WASHINGTON Dec 3, 2004 — Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson announced his resignation on Friday, warning as he left of dangers from a global flu outbreak and a possible terror attack on the nation's food supply.

"For the life of me, I cannot understand why the terrorists have not attacked our food supply because it is so easy to do," Thompson said as announced his departure before department employees. "We are importing a lot of food from the Middle East, and it would be easy to tamper with that."

Congress Approves Of $250 Billion

WASHINGTON, DC—In a near-unanimous vote Monday, 434 members of the House and all 100 senators voiced their approval of $250 billion. "My fellow members of Congress, $250 billion is an incredibly vast sum of money," U.S. Rep. Dennis Rehberg (R-MT) said. "That much money is totally awesome." House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the lone dissenter, disagreed with Rehberg's assessment, saying that, unless the money was stacked on a table in one-dollar bills, it was "pretty cool," but not "awesome."

Rep. Pitts: Abstinence study is merely a "partisan attack"

Washington-Congressman Joe Pitts (R, PA-16) today sent the following letter to the Editor of the Washington Post regarding an ideologically-charged report on federally-funded abstinence education programs.

Dear Editor:

I am disappointed that your paper would confuse Congressman Henry Waxman's ideologically-driven report on federally funded abstinence education programs ["Some Abstinence Programs Mislead Teens, Report Says," Dec. 2] with a serious examination of their effectiveness.

This report was prepared at taxpayer expense by partisan committee staff and was not reviewed in any hearings or publicly discussed with experts in abstinence education. Instead, Mr. Waxman took advantage of a slow news cycle to pass off his ideological attack as a legitimate congressional study. This type of misleading public relations tactic abuses taxpayer funds and distracts from the underlying fact that abstinence is the only 100 percent effective means of preventing sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy.

Federally-funded abstinence education programs are held to the strictest standards. The curricula used to educate our youth are meticulously researched and confirmed by reputable sources. By blasting abstinence education, Mr. Waxman puts at great risk so many of our youth who deserve to hear the hopeful and empowering message of abstinence education.

Additionally, polls show that parents want these programs. They want schools and the government to assist them in encouraging their kids to make positive and healthy life choices. If asked to side with partisan committee staff or parents, I'd choose parents every time.

This partisan committee staff report should be received with great skepticism. I'm disappointed that the Washington Post was so naïve as to take this partisan study on face value.

Sincerely,
Joe Pitts

"Pope condemns Bush," wish Times, others>BR> You know how Pope John Paul II condemned the U.S. invasion of Iraq, right? I mean, everyone knows that he pronounced it was not a "just war," and has publicly chastised President Bush for his warmongering on many occasions. Right? I mean, that has to be true, or else the New York Times and the BBC couldn't keep saying it. Right?

Well, Peter Robinson over at The Corner just refuses to reasonable about this. He actually wants to know when the pope literally, you know, said any of that stuff. Robinson wants someone -- anyone -- to e-mail him some actual quote from the actual pope that confirms his oft-adduced "outspoken opposition to the war in Iraq."

Sounds like a challenge to me. If you find such a statement by Pope John Paul II, e-mail it to me as well as to Robinson. The first one to send me any qualifying quote will win the coveted Gleeson Researcher of the Century Award, an honor so exclusive no one's ever earned it.

[I]t is not considered euthanasia to administer whatever quantity of drugs is necessary to releive pain, even if it may or will certainly cause death. I know from personal experience that the withholding of morphine to surgical patients because of suppression of circulatory function allows real pain, but because it does to allow recovery it is with held. I understood that for terminal patients, one may freely treat the pain as needed even if it hastens death. A fine line, but real, and may be what the translated statement [by the Dutch bishops] means.

You may not be able to link into this but give it a shot [i.e. subscriber-only]. It is an article from thestreet.com talking about how the traditional news sources, e.g., NYT, WaPo, Trib, need to develop answers to the blogosphere. The website comes at this from a financial survival point of view. These companies have to adapt or die. They are losing their readers. The writer notes how, “…my fingers no longer stain black when I read the news, and that spells trouble…” for the newsprint media. One solution mentioned so that these companies can survive is to buy the blog sponsors. That would be frightening.

According to a Council of Europe report on Euthanasia in 2003
“A number of quantitative studies of the rate and major characteristics of these practices have been conducted in 1990, 1995 and 2001. These have demonstrated a disturbingly high incidence of euthanasia being carried out without the patient’s explicit request and an equally disturbing failure by medical professionals to report euthanasia cases to the proper regulatory authority.”(Emphasis added)

As originally contemplated, doctor assisted suicide was supposed to be a rare event to ease the unrelenting pain and suffering of a person who was not going to get better.

