Saturday, January 26, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
The official charging document says the guard engaged in "forcible sodomy... by engaging in penetration of the penis of (inmate) BOBBY MANN with her mouth."
If that's true, she ain't doin' it right.
The article says that the movie "will see Daniel Craig reprise the role of Bond for a second time."
No, it will not.
It will be the second time Craig plays the role of Bond. It is only the first time he will reprise the role of Bond.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
The Congress and President Bush have agreed to "stimulate" the economy by sending checks to Americans. The idea is that we will spend the money, thereby "stimulating" the economy and avoid a recession.
Donald J. Boudreaux, chairman of the economics department at George Mason University, sums it up:
Such stimulus, however, is futile. Government cannot create genuine spending power; the most it can do is to transfer it from Smith to Jones. If the Treasury sends a stimulus check to Jones, the money comes from taxes, from borrowing, or is newly created.
If it comes from taxes, the value of Jones's stimulus check is offset by the greater taxes paid by Smith, who will then have fewer dollars to spend or invest. If Uncle Sam borrows to pay for the stimulus checks, this borrowing takes money out of the private sector. Any dollars borrowed – whether from foreigners or fellow Americans – for purposes of stimulus would have been spent or invested in other ways were they not loaned to the government.
The only other means of paying for such stimulus is for theto create new money. Unfortunately, this option leads inevitably to inflation.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Why? He didn't do it.
There is ample reason to believe that investigators and prosecutors withheld evidence during his trial. The result: An innocent goes to jail.
It should be a felony for any police officer or prosecutor to withhold evidence from any person charged with a crime.
Two of the prosecutors are now judges. They should ether resign or be impeached. Immediately.
I hope Masters succeeds in a civil suit against the investigators and prosecutors.
News' publisher John Temple introduced the paper's readers to it today. In his column he wrote: "Key to (us) was that the site had to provide equal representation from both sides and it had to be thoughtful and intelligent. This wasn't to be a place for screamers."
That is good news. Unfortunately for regular News columnist Paul Campos, it leaves him out.
Friday, January 18, 2008
In a perverse way, I actually want Dook to have a better football team.
In the Dook's latest attempt to lift the program out of the mire, they have hired head coach David Cutcliffe. Most recently, Cutcliffe was offensive coordinator at Tennessee. Before that, he was the head coach at Ole Miss, where his Rebels won four bowl games. In his best year, the Rebels won 10 games and a share of the SEC Western Division title.
I hope he makes it more fun to beat the Devils than it has been.
In an ESPN.com article, Cutcliffe said "You win in college football with great assistant coaches and great organization, and we're going to have both."
What about the players, Coach? I think you'll need some of them, too.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
He kicked a photographer for snapping a picture of him during a prayer.
Even better, he will not apologize. Even better than that, he wants an apology:
"I think the Rocky Mountain News photographer ought to apologize to the House and to me and to all the people whom he disrupted," Bruce said. "He needs to get a lesson in manners and decorum."
That's a hoot. A man kicks another man, and its the kickee that needs a lesson in manners and decorum.
There is only one conclusion: Bruce is a nutcase. A complete and absolute fruitcake. He will continue to embarrass the Republican party, and they only have themselves to blame. Bruce was appointed to fill a vacant seat. If this is the best they can do, they should be embarassed.
Tepid defenses from party hacks do not help:
"Like all of us, he has some human failings, and today, with the antagonistic way the press was pressuring him, he may have reacted the wrong way," said El Paso County Republican Party Chairman Greg Garcia."Antagonistic press?" Please. If you don't want to dance, don't show up at the prom.
"He may have reacted the wrong way?" What? Under what set of circumstance could his actions be justified?
I'm almost more embarrassed for Garcia than I am for Bruce.
Mostly, I am embarrassed for the State of Colorado.
Monday, January 14, 2008
We need to provide first rate mental health treatment to our soldiers that need it. People that willingly sign up for military service should be among our nation's top priority.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Friday night, the Pioneers hosted fellow West Coast Hockey Association member Wisconsin at Magness Arena. As the game clock wound down, the Pioneers had a 3-2 lead. As time expired, it appeared that the Badgers scored a goal just prior to the final buzzer. The referee disallowed the goal, saying it was late.
The ref was wrong, and the WCHA office issued a statement the following day acknowledging that the goal should have counted.
Mark Kiszla, of the Denver Post, wrote that the ref in question "handed DU a victory it didn't deserve."
No, he did not.
Unless, of course, the goal would have counted for two points. But in hockey, each goal counts just once.
If the goal had counted, the game would have been tied and would have gone to overtime, where the Pioneers might have won anyway.
Ergo, the ref did not hand the victory to DU.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Sunday, January 06, 2008
This time, the Heels take on the 18th ranked Clemson Tigers on the road.
Once again, FSN hired a play-by-play guy that did not bother to read the pronunciation guide. This time, it was Tim Brando. For that matter, color guy Mike Gminski got it wrong, too.
You pronounce Marcus Ginyard’s last name “gin YARD,” not “GIN yerd.” Sheesh.
(And the “g” is a hard “g” like “ghost.” Everybody gets that part correct.)P.S. It was a great game. The Heels won in OT on a last second three pointer by Wayne Ellington. They pronounced "Ellington" correctly.
For instance, take Denver Post columnist Bob Ewegen. (Please!)
In his column today, he wrote about the recent "adverse possession" ruling from a Boulder Court that allowed one rich couple to take title of some property from another rich couple - for no compensation.
Ewegen says that "there really won't be much the legislature can do about it, beyond fine-tuning the archaic 'adverse possession' laws dating back to medieval England."
He is wrong.
The legislature, if it is so inclined, can abolish the doctrine of adverse possession altogether.
It would be simple. The legislature could pass a statute that reads "Colorado no longer recognizes the common law doctrine of adverse possession."
Fine tuning? They can take a sledge hammer to the entire piano.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Thursday, January 03, 2008
"Our most basic civil liberty is the right to be kept alive."
One of these quotations is from a courageous man willing to give his life in the name of freedom. The other is from a vacillating and spineless coward.
Chatman served 26 years of a 99 year sentence for a rape he did not commit.
I have to wonder how this happens. One of my immediate thoughts is that juries do not take the concept of "reasonable doubt" seriously enough.
I have personally seen people convicted solely on the basis of testimony of convicted felons. These felons receive time off their sentence for their testimony. Somehow, jurors believe convicted drug dealers enough to put someone in jail. I doubt the jurors would buy a used care from these same convicted drug dealers if one of them said, "you do not have to look under the hood. You can trust me." Why not? because they would have damned serious doubt about whether or not the person was lying.
Yet somehow the jurors do not even muster reasonable doubt when it comes to believing them during someone else's trial.
In Mr. Chatman's case, the jurors believed the victim. The victim had been raped, but not by Chatman. While there is a strong desire to believe a victim, there should be a stronger desire to keep an innocent person out of jail.
In the cases where convicted felons get time off in exchange for their testimony, the State and the judge are complicit with the jury. If a witness was paid a lousy $20 to "tell the truth" on the stand by a party in a civil case, that testimony would be disallowed and people would be facing bribery charges.
Somehow, however, the promise of freedom in the form of a lesser sentence is not subject to the same restrictions. What is more valuable? What gives more incentive to lie? Twenty bucks or freedom?
The double standard is Alice in Wonderland absurd.