I am still terrible at electrical work. All I’ve really done is change light fixtures, but working on things attached to the ceiling is not any kind of fun. As a result, I’ve had trouble getting motivated to finish a couple really minor projects. They weren’t even ceiling-related, but I associate wiring with getting dust and fiberglass in my eyeballs – which makes me a little hesitant to wire things! Yesterday I replaced the rusty old polished brass number at the back door with something that matches the new door hardware:

Sweet hand-me-down lighting. Thanks, Amy & Alex!

A running joke at home is that mom always wants before and after pictures when dad works on a project, but we never remember the “before” ones. Dad will be replacing shingles or siding, building a barn, pulling out old shrubs, etc… and halfway through the job someone will say “this is going to look so much better – we should take before and after pictures!” True to form, I forgot to take a picture of the old porch-light.

Though vertically-mounted lighting is much, much easier than mounting friggin’ ceiling fixtures, I still bungled around twisting wires together and getting them to fit nicely into the wall. So, I was glad when I pulled out the old doorbell and remembered that low voltage stuff is a cakewalk.

Why put in a brushed nickel doorbell when the front door is bedecked with polished brass? Well, I hate polished brass, and the old doorbell was good and broken.

The plastic disappeared from the button a few months ago. I don’t know if it fell off, or what, but it’s gone. I was not crazy about the button at the front door looking like some tiny cyclops robot from an 80s movie, but I put off changing for fear that whatever I bought wouldn’t fit right. The new mount was a bit short; thankfully its self-driving screws were nice and sharp. I don’t think the drill driver would have worked so well with the bricks sticking out right in the way.

Oh yeah – I forgot to take a picture of the old unit until after I was finished putting in the new one. Fail.

At this rate, maybe we’ll all be dead before the country goes bankrupt.

The Obama administration launched a criminal investigation Monday into harsh questioning of detainees during President George W. Bush’s war on terrorism, revealing CIA interrogators’ threats to kill one suspect’s children and to force another to watch his mother sexually assaulted.

So now we’re not allowed to say mean things to suspected terrorists. Another guy was pinched! Pinched so hard he passed out! We’re basically barbarians.

In one instance cited in the new documents, Abd al-Nashiri, the man accused of being behind the 2000 USS Cole bombing, was hooded, handcuffed and threatened with an unloaded gun and a power drill. The unidentified interrogator also threatened al-Nashiri’s mother and family, implying they would be sexually abused in front of him, according to the report.

The interrogator denied making a direct threat.

Another interrogator told alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, “if anything else happens in the United States, ‘We’re going to kill your children,’” one veteran officer said in the report.

Death threats violate anti-torture laws.

These are the ACLU’s poor, downtrodden examples of prisoner abuse? Couldn’t they find a few people not responsible for hundreds of American deaths? I’ve compiled a list of questions acceptable to ask of, say, hapless innocent Saudi Arabians nabbed in Afghani huts full of bomb-making materials, schematics for American bridges, and fake passports:

1. Are you planning to kill Americans?
2. If detainee responds “yes” to (1). Could you stop, maybe?
3. Please?
4. Would you like another cappuccino?

The board of experts being assembled by the White House will have to be mindful of tone when asking the third question, but I think this is a list that will totally keep America safe while respecting the inalienable rights of foreign combatants captured overseas.

In a conference call today with religious leaders from around the country, President Obama framed the debate over health insurance reform in terms of right and wrong: anyone who hearts big government is right, and anyone who doesn’t is wrong. Trouble is, President Obama is wrong about practically everything.

“These struggles always boil down to a contest between hope and fear,” he said. “That was true in the debate over Social Security, when F.D.R. was accused of being a socialist. That was true when J.F.K. and Lyndon Johnson tried to pass Medicare. And it’s true in this debate today.”

This is President Obama’s argument? If throwing additional tax dollars and half-baked regulations at a serious national issue passes for hope these days, I’ll take fear. Look at Social Security and Medicare! Don’t you wish everything could be managed to insolvency by Washington bureaucrats? President Obama does.

