 |
|
|
I blog @ FRIENDLY FIRE read my LATEST COLUMN FRIENDS' BLOGS CATHOLIC LINKS  mater dei, ora pro nobis contact: @ weinkopf.com (C) 2001, - 2007. All rights are reserved. 
|
Friday, January 25, 2002
ATTABOY, JAMIE I had my differences with fellow FrontPage columnist Jamie Glazov on the question of priestly celibacy, but he sure hit the ball out of the ballpark on his latest column about Pat Buchanan. As I once noted in a 1999 column, Buchanan may not be a socialist or an anti-Semite, but he certainly targets his appeals to both unsavory crowds. He is not a conservative, and to the extent that he is considered one, he is an embarrassment to the movement. Kudos to Glazov for braving the slings and arrows of the Buchananite fanatics by pointing out that what Pat passes for authentic conservatism is little more than crypto-socialist, racialist twaddle. Conservatism is better off without Buchanan -- and his unabashedly anti-Semitic fans. Wednesday, January 23, 2002
WHO GOT DOG TAKE-OUT? (woof, woof, woof) I never thought I'd write the following sentence: My latest FrontPage column defends the practice of eating dogs. Tuesday, January 22, 2002
PROGRESS OK, so I've known for months that my archive link didn't work, but I never got around to doing something about it -- until now. Turns out, it was a VERY simple problem (the link went to a .html file, when it should have been .htm). So now that the link is fixed, the Weinkopf.com archive is up and running. The hits just keep on coming. Enjoy. BUSH FOR LIFE On today, the 29th anniversary of another date that will truly live in infamy -- January 22, 1973, the passage of Roe v. Wade -- we can find some comfort in the fact that American once again has a president who promises to defend human life at all its stages. Below is Preisdent George W. Bush's proclamation for National Sanctity of Human Life Day: This Nation was founded upon the belief that every human being is endowed by our Creator with certain "unalienable rights." Chief among them is the right to life itself. The Signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their own lives, fortunes, and honor to guarantee inalienable rights for all of the new country's citizens. These visionaries recognized that an essential human dignity attached to all persons by virtue of their very existence and not just to the strong, the independent, or the healthy. That value should apply to every American, including the elderly and the unprotected, the weak and the infirm, and even to the unwanted. Thomas Jefferson wrote that, "[t]he care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." President Jefferson was right. Life is an inalienable right, understood as given to each of us by our Creator. President Jefferson's timeless principle obligates us to pursue a civil society that will democratically embrace its essential moral duties, including defending the elderly, strengthening the weak, protecting the defenseless, feeding the hungry, and caring for children -- born and unborn. Mindful of these and other obligations, we should join together in pursuit of a more compassionate society, rejecting the notion that some lives are less worthy of protection than others, whether because of age or illness, social circumstance or economic condition. Consistent with the core principles about which Thomas Jefferson wrote, and to which the Founders subscribed, we should peacefully commit ourselves to seeking a society that values life -- from its very beginnings to its natural end. Unborn children should be welcomed in life and protected in law. On September 11, we saw clearly that evil exists in this world, and that it does not value life. The terrible events of that fateful day have given us, as a Nation, a greater understanding about the value and wonder of life. Every innocent life taken that day was the most important person on earth to somebody; and every death extinguished a world. Now we are engaged in a fight against evil and tyranny to preserve and protect life. In so doing, we are standing again for those core principles upon which our Nation was founded. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Sunday, January 20, 2002, as National Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon all Americans to reflect upon the sanctity of human life. Let us recognize the day with appropriate ceremonies in our homes and places of worship, rededicate ourselves to compassionate service on behalf of the weak and defenseless, and reaffirm our commitment to respect the life and dignity of every human being. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-sixth. GEORGE W. BUSH Monday, January 21, 2002
A WIN'S A WIN Sigh, less than 48 hours after watching the New England Patriots' triumphant come-from-behind victory over the Oakland Raiders, I find myself besieged, answering the arguments of unbelievers who claim that the Cinderellas of Foxboro don't deserve to be playing in next week's AFC championship game. According to this petty lot, the Pats got lucky when officials reversed their call and ruled that Tom Brady's infamous fourth-quarter incompletion was, in fact, not a fumble. First of all, let's get one thing straight -- this was not a bad call. The NFL rules clearly state that "any intentional forward movement of (the quarterback's) arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body." That makes it pretty clear. Brady bungled, but he didn't fumble. This is what instant replay is for -- to make sure that what refs think they saw on the field conforms to both reality and a strict application of the rules. (That being said, I'm all for scrapping instant replay, but that's another debate for another day.) What we really have here is the fair application of a stupid rule. An incomplete pass, by definition, should require a deliberate attempt to PASS the ball, not merely an attempt to TUCK it. But the rules are the rules, and we don't rewrite them in the fourth quarter of a second-round playoff game. That's for the off-season. Besides, even stupid rules are fair, so long as they apply to everyone. They key point, though is this: That call alone did not lose the Raiders the game. Had the Raiders got a first down on the previous drive, they could have run out the clock and never given the Patriots a chance to tie. (Remember the third-and-one, when the mighty Pats D stopped them cold?) After the call, had they stopped the Pats from driving another 20 yards downfield, Vinatieri never could have kicked the tying FG. Had they contained the Pats offense in OT, or stopped them on the 4th and 4 at the Oakland 25, they still could have won. And no, it wasn't the refs who gave Tom Brady 200+ yards in the second half, or who shut down Oakland's over-hyped offense. It's not about one play. It never is. And it drives me crazy when someone (Pats fans included) tries to argue that a single botched call cost them the game. Human beings are imperfect, so imperfect calls will always (replay or not) be part of the game. Get over it and deal. Even some of the more reasonable Raider fans (yes, there are some) can admit that it's not all The Call's fault. For a good article on the subject, see today's San Jose Mercury News story. Enough with that already. Next stop on the A-Train's drive to New Orleans -- Pittsburgh. Yours, Chris, the Mighty Mighty Pats Fan PATRIOTIC TO A FAULT My latest Daily News column deals with the noxious breed of California pols who are using Sept. 11 and the flag to rally political support for their otherwise unpalatable ideas -- like raising taxes. |