More on the food crap: Radley Balko spots an odd bit of truth coming from a politician:

Article: "I don't want to start banning things," [Dept. of Health secretary Tommy] Thompson said. "Prohibition has never worked."

Radley: "Quaint, almost charming when a powerful political leader slips up and speaks the truth, isn't it?"


It's shocking to me actually. The way our government seems to be run, you almost expect someone who says this to be hauled out on their ass the second the words leave their lips.

The bill banning "you made me fat by selling me what I wanted!" lawsuits passed the House, and is on it's way to the senate. Articles on that are here, here, and here.

One of the representatives opposing it provided the following quote, overlooking a larger problem...

"This is a fake bill that addresses a fake problem," said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). "We have a real problem with obesity in this country, and this bill does nothing to deal with it."

It'd be hilarious if it weren't so pathetic. People, put your noggins to work on this one for a moment: this is a congressman complaining because legislation which restates what should be (and was until the present) obvious -- that individuals who willingly purchase and consume large quantities of unhealthy food, then refuse to engage in physical activity, have no one to blame but themselves -- does not "deal with" obesity as a national problem. Just what reason is there for the federal government to even be concerned about our eating habits, or any other personal bad habits we may have for that matter? How is it within their role to micromanage our behavior?

Commit this to memory: The same power that gives you what is not yours is the same power that can take away what is. There is no distinguishing between the two, naturally if you expect the government to subsidize a part of your life it will eventually expect control over that aspect. Why? Because this type of intervention creates a counter-effect encouraging a run on the system, and barring a mass realization of personal responsibility, them and their save-you-from-yourself programs will go broke if they do not control both ends of the transaction. If you allow them to be the Alpha, in due time they will become the Omega as well.

If this bill doesn't pass the Senate, and years from now the government starts removing certain foods from the market, don't say no one told you. And to think this is just the tip of the iceberg...

9/11 ish: Hmm...some of these questions I've been curious about myself. Hopefully they get through.

If the perception that our Supreme Court is actually non-partisan was somehow still intact up to now, Scalia squished it once and for all:

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spoke before an anti-gay rights group while the court was considering a major gay rights case last year, [the LA Times] reported.
It is the third instance where critics say Scalia's actions created the appearance of a conflict of interest....Scalia, generally regarded as the court's most conservative member, spoke before Philadelphia's Urban Family Council on May 20, two months after hearing arguments in a case concerning Texas' anti-sodomy statute.

When the high court overturned that Texas law a month later, Scalia dissented forcefully — even taking the rare step of reading his dissent from the bench.

Personally, I'm wondering if maybe it's not such a bad thing for them to admit their allegiances. If we play our cards right, in the future this trend should make it a lot easier to tell who's screwy and speak out about it. As long as it's all laid out in the open, that is.

***MARKET FORCES NOT UNDER GOV'T CONTROL: NEWS AT 11***

Someone please tell me this was a joke. From Reuters:

With each successive disappointing monthly jobs report, George W. Bush's credibility comes under new scrutiny, but the president may be a victim of powerful economic forces far beyond his control....

Wow, that's a shock! The government doesn't have control over what the economy does! What kind of crazy place is this where the market works by itself....America?

"Clearly we are facing a new economic paradigm and the longer this lasts, the more difficult life is going to be for Bush as he faces the Nov. 2 election," said David Birdsell, a political scientist at Baruch College in New York.
"He cannot keep making assertions that are contradicted by the facts. The voters will not listen," he said....As recently as last month, a White House economic report predicted employment this year would average 2.6 million jobs above last year.

The slant in the article is pretty blatant, you can practically hear them cheering for Kerry. Too bad they couldn't put that type of effort into informing people that economic predictions are worthless regardless of who's making them.

So...Iraq is going to have a constitution no matter what...

A long-delayed signing ceremony for Iraq's temporary constitution looks likely to go ahead Monday after a group of Shiite Muslim leaders said they had ironed out concerns with the text over the weekend.

"You will hear very good news, very soon, the signing will take place Monday," Governing Council member Muwaffaq al-Rubaie said Sunday, after talks at the home of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the revered Shiite spiritual leader who holds an effective veto over the document. "An agreement has been reached and the signature will take place in any event on Monday," he added, without specifying the exact nature of the accord, or whether it had been approved by other parties on the council.

Sounds to me like is being rammed through. I swear, the more I find out about what's going on over there, the less hope I have. At this point anything short of them merging with Iran might as well be a success.