The Weekly Standard has an Obama quote that’s not included in the NYT story:

“You’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion. Not true. These are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation–and that is that we look out for one another, that I am my brother’s keeper and I am my sister’s keeper. And on the wealthiest nation on earth right now, we are neglecting to live up to that call.”

“I am my brother’s keeper,” “we are neglecting to live up to that call” – does President Obama have any concept of Americans as individuals? I feel bad for the self-proclaimed socialists out there; Obama keeps annexing more and more of their worldview as bipartisanship/pragmatism/realism/centrism/whatever we’re calling it this week.

The Weekly Standard story goes into more detail about the abortion question and the general tone of Obama and Congressional Democrats lately. Republicans are stifling debate – on a bill that Obama wanted to pass weeks ago, before anyone had even read it. Republicans are lying about what’s in Obamacare – although the Mad Libs legislation being pushed by statists would leave politicians to fill in the blanks while taxpayers foot the bill.

I didn’t mean for “Mad Libs” to have a double meaning in that last sentence. Looking at it now, though… that may accidentally be the wittiest thing I’ve ever written. A low bar to clear, I know.

A coworker sent me a link to an interesting story from KeithHennessey.com, a site I hadn’t visited before. Hennessey was an economic adviser in George W. Bush’s administration, and offers more detailed analysis of the problem – and more recommended solutions – than anyone I’ve stumbled across.

First, a post from way back on April 9, “How many uninsured people need additional help from taxpayers?” takes a close look at the “46 million uninsured” number we hear from President Obama, leading Democrats, and most media outlets. A brief excerpt:

Of that amount, 6.4 million are the Medicaid undercount. These are people who are on one of two government health insurance programs, Medicaid or S-CHIP, but mistakenly (intentionally or not) tell the Census taker that they are uninsured. There is disagreement about the size of the Medicaid undercount. This figure is based on a 2005 analysis from the Department of Health and Human Services.

That’s one point from a bulleted list wherein Hennessey lists categories of people included in the 46 million number advocates of expanded health entitlements use to paint a Dickensian picture of uninsured Americans dying in the streets. Six million here, four million there, and it’s obvious that far fewer than 46 million Americans need the ~$1,000,000,000,000 legislation slithering through Congress – unless you consider every good and service a “right” to be doled out on the government’s terms.

And here’s Howard Dean:

But, wait a minute, that’s, that is the farce of the argument, uh, on the conservative side. The farce is consumers can make informed decisions about medical care. You can make some informed decisions, but I practiced for ten years, I never had anybody with substernal chest pain get off my table and say, “Doc, the guy down the street does it $2,000 cheaper, I’ll see you later.”

In a single (bolded) sentence, the rotten core of Progressive thought. There’s an element of truth in Dean’s point – yes, medical decisions can be very complicated and difficult. But the conclusion that citizens cannot make decisions, and thus Government must make them, is telling. Replace “medical care” in the bold sentence with “credit,” “automobiles,” “home buying,” et cetera, and you have the foundation on which all the Democrats’ policies are built.

The Associated Press reports on the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., in a story titled, “Black scholar’s arrest raises profiling questions“:

Cambridge police say they responded to the well-maintained two-story home after a woman reported seeing “two black males with backpacks on the porch,” with one “wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry.”

By the time police arrived, Gates was already inside. Police say he refused to come outside to speak with an officer, who told him he was investigating a report of a break-in.

“Why, because I’m a black man in America?” Gates said, according to a police report written by Sgt. James Crowley. The Cambridge police refused to comment on the arrest Monday.

Emphasis mine. I can think of just one question this raises: Why is Henry Louis Gates Jr. such a jackass? Police responded to a phone call, and apparently it’s too much to ask of a Harvard professor that he behave like an adult. In America, where – as Professor Gates may not have realized – we have a black President, jumping to complaints of racial profiling is about as much an issue as racial profiling itself.

The Rev. Al Sharpton is vowing to attend Gates’ arraignment.

More salve on societal scars. Wait, “salve” is the wrong word… salt. That’s what I meant.

“This arrest is indicative of at best police abuse of power or at worst the highest example of racial profiling I have seen,” Sharpton said. “I have heard of driving while black and even shopping while black but now even going to your own home while black is a new low in police community affairs.”