What its become is a way to knock off granny before she becomes a financial burden on the family or to allow the kids to get their hands on granny’s estate before illness eats up the inheritance.

And, more and more, it appears granny - and now junior- is not being consulted on the subject.

I too grew up in the Eighties and think DD are underappreciated. I don't know if you've ever seen the video to `New Moon on Monday' [well, of course!] but it hit home with me. I was a Poli-Sci minor studying the Soviet Union at the time and the video, which appears to take place in Eastern Europe and chronicles an anti-governent demonstration----really romanticized for me, in a good way, anti-communism

That was my take at the time, anyway. Don't even get me started on the Apple `1984' ad.

"It is said there that one of the methods of treatments is, "And beat them." This is not obligatory, but it is permitted and it does not suit all wives. All Koranic commentators agree on this. Beating does not benefit all wives, but it is suitable for some."

These comments were made, not one thousand years ago, but last week.

Via the Financial Times:

"US distributors of the film Merchant of Venice, which premiered in London this week, have asked the director to cut out a background fresco by a Venetian old master so it is fit for American television viewers."

I note that other banned items included the "simulated slaughtering of goats".

Protecting 'the children', I suppose.

From a letter to the Guardian. The context is that the writer, an academic (I note without surprise) is addressing some questions posed in an earlier article:

"Would you rather have George Bush or Vladimir Putin? Given we have Bush, it is regrettable that we need Putin in order to fetter him and his fellow neocons. "

Simply deranged.

K-lo,
Duran Duran in Atlanta last night, ROCKED!
A forty-something Corner fan,

The Church's position on the subject of euthanasia is well known, constantly reasserted and confirmed with the intention to uphold the dignity and life of every human being: "It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. Nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it amounts to the violation of the divine law, an offence against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life and an attack on humanity" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iura et Bona, Chap. II).

The Roman Catholic Church realizes quite well that new born children can suffer from extremely serious afflictions, leading to agonizing situations. For both the children and their parents this means a via dolorosa. Without doubting the honorable motives of the doctors at the Academic Hospital of Groningen or the care they bring, the Church does not consider the active ending of the life of a newborn to be morally acceptable. Furthermore, the Church points to the proper alternatives that are used worldwide, such as witholding of further medical treatment, minimizing pain, and/or terminal sedation.

Many, many readers have written in to say that they too loooove that diamond commercial for the same reason that I do, but with a question. Who is ‘this woman’ ?

Needless to say, another reader obliges:

“I too enjoyed the DTC television ad "Declaration" - in fact, I've never so enjoyed having my intelligence insulted! I took the time following your Corner post to trace the actor in question, Dagmara Domincyz. It happens that she played the love interest in the recent Jim Caviezel vehicle, "The Count of Monte Cristo."

I don’t think this makes us all stalkers.

I'm swamped with other stuff right now (and I've already sounded-off on Beinart) but here are two emails re Drum's take:

He writes, "[Islam is] not fundamentally expansionist, and its power to kill people isn't even remotely in the same league."

1. Islam is expanding in Europe with no currently visible bounds. Islam is explicitly expansionist - it's called the Caliphate.

2. Islam is unlike fascism or communism - in that - it is not an external threat. It is a parasitic, internal threat - and that's specifically why it's so dangerous. It corrupts Western societies from within, using our own "tolerance" and lack of will to defeat us.
3. Iran and Pakistan both have nukes. It's not "in the same league" as Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan - because it's MUCH WORSE. But it's not at all qualitatively different than the Soviet Union. Quantitatively different, yes, qualitatively, not at all.

After all, radical Islam succeeded in doing something no country (to my knowledge) has ever been able to do: Live in our country, to plot mass murder against us, using only readily available weapons, we willingly supplied.

Drum seems to have his metaphors mixed up. He says that in the 5 years leading up to Pearl Harbor, we had this, and that, and that done by the Germans and Japanese, but that since 9/11 nothing of such import has been seen out of Islam. What he forgets is that 9/11 was Pearl Harbor. Germany and Japan had no major victories after Pearl Harbor. Maybe the lack of another 9/11 has to do with Bush's prosecution of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and stepped up security at home--Gitmo, the prosecution of Jihadist groups, etc. He accidentally makes a good argument for Bush.

From the Senate Joint Economic Committee:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported today that 112,000 new payroll jobs were created in November, while the unemployment rate fell to 5.4 percent. November’s payroll jobs gains followed gains of 303,000 in October and 119,000 in September. Including the benchmark revision of the payroll survey that was released in October*, 2.4 million new payroll jobs have been created since August 2003. Over 2 million new payroll jobs have been created thus far in 2004.

