One year ago this very month, I blogged about and devoted a WISN radio segment to Derek Fisher, at that time a hero with the Utah Jazz. Now a member of the Los Angeles Lakers, Fisher has quickly become a villain in Utah. It’s extremely unfortunate that fans lacking class in Utah have reacted to Fisher in a despicable fashion. They're far too short-sighted to understand Fisher chose Los Angeles, not because he wanted to stick it to Utah, but because Los Angeles afforded access to medical professionals his daugher desperately needed. Fisher, as my blog from a year ago reported, selflessly gave up millions of dollars so he could be closer to his young daughter and get the proper medical attention she required for what amounted to cancer in her eye. The story is in the forefront one year later because the former Utah playoff hero ended up signing with the hated Lakers who are now playing against Utah in the current round of the NBA playoffs. Fisher talked about the shoddy reception he got in Salt Lake City with ESPN. Click the link here, then click on the video. Last week, the Desert News reported: The update, as of Monday: "Medically, Tatum is doing great," Fisher said. "We continue to, obviously, watch very closely. But for intents and purposes ... doctors feel there's no cancer cells, or a threat to her life. "The tumor's still there, because of the treatment we chose, which allows her to keep her eye. So as long as the tumor's there, there's always a chance of the cancer coming back. That's why we have to watch so closely." Tatum's Los Angeles doctor is an ex-colleague of her surgeon, which Fisher said "really gave us the confidence that, 'OK, if we can't be in New York, this is the guy we want to see.' " "The tumor in the eye she experienced — they start like a pin mark on a paper. That small," he said. "So if you aren't watching closely, and if you're not dealing with doctors and medical people that have seen this for 25 or 30 years, and know exactly what to look for, you could miss something. We never want that to happen again. "But she's doing great, and prayers and support and love have been tremendous. I don't know what more we can ask for, as a family." Here's more from the Salt Lake Tribune: Kragthorpe: Derek Fisher's hardest day, Jazz fans' greatest cheer, came a year ago, today

By Kurt Kragthorpe The Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake Tribune