“The Reverend” is a blowhard who does more harm than good. Each time I see his Malcolm X impression, I’m grateful to have grown up in a world where skin color is only a big deal to a few of my racist white peers — and a few of my racist black ones.

Today’s AP story on health insurance has one of the best opening sentences I’ve read in a looong time:

House Democrats on Tuesday rolled out a far-reaching $1.5 trillion plan that for the first time would make health care a right and a responsibility for all Americans, with Medical providers, employers and the wealthiest picking up most of the tab.

When I say “best,” I mean “worst,” because words can mean anything you want them to mean. This is a fact I learned from the Associated Press, just now!

House Democrats want to “make health care a right and a responsibility for all Americans.” No, not a ‘responsibility’ like it is now, with you responsible for determining your health insurance needs. That type of responsibility is utter crap. House Democrats mean the kind of responsibility where the federal government decides what you need and who’s going to pay for it, with fees and taxes for the convenience — and penalties for disobedience.

And before even coughing up a period, the AP story mostly contradicts itself, saying that “Medical providers, employers and the wealthiest” will cover the majority of the costs. Of course they will! Can’t expect poor people to pay for their own… anything. Here we get closer to the point: some Americans have responsibilities, while other Americans simply are responsibilities.

Not to mention that what Democrats are suggesting is “a far-reaching $1.5 trillion plan.” Well, by all means, if it’s far-reaching, giddy-up! After all, what’s another $1.5 trillion among friends?

Standing before a banner that read “Quality Affordable Care for the Middle Class,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called the moment “historic and transformative.” The bill would provide “stability and peace of mind” by braking costs and guaranteeing coverage, she said.

This plan, like the AP’s coverage of it, is amazing. “Affordable care” will result in a doubling of our exploding deficits. Heaping more taxes on the economy’s producers to insure the poor equals “responsibility.”A bill based on the horrendous failure of Medicare will yield “stability.”

…backers of a public plan – including Obama – say it would provide healthy competition for the insurance industry.

Ah, nearly forgot: “healthy competition” is what you get when you take an industry and add a competitor whose costs are determined arbitrarily, enforced by the federal government, and covered by hundreds of billions in Treasury debt.

“We are going to accomplish what many people felt wouldn’t happen in our lifetime,” said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., one of the main sponsors.

Really… so, in whose lifetime did many people feel Congress would accomplish the permanent ruination of republican government in the United States?

[Update: Fixed a typo - made it clear to the last sentence! Then misspelled a stupid word.]

Headline of the week: “UN sanctions on NKorea may be futile”

If you’re not a member of the UN, you’re not looking to become a member of the UN, you trade with countries indifferent to the blathering of the UN, and your giant communist neighbor watches your back at the UN, it’s conceivable that maybe the UN can’t control your actions.

The sanctions allow for inspection of North Korean cargo, which might have been sort of useful, oh, fifteen years ago.

But the North Koreans have proved to be wily traders in the past, and many of their customers may be nations like Iran and Syria that may not cooperate with U.N. sanctions.

Much of the freight can also be transported by plane, and one of the North’s most prized products — technical nuclear know-how — is safe in the minds, hard drives and brief cases of their scientists who can travel without restrictions and transfer their knowledge in person.

I’m sorry, perhaps I should state my position on the North Korea situation: Bomb. Their. Shit. Maybe by now it would be too little, too late, but I’ll never understand the logic behind watching lunatics develop bigger and bigger missiles and more and more nuclear facilities.

From the AP story on last night’s foiled terrorist attack in New York:

Four men arrested after planting what they thought were explosives near a synagogue and community center and plotting to shoot down a military plane were bent on carrying out a jihad against America, authorities said Thursday.

Those wacky jihadists — George W. Bush left office months ago!

“They stated that they wanted to commit Jihad,” Kelly said. “They were disturbed about what happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that Muslims were being killed.”

“What happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan…” think we can safely say it’s not the Taliban’s ongoing barbarity that has these fruits bombing Jewish centers in New York. Plus, would-be terrorists really need to listen more closely to President Obama! It’s the Iraq war that’s transforming Muslims into mad bombers, not Afghanistan and Pah-kee-stahn.

