A few people in journalistic circles think she may be too close to the media, and hired for public relations purposes which they oppose.

For instance, the byline of an August 2, 2006 Argus Leader article states that "[p]ublic relations should be second to administrative duties for chief of staff."  Whether or not the Argus had a hot tip on Schwan's possibility is merely speculation; however, it is an interesting coincidence.  The mayor did fulfill a campaign promise that many people have been asking for by hiring Schwan.

Anyway, this rumor that has been swirling around journalistic circles turns out to be true.  Here's the article about her hire from KELO again. 

Death Penalty

Via South Dakota Magazine comes this thoughtful piece by Steve Hemmingsen on the death penalty and the slippery slope of justice.  Excerpt:

A couple of lawyer friends (yeah, I know. It sounds like an oxymoron) were sitting around a grill a few days ago eating salmon and eggplant parmesan and having a wide-ranging discussion about, among other things, justice, like trying to define justice.

 

The abortion thing came into it. I pointed out that if God exists as most people in KELOLAND believe he does, why don’t we just leave it to him? He’s the only one who knows for absolute certain when life begins. As we dig farther into this genetics thing, who knows; maybe life begins with a teenage boy’s first “evil” thought rather than an act or a biological collision or at least concurrent evil thoughts to allow for modern, liberated thinking.

We also discussed South Dakota's death penalty with Elijah Page now wanting to die. Maybe we shouldn’t execute him. Only a guy who’s nuts would want to die and we can’t kill an insane man just because the state said he should die when it thought he was sane. Do you get what I mean here? Who decides what is “just” for any given circumstance? Any way you slice it justice is arbitrary often embracing injustice. An act of the legislature doesn’t make justice any more logical.

Check out the whole thing and discuss amongst yourselves.

Jodi Schwan

See this about Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson's appointment of Jodi Schwan as the city's Chief of Staff: 

She's been a part of the KELOLAND team for four years as a political reporter, now Jodi Schwan is moving her career to Sioux Falls' City Hall.

Monday, Mayor Dave Munson announced he's appointed Jodi Schwan as the city's Chief of Staff. Schwan will assume the position Tuesday. She’ll be responsible for providing project support, communications, and public relations on behalf of the Mayor’s office.

Schwan has a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Science degree in journalism with concentrations in political science and business from Northwestern University in Evanston, IL. Before coming to KELO, Schwan interned as a bureau reporter in Washington, D.C. She’s also done reporting for WTOP-AM in Washington D.C. and has worked as a reporter for several Ohio and Illinois newspapers.

During her career in journalism, Schwan has received several awards for her work including being honored by the Radio-Television News Director’s Association and the William Randolph Hearts Foundation. While at KELO, she was recognized by the South Dakota Associated Press for reporting and writing.

Schwan says she is looking forward to helping to improve communication through the mayor’s office and excited about the opportunity to serve the city of Sioux Falls.

We want to thank Jodi for her hard work and wish her well on her new endeavor.

Best Court Opinion Ever

If this summary of a Ten Commandments case from Oklahoma is accurate at all, the actual opinon might be worth the read.  I guess this is what happens when federal judges get bored.  Thanks to Joe K. for the heads up. 

Energy Policy

Yesterday the Aberdeen American News published a piece I wrote with some suggestions about energy policy.  You can read all about it here. 

Argus

South Dakota War College:  "I guess all anyone ever needs now is a mailing list (with the Argus Leader on the list), a blank piece of paper and a copy machine to destroy your opponent's careers."

Iwo Jima Photographer Dies

Joe Rosenthal, the photographer who took the famous Iwo Jima Photo, has died.  In an August 11th post on fake photos, I unintentially spread what appears to have been a false story about the photo: that it was staged.  I was corrected by a reader, whose note I posted  here.  The Washington Post has the story. 

Rosenthal's iconic photo, shot on Feb. 23, 1945, became the model for the Iwo Jima Memorial near Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. The memorial, dedicated in 1954 and known officially as the Marine Corps War Memorial, commemorates the Marines who died taking the Pacific island in World War II.  The photo was listed in 1999 at No. 68 on a New York University survey of 100 examples of the best journalism of the century.  . . .

Ten years after the flag-raising, Rosenthal wrote that he almost didn't go up to the summit when he learned a flag had already been raised. He decided to go up anyway, and found servicemen preparing to plant the second, larger flag.

"Out of the corner of my eye, I had seen the men start the flag up. I swung my camera and shot the scene. That is how the picture was taken, and when you take a picture like that, you don't come away saying you got a great shot. You don't know." . . .

