The Smarmy Carny

ACLU

What really, truly bothers me in this instance is not that they removed the feeding tube per se, but that they have ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Removing the feeding tube is one thing, but when a patient is able to swallow, denying that person food or water just seems so much more cruel to me.

Here's a basic test on this: Have someone suggest to the courts that as an alternative to lethal injection (with sterilized needles, of course) we should also have the option to starve the inmate to death. How long do you think will go by before the ACLU pounces on that one?

The ACLU's own "About the ACLU" clearly states their own views and goals. Here are a few quotes from this page (emphasis added):

We work also to extend rights to segments of our population that have traditionally been denied their rights, including Native Americans and other people of color; lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people; women; mental-health patients; prisoners; people with disabilities; and the poor.
If the rights of society's most vulnerable members are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled.

Thus, one might think that the ACLU would be stepping in to help Schiavo, as she is a person with a disability . Unfortunately, the ACLU seems to go out of their way to never mention "life" on this page. It's all about "liberty" instead. Without life, what use is liberty?

After a previous tirade regarding the ACLU, a left-leaning friend of mine once asked me, "What's so bad about protecting people's civil liberties?" I noted that, while nothing in the ACLU's goals was objectional. The problem is in how the ACLU chooses to carry out these objectives in a political manner is what is quite bothersome. In this particular case, the ACLU posted a headline after the courts ruled yet again against Schiavo's parents: "U.S. Supreme Court Protects Liberty in Schiavo Case." Instead of fighting to protect the disabled Schiavo's life, they are rooting for the courts to rule that the feeding tubes remain out, "a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman's right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment and prevents politicians from interfering with intensely personal medical decisions." All right, I'll go with that. Put the feeding tubes back in, and let her "withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment" on her own. She never signed a paper to declare that is what she would want.

To continue my answer to my left-leaning friend, what wasn't in the ACLU's goals was also worrisome. They have clearly picked specific, particular groups. Am I saying these groups could not use assistance in protecting their liberties? Not at all. There is an obvious lack of protection for other groups who need protection as well. Unfortunately for those groups, their philosophies do not line up with the ACLU's political aspirations. Thus, you aren't included in our list of "people to help."

Meanwhile, a Cabot farmer convicted of starving his cows to death has begun serving a reparative sentence imposed by Washington County prosecutors as part of a plea bargain. Surprisingly, the ACLU focuses on humans and I could not find any comment on this particular case. Unfortunately for the farmer, all of his cows were healthy. If they had terminal diseases or disabilities, it probably would have been perfectly acceptable to starve them.

Perhaps the ACLU would care to go back and change a few things from history. First and foremost, they would alter Patrick Henry's famous saying and display it in their doorways:

Give me liberty and give me death!

Of course, they wouldn't quote the entire speech, as the previous sentence references God. Additionally, I can only imagine that the ACLU has a copy of the Declaration of Independence, and it looks like this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Happy Easter!

I'm taking the day off to spend time with my family, so go read the archives or something.

I have generally been avoiding any comment on the Terry Schiavo debacle, especially here on the blog.

I have finally given in, however, and feel the need to make a quick comment. I'm not interested in summarizing the entire debate of either side, as that has been accomplished numerous times on either side of the issue. If that's what you want, just tune into Fox News or CNN, as they have virtual 24-hour coverage of this issue right now.

I will not even argue either side of the issue, because even though I hold a position on the issue, I don't hold it strongly enough to discuss it here.

Here's all that I want to offer up:

If you want Schiavo to be able to die, why would you want her to die via the slow, excruciating methods of starvation and dehydration?

What really, truly bothers me in this instance is not that they removed the feeding tube per se, but that they have ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Removing the feeding tube is one thing, but when a patient is able to swallow, denying that person food or water just seems so much more cruel to me. This may also create a slippery slope regarding euthanasia of the elderly, but I won't hash that argument out.

If your living will notes that a loved one may pull the plug on you, you may want to add a notation that you are not to be starved to death.

Now, I realize that I began this post by saying that I avoided Schiavo and that this was just a "quick comment" type of post, but I will be posting again in the next day (or sooner) regarding this issue. In my own defense, I will mention that the next Schiavo post will be about this same issue, so it is really more of an extension of this post, with one exception: I will be focusing on ACLU's position. Good times.

To be continued . . .

Hoffarber takes the miracle shot

You may remember back in early February when I posted about the 87-foot full-court shot with .06 seconds remaining that blew my mind. While we're focused on college-level basketball during March Madness, high school basketball continues to come up with all the truly amazing footage.

Here's how startribune.com describes the circumstances:

It was an absurd shot. Taken out of desperation. Yet Hopkins sophomore Blake Hoffarber swished it, lying on his back on the three-point line late Saturday night at Target Center with his legs and arms up, looking a lot like an upside-down turtle. The shot, taken just before the buzzer sounded to end the first overtime of the Class 4A boys' basketball championship game, merely tied the score at 58. Yet it proved every bit as devastating as a game-winner.

Like I said with the other basketball video, even if you don't care about basketball, you still must take a moment to watch the video of the shot.

Regarding this video: Sorry, you have to suffer through a commercial. Also, the video uses the Windows Media Player ActiveX plugin, so it's not friendly with Firefox. Those hellbent on never using IE again might be interested in reading instructions on enabling ActiveX within Firefox, but I still couldn't get it to work.

Free iPods

Have you signed up for your free iPod yet?

Status:

5 referrals obtained!

I received my free iPod!

By this time, most everyone has heard about the "free iPod" deals out on the internet.

The intelligent people who hear about this deal immediately dismiss the entire plan as a scam. The gullible people who hear about this deal end up with free iPods. Go figure.

