Minor Thoughts from me to you

This isn't going to make my wife very happy. She loves playing Scrabble online.

Facebook Asked to Remove "Scrabulous" - New York Times:

LONDON (Reuters) - The makers of word game Scrabble have asked Facebook to remove its popular online version "Scrabulous," which they say infringes their copyright.

The U.S. and Canada rights to Scrabble are owned by Hasbro Inc, the world's second-largest toy and game company, while the biggest, Mattel Inc, has the rest of the world.

"Letters have been sent to Facebook in the United States regarding the Scrabulous application," said a Mattel spokeswoman in Britain.

"Mattel values its intellectual property and actively protects its brands and trademarks.

"As Mattel owns the rights to the Scrabble trademark outside the United States and Canada, we are currently reviewing our position regarding other countries."

I'd recommend that Mattel buy Scrabulous, rename it to "Scrabble Online", leave it on Facebook -- then thank the founders for making the game more popular and accessible. Seriously, what harm is there to playing Scrabble on Facebook and why wouldn't Mattel want to expand their market?

Division of Labour: I fall victim to the drug war:

As I've mentioned, I had transplant surgery on Tuesday. After removing my IV lines, the doctors put me on the controlled substance Percocet for pain relief, to be taken as needed up to 4x daily. (Note: the stuff works.) Under federal rules, I had to request each dose, and the nurse had to watch me take it upon delivery. (I might hoard and resell them?) The hospital could not give me any Percocet to take home with me when I was discharged on Saturday. But they could write me a prescription, to be filled at my pharmacy. Problem: I was discharged at 7pm, and my pharmacy had closed at 6pm. The hospital pharmacy was also closed. So, thanks to federal anti-narcotic hysteria, I would be without pain relief until my pharmacy opened on Sunday at 10am. The hospital said that they had faxed all my new prescriptions there, so my agent went to pick them up. But no Percocet was among the pills she returned with - under federal rules, prescriptions for narcotic pain relievers can't be faxed or phoned in; only presented in person in hard copy. She had to make a second trip, carrying the written script they'd given me.

I think it's time to return to a free market in narcotics.

I don't always enjoy listening to Rush Limbaugh. He tends to be bombastic and more than a bit over the top. I think that his brash rhetoric probably turns people away, who might otherwise agree with him. Still, when he's right, he's right.

One of his monologues today was perfectly on point.

No, no, no. Let me tell you something about this wealth business. I've been broke twice in my life. When I was 31 years old, I was making $17,000 a year. I have been fired I forgot how many times. Seven times! So I've been there. This constant refrain that I'm "out of touch," is just bogus. That's another thing that really bugs me: this movement within the Republican Party to claim that the middle class is in great suffering and pain. I understand if you own a house, and your value of your equity in your house is plummeting, that you're worried, and I understand that totally. What you need to hear is the truth of why it happened, so that you can make plans in the future. These are cycles, and everybody in every country and every society goes through them, and ours are not nearly as bad as people around the rest of the world are. I know health care is expensive. That's why I'm focused not on making it more expensive, but on making it cheaper, and how you do that? You do it with conservatism! I'm by no means out of touch on this. If the health care industry were priced like every other industry is on the patient's ability to pay, then we'd fix the problem, and that's the direction we have to head in.

But if we're going to keep this notion that everybody's entitled to have whatever they want medically paid for by their neighbors, then we are finished. We are finished as a country; we are finished as a society. You can talk about my wealth, but let me tell you something, sir. I don't depend on anybody else for anything, and it was one of my objectives when I grew up. I didn't want to be obligated. I didn't want to be dependent. I didn't want to owe anybody. I don't buy into insurance plans because it's a hassle! Now, I know a lot of people don't have that freedom. I used to not have that freedom, either. But I do now because I worked for it -- and if I can do it, a lot more people can do it than think they can, and that's conservatism again. People are much better than they know. They have much more potential than they know. But when you've got a Democrat Party and a movement telling them they suck, telling them they can't get anywhere because the deck is stacked against them and the people stacking the deck are Republicans and so forth, then you are diminishing the country; you're diminishing the future, and you're destroying people's lives.

......

The health care problem in this country is getting worse, while people are voting on for people who are making it worse because they hear these people saying, "I'm going to fix it." Well, the people in charge of fixing it have no interest in it getting fixed, because if it gets fixed, you don't need them. You can rely on yourself. This health care debate is one of the most infuriating things I witness every day, because I get so sick and tired of people buying hook, line, and sinker a lie. "I'm going to get everybody covered. I'm going to make sure everybody gets health insurance in this country. We're going to make sure it's not just the rich." It doesn't happen, does it? When you have government telling private industry how to operate, this is exactly what you get, and it's going to happen in energy. It's already happening in a number of other industries, too. It's happening in the auto industry...

Mary Anastasia O'Grady wrote in the Wall Street Journal about the findings of the latest Index of Economic Freedom.

