Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Month: December 2007 (page 1 of 2)

Keep Doing Nothing

December 27, 2007 / / 1 Comment

Neil Heinen has his metaphorical undies in a bunch because he believes the Wisconsin Legislature has sat on its hands for the last year. In a tortured attempt to shoehorn this point into a Christmas theme, he says:

These lawmakers saw the upcoming elections under the tree, all wrapped up with a card that said \”To Help You Get What You Really Want Next Year — Re-Election.\” Inside the box were instructions to avoid enacting a statewide smoking ban, avoid extending health care to all and above all avoid reforming campaigns and elections. So exchanges are in order. Return to sender and the maybe jump right into New Year\’s resolutions like \”Do what\’s best for the citizens of this state, do what we were elected to do, act like public servants, and justify the public\’s trust in us.\”

Basically, the Legislature has been ineffective because they didn\’t enact all the nutty left wing BS he favors.

Perhaps he is unaware that the Senate\’s attempt at cramming a $15.2 billion government-run health plan into the budget jammed up the Legislature for months. Thus, the \”health care to all\” which he so craves actually caused a great deal of the inaction which he criticizes.

Furthermore, Heinen just naturally assumes that all of these initiatives he espouses are just \”no-brainers.\” Taking away a citizen\’s individual freedom to smoke just makes sense, right? Why can\’t Wisconsin enact a health plan that will cost low income workers jobs and drive business out of state? Shouldn\’t we be in a rush to spend taxpayer money on campaigns and enact laws silencing citizens who want to have a say in the political process? What gives?

Laughably, he blames all this \”inaction\” on the fact that there\’s an election coming up in 2008. (Hope he has this same script ready for 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2017, etc.) It\’s an assertion without any foundation in reality. Are we to believe that Senate Democrats, in inserting their bogus \”Healthy Wisconsin\” plan into the budget with one day\’s notice, weren\’t doing so with an eye towards the next election? Are the only ones being political the ones that opposed throwing out the state\’s entire health care infrastructure with about 8 hours\’ notice?

Furthermore, he thinks the inability of the Legislature to do the work of the \”public\” is the result of… elections?  (For astute political observers, \”elections\” are the process by which \”the public\” actually gets to tell government what they want.)  Apparently, the public can\’t be trusted to vote for legislators who do the work of the public.  Ironically, universal health care is only a vibrant issue right now because Democrats think it\’s what the public wants – and they plan to exploit that fact in the upcoming elections.  Without voting (commonly known as \”democracy,\”) legislators wouldn\’t give a damn what \”the people\” have to say.  So what\’s the alternative to elections?  Neil Heinen gets to pick our leaders until they agree to double the state\’s tax burden? (In the name of \”the public,\” of course.)

I recognize that spending this much time deconstructing a Neil Heinen editorial is about as constructive as a college student who gets high and pens a 10-page paper on \”The Epistemology of Winnie The Pooh.\”  But this is just indicative of the fraud that continues to be local television news. Basically, all you need is a handful of talking points, and your career is set for a decade – it doesn\’t really matter if they\’re all contradictory.

This week George Will offers the counterpoint to this nonsense, as he lauds the \”Do-Nothing Congress.\”

Yule Blog, 2007

December 26, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Another Christmas come and gone.

My kids are getting to be the age where they\’re super-hyped for the big day. My two-year old son is a present opening machine – he attacks giftwrapping with a cold, steely, uncompromising venom that you see normally reserved for mob hitmen. That thin little piece of paper is all that separates him from the possibility of untold joy. If you\’ve ever seen cheetahs attack a gazelle on Wild Kingdom, it bears a resemblance to my boy ripping into his pile of gifts. Let\’s hope he shows as much enthusiasm for Algebra down the road.

Here\’s a video of my son from Christmas Eve – as you can see, he sings, tells jokes, does impressions… in Hollywood, I believe they call that a \”triple threat.\” I even left out his impression of The Count from Sesame Street. Danny Gans better be watching his back.

Of course, all that Christmas morning means for his dad is that I have to wake up at the butt-crack of dawn to document this monument to avarice on videotape. It\’s kind of a bummer, really – I\’m the one half asleep on the couch, but it\’s this illegal immigrant \”Santa Claus\” that gets all the credit for the gifts. I think parents should unionize to put this \”Big Claus\” out of business.

