FREE WHITEWATER

Monthly Archives: April 2010

Uncategorized

The Wisconsin Meteor of ’10

by  • 

I’m sure that everyone in Wisconsin has seen video of a meteoro streaking across our skies. Here are two followup stories.

First, over at Walworth County Today, there’s a story about discovered meteorites that have struck Wisconsin since the 1860s. See, Walworth County meteorite of ’55 struck near Zenda.

Second, here’s a story about a request from UW-Madison scientists for those who might have fragments from the meteor seen last week to bring them to the university. The story also includes a link to meteorite hits in Wisconsin. See, UW-Madison scientists seeking meteor fragments.

Finally, here’s a video of the meteor streaking across our skies, as seen from a few cameras. Enjoy.


more >>

Politics

Rushed Meetings in the Wisconsin Assembly

by  • 

I seldom write about Wisconsin’s Assembly, the exception being a recent series of posts on Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan of Janesville, who managed to embarrass his caucus, and the state, more ways that one. Over the weekend, though, the Associated Press wrote an analysis of Assembly deliberations on how to punish serial-offender assemblyman Jeff Wood of Chippewa Falls. (Wood has at least thrice been charged with operating a vehicle while under the influence.)

The AP’s analysis, entitled, “Analysis: Criticism of Nass one of many Democratic stumbles in Jeff Wood case,” is right on the mark.

First, the Assembly should never have acceded to Wood’s request to begin consideration late at night, so that a vote on punishment wasn’t held until just before dawn. Just before dawn — as though Wisconsin faced a natural disaster or threat to her political security. This was no crisis, and our legislators had no need to scurry to vote before a court date (today) that Wood had to enter a plea agreement. There wouldn’t have been any deadline if Wood had been sober, by the way. He created the circumstances that led to his court date; there’s no need for Wisconsin’s representatives to accommodate Wood.

Second, there should never have been a vote while assemblyman Nass was unable to attend due to the passing of his mother. Never. The Assembly majority owed Nass consideration for these circumstances, and it’s shameful that they acted both rashly in a pre-dawn vote, and disrespectfully to Nass.

Third, even if Nass had not experienced a family loss, he would still be owed more consideration that Wood. Wood is, after all, the one who should be accommodating — he’s the elected representative who’s conduct is in question. Nass hasn’t done anything wrong.

Fourth, representative Colon made himself ridiculous when he contended that Nass should have shown up for the overnight vote, and was even more ridiculous to offer an apology that was anything but a true apology (“I am very sorry that my statements were misconstrued on the floor of the Assembly and I certainly did not intend to criticize Representative Nass for missing session last night due to the unfortunate death of his mother”).

Nass is right not to accept an ersatz apology that blames him, Nass, for supposedly misconstruing something. Colon speaks as though an insult is all in Nass’s imagination. That’s nonsense. Even those who oppose Nass politically should be embarrassed by this sort of apology. It follows the Mike Sheridan course — a so-called apology that actually casts blame on those insulted by implying they’re just misunderstanding or misconstruing something. No, they’re not.

Nass was right to reject a false apology.

Fifth, I’m neither a Republic nor a Democrat. If I somehow found myself with the misfortune of being in the Wisconsin Assembly, I wouldn’t want to caucus with either major party.

Still, Democrats should look on this vote, and statements from Colon, with embarrassment. They should also take note that the Associated Press — hardly a right-wing organization — sees the late-night vote, and Colon’s remarks — as the stumbles they were.

Those progressive Wisconsinites who want good government will not find it in a majority party that holds rushed and ill-timed votes, and offers only false apologies for shameful statements.

Sixth, although I am sure that the rushed vote was a mistake, I don’t support expelling Wood. The Assembly has the power to do so, but Wood is already obligated to the law and his constituents. He has violated the former, and failed the latter. If the people of Wood’s Chippewa Falls district were foolish enough to elect him, they should have to live with that decision unless they can persuade him to resign, or until the next election. (Wood’s not running again, of course.)

