Final Protective Fire


Links to some interesting places:
R.J.Rummel's blog
Junk Science Blog and debunking discussion forum.
Pirate Ballerina
Dave Kopel's Home Page
Volokh Conspiracy
Glenn Reynolds' Instapundit
Prof Bainbridge Blog
Clayton Cramer
David Friedman's homepage
Vodka Pundit
Tiki Lounge
Jim Dunnigan's site
Cold Fury
Karl's blog

email to finalprotfire at

Note that there is someone sending the KLEZ ( and now SOBIG.F ) virus with forged blogger emails. I will never send you email with attachments - delete any immediately.

Archives ( hard links ):
August 07
July 07
June 07
May 07
April 07
March 07
February 07
January 07
December 06
November 06
October 06
September 06
August 06
July 06
June 06
May 06
April 06
March 06
February 06
January 06
December 05
November 05
October 05
September 05
August 05
July 05
June 05
May 05
April 05
March 05
February 05
January 05
December 04
November 04
October 04
September 04
August 04
July 04
June 04
May 04
April 04
March 04
February 04
January 04
December 03
November 03
October 03
September 03
September 03
August 03
July 03
June 03
May 03
April 03
March 03
February 03
January 03
December 02
November 02
October 02
September 02
August 02
July 02
June 02
May 02


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Thursday, June 27, 2002

I find the Ninth Circuit decision on the Pledge of Allegiance outrageous, but certainly not out of any religious fervor. The decision is just yet another example of the ludicrous way in which as a nation we've allowed the judiciary to involve itself in areas of our cultural and political life in which the courts simply do not belong.

However, consider the hypocrisy of a court system that would claim that the Establishment Clause ( "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" ) - a provision that prohibited the Federal government from creating a national church like the Church of England - prohibits putting "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance but claims that the Second Amendment ( "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" ) allows the government to ban people from purchasing infantry arms most suitable to militia use.

Some other random thoughts on the Pledge decision:

Evidently, the case is an example of a parent claiming to sue on behalf of his child for the purpose of getting attention for his own pet cause as the child in question prefers the "under God" formula.

It was hilarious to see Tom Daschle move his lame butt to get a resolution condemning the decision heard and adopted in the Senate since he knows the Democrats will be blamed for the kind of judges that produce this embarrassing decision. Maybe now we can get some media attention on the outrageous behavior of Daschle and Leahy in holding up judicial nominations.