Article Last Updated:05/09/2008 01:04:27 PM MDT

Telling the story of the emotion-filled day when he agonized about losing his infant daughter and winning a basketball game, Derek Fisher remembered everything about the feelings, fears and satisfaction he experienced.  He completely forgot the date: May 9. Only when someone pointed out how today would be the anniversary of the events that began with Tatum Fisher's initial, successful cancer treatment in a New York hospital and ended with her father's triumph at EnergySolutions Arena did the convergence hit home. Exactly a year later, he would be coming back to Salt Lake City, facing his old Jazz teammates in a playoff game. "Wow," he said. Fisher inspired the Jazz's overtime defeat of Golden State, providing one of the greatest memories in the team's history and receiving one of the arena's loudest, warmest welcomes after he arrived from the airport and checked into the game late in the third quarter, barely pausing along the team bench. Eventually, his only shot of the game, a three-pointer at a critical stage in overtime, helped secure the win and created what Sports Illustrated would label the NBA's signature moment of 2007. "It was life in a day," Fisher said this week, standing on the Lakers' practice court. "You think about all the good and the bad and the cheers and the tears and everything that happens in your lifetime. . . . To feel the threat of losing someone you love so dearly to then being able to go out and do something you love so dearly, the game of basketball, to juggle both of those in the same day was really remarkable." At the moment Fisher showed up, Andrei Kirilenko was playing point guard, because starter Deron Williams was in foul trouble and reserve Dee Brown was at a hospital, having injured his neck in a first-half collision. Fisher played the last 3:18 of the third quarter, then returned for the final 1:13 of regulation and stayed through overtime. He had not even touched a basketball for three days, but finally felt comfortable enough to drill a shot from the left corner that boosted the Jazz's lead to six points in OT. The shot gave his day a perfect ending and convinced him forever that the positive thoughts and prayers of fans helped make it all happen. So just imagine the celebration a year later, when Fisher returns to play in front of those fans. Uh, maybe not. If the greeting is anything like the reception for Fisher during the Lakers' two regular-season visits, it will feature more jeering than cheering. "Our fans . . . man, I hope they don't boo him the same way they did," said Jazz forward Carlos Boozer. You loved him then. You hate him now?  The reaction is understandable, to a degree. In July, when Fisher succeeded in having the Jazz and the NBA free him from his contract and later signed with the Lakers for about two-thirds of the $20.5 million remaining on the original deal, citing how Tatum's medical needs could best be met in Los Angeles, this was my question: Do you back him unconditionally? Or do you wonder how much of this was calculated? It was clear in November when Fisher came back as a Laker that "calculated" was trumping "unconditional" among Jazz ticket-buyers. He was booed every time he touched the ball, and he was stunned. "I didn't expect to be cheered or revered as a hero of any kind," he said this week, "but I didn't necessarily expect that reaction." The feelings expressed that night - and to a lesser degree in March, when Fisher returned - play deeply into Utahns' resentment of the Lakers. If he had signed with a team in another of the cities his New York-based doctor recommended for accessible treatment of Tatum, such as the New York Knicks, Memphis Grizzlies or even the L.A. Clippers, the emotion would be reduced. Anybody but the Lakers, in other words, especially now that they've become good again and Fisher is among the reasons for their improvement. His absence has also accelerated the Jazz's growth, making room for guards Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver. It's just that now, at the most important time of the year, he's hurting them. In Wednesday's Game 2 victory, Fisher scored 22 points on 7-for-10 shooting. Asked if facing Fisher in the playoffs makes him second-guess owner Larry Miller's accommodation of him, coach Jerry Sloan said, "Larry made the decision; we've supported that decision." Fisher obviously has no misgivings about the move. Tatum, who will turn 2 on June 29, is improving as a result of a procedure she has undergone every four weeks at Children's Hospital of Los Angeles. To deal with retinoblastoma, a rare form of cancer lodged behind her eye, her parents disdained the generally accepted method of removing the eye. The cancer is gone, following a year of treatment, Fisher said, but she is being closely monitored. Fisher's career, which he described as "at risk" when he left the Jazz, is thriving. His regular-season statistics as the Lakers' starting point guard - including 43.6-percent shooting, 40.6 percent from three-point range, 11.7 points - were career highs or close to them. He contributed to longtime teammate Kobe Bryant's MVP season, he's credited as a stabilizing influence on young teammates and he's contending for a fourth NBA title. The Jazz, to whatever degree of annoyance they may present, are temporarily in his way. So are their fans, whose feelings Fisher addressed by saying, "I don't know if there's anything I could even do or say at this point that would change that. . . . You just want what's best for your family and the people you love at that time, and how people respond is really secondary or maybe doesn't have a place at all." It would be naive to believe Fisher could not have known that rejoining the Lakers was a possibility, when he asked for his contractual release. It would also be very cold to think this was just a shrewd basketball move that happened to help his daughter, which is how the ESA crowd came across during the regular season. "I think if you were to pull each of the fans aside, maybe outside of the arena, and ask them, they recognize what he did and can appreciate someone going through that," said Jazz center Jarron Collins. Anybody who was in the building last May 9, even while knowing only part of the Fishers' story at the time, could never forget what happened. You loved him a year ago. You can't hate him tonight. On the anniversary of his legendary game, Fisher deserves to hear cheers when the Lakers' starters are introduced.  Or how about just an absence of boos, for that brief moment? --- * KURT KRAGTHORPE can be reached at kkragthorpe@sltrib.com. To write a letter about this or any sports topic, send an e-mail to sportseditor@sltrib.com. A year to remember  A lot has changed since Derek Fisher's memorable day a year ago... May 9, 2007 Fisher's day begins with his daughter's initial, successful cancer treatment in New York and ends in Salt Lake City, where he inspires an overtime playoff victory against Golden State, providing one of the greatest memories in the team's history. July 19, 2007 Signs a three-year contract with the L.A. Lakers for about two-thirds of the $20.5 million remaining on his Jazz deal. Nov. 30, 2007 Gets booed every time he touches the ball in his first game at EnergySolutions Arena since leaving the Jazz for the Lakers. He scores three points in Utah's 120-96 victory. March 20, 2008 Gets booed again, to a lesser degree than in November, at ESA as the Lakers prevail 106-95. He scores 11 points. May 9, 2008 Returns to the ESA for Game 3 of the second-round playoff series - exactly one year after what Sports Illustrated labeled the NBA's signature moment of 2007.  Like the New York Yankees, the Lakers are a glitzy, tradition-laden franchise that sports fans love to hate. Even if you despise the Lakers, you have to be pulling for Derek Fisher, and especially little Tatum. (NOTE: The Lakers won the first two games of the best-of-seven series, but Utah came back to win the next two in Salt Lake City. The series is tied at two games apiece)

 

Today the Supreme Court has ruled that lethal injections, if properly carried out, are a "humane" means of ending a condemned individual's life.

