6/03/2006
6/02/2006
Krauthammer discusses Barry Bonds and Steroids
Charles Krauthammer has a good piece in today's Washington Post. I have made these basic points before, though he may have done a better job of expressing the point.
. . . The idea that an athlete of Bonds's stature, for whom the body is both temple and bank vault, would be mistakenly ingesting substances is implausible, made all the more so by the evidence dredged up by two San Francisco sportswriters detailing Bonds's (alleged) gargantuan consumption of every performance-enhancing drug from steroids to human growth hormone.
But why should we care? What is really wrong with performance enhancement? We say we are against it because it diminishes striving, devalues achievement, produces a shortcut to greatness, etc. But in many endeavors we don't really care about any of that. Medical residents at hospitals have been known to take Ritalin to keep themselves alert on overnight shifts. If it enhances their thinking in the emergency room, what's the objection?
Many public speakers, performers and even some surgeons take beta-blockers to literally still their hearts and steady their hands. I've never seen a banner at the opera complaining: "Pavarotti does it on pasta." And what about the military, which pioneered some of these performance-enhancing studies to see how they could help soldiers survive the most extreme stresses? Isn't that an unqualified good?
Performance enhancement turns out to be disturbing only in the narrow context of competition, most commonly in sports. And the objection is not cheating nature but cheating competitors. It's basically a fairness issue.
When everyone has access to technological improvements (graphite tennis rackets, titanium drivers, more tightly wound baseballs) the sport may be transformed, but the playing field remains level. When technology is enhancing the equipment, fans become quickly reconciled to the transformation. (And it can be radical: The transition from bamboo to fiberglass totally changed the pole vault.) But when technology enhances the physiology of the athlete, we tend to recoil. . . . .
But why should we care? What is really wrong with performance enhancement? We say we are against it because it diminishes striving, devalues achievement, produces a shortcut to greatness, etc. But in many endeavors we don't really care about any of that. Medical residents at hospitals have been known to take Ritalin to keep themselves alert on overnight shifts. If it enhances their thinking in the emergency room, what's the objection?
Many public speakers, performers and even some surgeons take beta-blockers to literally still their hearts and steady their hands. I've never seen a banner at the opera complaining: "Pavarotti does it on pasta." And what about the military, which pioneered some of these performance-enhancing studies to see how they could help soldiers survive the most extreme stresses? Isn't that an unqualified good?
Performance enhancement turns out to be disturbing only in the narrow context of competition, most commonly in sports. And the objection is not cheating nature but cheating competitors. It's basically a fairness issue.
When everyone has access to technological improvements (graphite tennis rackets, titanium drivers, more tightly wound baseballs) the sport may be transformed, but the playing field remains level. When technology is enhancing the equipment, fans become quickly reconciled to the transformation. (And it can be radical: The transition from bamboo to fiberglass totally changed the pole vault.) But when technology enhances the physiology of the athlete, we tend to recoil. . . . .
Labels: Steroids
Has Europe gone nuts?
I am still trying to figure out how free train travel fits in with the other proposals, though may be it is just obvious so that people can see each other to do the other things that the party is advocating. It seems amazing to me, but this new party seems to be getting some support.
Last month, the NVD [Charity, Freedom and Diversity Party] presented its platform. The party seeks to lower the legal age for sexual relations in the Netherlands from 16 years to 12 years, decriminalize child pornography, bestiality and the consumption of all drugs, and make train travel free.
In order to officially take part in the January 2007 legislative election, the NVD requires 570 signatures of support. Party co-founder Ad van den Berg explained his rationale for allowing paedophilia, saying, "A ban just makes children curious." . . . .
In order to officially take part in the January 2007 legislative election, the NVD requires 570 signatures of support. Party co-founder Ad van den Berg explained his rationale for allowing paedophilia, saying, "A ban just makes children curious." . . . .
50 songs that conservatives love?
50 songs that conservatives love? I am not sure that I agree with all of these. The ones that I owned of these and liked are:
The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down -- I have it by Joan Baez, not The Band (What can I say, I have a weakness for the South.)
Who'll Stop the Rain -- Greedence Clearwater Revival
Janie's Got a Gun -- Aerosmith (I like this song, but it has never been completely clear to me that she was going to use it wisely.
Get over it -- the Eagles
Taxman -- Beatles (Obvious)
Revolution -- Beatles (Obvious, though for some reason it is not on their list.)
The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down -- I have it by Joan Baez, not The Band (What can I say, I have a weakness for the South.)
Who'll Stop the Rain -- Greedence Clearwater Revival
Janie's Got a Gun -- Aerosmith (I like this song, but it has never been completely clear to me that she was going to use it wisely.
Get over it -- the Eagles
Taxman -- Beatles (Obvious)
Revolution -- Beatles (Obvious, though for some reason it is not on their list.)