Wood’s not someone who should have been in office as long as he has been, but that’s proof of the ill-judgment of his constituents. Wood was first elected in 2002. Admittedly, his offenses have all come (I believe) since he was last re-elected in 2008, the first of three recent offenses taking place in December 2008. Yet, the man the voters of Chippewa Falls foolishly selected, the voters of Chippewa Falls deserve until the next election.

Most importantly, Wisconsin deserved much better from her representatives than a rushed vote on Wood’s fate. We deserved proper deliberations, consideration for a representative’s family loss, and a true apology to assemblyman Nass, rather than a weak and insincere one that shirks responsibility.

Daily Bread

Daily Bread for Whitewater, Wisconsin: 4-19-10

by  • 

Good morning,

Whitewater’s forecast calls for a mostly sunny day, with a high of sixty-two degrees.

This afternoon, from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m., it’s CROP Walk Night at Culver’s. Our Culver’s is on the west side of town, at 1414 West Main Street in Whitewater. A total of 10 per cent of the proceeds will be donated to the Whitewater CROP Walk, which is on April 25th.

This is a fun way to help our hungry neighbors everywhere. To learn more, contact Rev. David Huxley at 262-749-1168.

There’s also a CDA Board of Directors meeting this afternoon, from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. The agenda is available online.

Today marks two sad anniversaries, and one happy beginning.

In 1862, according to the Wisconsin Historical Society, Wisconsin Governor Harvey drowned in the Tennessee River, while

leading an expedition to relieve Wisconsin troops after the battle of Shiloh. The expedition was bringing doctors, nurses, and much-needed medical supplies to soldiers when Harvey, crossing from one steamboat to another, slipped, fell into the swift currents of the Tennessee River, and never re-surfaced. His body was recovered ten days later, nearly sixty miles downstream. When news reached Madison, Lieutenant Governor Edward Salomon was sworn in as Wisconsin’s first German-American governor. [Source: Wisconsin in the Civil War, by Frank L. Klement]

One hears much about what it means to be a great leader; Harvey’s a true example of service and leadership in response to dire need.

Today is also the anniversary of the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma, in 1995, killing or severely injuring hundreds of innocent people, including children. The New York Times has details from early reporting on one of the worst crimes and acts of terrorism in our history.

On a much happier note, the History Channel notes that today is the anniversary of the first Boston Marathon, first run in 1897:

On April 19, 1897, John J. McDermott of New York won the first Boston Marathon with a time of 2:55:10.

The Boston Marathon was the brainchild of Boston Athletic Association member and inaugural U.S. Olympic team manager John Graham, who was inspired by the marathon at the first modern Olympic Games in Athens in 1896. With the assistance of Boston businessman Herbert H. Holton, various routes were considered, before a measured distance of 24.5 miles from the Irvington Oval in Boston to Metcalf’s Mill in Ashland was eventually selected.

Fifteen runners started the race but only 10 made it to the finish line. John J. McDermott, representing the Pastime Athletic Club of New York City, took the lead from Harvard athlete Dick Grant over the hills in Newton. Although he walked several times during the final miles, McDermott still won by a comfortable six-minute, fifty-two-seconds. McDermott had won the only other marathon on U.S. soil the previous October in New York.

The marathon’s distance was changed in 1908 in accordance with Olympic standards to its current length of 26 miles 385 yards.

City

The Fairhaven Postcard

by  • 

There are lots of interesting items that one can find for sale, of memorabilia of a town’s past. I found something like that recently, and thought readers might find it interesting. It’s a postcard of Fairhaven, in Whitewater, from decades ago.

(I’ve no connection to Fairhaven, except to know of it as a senior care residence in Whitewater. More about Fairhaven is available online, at www.fairhaven.org.)

The postcard is in excellent condition, is unused, and bears the motto, “Fairhaven — Where Life is Added to Years.” It’s from the Artvue Post Card Company, 225 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York.

(I would guess that it dates from the 1950s about fifty years ago, as this was apparently the heyday of Artvue’s publishing. [Note: My initial guess was that the postcard was from the 1950s, but someone kindly wrote and said Fairhaven’s not that old, so I’m on a revised guess, now. My original theory remains, only in strikethrough.])