He added that if he had posed the flag-raising picture, as some skeptics have suggested over the years, "I would, of course, have ruined it" by choosing fewer men and making sure their faces could be seen.

Here is the photo:

Here is the Iwo Jima Memorial, in Arlington.

McCain Musings

Since Senator McCain will be visiting South Dakota in the near future, I note this interesting article about his future.  H/T to Real Clear Politics for linking to the article at the NY Times.  Here's the link, McCain Mines Elite of G.O.P for 2008 Team.  From the intro:

Senator John McCain is locking up a cast of top-shelf Republican strategists, policy experts, fund-raisers and donors, in a methodical effort to build a 2008 presidential campaign machine, drawing supporters of President Bush despite the sometimes rocky history between the two men.

Mr. McCain’s effort to woo a diverse lineup of backers and scare off rivals has augmented his travel schedule on behalf of Republicans — which this week and next includes trips to Iowa, Louisiana, Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio and Florida.

Whether or not you support him, he's working hard and will be a force in the 2008 President race.  He will be  in Sioux Falls on October 17 (RCJ link here).

Should Mike Rounds Commute Elijah Page's Sentence

There is much discussion over the looming execution of one Elijah Page.  Gov. Rounds must decide whether to commute the sentence or to simply allow the wheels of justice to turn, which will inevitably result in Page's execution by the State of South Dakota.  My colleague Mr. Adams helpfully links to the governor's ruminations on the justice of the death penalty, especially as it pertains to abortion.  Can one be against abortion and for capital punishment? 

On the justice of capital punishment, I highly commend this article by Avery Dulles, one of the foremost theologians of our time.  It is very well written.  Please read the whole thing.  Dulles concludes that there is nothing in Scripture that forbids the state from using death as a punishment and sacred tradition backs this up. 

Summarizing the verdict of Scripture and tradition, we can glean   some settled points of doctrine. It is agreed that crime deserves punishment   in this life and not only in the next. In addition, it is agreed that the State   has authority to administer appropriate punishment to those judged guilty of   crimes and that this punishment may, in serious cases, include the sentence   of death.

Dulles concentrates on the Catholic perspective (which should be of interest to our governor), but I point out that both Martin Luther and John Calvin favored capital punishment.  I believe I am right about Luther and Calvin (an Internet search was frustratingly inconclusive).  If I am wrong, someone please correct me. 

Dulles also takes seriously the arguments against the death penalty, the most serious of which is, in his opinion, the possibility of getting the verdict wrong. 

Dulles also argues that opposition to the death penalty is as likely to come from an incipient secularism rather than from an earnest religious convictions.

Many governments in Europe and elsewhere have eliminated the death   penalty in the twentieth century, often against the protests of religious believers.   While this change may be viewed as moral progress, it is probably due, in part,   to the evaporation of the sense of sin, guilt, and retributive justice, all   of which are essential to biblical religion and Catholic faith. The abolition   of the death penalty in formerly Christian countries may owe more to secular   humanism than to deeper penetration into the gospel.

I would note that opposition to the death penalty usually is based on some notion of equality, not of justice.  Death penalty opponents argue that the punishment is disproportionately used against racial minorities and the poor (both of which are true).  But this is not an argument that the death penalty is inherently unjust, but rather that it is administered unequally. 

It seems as though the preponderance of evidence from Christian sources is that the death penalty is just.  But this does not mean that it is wise.  I would advise Gov. Rounds to commute Elijah Page's sentence. 

In a society very confused about life, it sends a bad signal to the population when the state takes human life, even guilty life.  It could also stand as a remarkable gesture to the value of human life for Gov. Rounds to commute the sentence.  In a year where legislation concerning the killing of innocent human life in the womb is on our ballot, Gov. Rounds can use the commutation of Page's sentence as an occasion to speak to the people of South Dakota about the value of human life. 

I quickly add that this would be mercy for Mr. Page, not justice.  He does not deserve to live, but nonetheless we can give him life.  Also, there is a serious argument that by not executing murderers we disrespect human life.  There are some very smart and decent people who argue that it is precisely by the use of capital punishment on murderers that a society shows that it takes human life seriously.  If you take a human life you forfeit your own.  I do not share this view, but I think it is a reasonable and compelling one.

The Perfidious French

During the last Presidential campaign, John Kerry's idea of foreign policy was to work more closely with our allies.  He clearly had in mind the French, since we were already working closely with Britain.  Well, we now have a better idea of how that works out.  From the Wall Street Journal:

Most U.N. resolutions don't have the shelf-life of a gallon of milk, which isn't always a bad thing. But in the case of Resolution 1701--the cease-fire agreement for Lebanon and Israel adopted unanimously this month by the Security Council--things seem to be going sour even faster than that. And that is cause for serious unease.

