Terry Cowgill

From A Gunless Gun Nut …

I think as a rule talk radio leaves much to be desired. Too often there is an overemphasis on shouting and preening at the expense of meaningful discourse.

But last night as the March winds threatened to pick my house up and throw it — Dorothy-style — to a distant land, I listened to a Hugh Hewitt podcast on SCOTUS’s recent oral arguments on the 2nd Amendment and the extent to which it does or does not entitle us to own guns. The case is really a test of D.C.’s handgun ban. Click here to listen and here for the transcript.

I think I can safely say it is the best half hour of radio I’ve ever heard. There were audio snippets of Kennedy, Scalia, Stephens and Souter battling it out, each followed by analysis and advocacy from two distinguished law school deans (Erwin Chemerinsky and John Eastman) elaborating succinctly and in layman’s terms.

To top it off, in addition to being a skilled radio host, Hewitt teaches constitutional law and continues to be a practicing attorney. If you’re interested in the Constitution, it doesn’t get any better than this.

Continue reading From A Gunless Gun Nut ……

A Hooker Is A Hooker …

I saw this question raised a couple of days ago in a blog about Spitzer, but (for the life of me) I can’t remember where, so I will throw it out here for discussion:

Why is it legal to pay someone to have sex in front of a camera (i.e. the pornography industry) but illegal to pay that same person to have sex with you in the privacy of a hotel room? No rationalizations, please …

Spitting at Spitzer

Kristen, Spitzer’s high-priced call girl, is expected to resign.

“I made a serious mistake and betrayed the trust of my co-workers, my many clients, and my pimps,” she said in a quiet voice cracking with emotion. “I will be taking a leave of absence to earn their forgiveness, and redeem myself in the eyes of the entire expensive whore community.”

You can’t make this stuff up. Actually, you can …

H/T to Jake and IowaHawk.

No Longer Brain Dead

OK, so do I get some credit for hounding Eliot Spitzer out of office? I was chugging along on the elliptical rider late this morning when the governor walked out with his poor wife once again at his side (why did she do that a second time?) and made what was actually a very eloquent speech announcing it was over.

Over the next several weeks it will be interesting to see how many additional details will be leaked and whether criminal charges will be filed. In his career as a public servant, Spitzer made many enemies. I’m told people at the NYSE literally jumped for joy at the news of his demise. Even the good guys on Wall Street hated Spitzer because of his tendency to go at them with a sledgehammer, destroying lives along the way.

State Democrats despised his arrogance and Republicans hated him for his use of the state police to try to smear his chief political foe, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno. Bill Clinton had people willing to risk their reputations to go out there and defend him, but alas, poor Eliot had no friends left.

Some have suggested he is the victim of overzealous prosecution. Too bad. Spitzer himself was an overzealous prosecutor. I feel bad for his wife and family but I really have no sympathy for him. Good riddance.

* * * * * *

Ever heard of David Mamet, the distinguished playwright? As a drama major, I read several of his plays years ago. He’s just come out with a piece in The Village Voice announcing he is “no longer a brain dead liberal.” Most amusing are the howls of outrage in the comment thread from unreformed libs.

Breaking News … again

Update 4 p.m. Monday: Ladies of the night, doors slamming. This is like a French farce.

* * * * * * *

I predicted on a vlog just before Thanksgiving tha Eliot Sptizer would not make it through one term as governor of New York.

I may very well be right. Now in addition to siccing the State Police on his political enemies (a Nixonian trait), the NYT is reporting Spitzer has been linked to a prostitution ring (a Clintonian trait). A paranoia problem and a zipper problem. Doesn’t get much worse than that.

Someone here in the newsroom just said Spitzer has a death wish. I’d say that’s being kind. Who is the lieutenant governnor of New York anyway? We might be hearing a lot of that name soon.

P.S. It’s 2:50 p.m. and everyone is reporting Spitzer is expected to appear before the cameras soon.

A Group Therapy Session

One story on page A3 of this week’s LJ that probably caught everyone’s eye concerned a group of Salisbury petition signers who want to hold a town meeting in which residents would vote on whether to endorse a resolution calling on Rep. Chris Murphy to start an investigation of the Bush administration.

The Board of Selectmen rightly refused to hold a town meeting on the advice of the town’s legal counsel that state law does not permit Connecticut’s towns to pass resolutions on matters over which they have no authority or powers of enforcement. The selectmen did agree to a special board meeting (held Jan. 16) in which the signers could air their grievances.

Despite evident frustration on the part of the petitioners at the meeting, the selectmen held firm. Both parties were respectful and a few conservatives even spoke out against holding the meeting at all.

I know many of the petitioners. They are honorable, decent people who are upset at the Bush administration and its alleged misdeeds. The self-described “instigator” of the petition, Dr. Bill Gallup, clearly would prefer impeachment, but has settled for milder language in his resolution since he knows Murphy does not support bringing the president and vice president up on charges.

But I think the petitioners are missing the mark here. To get the town formally involved in these sorts of issues is, as Michael Walsh said, “simply a supererogatory exercise in Bush Derangement Syndrome.”