"The evidence is piling up that neither government nor multilateral spending on education and infrastructure are key to development. To move out of poverty, countries instead need fast growth; and to get that they need to unleash the animal spirits of entrepreneurs.

The nearby table shows the 2008 rankings but doesn't tell the whole story. The Index also reports that the freest 20% of the world's economies have twice the per capita income of those in the second quintile and five times that of the least-free 20%. In other words, freedom and prosperity are highly correlated.

Why are some countries so poor? Why is the U.S. so much richer than countries like India? Is it because the U.S. gobbles up the wealth of the world and doesn't play nice with other countries? Not really, no.

In "Narrowing the Economic Gap in the 21st Century," Stephen Parente, associate professor of economics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, debunks several World Bank myths by showing that it is not the resources -- land, workforce and capital -- of an economy that play the most important role in explaining higher income countries. Instead it is "the efficiency at which a society uses its resources to produce goods and services."

Mr. Parente cites the microeconomic research of McKinsey Global Institute, which estimates that modern industry in India could take a huge bite out of its productivity gap with U.S. competitors by simply upgrading production techniques. India doesn't need another multilateral education project. It needs to tap into knowledge already available in successful economies -- the information and technology is out there. The trouble is that it is unavailable in many countries like India, because government barriers and constraints to limit competition make access difficult or impossible.

In other words, the U.S. is richer because American workers do more with what they have, not because they have more to do something with.

Don Boudreaux puts it quite nicely.

As Julian Simon taught us, the ultimate resource is the free human mind. A land rich in petroleum, arable land, and iron ore and other minerals is useless to a society of humans incapable of rational thought and intolerant of change. Nor would such a land of potential plenty realize its potential if its inhabitants are restrained by tyranny or by widely shared misconceptions that individual enterprise, innovation, profit, and the pursuit of worldly pleasures are degrading or sinful.

But unleash people from the countless foolish and rent-seeking constraints imposed by government and from constraints imposed by their own superstitions and they will create resources. They will flourish and prosper, not only materially but also culturally and intellectually. A free people can and will build a dynamically prosperous society in even relatively barren and inhospitable places such as New England, Arizona, and Hong Kong. An unfree people will languish in poverty even in lush paradises such as much of Central and South America and in lands teeming with 'natural' resources such as Congo and Russia.

(Via Cafe Hayek: Freedom and the Ultimate Resource.)

This is the first time I've ever heard a candidate give the right answer, when asked how Christians should approach social problems. The fact that Fred Thompson refused to pander to the crowd just ices the cake.

Thompson Talks Religion - From The Road:

Mixing theology and social issues on the campaign trail is rare for Fred Thompson, but he discussed it today answering a question from a member of the audience.

A woman asked him if he would "as a Christian, as a conservative" continue President Bush's programs to combat global AIDS.

"Christ didn't tell us to go to the government and pass a bill to get some of these social problems dealt with. He told us to do it," Thompson said.

"The government has its role, but we need to keep firmly in mind the role of the government, and the role of us as individuals and as Christians on the other."

Since when did playing poker become illegal?

Another Dumb Poker Raid:

Police in San Mateo County, California apparently first spent months investigating the small-stakes poker game. From this firsthand account, it looks like a couple of the officers were playing regularly for several weeks before sending in the SWAT team, guns drawn, last week. If California is like most states (and I believe it is), a poker game is only illegal if the house is taking a rake off the top. In this case, it looks like that "rake" was the $5 the extra the hosts asked from each buy-in to pay for pizza and beer.

Police also took a 13-year-old girl out of the home, away from her parents, and turned her over to child protective services. In addition to the charge of running an illegal gambling operation, the hosts are also charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Good thing the poor girl was saved before slouching toward an inevitable life of crime.

...

This account suggests the police hinted to individual players that the hosts may have been cheating or defrauding them, though that's not apparent in the news accounts. Firsthand accounts on poker sites have only good things to say about the hosts. Of course, even if the hosts were cheating, it wouldn't justify a full-on raid, particularly in mid-tournament. The SWAT tactics seem more like intimidation. Raiding in mid-tournament also ensures there's a $1,300 pot to seize for the sheriff department's general fund.

(Via The Agitator.)

The hardest thing I ever had to read was the "goodbye" that I wrote for my grandfather's funeral. This was the second hardest.

Obsidian Wings: Andy Olmsted:

Andrew Olmsted, who also posted here as G'Kar, was killed yesterday in Iraq. Andy gave me a post to publish in the event of his death; the last revisions to it were made in July.

Andy was a wonderful person: decent, honorable, generous, principled, courageous, sweet, and very funny. The world has a horrible hole in it that nothing can fill. I'm glad Andy -- generous as always -- wrote something for me to publish now, since I have no words at all. Beyond: Andy, I will miss you.