An official told The Associated Press that three of the men are converts to Islam. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to discuss details of the investigation. Three of the defendants are U.S. citizens and one is of Haitian descent, officials said.

That explains it. If these dudes were born Muslims, they’d realize “jihad” is a peaceful internal struggle for world domination.

Bloomberg warned against stereotypes, emphasizing that the temple is open to people of all faiths, including a Muslim girl who sometimes prays there.

What kind of stereotype could Mayor Bloomberg be referring to? Like the jailed jihadists, he should pay better attention: Muslim terrorists have no problem with killing other Muslims. Heck, if you die as collateral damage in an attack on Jews, you probably get a free ticket to Virginville!

Crossing over 270 on Cemetery Road yesterday I noticed a backup in the eastbound lanes that was kind of funny (which of course tells you what direction I was going). As if the just-after-5 traffic isn’t bad enough at every intersection with ramps to the outerbelt, a family of geese decided 5:10 was the ideal time to chug across from the grassy median to the pond behind Damon’s. At first I saw only the lead goose and thought “I hope that SUV hits that stupid goose,” and then I noticed all the puffball babies and felt like the worst person on earth.

How can it be that the baby version of a useless, hateful thing like a Canadian Goose is so doggone cute? And how is it I could grow up on a farm and remain such a wimp-bag where cutesy animals are concerned?

Last weekend I “met” my cousin’s 4-H pig for the year. We’ll not even go into how my brain justifies loving both the personality and the flavor of a pig. I’d be equally useless as an exterminator or as a PETA activist.

I’m one of those clueless Midwestern rubes who thinks most reporters are ridiculously biased towards Democrats. You could view as an example anything about Obama’s first 100 days in office that wasn’t produced by Fox News, The New York Post, or the Wall Street Journal. Joe Klein’s contribution in Time, for instance:

But in prose that was spare and clear and compelling, the President proceeded…

And,

The combination of candor and vision and the patient explanation of complex issues was Obama at his best — and more than any other moment of his first 100 days in office, it summed up the purpose of his presidency: a radical change of course not just from his predecessor, not just from the 30-year Reagan era but also from the quick-fix, sugar-rush, attention-deficit society of the postmodern age.

Press coverage of President Obama – like coverage of Obama the candidate – is glowing and supportive because reporters agree with Obama. No conspiracy required. The premise we’re supposed to accept from Fox News and CNN alike is that reporters can talk about politics objectively day in and out. False.

Joe Klein doesn’t even have the excuse of talking for hours a day on some 24-hour cable news channel. But he can’t help using a first and a second and a third complimentary adjective when reporting on Obama’s speech. Even when he suggests the possiblity of Obama’s policies being wrong, it’s only to jab at President Bush:

Whether you agree with him or not — whether you think he is too ambitious or just plain wrong — his is as serious and challenging a presidency as we have had in quite some time.

Because nothing about 9/11, al Qaeda, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, etc prompted seriousness from President Bush. If Joe Klein wants to assert that President Bush was unserious about a number of domestic issues, I’d agree with him there. But not for the same reasons, if I were to make a wild guess.

The piece continues as expected – Obama’s first 100 days as wonderful as FDR’s, unlikeable Republicans, glorious post-Dubya diplomacy  – and nothing else seems worth mention until the end.

There are those who mistake his quiet, deliberative style for softness. There is the fear that he won’t have the strength to stand up to the Israelis (or the Iranians) or to the left wing of his party on health care or to the porkers on the defense budget.

Emphasis mine. This sentence sums up so much of what’s wrong with Progressive thinking. Who in their right mind lists a failure to stand up to Israel as a concern, and then lists Iran as an afterthought? As for “the left wing of his party” – Dear Joe: Obama is obviously the left wing of his party, if you pay a little less attention to his words and a little more attention to his actions. Oh, and the defense budget! Earmarks and special interest funding by the billions in the stimulus and domestic budget are no concern, but America’s doomed if we buy too many F-22As!