Full release: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Highlights:

* During November, payroll employment increased by 112,000, while the unemployment rate fell to 5.4 percent.
* According to the payroll survey and including the benchmark revision, 2.4 million new jobs have been created since August 2003, and over 2 million new jobs have been created thus far in 2004.

Charts:

* How Many New Jobs?: http://jec.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Charts.Detail&Image_id=89
* 15 Straight Months of Payroll Job Growth: http://jec.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Charts.Detail&Image_id=84
* Unemployment Rate Declining: http://jec.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Charts.Detail&Image_id=69

The British Independent reports:

As American forces closed in on Baghdad last year, senior members of Saddam Hussein’s government devised a plan to send suicide bombers in vehicles packed with devastating high-energy explosives that were under UN safeguards.

The disappearance of the explosive, known as HMX (high melting explosives), in mysterious circumstances at the end of the war caused a few nasty moments for President George Bush’s presidential election campaign last month.

A letter to Saddam from Dr Naji Sabri, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, five days before the fall of Baghdad, suggests taking the HMX from underground bunkers, where it had been kept under seal by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and giving it to suicide bombers.

He wrote: “It is possible to increase the explosive power of the suicide-driven cars by using the highly explosive material [HMX] which is sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] and stored in the warehouses of the Military Industry Departments.”

The Iraqi regime took credit for several suicide bombs towards the end of the war. After the fall of Saddam, one of the worst attacks - which killed 22 UN workers and the special envoy, Sergio Vieira de Mello, in August 2003 - had an explosive force that could only have come from military grade explosives.

The disappearance of 350 tons of explosives, including 191 tons of HMX, at the time of the war in April last year became a crucial issue in the last weeks of the US presidential election campaign. John Kerry portrayed the failure to secure the explosives, which could have been used to kill US soldiers, as a symbol of Mr Bush’s incompetence in Iraq.

It now appears that senior officials in the Iraqi government were discussing the removal of the HMX before the fall of Saddam. The letter from Dr Sabri, obtained by The Independent, was sent on 4 April 2003 as US tanks were advancing on Baghdad. It said that the world was getting the impression that Iraqi civilians were co-operating with American soldiers.

[Nod to Little Green Footballs]

The British Independent reports:

As American forces closed in on Baghdad last year, senior members of Saddam Hussein’s government devised a plan to send suicide bombers in vehicles packed with devastating high-energy explosives that were under UN safeguards.

The disappearance of the explosive, known as HMX (high melting explosives), in mysterious circumstances at the end of the war caused a few nasty moments for President George Bush’s presidential election campaign last month.

A letter to Saddam from Dr Naji Sabri, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, five days before the fall of Baghdad, suggests taking the HMX from underground bunkers, where it had been kept under seal by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and giving it to suicide bombers.

He wrote: “It is possible to increase the explosive power of the suicide-driven cars by using the highly explosive material [HMX] which is sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] and stored in the warehouses of the Military Industry Departments.”

The Iraqi regime took credit for several suicide bombs towards the end of the war. After the fall of Saddam, one of the worst attacks - which killed 22 UN workers and the special envoy, Sergio Vieira de Mello, in August 2003 - had an explosive force that could only have come from military grade explosives.

The disappearance of 350 tons of explosives, including 191 tons of HMX, at the time of the war in April last year became a crucial issue in the last weeks of the US presidential election campaign. John Kerry portrayed the failure to secure the explosives, which could have been used to kill US soldiers, as a symbol of Mr Bush’s incompetence in Iraq.

It now appears that senior officials in the Iraqi government were discussing the removal of the HMX before the fall of Saddam. The letter from Dr Sabri, obtained by The Independent, was sent on 4 April 2003 as US tanks were advancing on Baghdad. It said that the world was getting the impression that Iraqi civilians were co-operating with American soldiers.

[Nod to Little Green Footballs]

We're doing better this morning, but still in third. We were in fourth last night when I posted that link (sorry about that Powerline). If our third-place status doesn't change by the end of the day, some NR interns will be shot, in the leg at first, northward soon after.

But we are soaring in best group blog and Jim's way out in front for best new blog. But how can we be the Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu waza Banga of the worldwide web while eating Glenn Reynold's dust? I ask you, How! HOW!?!?!

[Note interns get scared by large and loud ALL CAPS, cowering under desks]

Since I posted that link to the Weblog Awards about 1,400 people have voted. Mostly, it seems, for the Corner. At least in the top category (I hope you're voting for the Kerry Spot too).