6/01/2006
5/30/2006
More info on Hillary's Decision to Run for Presidency
There are so many conflicting polls on Hillary Clinton's presidential run that I am not completely sure what to make of things. John Fund has an interesting note, even if it is informal, on her decision to run for the presidency.
"There is no sentimentality for the Clintons on this issue," one party adviser says. "This is a cold political decision, because the party can't afford to lose a third straight presidential election." Jonathan Alter, a columnist for Newsweek, agrees. He says he took an informal survey of women voters who admire Hillary Clinton. He put the question to them about what they would do if in early 2008, Mrs. Clinton "is 12-to-15 points behind John McCain and that [former Virginia governor] Mark Warner or somebody else is 4-to-6 points behind John McCain. Who do you vote for? And every single one I've talked to have said that they would go for Warner or the candidate with the best chance."
We've come a long way from 1992, when almost every reporter covering the Clinton campaign knew the candidate's habits and weaknesses and chose not to report them. As the 2008 campaign approaches, the New York Times story is a signal by the mainstream media that that any foibles are likely to be addressed sooner rather later.
We've come a long way from 1992, when almost every reporter covering the Clinton campaign knew the candidate's habits and weaknesses and chose not to report them. As the 2008 campaign approaches, the New York Times story is a signal by the mainstream media that that any foibles are likely to be addressed sooner rather later.
5/29/2006
5/28/2006
"Knife amnesty held across the UK"
Well, even if the various gun amnesties don't work, knives might really be one case where this would work. Afterall, knives are so difficult to make and so large that no one could possibly smuggle them into the UK, right? (Just joking.)
A knife amnesty has begun across the UK meaning all bladed instruments can be handed in without fears of reprisal.
In recent weeks, promising teenage footballer Kiyan Prince was killed outside his northwest London school while volunteer policewoman Nisha Patel-Nasri was fatally knifed outside her home in the capital.
The amnesty, the first for ten years, spans the next five weeks and is being backed by police forces throughout England, Northern Ireland and Wales. Scotland is running its own amnesty concurrently. . . .
In recent weeks, promising teenage footballer Kiyan Prince was killed outside his northwest London school while volunteer policewoman Nisha Patel-Nasri was fatally knifed outside her home in the capital.
The amnesty, the first for ten years, spans the next five weeks and is being backed by police forces throughout England, Northern Ireland and Wales. Scotland is running its own amnesty concurrently. . . .
Felons have legitimate benefit from owning guns
There is a lot of pressure to let felons vote after they have been released from prison. Despite all the sanctions imposed on felons (lost jobs, lost professional licenses, lost retirement and other benefits, etc.), the inability to vote is considered the most important sanction by many. Jobs and hte inability to defend oneself also seem important to me, here is one example of self defense:
The Issaquah man who claims he shot a black bear in self-defense near his home Monday night is now under investigation by the Department of Fish and Wildlife for being a felon in possession of a firearm and for hunting a bear out of season.
King County Sheriff's deputies, officers with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms served a search warrant Wednesday at Aaron Enright's home in the rural High Point neighborhood near Issaquah.
They seized the 10-gauge shotgun he used to shoot the bear, a .22-caliber rifle and .22-caliber ammunition. The search warrant indicates they are seeking evidence that would support a charge of "Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree" and "Unlawful Hunt Big Game 2nd Degree: Closed Bear Season."
"It's complete insanity," Enright told us Thursday night.
Enright says that on Monday he thought his black labrador retriever was at his back door so he opened the door to let it in. Instead he stood face to face with a black bear.
He says he backed away from the door and reached for his shotgun, that the bear backed up about 10 feet from the door, then made a move as if it was going to charge at him.
"I'm tracking it and then it turns and I shoot it," said Enright, showing us where he says he stood in his own kitchen when he fired the single shot through the open door. "It turned left and took one step and I shot it." . . .
King County Sheriff's deputies, officers with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms served a search warrant Wednesday at Aaron Enright's home in the rural High Point neighborhood near Issaquah.
They seized the 10-gauge shotgun he used to shoot the bear, a .22-caliber rifle and .22-caliber ammunition. The search warrant indicates they are seeking evidence that would support a charge of "Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree" and "Unlawful Hunt Big Game 2nd Degree: Closed Bear Season."
"It's complete insanity," Enright told us Thursday night.
Enright says that on Monday he thought his black labrador retriever was at his back door so he opened the door to let it in. Instead he stood face to face with a black bear.
He says he backed away from the door and reached for his shotgun, that the bear backed up about 10 feet from the door, then made a move as if it was going to charge at him.
"I'm tracking it and then it turns and I shoot it," said Enright, showing us where he says he stood in his own kitchen when he fired the single shot through the open door. "It turned left and took one step and I shot it." . . .