---

"I am leaving this message for you because it appears I must leave sooner than I intended. I would have preferred to say this in person, but since I cannot, let me say it here." G'Kar, Babylon 5

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." Plato*

This is an entry I would have preferred not to have published, but there are limits to what we can control in life, and apparently I have passed one of those limits. And so, like G'Kar, I must say here what I would much prefer to say in person. I want to thank hilzoy for putting it up for me. It's not easy asking anyone to do something for you in the event of your death, and it is a testament to her quality that she didn't hesitate to accept the charge. As with many bloggers, I have a disgustingly large ego, and so I just couldn't bear the thought of not being able to have the last word if the need arose. Perhaps I take that further than most, I don't know. I hope so. It's frightening to think there are many people as neurotic as I am in the world. In any case, since I won't get another chance to say what I think, I wanted to take advantage of this opportunity. Such as it is.

Please read his last words.

His family has also provided information about how you can help out.

A member of Andy Olmsted's family has just written me to say that if people want to do something in honor of him, they can send donations to a fund that has been set up for the four children of CPT Thomas Casey, who served under Andy and was killed while trying to help him.

I haven't been organized enough to write here for quite a while. I did, however, find some time to get into a discussion about health insurance over at Coyote Blog.

You may find it interesting.

Are we slaves to the state or are we entitled to the fruits of our own labor? Wisconsin state Senator Jon Erpenbach thinks that we're slaves to the state:

Sen. Jon Erpenbach has proposed a bill that at first glance appears to have nothing to do with video games: It would raise the age at which a person in Wisconsin is considered an adult in criminal court from 17 to 18.

Erpenbach's measure would pay for the added expense by creating a power pill for the counties: a 1 percent surcharge on video games and video game consoles such as Wii systems, Xboxes and PlayStations.

The fee would translate to about 60 cents more on the $60 "Halo 3 " or $2.50 more on a $250 Wii.

Erpenbach, a Middleton Democrat, said he doesn't believe video games cause crime. He was simply searching for a revenue stream to cover his bill, he said.

"Here 's one idea to pay for it," he said. "If you have another one, fine. "

Apparently, my purchases and my income are simply a "revenue stream" for Senator Erpenbach's bright ideas. If his bill is such a great idea, maybe the state could find a less worthwhile idea and shift some money from one to the other.

Wendy Henderson, a policy analyst for the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families, thinks that the state should tax video games, for the good of the children:

"Video games are perhaps not the best use of the kids' time, so if we can use some of the money from the video games and turn it into something positive, that's a really good use of that money."

What a vacuous argument. A lot of gamers are adults, not children. Given that the gaming industry makes more money than Hollywood right now, it's possible that far more adults than children play video games. Is Ms. Henderson going to dictate how my wife and I spend are time? Will she tax us if she disapproves?

Finally, 20-year old Nathan Bakken,

said the surcharge wouldn't change his game-buying habits.

"I 'm not going to boycott it or anything, " he said. "It's not that much money. And it's helping people."

Nathan, I support your right to spend your money on anything you want. If you want to give your money to help people, I suggest you buy the gift cards in the checkout lane of the grocery store. You could make a lot of friends by handing them out at local food shelters. But, please, don't pick my pocket when you want to be generous.

I was just flipping through my newsreader and saw an interesting headline: Tata Pulls Ford Units Into Its Orbit:

Tata Motors said that it was entering detailed talks with Ford about the takeover of Jaguar and Land Rover, confirming what investors and analysts have anticipated for months.

I've been reading The Downing Street Years by Margaret Thatcher lately. Early in her prime ministership, Lady Thatcher had to decide what to do with Land Rover -- at the time an ailing government owned company. I haven't yet read what her ultimate decisions were, but somewhere along the line it was sold at least once and now Ford owns it.

According to this article, Ford may sell Land Rover to Tata Motors, an Indian owned company. It wasn't that long ago (cosmically speaking) that Britain "divested" itself of India. Now, in a manner of speaking, India may be taking over a part of Britain.

I find that both slightly amusing and a great symbol of how much richer the world is becoming.

Everywhere I turn in the media, I hear that the economy is horrible. I hear that our parents had it better than we do. I hear that my generation may be the first ever to be poorer than my parents generation.

Hogwash.

First off, my parents never had iPods growing up. In fact, they didn't even have cassette walkmen. Surely that's a form of wealth? Second, my daughter will grow up in a home with multiple computers; flat screen high definition televisions; cars with automatic windows, doorlocks, and airbags; wired and wireless networks; video chat with grandparents; cellphones for all; and more. Isn't that also a sign of great wealth? Isn't that also far more than my parents ever had? (Yes.)

Secondly, even if new technology didn't indicate an increased standard of living, rising incomes would. Check out the the National Data Book's spreadsheets for Money Income Of Families--Distribution by Family Characteristics and Income Level.

Between 1970 and 2004, annual median income increased from $9,867 to $54,061. After adjusting for inflation, annual income increased from $41,568 to $54,061. That's quite an increase! Incomes were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index Research Series, to that even takes into account increases in the cost of healthcare.

