Now, here's something that really gets me heated. We have a brilliant 13 year old girl who hid her pregnancy from her parents for 9 months, who then threw the baby out her bedroom window after it was born because she was "scared." Please, you are kidding me. Put her in jail with Andrea Yates, and round up her ignorant 15 year old boyfriend, and the parents too. Do us a favor and rot in prison. There's no excuse for this.

[ Certainly, there's no excuse for killing an innocent baby, but this sounds more like the outgrowth of a more systemic problem, and one which I'm not convinced prison can solve. Prisoners are a huge drag on our society, the equivalent of treating the symptoms of a disease instead of it's causes. There's been a lot of motion lately in the medical community towards preventitive medecine, because it's cheaper to prevent a disease than to cure it, not to mention, more pleasant for everyone involved. I think the same sort of thinking is sorely lacking from discussions of social diseases.

Anyway, it's almost certain that the girl, at least, will be in jail for a while, and probably the boyfriend too. Negligence of that magnitude is undoubtedly deserving of punishment. I just think those who call for strong punishments ought to think extra hard about finding ways to minimize the number of people who recieve them. In some cases, prison may serve that purpose, but I don't think that's true in all cases. -k]

13 year old throws baby out her window and lets it die

MOST two-term American presidents lose steam in their second four years. If scandal doesn't get them (Watergate, Iran-contra, Monica Lewinsky), weariness does. Sitting presidents rarely campaign on a revolutionary agenda, just feel-good blather: Ronald Reagan's “Morning in America”, or Bill Clinton's “Bridge to the 21st century”. And a re-elected president is a lame-duck long before his second term ends, leaving little time to get much done.

George Bush seems determined to be different. He has laid out a second-term domestic agenda more ambitious than anything seen in the first term, and that was hardly a lull. It brought the biggest tax cuts since 1981, the broadest education reform in a generation and the costliest expansion of Medicare, the state health system for the elderly, since it was set up in 1965.

If the first-term legacy is largely a deficit, the second term promises to shake some of the country's economic pillars. At the Republican convention last September, Mr Bush spoke of transforming America's fundamental economic institutions for the 21st century, and offered two broad organising themes. The first was to make the United States the best place in the world to do business. That covered changes from tort reform (fewer burdensome lawsuits) to a simpler tax code, spurring more economic growth. The second theme was to foster an “ownership society”, by giving individuals greater control over, and responsibility for, their own health care and pensions. In particular, it meant restructuring Social Security, America's public pension system, by basing it partly on private accounts.

Empty campaign promises? Not so. At his post-election press conference, the president left no doubt that he regarded his victory as a mandate for reform. “I earned capital in the campaign, political capital”, he said, “and now I intend to spend it.”

[ Not particularly objective, unsurprisingly... the economist is often on the Right side of the issues, but at least provides a decent picture of what to expect. -k]

George Bush's second term

] Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko has won Ukraine's
] presidential election by more than two million votes,
] electoral officials have said after completing the count.

[ Not that otherViktor has conceded defeat. It's not quite over yet. -k]

Yushchenko wins Ukraine's Election

] Schmitt said the donations help pay for the venues,
] vendors, parade-route bleachers, entertainment and other
] costs associated with staging the Jan. 20 inauguration,
] as well as lead-up events beginning Jan. 18.
]
] The inauguration is estimated to cost $30 million to $40
] million, which private donations will cover. The estimate
] includes security costs not covered by the federal and
] local government. Security is expected to be tight for
] the first inauguration since the Sept. 11, 2001,
] terrorist attacks.

WTF? Why does a second term president need to even do this? Why not give this money to No Child Left Behind? Or, y'know... feed DC's hungry and sick? Hell, feed Austin's hungry and sick.

[ Agreed. It seems like a nasty gratuitous waste on something that's all pomp and superficiality. And not just this year either. Ever. I recognize the importance of some degree of ceremony, but$ 30 million dollars worth. That's kind of grotesque. -k]

14 Give Inaugural Planners $250,000

] U.S. veterans from the war in Iraq are beginning to show
] up at homeless shelters around the country, and advocates
] fear they are the leading edge of a new generation of
] homeless vets not seen since the Vietnam era.