As for me, I got what I asked for – Guitar Hero III for the Playstation. When I tried to explain my gift to my mother over the phone, I got silence followed by, \”…how old are you, again?\”

It is a great game, though – it\’s impossible for me to play it without taking \”the stance.\” It\’s the typical rock star pose, with one leg in front of the other, which aids in the convulsing back and forth while making musical magic with your little toy guitar. (This video about says it all.) After playing about 10 songs, it occurred to me that I have these things called \”children\” that apparently need to be fed and cared for. Somewhere down the road, my daughter\’s going to be working the pole at Beansnappers, but I\’ll have the high score on Guitar Hero. So the years of neglect will all be worth it.

Despite my enthusiasm for my new video game, this was a really strange Christmas for me. When making out the list of things I really wanted, it occurred to me that anything that I really want can\’t be bought. Almost all of it is stuff I have to go out and achieve on my own. Having a happy family, losing weight, making more time to read books, achieving more at work, the Packers in the Super Bowl – if anybody knows where I can write a check to make these things happen, let me know. Otherwise, it might mean that I might actually be growing up.

Back to Guitar Hero.

SIDE NOTE: In November, my friend Stephen Thompson at NPR drove all the way from Washington D.C. to Wisconsin while listening to nothing but Christmas CDs. Here\’s his written review. He also appeared on Milwaukee Public Radio\’s \”Lake Effect\” show to discuss the experience. Good stuff.

The Government Protection Racket

December 20, 2007 / / 0 Comments

In the late nineteenth century, a cowboy rode into a water-drilling camp in Odessa, Texas. The cowboy immediately demanded some food from the cook, described as a “chinaman.” The cook refused, so the cowboy shot him to death. The cowboy went on trial in San Angelo, but the judge freed him on the grounds that there were no laws on the books making it illegal to kill a Chinaman.[i]

It was racial injustice that led Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which required that “citizens of every race and color … [have] full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property.” This new law was immediately followed by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which forbid states to “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Those looking for equal protection of person and property in Wisconsin, however, may want to keep looking. In cases of battery and assault, Wisconsin state law carves out special classes of individuals to which it grants heightened punishment for their assailant. Chances are you aren’t eligible for this “super-justice” standard, since these protections are largely reserved for the most enlightened and indispensable of our citizens. Namely, government employees.

For battery, substantial battery, and aggravated battery, punishment under Wisconsin law ranges from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class E felony, depending on the severity and intent of the beat-down. But the penalties go up if certain protected individuals are the victims. In almost all cases, these stiffer protections are granted to government workers, presumably to provide more of a deterrent. Put simply, a “private sector ass-kicking” is clearly something you want no part of.

It makes sense for some of these individuals to be granted heightened protection. For instance, police officers and firefighters are put into harm’s way by laws implemented to protect us – it can be argued that bumping up the penalty for assaulting them is reasonable. (Who are the people who go out of their way to assault firefighters – people who insist that their house be allowed to burn to the ground?)

But the list goes on – and it smacks of a Sopranos-style government employee protection racket. Causing bodily harm to an elected official (“public officer”) will get you an immediate felony, no matter the severity of the “fist blizzard” you deliver. Same goes for causing bodily harm to a “school district officer or employee” or anyone who works at a technical college. If you work as a teacher in a private school, you’re out of luck – if you’re assaulted, the perpetrator could receive a fraction of the penalty they would get had the attack taken place in a public school. Clearly, the value of your security isn’t as much of a priority for the state.

If you’re looking to beat someone up, it’s probably in your best interest to steer clear of public transit. It is an instant felony to cause bodily harm to a public transit vehicle operator, driver or passenger. Somehow, the Legislature has deemed certain people worthy of enhanced protection under state law, as long as they just happened to be riding on a government-owned bus.[ii] (Incidentally, if you’re riding in some form of private transit, don’t expect state government to allow you to protect yourself, either.)

Curiously, the law then extends greater legal protection to Department of Revenue, Department of Commerce, and Department of Workforce Development employees and their families. In fact, these government workers are provided protection from threats, which is even more protection than police officers get. Are these people under any serious threat of assault and battery? Are we expecting gang-style warfare to break out between the people who review our tax returns and the people who collect child support payments? Despite not being in any more danger that you are at your job, these people have one thing that you don’t – the respect afforded to government workers by the Legislature. The private sector might as well not even exist.