Sounds to me like we're doing pretty good.

Last year I was extremely critical of Governor Doyle's plan to increase heating aid for poor Wisconsin residents. This year, I'm still critical of the state's heating aid program.

I'm certainly not opposed to helping my poor neighbors. In fact, I don't really think I have much of a choice in the matter.

[esvbible reference="Matthew 25:34-40" header="on" format="block"]Matthew 25:34-40[/esvbible]

But I want my assistance to be precisely targeted, I want it to help those who need the most help, and I want to give it myself -- not have it taken from me by an overbearing government. That's why I was glad to find Alliant Energy's Hometown Care Energy Fund.

Through the Hometown Care Energy Fund, Alliant Energy offers free, confidential financial help for the elderly, disabled and families trying to make ends meet.

Hometown Care Energy Fund is supported by Alliant Energy and its many caring customers, employees and shareowners.

When you give to Hometown Care, your donation goes directly to neighbors in need in your area, with funds administered by local community action programs.

In 2006, more than 1,699 families received an average grant of nearly $248. Your generous contributions of $244,000 helped share the warmth with those who needed it the most.

Their description of the program didn't offer the kind of information I was really interested in, so I asked some questions.

1. How much of the funds collected funds are paid to community groups? 100%? Or does Alliant Energy keep some of the funds as administrative fees? Alliant Energy distributes 100% of the donations to agencies, but allows the agencies in WI to use up to 6% of the funds for administrative purposes.

2. Does Alliant keep track on exactly how the community groups use the money? Do they use 100% of the money for heating aid or do they keep some of it as administrative fees? Besides the up to 6% used for administrative purposes, the rest is distributed as agencies see fit for heating aid.

3. The website says "your donation goes directly to neighbors in need in your area". How big is the local "area"? I live in the Village of Oregon, in Dane County, Wisconsin. Is the money I donate disbursed to community groups in Oregon, in Dane County, in Southern Wisconsin, or in the entire state of Wisconsin? The area is by county. A donation from Oregon would go to Energy Services Inc of Dane County.

4. The site says that "A customer's payment history may also play an important part in selection for a Hometown Care Energy Fund grant." Does this mean that customers with a solid record of payment -- who suddenly fall behind -- are preferred over customers who habitually don't pay their bills. Yes, agencies take this into account in awarding their grants.

5. Finally, does the program encourage customers to economize on other areas of finance before receiving grants? For instance, if a customer was paying for cable television but unable to pay their energy bill, would they first be encouraged to cancel cable before receiving grants? Yes, the reason we use the agencies we do to distribute the funds is the often first take an Energy Assistance application from the customer which may provide them some state aid. Second they may discuss with them their income and expenses. Last these funds are there to help them if needed.

I hate cold weather with a passion and am very grateful for on-demand heat. I can't stand the thought that some of my neighbors might be cold because I was too stingy to help them out. Now that weather is getting frigid, we're donating money to the Fund each month.

As we approach Thanksgiving and you think about your blessings, this is a great way to share your wealth with those less fortunate.

In case you haven't been paying attention to the news, a huge cyclone ripped through Bangladesh a few days ago.

Soldiers and relief workers raced Monday to get aid to millions left homeless by the cyclone, as officials said the death toll had topped 3,100 and was certain to keep rising.

According to the Red Cross, the final toll could be anywhere between 5,000 and 10,000.

"The immediate and critical needs are for food, clean drinking water, shelter materials, clothes, blankets and cooking utensils," said EU Humanitarian Aid Commissioner Louis Michel.

"The enormous damage to infrastructure, coupled with losses of both crops and livestock, mean that urgent action is also needed on basic rehabilitation. Otherwise, disease and malnutrition could claim many more victims."

Most of the deaths following Thursday's cyclone were caused by a six-metre (20-foot) high tidal wave which engulfed coastal villages, or by flying debris and falling trees that crushed flimsy bamboo and tin homes.

Food stocks, crops, livestock and drinking water sources -- as well as entire stretches of road -- were washed away by the wave that smashed into the coast along with Cyclone Sidr, and in many places the situation was desperate.

Red Cross and Red Crescent workers said they were using their network of volunteers to distribute dried food and plastic sheeting for temporary shelters, but that many helpers were themselves victims.

"Our estimate is that 900,000 families are affected," said Red Cross official Shafiquzzaman Rabbani -- a figure that accounts for around seven million people.

My wife and I have "adopted" a child through World Vision's Sponsorship program. As a result, we're on the regular mailing list. Today, we received a message about their efforts in Bangladesh.

Dear Sponsor,

Last week, we alerted you to the devastating category 4 Cyclone Sidr that struck Bangladesh. We want to update you on World Vision's relief response to the survivors and to ask you to continue to pray for cyclone and flooding survivors and relief workers providing urgent assistance.