Unacceptable.

Homeless Iraq vets showing up at shelters - (United Press International)

] NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The CBS and NBC Networks have
] refused to run an ad by a liberal church promoting the
] acceptance of people regardless of sexual orientation
] because the networks believe the ad is advocacy
] advertising.
]
] The 30-second spot, run by the United Church of Christ,
] features two muscle-bound bouncers standing outside a
] church, selecting people who could attend service and
] those who could not. Among those kept out are two males
] who appear to be a couple. Written text then appears
] saying, in part, "Jesus didn't turn people away, neither
] do we."
]
] "It's ironic that after a political season awash in
] commercials based on fear and deception by both parties
] seen on all major networks, an ad with a message of
] welcome and inclusion would be deemed too controversial,"
] said Rev. John Thomas in the statement.

Rock that statement, Reverend!

Jesus accepting gays too hot for NBC, CBS - Dec. 1, 2004

] "I really have seen it dwindle in the last year, and that
] to me is curious," Brenda Melton, a counselor at the
] Navarro Academy in San Antonio, said. "I think part of it
] is that the war is a major topic and they see people
] getting killed over there and not everyone is in
] agreement with it."

[ Really? It's curious? Makes perfect sense to me. We're in the middle of a war which has, maybe, 50% support among the populace, and from which we have daily casualty reports and imagery. Despite the best efforts of the Bush administration to portray this as a morally imperative war, people are skeptical, and I don't think it's surprising at all that fewer folks are thinking about a nice long stint in americas armed forces.

Though maybe i'm wrong... what are the numbers for regular enlistment like? Have they gone up or down? We're not in the greatest economy at the moment... doesn't that tend to drive up enlistments? I would think, if those are down as well, at a time like this, that doesn't bode well for current levels of actual support for the current war plan (or lack thereof), the election notwithstanding. Plenty of people have supported this war. I wonder how many put their bodies where their mouth is. -k]

Military Academy Admission Down

] If we lived in a primitive age, the ground at Langley
] would be laid waste and salted, and there would be heads
] on spikes. As it is, the answer to the C.I.A.
] insubordination is not just to move a few boxes on the
] office flow chart.

So, the "tabloid" version of the story is that Bush is clearing people out of the CIA who disagree with him. I have a hard time believing its true, but it really seems to be the case, at least on some level.

[ Yeah, i memed a NY Daily News article about this earlier, but with the caveat that it had yet to gain credibility... I don't know that the NYT echo helps much, but it's something. Most Bush supporters believe he's, if nothing else, genuine and upright... my history makes it clear that I'm not at all convinced, partly from general cynicism about political figures in general and partly from my interpretations of the past 4 years worth of actions. So this doesn't come as a surprise to me, particularly. -k]

The New York Times - Op-Ed Columnist: The C.I.A. Versus Bush

] Secretary of State Colin Powell, who enjoyed enormous
] respect around the world, has resigned but will stay on
] until his replacement is named as Washington makes a new
] push for Middle East peace, officials said on Monday.

The voice of moderation is gone. The baby boomers now completely control the country. Hold on to your hats.

Powell Resigns!!

] MR. RUSSERT: The last time you were on in January of '01
] after the president had been elected, we had this
] exchange. Let me show it to you:
]
] (Videotape, January 21, 2001):
]
] MR. RUSSERT: You're heading over to the national
] cathedral for a prayer service with our new president.
] What are you gonna pray for?
]
] MR. ROVE: Wisdom and patience. Humility. That's
] important, I think, for people who come here to realize
] that we are here for only a time and we have an
] obligation of service and we need to keep things in
] perspective.
]
] (End videotape)
]
] MR. RUSSERT: Wisdom, patience, and humility, the
] watchwords for the second term?
]
] MR. ROVE: Yes. Those that the Gods destroy they first
] make prideful. So, absolutely.

Interesting reading, and gives me more hope about the next few years. :)

[ Really? It did? Scared the fuck out of me, to be perfectly honest.

For Karl Rove to be talking about the "coarseness" of our society is as painful an irony as has ever, EVER been committed to the public record. It defies reason, in much the same way that 52% of the nation does. -k]

MSNBC - Rove tells conservatives to chill out