It’s always tricky business for the government to start ascribing value to individuals’ legal protections. What makes one person’s safety more legally desirable than the safety of anyone else? How is it that the penalty dealt to your assailant depends on where you happen to work?

For example, the law also provides enhanced protection to emergency medical care providers, including “an employee of a hospital who works in an emergency department.” Certainly, some EMTs are in sensitive situations that may merit protection. But how is it that people working in one wing of a hospital deserve greater legal protection than those working right down the hall? One would think that patient anger is a universal reality among all health care providers. Where do we draw the line between who deserves protected status and who doesn’t?

Currently, there’s a bill working its way through the Legislature that would provide harsher penalties for assaulting a district attorney (judges are already on the endangered species list). Naturally, public defenders are now claiming they should have the same special status – presumably to protect them from being assaulted by a client that they are trying to get off the hook for assaulting some poor sucker like you.

Furthermore, it’s not even clear that these enhanced penalties do any good. Does a criminal really make a rational decision not to assault a police officer based on the fact that he may be charged with a Class H felony instead of the standard Class A misdemeanor? More likely, he chooses not to fight an officer because of the impending rectal boot removal surgery that will probably follow his transgression. In fact, violence against police officers is almost certainly more attributable to the drugs that the suspect is on, rather than any law on the books.

If the concept of “equal protection of the law” means anything, it has to mean that citizens should receive the same level of justice as anyone else for a crime committed against them. Someone who punches out a Department of Commerce worker shouldn’t get six years in prison, while the same act against an insurance salesman only brings nine months in the joint (as is currently the case). Unfortunately, some people are eligible for more justice based on where they happen to draw their paycheck.

The lesson here is obvious – if your son or daughter is going to be a victim of assault, make sure they’re riding a bus.
[i] This story was told by novelist H.G. Bissinger in his book “Friday Night Lights,” in a section where he discusses the history of Odessa, TX.

[ii] In fact, the protection for public transit riders extends beyond the bus. Under Wis. Stat. 940.20(6), the enhanced penalty applies if “the harm occurs after the offender forces or directs the victim to leave a public transit vehicle.” So because a bus merely served as a meeting place for an assault that took place much later, the heightened penalty still applies.

Baby Name Overturned

December 19, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Between members of the U.S. Supreme Court, there has recently been a spirited debate about the role foreign law should play in instructing our High Court.  Justices such as Stephen Breyer argue that foreign law has a place in influencing U.S. decisions, while Antonin Scalia believes that foreign law shouldn\’t play a role in how we interpret our laws.

After reading this story, Scalia\’s case just got stronger.

Court says baby can\’t be named \’Friday\’

ROME (AP) — What\’s in a name? If the name is Friday, shame and ridicule, according to Italian judges who forbade a couple from naming their child like the character in \”Robinson Crusoe.\”

\”They thought that it recalled the figure of a savage, thus creating a sense of inferiority and failing to guarantee the boy the necessary decorum,\” the couple\’s lawyer, Paola Rossi, said Wednesday. The couple are considering appealing the decision to Italy\’s highest court, she said.

Mara and Roberto Germano, whose son was born on Sept. 3, 2006, had the boy named and baptized Venerdi, Italian for Friday. Even though the boy was not born on a Friday – it was Sunday – his parents liked the name, said Rossi.

\”They wanted an unusual name, something original, and it did not seem like a shameful name,\” Rossi said in a telephone interview. \”We think it calls to mind the day of the week rather than the novel\’s character.\”

Since city hall officials are obliged by law to report odd names, the matter ended up before judges in Genoa, the northern Italian city where the couple live.

Last month, an appeals court stated that Friday falls into the category of the \”ridiculous or shameful\” names that are barred by law, as it recalled the native servant in Daniel Defoe\’s novel.

The judges wrote that naming somebody Friday would bar him from \”serene interpersonal relationships\” and would turn the boy into the \”laughing stock of his group,\” according to a report in La Repubblica this week.