On Thursday, Jacques Chirac confirmed a Le Monde report that his government was prepared to offer only some 200 combat engineers (in addition to the 200 French troops already in Lebanon) to what is supposed to be the resolution's centerpiece: A 15,000-man U.N. force that will help the Lebanese army patrol their southern border and ensure that Hezbollah will no longer use the area as a staging ground for future attacks against Israel.

Given that the French contingent was supposed to be at the vanguard of this enhanced force, it's unclear whether other nations will be willing to chip in with troops of their own. All of this after the French used the promise of a robust, French-led international force to get the U.S. and Israel to agree to a cease-fire and withdrawal. Even less reassuring is the insistence by French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie that her troops will remain in the lead only until February, after which, apparently, it's salaam and adieu.

Here is what the French did: promising a large contingent of troops to police Souther Lebanon, they forced a weaker U.N. resolution on Lebanon than the one that the U.S. and Israel wanted. Now they say they can't commit more than 200 troops because the U.N. resolution was too weak.  This is treachery.  It is difficult to imagine that the French are not trying to hand a victory to Hezbollah.  Either way, that is what they have succeeded in doing.   

Here is Jules Crittenden from the Boston Herald:

French is the traditional language of diplomacy. Diplomacy is the art of saying one thing while doing another.

    In recent weeks, France stepped forward to act as a broker of peace in Lebanon. “Act” is the key verb in that last sentence, as it now would seem that the only other verifiable part of the sentence is “in recent weeks.”

    To correctly parse that sentence, one must understand that when France suggested it wanted to broker peace in Lebanon, it did not necessarily mean “broker” or “peace” or “Lebanon” in the way we might understand those words. The same is true when France further suggested it wanted to “lead” a “strong” “multinational” “force” there.

    I don’t speak French, so I have no idea what the actual French words are for those concepts or what possible nuances there may be. I’ve been relying on news reports in English, which now inform me that the French do not intend to send any significant number of troops to what is supposed to be a force of 15,000 in Lebanon, like everyone thought they said they would.

    The heady moment of peace brokering having passed, uponsober reflection, the French now say they already have a general and some staff in south Lebanon ordering about UNIFIL, the U.N. monitoring entity there. That’s plenty of leadership, the French suggested: All France needs to contribute now is another 200 combat engineers.

    In tactical terms, when it comes to securing a Middle East conflict zone, that can be referred to as “squat.”

This Afternoon in the Metrodome

House Blanchard saddled up the Subaru Saturday morning, with four Twins tickets in the lock box,  and pointed the old girl east for a road trip.  Fortunately I watched the Chi Sox get beat on TV Friday, and Sunday afternoon my family and I joined 42,533 other hopeful souls at the Metrodome.  Unfortunately, I also saw a good bit of Saturday's game on TV at Stella's Fish Cafe, uptown.  The Shrimp and Sausage k-bob was excellent.  The Twins stunk like day old shrimp in the sunshine.  Today was a great game, not the least because the Twins won.  It was especially excellent because Torri Hunter hit another long ball, this one landing just a few rows past the fence, near the left field fly poll.  Like yours truly, Hunter is an Arkansas native.  Of course I taught him everything he knows.  Or I would have if I'd met him and had the talents of, say, Spiderman.  He also has the most infectious smile in the majors.  Oh, and Santana pitched seven innings and gave up one run. The Twins can catch up with Detroit, let alone Chicago.  I also think they are capable of winning a seven game series with any team in Major Leage Baseball.   

Little Green Footballs

The Washington Post article about the website Little Green Footballs to which Ken Blanchard refers can be found here.  It is not clear how valid these charges are about anti-Muslim rhetoric at LGF. What seems clear is that the rhetoric has all come from commenters, if at all, and not from Charles Johnson.  Johnson seems to be saying the the accusations are the invention of his political opponents.  It might be the the FBI indeed investigated LGF based on accusations, but in the end found nothing.  Not being a reader of LGF, I wouldn't want to comment one way or the other.

Culture of Corruption

Ed Morrissey: The Culture Of Corruption Redux

Smearing Politicians

This Rapid City Journal editorial reviews current and past attempts to smear South Dakota politicians with rumors:

Politics is dirty business. It involves emphasizing your candidate's positive attributes while highlighting your opponent's negative attributes. The other side does the same. What's known as "spin" is simply phrasing a message so your candidate looks better than his opponent.