World Vision continues to rush emergency aid into Bangladesh following one of the worst cyclones in a decade, which left over 3,000 dead and millions in desperate need of food, water, and shelter.

Seven of World Vision's projects were hit, three of them severely, and we are now sheltering over 20,000 people who lost their homes. Please know if a sponsored child is directly affected by a disaster, that it is our policy to notify sponsors as soon as possible.

Supporting 20,000 people isn't cheap, even in a third-world nation. We donated money tonight and we'll probably send more next month. Have you donated? Even $10 or $20 will go a long way towards helping those devastated by the cyclone. It will take you less than 5 minutes to donate.

As a Christian, what better way is there to reflect the love of God? You could fly over there and share the Gospel directly. But Gospel presentations without material help are worse than useless. Saudi Arabia is donating more than $100 million. Does the world's largest "Christian" nation want to be missing in action? When Bangladesh's Muslims remember who helped them after a disaster, what will they remember about the world's Christians?

Frugal Christian is a term that should never apply to charity. It's not up to our government and it's not up our church boards. Joyful loving giving is up to us.

This Thanksgiving, President Bush wants us to give back to our communities.

In a reflective mood as he looks toward his final year in office, President Bush delivered his first official Thanksgiving speech Monday, urging Americans to "show their thanks by giving back" and to remember that "our nation's greatest strength is the decency and compassion of our people."

It was a call to action, in a sense, from a president whose first instinct after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was to ask the public for "continued participation and confidence in the American economy," a request that has been widely interpreted as advice to go shopping.

By contrast, Mr. Bush on Monday asked Americans to consider the "many ways to spread hope this holiday: volunteer in a shelter, mentor a child, help an elderly neighbor, say thanks to one who wears the nation's uniform."

Now, I'm certainly no opponent to charity. I love giving and sharing my resources. But I agree with Thomas Sowell. All of this talk about giving back "irritate[s] me like chalk screeching across a blackboard".

I have donated money, books, and blood for people I have never seen and to whom I owe nothing. Nor is that unusual among Americans, who do more of this than anyone else.

But we are not "giving back" anything to those people because we never took anything from them in the first place.

This Thanksgiving, my family and I will be thankful for all of the ways God has blessed us. We'll be most thankful for the gift of forgiven sins and the gift of becoming children of God. We'll also be thankful for the gifts of family, friends, strong jobs, material prosperity, and much more.

In response to our thanksgiving, we will give to others freely and generously as a reflection of the free and generous gifts we receive from God. But we will not be giving back. Not to Madison's poor, because they've never given us anything. And certainly not to God -- nothing we do for Him could ever begin to approach even a partial repayment for what He's given us.

Two months ago, I wrote about the sub-prime mortgage "crisis". Specifically, I wrote about Mrs. Audrey Sweet and her troubles repaying a loan from Countrywide. Two days ago, Mrs. Sweet stopped by our humble blog to plead her case.

Countrywide forged my loan documents, they lied about the tax amount and my income to get the loan approved then gave me a different set to sign, they broke the law. That is why I was invited to testify before congress regarding my situation. The proof of what they did is in black and white. Because of my interest rate I had already paid back 27% of the amount I was loaned in a mere 30 months.

Mrs. Sweet, I looked up your Senate testimony. It was very enlightening. Let me begin by saying that Countrywide is not a bank I would ever want to do business with. Like you, I find them completely untrustworthy. Like you, I find their lack of accountability and their lack of accessibility to be completely appalling. Unlike you, I'm not sure that I find their conduct illegal, although certainly distasteful.

This is what I learned about your home buying experience.

1. You knew you couldn't afford a large monthly payment
2. You knew you had been turned down by multiple lenders in the past
3. You desparately wanted your piece of the "American Dream".
4. You were shocked at the total amount of the monthly mortgage payment
5. You took the verbal assurance of a loan officer that your high interest rate could be renegotiated, but didn't ensure that that promise was in writing with specific terms.
6. You failed to notice that your loan agreement specified that the interest rate "can only go up never down!".
7. You testified that "In the excitement of the moment, I did not focus" on the amount of your total monthly payments.
8. You continually fell behind on the mortgage and seriously neglected your property taxes. You left it up to Countrywide to step up and pay the back taxes out of their own funds.
9. You admit to signing loan papers that were different from the loan papers that you were given 10 days before closing.

Mrs. Sweet, from what I can see you did not pay enough attention to what was going, what you were signing, or what you could ultimately afford. It was your responsibility to reread the loan papers before signing them. It was your responsibiliy to total up the monthly mortgage and tax payments and realize that it was more than you could afford. Ultimately, it was your responsibility to look out for your own investment rather than assuming that the mortgage company would place your interests above their own.