Daily Bread

Daily Bread for Whitewater, Wisconsin: 4-16-10

by  • 

Good morning,

Today’s forecast for Whitewater calls for a breezy day with a high of fifty-nine degrees.

It’s a proud day for Wisconsin’s naval history, as the Wisconsin Historical Society recalls that on this day in 1944

1944 – USS Wisconsin Commissioned

On this date the USS Wisconsin battleship was put into active duty for service during World War II. The ship, decommissioned in 1948, was recommissioned in 1951 for service in the Korean War. [Source: The National Maritime Center]

Law

King Kong, YouTube, Universal Studios, and Publishing

by  • 

I’m a fan of both the original King Kong (1933) and the Peter Jackson version (2005). They’re both astonishing, and among the finest American films I’ve ever seen.

(I know Peter Jackson’s from New Zeland, but his film is American in scope, and deep in an understanding of this country. One of the reasons that I think that the 1976 version — a terrible film in many ways — failed was because it lacked the Carl Denham role. The original and the Jackson version both saw presented Denham as an easily identifiable, big-dreaming, ambitious American. The 1976 version didn’t have Denham, and director John Guillermin lacked any understanding of grand American dreams.)

In the 2005 version, Jackson begins with a montage of life in Depression-era Manhattan, with a mixture of poverty & unemployment, alongside wealth and high-living. Those early scenes — especially in a movie that’s about an adventure on a mysterious island — are astonishing.

I could take a brief clip — about two minutes or less — and post it to YouTube, as an example of a filmmaker’s portrayal of the Depression. One cannot do that, of course, as YouTube’s software scans and blocks a film clip as the property of Universal Studios.

A few quick comments –

YouTube as Private Property.

Although I think there’s a strong fair use claim for using the clip, that’s a claim against action from Universal Studios, not YouTube. If YouTube doesn’t want to post a clip from an adventure film about a rampaging ape, or Depression-era montage, they don’t have to do so. YouTube is private property, and they can restrict clips of Universal’s films. They need not assert, against Universal Studios, or anyone else, any claims at all. That’s their choice.

It’s not censorship, either, for YouTube to ban giant ape films (if they wanted a blanket rule). They’re a private enterprise (part of Google), and not a government agency.

(The do offer users the chance to assert offer fair use justifications that they, YouTube, could evaluate. I don’t know where their evaluations lead, but I can guess that most users who submit a form still don’t get a video clips posted. Again, that’s YouTube’s choice.)

Defending Directly.

If a blogger wanted to post a clip from Jackson’s King King and assert a fair use right to embed the clip, he or she could do so on his or her own website. In this case, no third party would be required — only the blogger and the copyright holder would be involved. I’ve asserted fair use rights on my website before. I’ve not done so in the case of the 2005 King Kong. I’d like to see what would happen to a request to YouTube first. (I think I can guess correctly what will happen.)

Defending Tenaciously.

If something’s important, and worth defending, then it’s worth defending tenaciously. People who don’t understand blogging, and the assertion of rights under the constitution or from a statute (like fair use from copyright law), sometimes don’t expect a tenacious defense of these rights. They may assume the blogger will relent, as they see blogging as a hobby, or a casual pursuit. For some bloggers, that’s likely true.

Not for others, though — there’s no game in asserting one’s rights. It’s safe to say that websites with a lot of political content are likely to be committed to defending against encroachment to speech and other constitutional or statutory rights. Still, a committed defender of individual liberty may be born when told that her travel website site is now unlawful, and banned.

A right asserted also deserves a defense, should one be necessary. It deserves not just any defense, but a tenacious one.
That’s the way in which, when pressed, bloggers are ‘happy warriors,’ in the way that Gov. Al Smith of New York was often described. One fights for something good, and against a worse alternative.

So is it worth fighting over a clip of the 2005 King Kong to be published for critical or artistic commentary? Yes, I am sure that it is. First, I’ll see what YouTube has to say, and after that, I’d be curious to see what Universal might say (if anything).

We’ll see what happens.

Laws/Regulations, Libertarians, Liberty

The Institute for Justice

by  • 

I’ve added a link to my blogroll for the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm. A tagline from their website tells their tale succinctly: “Litigating for Liberty.” Their motto, “We change the world, and have fun doing it,” tells how much they enjoy their work.