The most popular site offering free iPods has caused quite a frenzy. First, there was a flurry of people claiming that they really did get a free iPod. Then there was a flurry of people saying they qualified for a free iPod, but they were still waiting to get theirs, and they were pessimistic. Then there was a flurry of people saying they finally got their free iPod. Then there was a flurry of people saying they finally believed the second generation of free-iPod'ers, and had finally decided to join up and go for the gold. This is precisely where I entered the story.

You've got questions? Of course you do? Still skeptical? Of course you are. Here are some answers for you:

• Is this really for real?
  What . . . you mean that just because you read my blog entry, you don't believe it's legit? Fair enough. I wouldn't believe a random blog entry, either. Read an article on the free iPod deal at Wired.com. Even they admit it's legit.
• How does it work?
  Basically, you sign up and complete an "offer." You can pick from various offers. Right now, there are items such as "Join the Columbia House DVD Club and get 5 DVDs for $.49 each," "Start your free trial of Appéra tooth whitener," "Get a free 7 Day Trial of Trimlife Trio," "Sign up for a free 30-day trial at eFax," etc. My personal advice is to go with one of the free trials and cancel near the end of the trial, unless of course you were already thinking about getting involved with one of the deals (like Columbia House). Then, get five friends (or even enemies or strangers, if they are willing) to sign up using your referral link and complete an offer themselves. Once this is all done, they ship you an iPod!
• How can they make money off of giving away free $200+ iPods?
  Apparently the company behind this deal gets money for sending people (prospective customers) to the specified sites. If they give an iPod to a person, that means they fulfilled the obligation and had five people sign up under them and complete an offer. So, five referrals costs them one iPod . . . and not everyone who completes an offer bothers to get all five referrals, and never picks up an iPod. Easy money for the company.

Just to recap, here's information from the site about how to get your free iPod:

To get your free item is simple:

1. Join our website.
   You create an account with our website by filling out the simple form on our main page. Give us your email address and create a password, and hit next. That's it!
2. Click and complete an online offer from our website.
   These are special online offers that our advertisers are offering, and can be found once your are logged into your account, and on the "Complete Offer" page. You will simply have to choose 1 (one) of these offers which you are interested in, and complete the necessary steps. Offer instructions will pop up once you click on that offer, just make sure you have disabled any pop-up blocking software.
   You will receive credit for this offer, once you have completed all of the necessary steps, and we have received confirmation of credit from that offer provider.
   You can see the status of this credit on the "Check Status" page of the website. You are also free to try more than one offer.
3. Refer people who also create an account, and complete an offer.
   You will need to refer new people to sign up with our website by having them click on your referral link. They must click that exact link in order for you to get credit. Once they have joined, they must also complete one online offer from their account. Once you have the appropriate number of referrals who completed an offer, and once you yourself have completed an offer, you will then be eligible to receive your free product.

I'm not going to lie to you. After reading the post, I'm sure you are well aware that the links above all head to referral URIs. You're helping people by getting them closer to a free iPod, and I'm helping you by informing you about the whole deal. Of course, you could chop off the referral portion of the link, but then you'd be helping no one . . . except for Freepay. These referral links are not for me, as I have already received my free iPod! Read here about my free iPod!

"Fantasy Ranch"

There's a bit of discussion out there regarding Burger King's new ad, "Fantasy Ranch."

Despite all the discussion, no one seems to know what to make of this ad. Watch the full commercial and judge for yourself.

Personally, I love it, and I'll tell you why.

• First, the song uses the tune from Harry "Haywire Mac" McClintock's "Big Rock Candy Mountain," which I immediately recognized from the soundtrack. This song is so addictive, it's unbelievable. Without this song, the commercial doesn't have much behind it.
• Hootie's Darius Rucker sings this addictive song. Get a pop rocker to sing an old western. It works every time.
• Subservient Chicken! W00t! The subservient chicken has a cameo in this commercial. (If you don't know who SC is, he's the big chicken in the commercial. D'oh!) Crispin Porter + Bogusky is the agency behind this commercial, and they also are the ones who headed up the SubservientChicken.com site. If you haven't ever checked that out, drop what you're doing, go there, experience Subservient Chicken, and then come back and finish reading.
• Subtle double entendres punctuate the song. Most people won't catch these as they mindlessly watch. For instance, lines sung with models on the screen are "the breasts grow on trees" and "there's a train of ladies with a nice caboose." Dirty as it may be, that's wit you just don't get often in today's culture.

Clearly, commercials like this are not aimed at pleasing everyone. Many people will form a love/hate relationship with the commercial, and many others will hate it wholeheartedly. I can accept that. The commercial still rules!

Just a quick note: One thing I categorically hate, however, is that King in the weird-looking mask. Appearing at a Kings game as their mascot? Acceptable. Appearing in a Burger King commercial? Nauseating.

Update: I just stumbled on The Impulsive Buy's article on this commercial. If you've never been to the site, check it out. It's good times.

USA PATRIOT Act

What's wrong with the Patriot Act? Not as much as the left and leftists would have you believe.

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 has not resulted in a flood of abuses, as we were told by Scary Kerry et al.

Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act directs the Office of the Inspector General in the U.S. Department of Justice to issue a report every six months related to claims of civil rights or civil liberties violations allegedly committed by DOJ employees. A new report was released on 11 March 2005, and according to The Volokh Conspiracy, "The report does not detail the nature of the allegations, but does add that 'none of the complaints . . . processed . . . alleged misconduct by DOJ employees relating to use of a provision in the Patriot Act.'"

Those who maintain that the Patriot Act is evil should take some time to read lifeandliberty.gov's page dispelling some of the major myths about the USA PATRIOT Act.

Still, it's not like the ACLU will ever give up . . .