Growing up, my dad taught me to always assume that I was the only one looking out for myself. When I bought my own house a year ago, I approached both the lender and the real estate agent with that lesson in mind. I knew that they had their own agendas, just as I had my own agenda. I triple-checked every piece of paper I signed and didn't sign the loan documents until I had a clear understanding of exactly what I was committing myself to. I did my own research on the type of loan I was taking out. I did my own research on current interest rates. I asked other people about whether or not the loan made sense. I thought that was the only prudent thing to do.

Countrywide is not responsible for your misjudgments and inattentiveness. They are only responsible for their own sleazy behavior. That sleazy behavior wouldn't have mattered if you had taken more time to research the loan and double check your responsibilities. I'm sorry you had to learn these lessons the hard way, but I sincerely hope that this is the last time you have to go through an experience like this.

How's this for on the job competence?

According to the lawsuit, about 9 p.m. June 15, Vega came to Guardi's and ordered pasta salad. When Mendez walked into the cooler to get the food, Vega asked Mendez's wife if she wanted to see Vega scare her husband. She said "no," according to court documents.

Then, Vega allegedly pointed the gun at Mendez's head and fired, causing the prongs to stick to Mendez's right temple and collarbone. Mendez went into convulsions and later became unconscious. He also bit off a piece of his tongue, the lawsuit said.

Vega is accused of immediately removing the Taser prongs, which caused Mendez to bleed profusely. Vega then called for back-up, and a supervisor and two detectives showed up and confiscated bloody towels, Mendez's bloody glasses, the Taser prongs and the video surveillance equipment in the restaurant, the lawsuit claims.

Reading a prepared statement, Zabrocki said Vega was conducting a routine check on the business when he noticed his Taser safety deactivated. While resecuring it, the Taser accidentally discharged, striking Mendez in the head and chest and knocking him to the ground, Zabrocki said.

It really doesn't matter which version of this story is true. Officer Vega should be fired either way. He was either guilty of gross misjudgment for using a taser to play a "prank" or he was guilty of gross incompetence for pointing his taser as somebody while adjusting the safety.

The first law of firearm safety is "thou should not point thy weapon at people". For violating that rule one or another, for hurting the very people he was sworn to defend, Officer Vega should be fired.

He won't be. The police department will call the entire thing an accident, verbally reprimand the officer, and sweep the entire incident under the rug. Rather than standing up to protect their reputation, the police department will stand up to protect "one of their own". And that's why it's getting harder and harder to trust America's police officers.

The Wisconsin State Journal reports that two homes were invaded recently, by robbers looking for drugs.

"These guys kicked in the doors of people 's residences who had nothing to do with the drug trade, " said Madison police spokesman Joel DeSpain. "It was a terrible event for both couples. "

And a violent one, especially for the women in each couple.

In the first attack, at about 2:55 a.m. on Sachtjen Street on the North Side, the woman was hit in the head with a pistol that one of the two intruders was carrying when they burst into the couple 's bedroom and demanded to know, "Where it at? " according to a police report. They fled without taking anything after the man in the couple yelled at them to leave.

In the second break-in, at about 3:30 a.m. at an apartment on Pike Drive on the South Side, the intruders kicked in the couple 's front door and punched the woman in the face while yelling "something about money and drugs, " the couple told police.

The men in that case rummaged through areas of the apartment before leaving. And again, one of the two intruders was armed with a handgun.

"The couple could not think of any reason why someone would try to rob them, " the report said.

This is a horribly, horribly ironic story. Why? Well, it reads exactly like the stories I've read about cops kicking down the doors of the wrong house, looking for drug dealers. The treatement is exactly the same however. Homeowners terrorized, brutalized, and left without an apology for compensation for damages. Don't believe me?

How about this?

The couple baby-sitting their grandchildren when police mistook their home for a drug dealer's residence has been awarded a $325,000 settlement, their attorney said yesterday.

That's when, without a warrant authorizing entrance into the home of William and Sharon McCulley, but rather with an "anticipatory search warrant" that authorized them to search any property where the marijuana was transported, police entered their home.

Though the Toyota truck they had been following and the transported box wasn't at the McCulley's home, police then threw Sharon McCulley on the ground next to her grandchild and handcuffed her, pressing a gun so hard into her head it left a circular mark, according to the complaint.

Her husband, William McCulley, who has a severe nerve disorder and has a walker and leg brace, was also ordered to lie on the ground, but was unable to do so quickly because of his disability. Thrown to the ground by an officer, William McCulley's implanted electronic shocking device to alleviate pain malfunctioned causing him to convulse, court documents state.

Or this?

The three defendants were among a group of DEA agents who burst into the couple's home Dec. 19 using a search warrant signed by a Sonoma County judge for an investigation of a cross-country shipment of six pounds of marijuana.

No drugs, drug residue, money or weapons were found during the search of Keane's house.

Strange, 63, said in the suit that a DEA agent held her down with a boot on her head as agents stormed through the house yelling, "Where are your weapons?" and "You know why we're here."

Or this?

Williams said he believes the team was supposed to be raiding a parolee's home Aug. 24 when they inadvertently hit the wrong door.