I've mentioned that my anti-youth vote columns seem to have a half-life. Here's one that just arrived at my syndicated column email address:

Dear Mr.Goldberg, You are a very smug and unhappy little man in my eyes. I can't believe someone especially a journalist whose words get published all over the world would have the nerve to say that Youths Shouldn't Vote. Well just because teenagers did not live through everything you have does not mean you know way more than us . We have school Government classes everyday that tell us exactly what goes on and we pay much attention to everything we read. We teenagers have our opinions just as adults do and sometimes one opinion is better than another, but you don't need to call us ignorant and make us feel like we are inexperienced with voting. We know what goes on and we pick which man would be best at being President. We are smart as well as you with politics and know just about as much as you do and maybe even a little more. Yes as well to teenagers having t.v. shows that tell us things are sexy and cool and hot but you don't know what we really think and feel. You have made us teens feels stupid and your sarcasm doesn't help either. If you think that teens can't be serious about voting and want to make them know that in harsh words then maybe you shouldn't have the job you have. You have hurt alot of people with your article. Sincerely, Angry teen

Vote your conscience. Vote it early. Vote it often.

Note: Remember to scroll down to the other categories. There are a lot of them. And a lot of blogs I've never heard of.

Several Supreme Court dark horses are making the rounds. Former solicitor general Ted Olson, 64, could get the job. Another possibility is former Missouri senator John Danforth, now the US ambassador to the United Nations....Danforth’s integrity and character are widely admired.

Working against Danforth would be his age—68. The oldest person appointed to the court in recent years was Richmond’s Lewis Powell at 64. When Powell was approached in 1969 about a possible appointment, he advised President Nixon to “appoint a relatively young man who will have the prospect of at least two decades of service.” Powell took his seat in 1972 and retired in 1987 after 15 years on the Court.

From a reader:

Jonah,

I went to the range with my sister’s boyfriend last weekend, and he brought his newly-acquired Ruger Mini-14. The clerk looked at it and said, “That must be the least-lethal rifle ever.” When I asked why he said so, he responded, “They used those things all the time on the A-Team, and nobody ever died!”

Best Regards,

This email could be from me -- if I'd gone to Middlebury and lived in Japan. But I should note that the best cartoon when it came to not observing the no-kill rule was Johnny Quest. I never really liked it much, but I was always amazed that the henchmen would catch some lead in their chests and die. That was cool. Good times, good times...oh right. The email:

When I was a sophomore at Middlebury (whom am I kidding…it continued through junior year) there were about five of us at my house that would catch a daily double billing of Transformers and GI Joe back to back. Personally, I went in more for Joe than Transformers except I couldn’t take the no-kill rule in Joe. If a Cobra plane was shot down they had to show two Cobra pilots safely gliding to earth in parachutes. We even instituted this awful practice of throwing a bucket of ice water on housemates in the shower. These attacks were known as “Cobra” attacks and were always accompanied by the battle cry “COBRAAAA!!”

Later, when living in Japan there was a group of us that would kill for any American television and that meant Knight Rider followed by the A-Team. A-Team was fantastic, but they had the same no kill rule as GI Joe. It made me long for the days of Magnum PI where he would kill someone at least once a month (I used to muse that Magnum must spend about 3/4’s of his off-camera time in the court room)

Yes, yes I know the flying turtle was named Gamera. In fact I wrote in 2001:

(For the record, yes, I know that the turtle's name was Gamera, and that in fact he wasn't a colleague of Godzilla at all. In fact he never appeared in any Godzilla, i.e. Toho Productions, films period.)

More than meets the eye. Transformers, robots in disguise! This link (via instapundit) made me so nostalgic for the Transformers. Ah, high school. Come home. Heat up some Stouffer's french bread pizza. Check to see that the 4:30 movie doesn't stink (wouldn't want to miss that flying turtle with the flame coming out of his leg holes). Than switch over to see what hijinx those whacky decepticons were getting into this week.

Sigh....

Transformers
More than meets the eye
Transformers
Robots in Disguise
Transformers

Autobots wage their Battle
To destroy the evil forces
Of the Decepticons

It's judgment day and now we've made our stand
And now the powers of darkness
Have been driven from our land

The Battle's over but the war has just begun
And this way it will remain til the day when all are one

Transformers
Transformers
Transformers
Transformers
More than meets the eye

How did I miss this?? Former Democratic congressmen -- paid by a lobbyist hired by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych endorsed the Ukranian election.