Will Scab for Money

December 18, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Dear NBC Money,

Well it looks like the writers\’ strike is dragging on longer than expected. But the good news is that two of my favorites, Leno and Conan, are crossing the picket lines and coming back to film more shows. Since the late night funnymen won\’t have their union joke writers, you could use some scabs. I hereby offer the combined services of the gang here at the Trousers.

When I was six years old, I decided I had two goals in life – to make people laugh with the things I wrote (in crayon) and to do some union-busting. These two goals could be achieved in one fell swoop! But you don\’t care about my goals, you care about the bottom line. And God bless ya for that. So in the interest of you eventually paying me to write some ad revenue-generating monologues for you, here are some freebies:

\”So it\’s the Christmas season – everyone got their shopping done? (Pause for audience response.) I\’m buying everyone on my list DVDs of Al Gore\’s movie \”An Inconvenient Truth,\” you know the film about how the earth is getting too hot. At least I will be as soon as I can find a store that isn\’t buried in snow and ice. (Pause for uproarious laughter.)

And speaking of frigid, I see the Hillary Clinton campaign brain trust is crafting a plan to warm up her image of being a cold, calculating, insencere, political schemer. Nothing like a calculating, insencere scheme to prove you aren\’t a calculating, insencere political schemer. (Pause for more audience laughter/pants wetting.)\”

I could go on, but I\’ll need some financial incentive, see? Anyway, dig around in our Trousers and I\’m sure you\’ll find plenty to make you laugh.

Have your people call my people.

– Dr. S

Christmas Shopping Follies

December 17, 2007 / / 0 Comments

For some reason, I felt the need to go Christmas shopping on Saturday night. Normally, this would be like saying, \”for some reason, I decided to pull the bones out of my legs and run a mile.\” But off I went in the snow, and here are a couple observations:

At Barnes and Noble, some 40-year old woman\’s cell phone went off, and the ringtone was not only deafening, but it was some ridiculous ghetto booty music. I sat there with my mouth agape while she clawed at her purse as if a kitten was suffocating inside. Finally, she got it turned off. Honest to God – these ridiculous ringtones should come with a warning – \”If you add this to your phone, SOMEONE MIGHT CALL YOU IN PUBLIC.\” She acted as if it was a total surprise that someone called her. Come to think of it, I am too.

When I got to the register at Barnes and Noble, they hit me up to donate to some charity for homeless kids or something. I knew this was coming, as I had heard the whole script delivered to the previous thirty customers in line. I know the whole purpose of harrassing people to give to this phony charity is to make people think Barnes and Noble cares about kids, but all it does is make the customers feel like total a-holes when they decline. Would you want all your customers walking out looking sullen, with their shoulders slumped?

As I got to the parking lot, I realized that I had no idea where I parked. I walked around for 15 minutes in the cold until I found my car. When I saw it, I realized I got a great spot way in the front, and gave myself a congratulatory fist-pump. Then it occurred to me that the whole purpose of having such a great spot was cancelled out by the 15 minutes I had been walking around.

I walked over to the mall and entered through Boston Store. Near the door, they have \”Green Bay Packers – 2007 NFC North Champions\” shirts. I wondered who would ever buy one of these shirts before the season is over. Think about it – let\’s say the Packers go on to win the Super Bowl. Then you\’re stuck with a shirt that celebrates the least of the Pack\’s accomplishments. Wouldn\’t you look kind of dopey wearing a shirt that said \”Packers – 1996 NFC Central Champions?\” Wouldn\’t people be like, \”uhhhh…. didn\’t they win the Super Bowl that year?\” Think people are going to get \”Mitt Romney – 2008 Iowa Caucus Winner\” t-shirts printed up?

I also get a kick out of cosmetics counters. All the employees back there are wearing white lab coats – as if they have Bunsen burners and lab rats back there. Like one day we\’re going to see a headline that says \”University of Wisconsin, Clinique Counter researchers team up on life-saving adult stem cell breakthrough.\”

And who are these women who sit there and have cosmetics applied to their face while hundreds of people walk by? Isn\’t that kind of a personal thing? Can any man imagine standing there while a Gillette salesman shaved him in public? On second thought – don\’t answer that. Same goes for these people who get massages at the mall. How is this possibly relaxing?

Finally, one more Christmas pet peeve of mine – those dopey commercials where some husband buys a Lexus for his wife and has it sitting in the driveway with a big bow on it when she gets home. Has this ever actually happened in the history of humanity?