Officers ended up at the home of David and Lillian Scott, just off Rancho California Road.

Lillian Scott said she and her husband were in the living room discussing family plans, their 15-year-old daughter was in the garage with two friends and their 16-year-old son was in another room feeding the Scotts' 5-month-old baby.

That all changed at 9:35 p.m. she said, when Temecula police officers -- four or five, she's not sure -- carrying rifles charged though the unlocked front screen door and ordered the couple to the floor.

"Two of them came over and put handcuffs on the two of us," Lillian Scott said. "We asked what we had done wrong and didn't get an answer."

Elsewhere in the house other officers handcuffed their daughter and her two friends.

"(The officers) told them to get down on the f---ing floor," she said.

Her 16-year-old son, who was feeding the baby, was also ordered to the floor and handcuffed, Scott said.

From the other room, Scott heard her infant crying.

"I asked if my baby was OK and the officer told me if I moved he was going to put a bullet in my head," Scott said.

Or this

Law-enforcement officers raided the wrong house and forced a 77-year-old La Plata County woman on oxygen to the ground last week in search of methamphetamine.

The raid occurred about 11 a.m. June 8, as Virginia Herrick was settling in to watch "The Price is Right." She heard a rustling outside her mobile home in Durango West I and looked out to see several men with gas masks and bulletproof vests, she said.

Herrick went to the back door to have a look.

"I thought there was a gas leak or something," she said.

But before reaching the door, La Plata County Sheriff's deputies shouted "search warrant, search warrant" and barged in with guns drawn, she said. They ordered Herrick to the ground and began searching the home.

"They didn't give me a chance to ask for a search warrant or see a search warrant or anything," she said in a phone interview Thursday. "I'm not about to argue with those big old guys, especially when they've got guns and those big old sledgehammers."

Or this guy, who accidentally tripped his own security system?

"I felt a lot of voltage going through my body," Mr. Hicks said recalling the events of that late July weekend. "That's what woke me up."

Jumping to his feet, Mr. Hicks was aware of an intense sensation between the shoulder blades of his 150-pound body. It didn't stop there. His whole body felt as if it were on fire.

... According to Mr. Hicks, the cops were skeptical. "How do we know that you're who you say you are?" the shorter of the two cops asked.

At that point, the cop holding the Taser squeezed the trigger, sending Mr. Hicks into paroxysm of agony. It was not a short jolt like the first one he received. He fell to the floor. His screams woke the neighbors.

"What do you want?" Mr. Hicks asked. "Please stop [shooting] me." The shorter cop helped him to his feet. Swaying unsteadily, he offered to show them his identification. They searched him and found his wallet. After inspecting it, they threw the wallet on the coffee table.

"I told you I lived here and that I'm the legal resident," he shouted, believing he finally had justice, common decency and the angels of heaven on his side. A staff member at the African-American Chamber of Commerce of Western Pennsylvania, Mr. Hicks counts himself on the side of the law-abiding citizen.

The cop with the Taser squeezed the trigger again, anyway. Mr. Hicks flapped his arms wildly, but didn't fall. All he could do was scream loud enough to be heard all over the Mon Valley.

After removing the pellets from his bloody back, the cops handcuffed Mr. Hicks and led him out his front door to a police van. They did not read him his rights, Mr. Hicks says. The back of his shirt was soaked with warm, sticky blood.

Meanwhile, cops from six neighboring boroughs searched the house for other "burglars."

Mr. Hicks' mother, Arlene, arrived just as her son was being escorted out the door. She had Mr. Hicks' 11-year-old daughter and a niece in tow. "Why are you arresting my son?" she asked. The taller of the two cops answered that he "didn't have to tell her anything."

When Mrs. Hicks persisted, he said her son was being arrested for "being belligerent."

Ah, yes. Belligerence. A crime truly worthy of repeated tasering, false arrest, and a night in jail. Sounds to me like the cops were angry because the rest of the world doesn't take them nearly as seriously as they take themselves. Of course, they won't face any discipline for the behavior. Honestly, I'm more frightened of hopped up SWAT teams than I am of actual criminals.

Dear Reader, some mornings I wake up and ask myself: "Self, how much are hated, really hated?". Invariably the answer that comes back is "Not nearly enough". This morning, I'm going to take the first step towards changing that.

Over the weekend, I saw this video of pretty people trying to save pretty animals, dolphins in this case. Seems that the Japanese like to catch and eat dolphins. Several actors, including Hayden Panettiere -- better known as Claire Bennet, to fans of NBC's "Heroes" -- tried to swim out and save the dolphins. They were shockingly unsuccessful. Apparently Japanese fishermen don't hold actors and surfers in the same high regard that Americans do.

After her brush with evil, Hayden had this to say:

It was so incredibly sad. We were so close to them and they were sky hopping, jumping out of the water to see us. One little baby dolphin stuck his head out and kinda looked at me and the thought that it's no longer with us is really hard to take."