Continue reading A Group Therapy Session…

Stormin’ Norman

Heard an interview on Hugh Hewitt the other day with Norman Podhoretz , the neo-con icon who recently wrote a much-talked-about piece advocating military action against Iran’s nuke facilities.

You know, it’s times like these that I’m grateful I don’t (and never will) command a huge military. My first reaction to Podhoretz’s piece (and indeed the whole notion of bombing Iran) was that it is a bit nutty and extremely dangerous. And most of me still feels that way.

But if you accept two logical premises in sequence (for both of which there is conflicting evidence, btw), then the choice about taking action becomes less clear: 1) If you think it’s obvious that Iran either has nukes or will develop them soon and 2) If you are convinced she will use them against Israel.

Now, Iran is major sponsor of terrorism, so I agree with Podhoretz  that it’s reasonable to conclude some of that nuke techonolgy could find its way into the hands of those who would use it to harm others, including us.

As for whether Iran would use nukes against Israel, I have no idea. But President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is on record as saying the Jewish state is “heading toward annihilation,” will soon “be liberated and “will be eliminated by one storm.” Apocolyptic rhetoric if ever I heard it.

Though officials there won’t admit it, Israel is also known to possess tactical nuclear weapons. If Iran attacked Israel and she responded, we could have a much more dangerous situation our hands than the simple political fallout from a U.S. attack on Iran’s nuke facilities. Indeed, the conflict could escalate well beyond the borders of the Middle East and have almost unspeakable consequences.

Now you see why I’m glad I’m not the guy with the security aid carrying around that nuclear football? Maybe what Podhoretz is hoping that if we don’t act (and despite all the saber-rattling, I’m not convinced Bush will) then Israel will.

From Salisbury Steak To Sweet Potato Fennel

You got to hand it to the Dems. They may not have accomplished much beyond increasing the minimum wage since taking over Congress a year ago, but Nancy Pelosi has her priorities. She has greened up the House cafeteria.

Red Meat Republicans are aghast that cheeseburgers and Freedom Fries have receded in favor of the toney fare favored by the Blue State crowd. Gone are the days when biscuits and gravy rolled trippingly off the tongue.

Now if they want to clog their arteries, congressmen and their staffers are greeted by signs pointing them to bok choy, jicama and (for the truly indulgent) cumin-scented leg of lamb with almond couscous. And if that wasn’t enough, the new salad bar was constructed from “green materials” and the seafood is “sustainable.”

“I like real food,” proclaimed Republican leader John Boehner when asked about the new menu. “Food that I can pronounce the name of.”

In addition to the priciness, which will no doubt set back the budgets of the young staffers who depend on the cafeteria, some of the biodegradable “ecotainers” and other eating implements start to degrade a bit early, as in the compostable coffee straws that melt away in your cup.

If this is what all those presidential candidates mean about striving for “change,” then I’ll take the status quo. Forgive me for my philistine leanings, but I’ll take a bowl of Ben & Jerry’s any day over “raspberry kiwi tarts and mini-lemon blueberry trifles.” Slim Jims, anyone?

Can I See Your … Bill?

In the you-can’t-make-this-stuff-up department: Both USA Today and The Washington Post report today that an audit has revealed telecommunications carriers shut off some wiretaps of suspected terrorists not because the FBI failed to provide warrants but because the G-men didn’t pay their bills on time.

“It sounds as though the telecoms believe it when the FBI says the warrant is in the mail, but not when they say the check is in the mail,” quipped one analyst.

It’s a variation on that old saying, “Money talks and [bovine feces] walks.”

What Next?

With the death of Pakistani opposition leader and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, we are all left wondering what’s next for that troubled country. I must say — and I think I can speak for lots of observers near and far — her assassination came as absolutely no surprise.

In fact, after hearing the news while driving to Manhattan yesterday with my family, I found myself asking what had taken the murderers so long — especially given Bhutto’s legendary disregard for her own safety.

We can only hope that the outcome in Pakistan differs from what happened in Iran in 1979, when the Shah was toppled and was replaced by an Islamic theocracy. At that time, members of the Revolutionary Guard seized the U.S. embassy and held hundreds of Americans captive for 444 days, eventually releasing all of them alive. Sounds almost quaint in comparison to 9/11.

The difference here, of course, is that Pakistan has already acquired nuclear weapons. There are tens of millions of Islamic radicals who hate our guts and would love nothing more than to be rid of the Great Satan once and for all. Since there is little we can do to effect change in Pakistan, we can only pray (literally or figuratively) that bloodshed is kept to a minimum and that a democratically elected government can assume power after achieving some level of legitimacy.

In the absence of information yesterday about Bhutto’s attackers and about Pakistan’s future, the electronic media were mostly left to speculate on the impact the assassination would have on the U.S. presidential race. Who has more experience to deal with crises abroad? Does it help Hillary or Rudy? Does it hurt Obama and Mitt?

Continue reading What Next?…