It is the correct and appropriate ruling.

Two convicted murderers, Ralph Baze and Thomas C. Bowling, were able to get their case heard by the high court, claiming death by lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Since the case went to the Supreme Court last September, no executions have been carried out in the U.S.

Dennis Briscoe said it best. He was just 14 when Baze used an assault weapon to kill Briscoe’s father an uncle who were law enforcement officers in Kentucky.

Briscoe said, “What they should really consider is the pain my father and uncle went through when that happened. We should all be so lucky as to just fall asleep when we die."

Here are details from ABC and the Los Angeles Times.

In January, I discussed on WISN and also blogged about the absurdity of brutal, cold-blooded murderers claming a lethal injection was cruel and inhumane punishment

 “It is a great suffering for the church in the United States and for the church in general and for me personally that this could happen. It is difficult for me to understand how it was possible that priests betray in this way their mission ... to these children. I am deeply ashamed and we will do what is possible so this cannot happen again in the future. We will absolutely exclude pedophiles from the sacred ministry. It is more important to have good priests than many priests. We will do everything possible to heal this wound."
Traveling from Rome to Washington on his first papal journey to the United States, Pope Benedict XVI, April 15, 2008.


On April 7, while filling in for Mark Belling on WISN, I asked listeners if they thought there was a serious sex scandal today in the Catholic Church and to rate the seriousness on a scale of 0-10.

Some callers thought a problem remains, but more thought the problem is being addressed by the Church as it attempts to settle with victims. Many felt the crisis isn’t as rampant as it was in the past.

I then quoted a March 31 news release by Bill Donohue, the president of the Catholic League. Donohue correctly predicted that with the Pope set to visit the United States, “Some will try to slam the pope for the sex abuse scandal, as if he somehow approved it (he actually used some of the most condemnatory language of anyone when he called molesting priests ‘filth’).”

Donohue then fired this shot:

“What will not be reported is the fact that for the year 2007, .01 percent of the more than 40,000 priests in the U.S. had an allegation made against them for violating someone under the age of 18 (want to compare that with public school teachers anyone?).”

I decided to take Donohue up on his invitation to compare. I found this, from Worldnetdaily.com:

“An estimated 5 million students in United States schools have been assaulted sexually by teachers, according to a congressional report. But no one is calling for investigations or law enforcement crackdowns, there have been no campaigns to ban the offenders from schools, and in many states there aren't even any requirements such predator attacks be reported to education licensing agencies.

Terri Miller, who runs probably the only organization in the nation that focuses specifically on assaults by educators on students, (said) ‘This is an epidemic.’

She said the problem easily could be many times larger than the scandals involving Catholic Church priests molesting children, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in civil liabilities already determined in those cases.”

Here’s more.

All practicing Catholics decry the sins of priests who’ve assaulted, However, the overwhelming majority of Catholic priests are good, decent men who should not be unfairly judged or painted  with a wide brush just because the Pope has landed.

It works like this.

A pregnant woman and her husband find out the unborn bay is going to be a girl.

They don't want a girl. They want a boy.

To an abortionist they go.

It's called a selective sex abortion, quite common in India and China, but now growing in frequency in America,

Most Americans think it should be illegal, but the practice is not.

How any feminist can remain silent about this is unconscionable. Same for pro-choicers

Jeff Jacoby wrote a great column on this outrage in the Boston Globe that I read on the air today on WISN:

Choosing to eliminate unwanted daughters
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist
April 6, 2008

THE UNFETTERED "right to choose" is a progressive value, we are instructed by the abortion lobby - one indispensable to the empowerment of women. But a new study in PNAS (the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) prompts an awkward question: How exactly are American women empowered when abortion is deployed to prevent the existence of American girls?

Population experts have documented for years the use of abortion for sex selection in regions of the world where sons are more highly prized than daughters.

The problem is particularly acute in Asia, and especially in China and India, the world's two largest countries.

The natural sex ratio at birth is slightly male-biased at roughly 1.05-to-1, meaning that about 105 boys are born for every 100 girls. But in China the current ratio at birth is about 120 boys per 100 girls - and in more prosperous parts of the country, such as Guangdong and Hainan, the imbalance has reached an even more lopsided 135-to-100.

