White TV network. Is this great, or what?

I just discovered a TV channel I had missed, called Starz In White. According to the Bright House Network blurb, it's:

"...the only movie channel dedicated to showcasing the work of White actors, producers and directors 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Starz In White features a wide variety of White movies including exclusive first-run theatrical releases, recent popular titles, classic movies, independent films, Pan European films (films from Europe and by persons of European descent around the world), and original productions. Films featured may star a White actor or actress, or have a White story line. Hollywood's White creative community... resoundingly supports the Starz In White entertainment experience. Many other White celebrities... guest host the channel and introduce many of the movies by offering interesting insights into their background. On-air promotional programming features interviews, celebrity spotlights, and behind-the-scenes look at current theatrical releases."

What's that? You're offended by the inherent racism of such a network? How can that be? I thought by singling out a particular race like this, we would be expanding diversity, or some such PC thing.

Oh, wait..... I got a couple of things wrong here. Silly me. Bad proofreading, I guess. Just replace the words "White" and "European" with "Black" and "African" and you'll have the real Starz network summary just as it truly exists.

Is that better? [insert large dose of sarcastic attitude here] Good grief.

The Terri Schiavo case; shades of gray.

Ok, everybody. Let's choose sides.

All those who want to let Terri Shiavo die, stand on the green line. All those who want to keep her alive, stand on the yellow line.

What's that? Did I hear someone say that it's not all that clear cut? Gee, I guess we need a gray line for those who refuse to take sides here.

Um.. actually.. maybe I should stand on the gray line as well.

Terri Shiavo is in a terrible state, one that I would never want for myself. My living will clearly prohibits a feeding tube in such circumstances. I'm quite adamant about this. But the problem is that Terri Shiavo's wishes are not known. All we have to go by is the husband's statement that she told him she wouldn't want to live in that state. Is he to be believed? Who knows? Her parents obviously think just the opposite.

So I'm left in limbo, knowing I would opt for death over that sort of life, and at the same time I'm unable to support causing her death deliberately. Choosing a side and throwing stones at the other side is just not possible. Well, stone throwing is justified for some. The posturing politicians and various agenda-driven zealots who are falling all over themselves while racing one another for the TV cameras deserve a stoning. This is not a "face time" moment. It's a solemn time, and it's a tragic circumstance that has no solution in sound bites.

Something we've been waiting to see.

Spanish Muslims have issued a fatwa against Osama bin Laden. This is wonderful, even though a long time coming.

The great hope has been that Muslims worldwide would have the courage to stand up and be counted in opposition to terror. Since 9/11, that hope almost vanished, with near silence from mosques and from ordinary Muslims.

Perhaps this courageous action in Spain will cascade into a larger effort. Nothing would seal Osama's fate more surely that a repudiation by Muslims everywhere.

Martha who?

Martha Stewart has been released from her quaint little prison cell. Apparently, judging by the media feeding frenzy, this is big, big news. Really big news. But I don't get it.

Wake me when something happens that makes a difference to real people in the real world.

The Supreme Court; an institution run amok

The 5-4 decision in Roper v. Simmons case is most distressing. The court majority, as led by Justice Kennedy, has apparently decided this case more on moral grounds and international opinion than on law. Hello? All this time, ever since I first studied about the Court, I've been under the impression that the law, and the Constitution as supreme law, was the only thing that mattered in this sort of decision.

But according to five justices, I'm wrong. In their eyes, the Court is free to impose the personal philosophy of the justices and the utterly irrelevant opinions of foreigners in disregard for U.S. law. Unbelievable.

At least the Court has Justice Scalia as its anchor, its rock, in providing some common sense and some respect for law:

"The Court thus proclaims itself sole arbiter of our Nation's moral standards--and in the course of discharging that awesome responsibility purports to take guidance from the views of foreign courts and legislatures. Because I do not believe that the meaning of our Eighth Amendment, any more than the meaning of other provisions of our Constitution, should be determined by the subjective views of five Members of this Court and like-minded foreigners, I dissent." --Justice Antonin Scalia

If anything highlights the need for confirming constitutionalists to the high court, it's this case.

Priorities

I heard there was an important awards show of some sort on TV last night, but I missed it due to much more pressing matters, like clipping my toenails and sorting my sock drawer. Priorities, you know.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Much to my delight, George W. Bush is once again confounding the Euro-left, leaving them flailing about and searching desperately for a place to stand on the issues. It's very entertaining.

Even the more balanced souls on the other side of the Atlantic are not really able to get a foothold, as Mr. Bush pushes ahead while the Euros fumble, diddle, twiddle, and dissemble. An illustrative editorial appeared in the Financial Times. The subtitle could have been, "Slow down, President Bush; we're old and a bit dotty, and we can't keep up."

Poor, poor multi-millionaire victims of racism.

Gosh, the news on the bigotry front is terrible! Apparently Barry Bonds and Jose Canseco are both victims of racism. Both of them have so stated in recent days, so it must be true.

We can't let minor details get in the way of feeling sorry for them. By that I mean details like the fact that they made millions of dollars playing a kid's game part of each year, and that they have been idolized by millions of fans. Those things don't count. No, we must cry along with them about the absolutely horrible way racism has kept both of them down.


Please. Give me a break.

The forgotten amendment

Do you know what the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says? More importantly, do you understand what it means? If so, you're better educated than the vast majority in government.

Or perhaps those fine public servants really do know, but just choose to ignore the article.

Hmmmmm....... which is worse, gross ignorance or deliberately flaunting the supreme law of the land? Toss up.

The Founders believed very strongly in a limited role for the central government, preferring to leave most sovereignty in the hands of the states. Any doubt about that can be overcome by reading their words, both in the great document and in their personal letters and papers.

James Madison, the de facto father of the Constitution, said that "the powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction." The 10th Amendment codified this principle, stating: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

I'm puzzled as to why this simple, easy-to-read article of law is seemingly so difficult for our elected officials to grasp.

Has Dick Morris been right all along?

Count me as someone who generally takes Dick Morris with a grain of salt. Despite his current status as a Clinton (both of 'em) basher, he was, until recently, a member of the Clinonista inner circle. It's somewhat hard to trust the judgement of a man who changes position so dramatically in such a short span of time.

So when Morris began trumpeting a 2008 match-up between Hillary and Condi, it seemed like the fantasy of a confused man obsessed with the name Clinton. But now, after hearing the latest rumor floated over at World Net Daily http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42938 derived from an article by Jack Wheeler http://www.tothepointnews.com/welcome.php?partner=WND it's beginning to look like Morris might have more than whimsey upon which to base his 2008 match-up.

At the very least, such a contest would drive the left absolutely around the bend. It would provide endless entertainment value as we would be watching the left accelerate the process of self-destruction to the point of their own extinction. I do hope they leave a fragment of their loopy membership on the public stage; it's important to have an example of political insanity as a warning to us all. Maybe Hillary could write a book or something.

Is it just me, or is there a change in the wind?

I hope it's not just wishful thinking on my part, but it really does seem as though the Noam Chomskys and Michael Moores of the world are coming under some serious scrutiny by objective commentators. About time.

Now if Tim Russert will keep the pressure on John Kerry to honor his pledge to release his military records... well hey, I can hope, can't I?