Politics has few rules, but one rule would be that a candidate or campaign shouldn't spread outright lies about a political opponent. If it's done at all, it's done by political allies not directly tied to a politician or staff.

When Lee Breard, campaign manager for Bruce Whalen, Republican candidate for U.S. House of Representatives, sent an e-mail to South Dakota reporters and bloggers about a Wikipedia entry for Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D., he made several serious mistakes.

The first was believing what he read on the Internet. Wikipedia is an Internet encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Someone altered Herseth's Wikipedia entry to include "facts" about her sister, her fiancé, her pregnancy and her stand on abortion rights. These "facts" are easily refutable as Herseth doesn't have a sister, is not engaged to her chief of staff, is not pregnant and hasn't had a change of heart on abortion.

Second, Breard forwarded the Web address for the information to the media and others.

Third, Breard embellished the untruths by referring in his e-mail to Herseth as a "Home Wrecker."

Fourth, Breard is Whalen's campaign manager and his communications are official.

Fifth, having been caught in the act of spreading false rumors about Herseth, neither Breard nor Whalen have apologized.

Politicians have to get used to responding to rumors. It's an unfortunate consequence of being in the public eye.

Even Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., who has had to fend of rumors about himself and his family, has expressed sympathy for Herseth on this matter.

We are reminded that during the 1996 U.S. Senate race between Sen. Larry Pressler, R-S.D., and then-Rep. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., Alexander Cockburn, author of "Washington Babylon," was invited to come to South Dakota to speak. Cockburn had alleged in his book that Pressler was homosexual, a charge that Pressler called "despicable and totally false," but which was repeated by South Dakota media. Former Democratic Sen. James Abourezk orchestrated the events, of which Johnson denied any connection. Pressler later won a libel lawsuit against the book's publisher and author, but by then he was an ex-senator and the damage had been done.

We expressed our outrage at the time about spreading false rumors about Larry Pressler; we are equally upset that Whalen's campaign would relay untrue rumors about Stephanie Herseth.

Exaggerating an opponent's faults is fair politics; lying about them is not. Bruce Whalen owes Stephanie Herseth an apology for his campaign manager's inappropriate gossip.

Governor Rounds on the Death Penalty

Governor Rounds was recently interviewed about his position on the death penalty, the Page case, and his pro-life stance as it applies to this issue.  Here is an excerpt from the interview obtained from the Argus Leader; however, I strongly urge you to read the whole thing here.  I think the Governor does a pretty good job of articulating his position with reason.

Q: What do you think of the death penalty?

A: My record in the Legislature and so far as governor is to make it extremely limited in use and do your best so that children are not in a position of being executed.

Q: Do you think Page should die?

A: Clearly this was a case where extreme cruelty was involved. This individual has most certainly proven that he is capable of some of the most cruel and inhumane treatment of another person that's ever been recorded.

Q: So you are inclined to let the execution occur?

A: The judicial activity will move forward and the statutes will be carried out unless we directly intervene. ... At this point I don't have any plans to intervene.

...

Q: You have consistently said that you oppose abortion, and you signed House Bill 1215 that would ban most abortions. Is it consistent to be pro-life on abortion and also to favor the death penalty?

A: There's a real difference between an innocent human being and someone who has been convicted in a court of law of murdering another human being and may do it again.

Q: Would this be a milestone for South Dakota?

A: Yes, it would. It would be a sad day, but not as sad as the day a mother went to find out that her child had been murdered by one of these people.

Once again, here's the story from the Argus Leader.

Sheehantics

We all have the right to peacefully assemble.  I think when Cindy Sheehan gathers a group, they forget the peacefully part.  I love seeing protestors make their voices heard, but when they cross the lines of civility it really takes away from their message.  Here is an example of the antics that are recorded when the Sheehaniacs gather to protest (from the Washington Times, AP writer A. Brown):

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Chanting "Try Rove for treason," Cindy Sheehan and more than 50 other war protesters disrupted a reception before President Bush's top adviser Karl Rove spoke at a fundraiser Saturday.

One woman was arrested during a scuffle with police after Sheehan and the anti-war demonstrators rushed toward the closed doors and kept chanting loudly after the guests went into the dinner.

Read the whole article here.

Its unfortunate that Sheehan lost her son in combat; that must have been terrible.  But we are in a war to protect our citizens and our way of life from terrorists who want to tear the fabric of our society to shreds.  I hope that she and all of her followers support our great soldiers who continue to put their life on the line for our own safety and security.