There is no formula that can calculate the amount of trouble I would be in if I were to buy my wife a Lexus for Christmas. Let\’s just say her reaction would be less than ideal, and would likely involve bruising. Of course, nothing says \”I love you\” than committing your family to five years of crippling debt.

My Attempt to Make You Hate Me…

December 14, 2007 / / 0 Comments

…as if you don\’t already:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPp9pEn62no&rel=1]

The Gagne Conundrum

December 14, 2007 / / 0 Comments

With today\’s release of the Mitchell report on steroid use in baseball, Brewer fans have to do a little soul searching. Eric Gagne, who the Brewers just signed to a one-year, $10 million contract, is named in the report, allegedly buying human growth hormone in 2004. It appears many Brewer fans are willing to exhibit a little \”moral flexibility\” with regard to their newest reliever.

At the very least, fans should question the wisdom of spending $10 million on a player whose reputation was forged primarily when he was alleged to have been on steroids. Gagne is a three-time all star who won the National League Cy Young award in 2003, and the Brewers had to know that he had steroids in his past. Even Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein knew when he traded for Gagne last year. In an e-mail to a scout, Epstein said, \”I know the Dodgers think he was a steroid guy,\” and the scout responded, \”Some digging on Gagne and steroids IS the issue… Mentality without the plus weapons and without steroid help probably creates a large risk in bounce back durability and ability to throw average while allowing the changeup to play as it once did . . . Personally, durability (or lack of) will follow Gagne . .\”

While every Brewer fan wants to see the team succeed, how can they back a cheater? If Gagne was still pitching for the Dodgers, would they be willing to cut him so much slack? Remember all the vitriol aimed at Barry Bonds in Milwaukee for eclipsing Hank Aaron\’s home run record? How is Gagne any different?

People who think the whole steroid controversy is overblown say that HGH wasn\’t banned by major league rules at the time, so it\’s no big deal that players were using them. In fact, it is actually a very big deal.

As pointed out by Mitchell, steroids have been banned by the league since the 1991 collective bargaining agreement. The problem is, the league didn\’t begin actually testing for them until 2003. For that, the league and the union are both to blame. Furthermore, there still isn\’t a test for HGH, so players could still be using it undetected now. And it has always been a violation of federal law to obtain HGH without a prescription.

To say that the players shouldn\’t be punished because the league wasn\’t testing for HGH at the time is ridiculous. First of all, they were cheating. Second of all, they were violating federal law. Thirdly, they made a mockery of the record books, which is the one thread that connects generations of baseball fans.

So should Gagne be given amnesty for his steroid use?

Of course not. Just because something isn\’t in the baseball rule book (even though obtaining any prescription medication without a prescription was), doesn\’t mean it shouldn\’t be a punishable offense. If a player murdered someone, should it have to be in the league\’s rules to suspend them? (I am not equating murder and HGH use, incidentally – although HGH is even worse, in a way, because it affects the integrity of the game).

Additionally, there\’s no rule that says Bud Selig can only punish players who violated something specifically proscribed by major league rules. Selig can do whatever he wants, pursuant to the \”best interests of baseball\” clause in the league rules. Is there really any question that punishing cheaters who have erased the league\’s history is in the game\’s best interest? Should the fact that Gagne owns a Cy Young award that may have been won by someone else be left to stand?

There are those that will say Gagne\’s steroid use took place years ago, so there\’s no need to punish him now. Actually, we don\’t know that Gagne stopped using steroids years ago, since he was allegedly using a substance for which there is no test. But think about someone who robs a bank – the criminal justice system doesn\’t just order the bank robber to repay what he stole and call it all square. There are penalties for bad judgement and bad behavior – both of which Gagne displayed in his apparent receipt of steroids.

I recall being bewildered by San Francisco Giants fans who stood by Barry Bonds just because he was \”their guy.\” It makes no sense to judge a player\’s character by the uniform he happens to wear. It would then be the height of hypocrisy to now cheer for Gagne – a bad guy on a team I love.

Currently, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is running a poll of whether people care if Gagne used steroids, as long as he helps the team. The fact that the poll is running at a dead-even 50% to 50% split is dispiriting. It shows that there are too many people to make moral concessions based on their own rooting interest. And that is a shame.