If you’ve not visited their site, it’s surely worthwhile to do so.

One often hears how, in different times, people were excited to be part of a principled commitment, and worthy undertaking. Those who work at the Institute for Justice — and those who support their work — know what it feels like to be part of something good and meaningful, right and hopeful.

Here’s a more complete description of their work, from the IJ website:

Founded in 1991, the Institute for Justice is what a civil liberties law firm should be. As our nation’s only libertarian public interest law firm, we engage in cutting-edge litigation and advocacy both in the courts of law and in the court of public opinion on behalf of individuals whose most basic rights are denied by the government–like the right to earn an honest living, private property rights, and the right to free speech, especially in the areas of commercial and Internet speech. As Wired magazine said, the Institute for Justice “helps individuals subject to wacky government regulations.”

Simply put, we challenge the government when it stands in the way of people trying to earn an honest living, when it unconstitutionally takes away individuals’ property, when bureaucrats instead of parents dictate the education of children, and when government stifles speech. We seek a rule of law under which individuals can control their destinies as free and responsible members of society.

We have accomplished a great deal since our founding in 1991. You may have seen our clients, cases and attorneys featured frequently in the national media, such as ABC News 20/20 or the CBS News program 60 Minutes. As Investor’s Business Daily observed, “The Institute for Justice’s influence is being felt across the nation.”

The Institute for Justice is a 501(c)(3) organization; contributions are tax-deductible.

When bureaucrats impose layer upon layer of regulations on common people, or ban activities entirely, they often assume that there’s no other possiblity, that their way is the only way. They’re often quite sure that they’re right, and surprised when others disagree. Quick to take umbrage, they afterward try twice as hard to force their way on others. Their way makes sense to them; they find others’ ideas alien and strange. There’s nothing alien and strange about a commitment to individual liberty and limited government, especially not in a truly extraordinary place like America.

Their surprise is unsurprising, and its extent measures the distance between our tradition of individual liberty and a pinched, contrary understanding.

Have fun exploring the Institute for Justice website, for the first time, or on a return visit. Looking around, it’s easy to see why the IJ is dedicated to its work, and has fun while working.

Daily Bread

Daily Bread for Whitewater, Wisconsin: 4-15-10

by  • 

Good morning,

Today’s forecast calls for a breezy day, with a high of eighty-one degrees.

There’s a morning meeting today at 7 a.m. of the Whitewater Aquatic Center Board. The agenda is available online.

It’s Library Night at Culver’s in Whitewater tonight. From 4:00-8:00 p.m, tonight Culver’s will donate a percentage of their sales to the library.

In this day in Wisconsin history, in 1900, Spencer Tracey was born, as the Wisconsin Historical Society reports:

On this date Spencer Tracy was born in Milwaukee. He attended the Northwestern Military Academy in Lake Geneva and Ripon College. He won Academy Awards for Best Actor in Captain Courageous and Boys Town. [Source: Wisconsin Film Office]

City, Laws/Regulations, Libertarians

Could a Libertarian Run a Competitive Campaign Against President Obama? Yes.

by  • 

Over at Rasmussen Reports, there’s a poll asking about a matchup in 2012 between President Obama and libertarian-oriented Ron Paul. The results aren’t surprising – there’s a considerable support for a libertarian-leaning candidate, even if people don’t always refer to support for free markets, individual liberty, and limited government by using the term libertarian.

In Rasmussen’s matchup, the pollsters finds that if one were to “Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race [would be] — virtually dead even. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.”

These results are all the more impressive when one considers that Paul has some views idiosyncratic for most libertarians, and that he’s had nowhere near the favorable press attention that President Obama has had. I don’t doubt that Representative Paul would lose a real race against President Obama, but I think he’d come much closer to winning on election day than the incumbent’s supporters, or status quo Republicans, would find comfortable. (Of the group that Rasmussen defines as the “political class,” 95% would favor Obama; of those that Rasmussen defines as “mainstream,” 58% would favor Paul. Definitions of these terms, and the questions and toplines from the survey, are available at Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%.