Suffice it to say I can't remember the last time I received so many differing emails about a column. Lots of people agree, lots of people disagree. Lots of people hated it, lots of people loved it and folks within each group disagree wildly as to the reasons why the reacted the way they did.

I'm not going to clutter the Corner with any more emails about this. But let me just offer a scattershot of responses rapid fire. I don't think I'm making up my own religion (hint my daughter won't be attending the Synagogue of Jonah); I do believe that morality is transcendent and have never said otherwise; I do not think religion is trivial or silly. I think people seeking to logically diagram today's column missed the point a bit.

I think you can be un-religious and moral and I think you can be religious and immoral. But, I think the odds of you being moral are greatly increased if you are religious. Even religious people within the same tradition can disagree about what is or is not moral. Except in the most glaring circumstances we figure out what is moral by weighing history, text, arguments, etc and make our best judgement. There can be no, or very, very few perfectly moral acts, because we live in an imperfect world.

Yes, the soup can was a false idol and I can understand why that analogy annoyed people. My only response there is that I am perfectly comfortable with the argument that we will know fairly quickly if someone's religion is based upon a false idol by the actions that flow from his form of worship. For example, we can tell that the Thuggee cult was a bad faith largely from the fact that it required its adherents to murder people. But also because they liked mint jelly. I am making up the part about mint jelly, even though I find it disgusting and I think all moral people would be compelled to agree with me.

Lastly, yes my argument was a secular argument, not a religious one. In other words, I think it's perfectly legitimate and reasonable for people to be offended or simply to disagree on theological or religious grounds. The whole point of being concerned with morality is that it affords some purchase for us all to discuss things. I am not qualified to discuss the finer points of theology except as an amateur in the strictest sense.

John: As you may recall, before the election I was tossing around the idea of writing an article on Bush's top ten political mistakes in the event he lost. I was going to include two Cabinet appointments: Ann Veneman as Agriculture Secretary and Norm Mineta at Transportation. Both are Californians. And California is a big agricultural producer and exporter, which perhaps made Veneman seem like a good choice. But ag has a much larger impact in other states. A politically competent ag secretary from Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Iowa could have locked down his home state. Transportation is also a bit of an empire. If it's a prelude to a 2006 run by Johanns, this ag appointment looks a lot better than the last one--although getting Nelson to flip would be even better.

(Incidentally, I was talking to a top Republican about that Senate seat and he quipped to me, "We'll flip it either with [Nelson] or without him.")

We were scared of carny folk because they smell like cabbage?

Oh, wait, that's Austin Powers.

I love this word. I didn't remember it from Habits of the Heart which I read in college. From a reader:

Jonah-

I appreciated your abbreviated g-file on belief in God. I am a minister, so it is my business to ask people (although not necessarily public figures like you) what they think about God, beyond what they practice. In my case, however, most people don't think I am being rude, they just think I am doing my job. I do believe that there is an unhealthy interest in what people believe, especially when you are in no position to enter into an ongoing conversation on the topic.

Now, to Sheilaism. Your disgust at people picking their favorite items off salad bar of religious belief is right-on. It is really a way of saying, "I only believe in anything, but I do pick and choose the best of everything to create a religion that fits my lifestyle." Last time I checked, any faithful religious observance (no matter the religion or tradition) shapes one's life, not the other way around. You are not the first to dislike or observe this phenomenon. Robert Bellah in Habits of the Heart written in the 1980's interviewed a woman who described her religion as "Sheilaism," which was a smattering of all the things that she thought were most true and fit her own outlook.

I thought that you might like to know the technical term and where it came from.

Peace,

Now, this is a helpful term I didn't remember from when I read Habits of the Heart in college. I think I'll be using it for quite a while. From a reader:

Jonah- I appreciated your abbreviated g-file on belief in God. I am a minister, so it is my business to ask people (although not necessarily public figures like you) what they think about God, beyond what they practice. In my case, however, most people don't think I am being rude, they just think I am doing my job. I do believe that there is an unhealthy interest in what people believe, especially when you are in no position to enter into an ongoing conversation on the topic.

Now, to Sheilaism. Your disgust at people picking their favorite items off salad bar of religious belief is right-on. It is really a way of saying, "I only believe in anything, but I do pick and choose the best of everything to create a religion that fits my lifestyle." Last time I checked, any faithful religious observance (no matter the religion or tradition) shapes one's life, not the other way around. You are not the first to dislike or observe this phenomenon. Robert Bellah in Habits of the Heart written in the 1980's interviewed a woman who described her religion as "Sheilaism," which was a smattering of all the things that she thought were most true and fit her own outlook.

I thought that you might like to know the technical term and where it came from.

Peace,