While there\’s no question this report is an attempt by Bud Selig to cover his own tail during the Steroid Era, it doesn\’t mean that the players named in the report don\’t deserve to be punished.

Some other thoughts:

There\’s no question that the names of the players on the list are just the tip of the iceberg. Essentially, it\’s a list of players who were dumb enough to buy steroids with a personal check. But criticizing these players only because they have been identified doesn\’t make it unfair because some will go unpunished. If they did it, they did it – the fact that some are going to get away with it is completely irrelevant.

If ESPN was do die-hard about getting to the bottom of the steroid story, they could have looked down the desk at Baseball Tonight and asked Fernando Vina. As a commenter on Deadspin.com said, \”Fernando Vina does not surprise me. You don\’t maintain that perfect a goatee without performance enhancers.\”

The only people I marginally feel bad for are the players on the list who essentially were life-long minor league players. The message: these guys sucked so bad, they couldn\’t make the majors even by cheating.

The argument that you\’ll hear players use that they never tested positive is completely fraudulent. Marion Jones used that argument. She\’s headed for prison.

If anyone in the report is wrongfully accused, they can feel free to sue major league baseball. Of course, doing so will open their past up to all kinds of discovery. So don\’t expect that to happen any time soon.

I\’m also tired of people portraying steroid use as some kind of \”victimless\” crime. The only difference between steroids and a bank robbery is that players use needles instead of guns to steal statistics they didn\’t deserve. In a lot of cases, these players made millions of dollars they shouldn\’t have – and it\’s not like they\’re going to be giving it back after these allegations.

Imagine if your boss found out someone in your office had been stealing money, but didn\’t know who it was. Immediately, everyone in your workplace was under a cloud of suspicion. And the boss announces that because of all the money that went missing, nobody would be getting raises next year. Would you think that would be okay? Of course not. But that\’s exactly what steroid users have done to baseball – they\’ve stolen money they didn\’t deserve (money that the fans pay in ticket prices, FYI), and they\’ve put everyone under a cloud of suspicion.

Rocket in Hot Water

December 13, 2007 / / 0 Comments

ESPN is reporting that Roger Clemens will be named in the Mitchell Steroid Report. I believe I had that one. From May 7th of this year:

Incidentally, one more note on the Rocket – in the steroid era, when something happens that nobody has ever seen before, it\’s impossible to believe it. We may never know what substances Clemens was taking (there\’s no test for human growth hormone), but it\’s awfully coincidental that a 45 year old can go out and throw 95 miles per hour – something completely unheard of before he did it. And if someone ever documents his cheating? I\’ll have just as much vitriol for Clemens as I do Bonds.

Santa\’s Got it Right – The Economics of Gifting

December 13, 2007 / / 2 Comments

We all run into the same problem every year: what to get those special people in our lives for Christmas, or birthdays, or anniversaries, etc… In fact, economics can point us in the right direction.

In economic terms, when one person purchases an item for $100 and gifts it to another that might only value the gift at $50, there is an economic loss of $50 in the transaction. The loss may occur because the recipient already possesses such a gift or simply does not want it. Of course there is some psychological and relationship benefits from giving and receiving gifts, but have we not all received or given gifts in the past that were duds and felt badly afterward? One solution that has crept up on us literally in the past decade are gift cards. These alleviate some of the psychological issues that may arise, but gift cards also provide us with economic loss. Not only do gift cards restrict the recipient to shopping at particular retailers that they may not otherwise patronize, but oftentimes recipients cannot find items they want equal to the value on the gift card and are forced to purchase something beyond the value of the gift card. The final solution may be to simply give cash as a gift. Consumers like options, and cash grants the gift recipient unlimited options. But cash is also considered a thoughtless gift and could cause some relationships to rift.

So how do we really solve the economic problem of gifting? Although Santa Claus is a mythological creature, the tale of how children send their wish lists to Santa every Christmas just might work. If everyone exchanged their wants and desires with their loved ones and received in return exactly what they wanted, there would be no economic loss of gifting. Indeed, the giver would be supremely confident in the gift and the recipient would not feel the need to act happy. Wish lists could solve the problem outright. On the downside, the excitement of surprise would be forever lost…

Des Moines Republican Presidential Debate Recap

December 13, 2007 / / 0 Comments

\"\"

At Least Get My Name Right

December 12, 2007 / / 0 Comments

The \”mainstream media\” takes a lot of heat for sloppy reporting, but in this case, it is warranted:

Hollywood actress Jessica Alba is expecting her first child with boyfriend Cash Warren.