She broke into tears at this point.

Here's where I draw the hate (if I haven't already!). I see no moral distinction between killing cows, chickens, pigs, or eels and between killing dolphins. I've never eaten eel or dolphin, but I have eaten chickens, cows, and pigs. They're all quite tasty. I'm not a fan of seafood, generally, so I'm not optimistic about dolphins or eels. But I see absolutely nothing wrong with killing them -- or with baby seals for that matter.

I think that seals and dolphins attract an inordinate amount of love solely because they're cute. I'll acknowledge it: they are cute. But if cuteness is our sole defining criteria of what life is worthy to save and what life isn't, we are messed up in a major way.

Right now, there are poor kids in Vietnam whose parents would love to sell Vietnamese catfish to American diners. They can't, because American trade regulations are designed to protect catfish sellers in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas. Hayden, do you cry for those poor children nearly as much as you cry for the cute baby dolphin?

Let the hating begin.

Beth Hanley, I weep for thee.

Armed with a Georgetown University diploma, Beth Hanley embarked in her 20s on a path hoping to become a professional world-saver. First she worked at nonprofit Bread for the World. Then she taught middle school English in central Africa with the Peace Corps. Finally, to certify her idealism, she graduated last spring with a master's degree in international relations from Johns Hopkins University.

... Hanley, a think tank temp who dreams of aiding the impoverished and reducing gender discrimination in developing countries, is stuck. ... Numerous young Washingtonians bemoan the improvisational and protracted career track of the area's public interest profession. They say the high competition for comparatively low-paying jobs saps their sense of adulthood, forcing them to spend their 20s or early 30s moving from college to work to graduate school and back to work that might or might not be temporary.

No, wait. I don't weep for you.

dispatches from TJICistan: Little Miss Perky Nose and Silk Blouse is not making mad benjamins

You know, somewhere there's a guy, toiling in a cube, who just spent six weeks working out a way to make toilet paper with 1% less energy input, thus cutting the cost of goods sold by 0.25%, while keeping the TP just as soft and smooth as it was before.

...and that man has added more to the sum total of human happiness and productivity over those six weeks than little-Miss-altruist Beth Hanley has in her decade of getting elite degrees, wasting time in the Peace Corps, and getting her masters degree in international relations.

I'm not saying that Mr-TP-improvement is a hero ("because what's a hero?").

And I'm not saying that little-miss-perky-nose-and-silk-blouse is a bad person.

But, aside from her own sense of self worth, what has she accomplished in the last decade?

Pretty much zero.

Transterrestrial Musing: Get Out the Hankies

Who is more of a humanitarian, a Norman Borlaug, who through his technological efforts saved untold millions from hunger, and even starvation, and was reasonably compensated for it, or an Albert Schweitzer or Mother Theresa, who labored to help a relatively few poor and ill, while living in relative poverty? Obviously the latter derived personal satisfaction from their hands-on retail efforts, but I don't think that they ever whined about their lifestyle.

These people do in fact need to grow up, and understand that there are other ways to help people than forming non-profits and NGOs, or working for a government bureaucracy. People are helped most by technological advances that make essential items--food, transportation, communication, shelter--more affordable and accessible to them, not by those who provide them with handouts and sympathy, and keep them in a state of perpetual dependency.

Exactly.

What causes poverty in America? Greedy capitalistic businessmen? Unethical financiers? How about marriage?:

For the most part, long-term poverty today is self-inflicted. To see this, let's examine some numbers from the Census Bureau's 2004 Current Population Survey. There's one segment of the black population that suffers only a 9.9 percent poverty rate, and only 13.7 percent of their under-5-year-olds are poor. There's another segment of the black population that suffers a 39.5 percent poverty rate, and 58.1 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

Among whites, one population segment suffers a 6 percent poverty rate, and only 9.9 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. Another segment of the white population suffers a 26.4 percent poverty rate, and 52 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

What do you think distinguishes the high and low poverty populations? The only statistical distinction between both the black and white populations is marriage. There is far less poverty in married-couple families, where presumably at least one of the spouses is employed. Fully 85 percent of black children living in poverty reside in a female-headed household.

It turns out that the poor in America are actually doing pretty well, by absolute standards.

In 1971, only about 32 percent of all Americans enjoyed air conditioning in their homes. By 2001, 76 percent of poor people had air conditioning. In 1971, only 43 percent of Americans owned a color television; in 2001, 97 percent of poor people owned at least one. In 1971, 1 percent of American homes had a microwave oven; in 2001, 73 percent of poor people had one. Forty-six percent of poor households own their homes. Only about 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. The average poor American has more living space than the average non-poor individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other European cities.

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars. Seventy-eight percent of the poor have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception; and one-third have an automatic dishwasher.

That's certainly doing better than me. I don't have cable TV or a dish washer (not until my daughter gets a bit older, at any rate).