More interesting to me is how the results show the decline not of the left, so much as so-called big-government conservatism. There’s been much of that these last several years, and it’s brought the Republican party only voter discontent and defeat. Simultaneously, it left the Republicans unable to challenge credibly the more far-reaching political program of America’s progressives. Those Americans who favor government intervention and regulation aren’t likely to find the lukewarm efforts of big-government Republicans appealing. I don’t support government intervention in this, that, and the other thing, but if I did, I’d rather have the genuine article over a pale copy. Why would one buy a Republican rabbit for the same price as a Democratic mink?

In Whitewater, one can see the Pyrrhic victory that big-government, there-oughta-be-a-law conservatives have had. The price of entry into local politics is a “we-have-to-regulate-something, we-have-to-prohibit-something” admission ticket. Small-government conservative are plentiful in the city, but not so much in office. On a topic like binge drinking, for example, one will find an alliance between incumbent progressives who want to legislative to prevent harm, and incumbent conservatives who want to extend enforcement authority. It’s a bad bargain for the left: the problem of over-drinking won’t go away, and big-government conservatives will just move on to another area of administrative over-reach, using their last effort as a precedent.

These victories come at a price. One can see the wide gap between how officials portray regulatory efforts, and how people freely describe them, whenever comments are published freely. Outside of a small, sycophantic press, initiatives touted as major or extraordinary are often viewed skeptically, or ridiculed. It’s not radicals – we don’t have ‘radicals’ in town – who have come to doubt the florid justifications for government intervention. Look carefully at those voicing objections, and one will see that many are center-right in viewpoint, but increasingly doubtful of one grand claim after another. If enforcement actions meet with increasing skepticism — and they do — it’s because formerly supportive moderates and conservatives have grown tired of grand talk.

New ordinances should be subject to half-year and full-year review, where officials would be required to present concrete, verifiable evidence of a new ordinance’s influence. That’s the last thing many advocates of new regulatory authority would want, but it’s among the first things that the city should require, and expect.

Daily Bread

Daily Bread for Whitewater, Wisconsin: 4-14-10

by  • 

Good morning,

Today’s forecast calls for a sunny day with a high of seventy-nine degrees.

Walworth County Today has a story about the departure of Fred Burkhardt from the Walworth County Economic Development Alliance, entitled, “Walworth County Economic Development Alliance head takes job in Ohio.”

In January, Walworth County Board Supervisor Dan Kilkenny urged the county board to seek an audit or financial review of the economic development alliance, partly due to what he referred to as Burkhardt’s “serious financial problems.”

“I am not suggesting that something is necessarily amiss with WCEDA’s finances because of the executive vice president’s personal financial problems, nor am I making any accusations,” the supervisor wrote.

“But I think that if you asked a professional auditor, they would advise that an audit would probably be in order under the circumstances.”

Kilkenny wrote that the county board’s lack of oversight and its unwillingness to judge the economic development alliance and its officials objectively would cause embarrassment to the county board.

County board supervisors, however, decided against considering the subject.

Wired has a story today on how technology helps diners detect adulterations in their food: DNA Testing Finds Endangered Whale Meat in Restaurants:

Genetic tests of whale meat from Japanese restaurants in Los Angeles and Seoul, South Korea, have confirmed the meat is from endangered animals.

The Los Angeles bust was publicized in March, prompting a restaurant there to close, but finding the meat in South Korea was even more troubling.

“This problem may be more widespread than we originally thought,” said Scott Baker, a whale researcher at Oregon State University. The identifications are described in a paper published April 13 in Biology Letters.

Killing sei, fin and minke whales was outlawed by the International Whaling Commission in 1986, and trade in their products is forbidden by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

Possessing or selling whale meat is illegal in the United States. Japan and South Korea allow endangered whales caught as “bycatch” by fishermen to be sold. Japan also operates a research program that’s been criticized as scientific cover for continued whale hunts.

No one thinks that DNA testing was initially designed to analyze restaurant dishes, but the wider application of the technology is a consequence of its increasingly lower cost. There’s no certain or natural use for the technology — its more frequent use is a market development, as more efficient and lower-cost tests meet market demand.