See how they blatantly mis-spelled the name? It\’s C-H-R-I-S S-C-H-N-E-I-D-E-R,\” not \”CASH WARREN.\” Duh.

\"\"

Connecting the Dots on Immigration

December 12, 2007 / / 3 Comments

Yesterday, we here at WPRI released the results of a poll that showed strong public opposition to various state benefits for illegal immigrants.  According to the poll, 76% of Wisconsin residents oppose allowing illegal immigrants to apply for drivers\’ licenses, 86% oppose giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition, and 46% disapprove of \”illegal immigrant children\” attending public schools.

It\’s interesting to see such stringent opposition to illegal immigrant benefits.  What\’s more interesting, however, is examining how the education questions relate to one another – there are connections that should be examined beyond just looking at the numbers.

As you can see, there\’s a big difference between what respondents thought about children and adult illegal immigrants.  It appears that there\’s a gap of people more willing to forgive illegal immigrant children than their parents.  To them, it likely makes sense that children shouldn\’t pay for the mistakes their parents make.

Yet these elementary school children will grow up and go to college.  And many of them will be the same kids that the public feels strongly should not get in-state tuition.  Presumably, that would mean they would have to pay out of state tuition or be denied entry into a state school altogether.  In other words, their education would likely end at a high school degree.

In fact, elementary school students receive a much larger public subsidy than University of Wisconsin students.  If the public was concerned about tax money being used to subsidize illegal immigrants, elementary school per-pupil spending should logically be the more difficult subsidy to stomach, considering per-pupil aid is so much greater.

Of course, the difficult question of why illegal immigrant children should be allowed to attend public elementary and high schools, but not colleges, is left up to the people who support the former but not the latter.  It appears that 46% of people oppose any and all concession to illegal immigrants, not matter what the age – and another 10% side with the illegal immigrants on all issues.  (I am assuming, of course, that there aren\’t a lot of people who oppose elementary school subsidies but support taxpayer aid for college.)  It would be interesting to listen to the rationale of the people in the middle – who may support one, but not the other – and why.

Most likely, respondents probably viewed illegal immigrants trying to attend the UW as trying to mooch off the system after they crossed the border.  It\’s unlikely that they understood that many of these kids are actually graduating from Wisconsin public schools.  Of course, this is the same rationale Governor Jim Doyle has used in pushing for his plan to give illegal immigrants the ability to pay in-state tuition.

It would seem, then, that to make his plan more viable, Doyle could implement a provision that requires an illegal immigrant spend a more substantial amount of time in a Wisconsin public school before being eligible for in-state tuition (his plan as introduced in the 2007-09 budget had a one-year residency requirement).  If a kid were required to spend four years in a public school, the public might feel a little different about their tuition eligibility – as they would be assured the student isn\’t just taking advantage of the system.

Of course, even if such a concession were made, 46% of the public appears to be against any type of compromise.  So it would still be a large mountain to climb.  But it may be enough to begin to convince the gap of people who believe there\’s a benefit to educating the children of illegals at some level.

A Special Christmas Message From Angel

December 11, 2007 / / 0 Comments

In the times in which we live, we need more positive messages to keep us inspired. This is especially so during the holidays, where people of all nationalities, colors and creeds should set aside their differences and embrace the common bond of humanity.

Such a soul-warming holiday message is found in the following clip, where 9th grader Angel reminds us of one the most simple rules a civil society should promote: \”Don\’t Hate.\”

Well put, Angel. And may God bless you during this holiday season, too.

Mentoring the Youth of Today

December 10, 2007 / / 0 Comments

UW-Milwaukee Student and Frontpage Milwaukee writer Rebecca Kontowicz asked me to be a guest on her radio show class project. She apparently is under the mistaken impression that I am someone important. Always wanting to help the youth of today, I agreed. You can listen here.

« Older posts

© 2024 Christian Schneider

Follow me at Mastodon