In India, census data from 2001 show that among children younger than 6, there are just 927 girls per 1,000 boys. There too, the greater the prosperity, the greater the discrepancy: In the high-income state of Punjab, notes Joseph D'Agostino of the Population Research Institute, there are only 793 girls for every 1,000 boys. He cites a report by UNICEF, which calculates that "7,000 fewer girls are now born in India each day than nature would dictate, and 10 million have been killed during pregnancy or just after in the past 20 years."

There is nothing new about the high cultural premium placed on sons in developing countries. What is relatively new is easy access to cheap ultrasound scans for determining the sex of an unborn child, and the availability of inexpensive abortions for parents who don't want a baby of the "wrong" sex.

Consider Vietnam, where a decade ago the sex ratio of newborns was a normal 1.04-to-1. Today, with the rise of ultrasound and abortion clinics, the number of newborn males has surged ahead of females.

"Vietnamese women who find they are carrying an unwanted female baby often head immediately to an abortion clinic," the Straits Times of Singapore reported last fall. "A walk-in abortion at a state hospital can be performed for $10, and at private clinics for about $20."

Most Americans rightly regard sex-selective abortions as odious; in a 2006 Zogby poll, an overwhelming 86 percent of Americans agreed that such abortions should be illegal. But they're not illegal - and as economists Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund indicate in the latest issue of PNAS, they are now occurring in the United States, too.

Almond and Edlund examined the ratio of boys to girls among US children born to Chinese, Korean, and Indian parents. For the first children of these Asian-American families, the sex ratio was the normal 1.05-to-1. But when the first baby is a girl, the odds of the second being a boy rose to 1.17-to-1. After two sisters, the likelihood of the third being a son leaped to 1.51-to-1. This is clear "evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage," the authors write. Prenatal sex tests for pregnant women are now available earlier, more cheaply, and more conveniently than ever, "raising the prospect of sex selection becoming more widely practiced in the near future."

The destruction of unwanted daughters is appalling everywhere, but at least in places like India and China parents may have rational reasons for preferring a son. In China, for example, daughters routinely join their husbands' families and parents rely on sons to take care of them as they age. Facing intense government pressure to have no more than one or two children, many parents resort to sex-selective abortion.

But nothing can excuse such abortions in the United States - nothing except the theology of "choice," which elevates the right to an abortion above all other considerations. You don't have to be a feminist to know that being a girl is not a birth defect, or to be horrified by a practice that lethally reinforces the most benighted forms of sexual discrimination. For what kind of feminist would it be who could contemplate the use of abortion to eliminate ever-greater numbers of girls, and not cry out in horror?

Jeff Jacoby can be reached at jacoby@globe.com. 

 

I’ve said on WISN and on my blogs that the anti-smoking zealots won’t rest until you can’t smoke in the confines of your own private residence.

I was right.

  

A story I discussed on WISN today filling in for Mark Belling is getting national attention.

Public school officials in Reedsburg thought it was a wonderful idea to let elementary school students to come to school dressed as the opposite sex as part of Wacky Week.

I am not a fuddy-duddy.

I am not a prude.

This doesn’t belong in taxpayer-funded schools, and supposedly educated leaders with degrees coming out of their armpits should, when students suggest this nonsense, put their foot down and say it’s not acceptable. Sorry, kids. Inmates are not running the asylum.

Of course, I was hit with callers from today’s parents who aren’t parents at all. They want to be their child’s pal or best friend, and God forbid they should ever disappoint their child by saying no.

Loosen up, they told.

Relax.

Kids need to have fun.

They need to let off steam.

They’re too stressed.


HEY JIMMY, YOU’VE BEEN HAVING TROUBLE IN SPELLING FOR WEEKS. TOMORROW YOU’RE PUTTING ON SOME MASCARA AND LIPSTICK, A LITTLE COCKTAIL DRESS, SOME STOCKINGS AND HIGH HEELS.

Instead of Wacky Week, how about American history week, math week, geography week.

As for fun in school, I’m all for it.

That’s why God invented recess.

Here’s the story.

The teacher scolded the young girl, telling her to get down off a chair.

The girl didn’t like being told to take a “time out,” and neither did some of her friends.

They went home and concocted a plot to kill the teacher. They are third graders.

As part of their scheme, they collected a crystal paperweight, duct tape and handcuffs, and a broken steak knife.

The plan was to hit the teacher over the head with the paperweight, secure her with the tape and handcuffs, then stab her with the knife. Some kids were instructed to cover school windows so no one could see inside. Others would clean up afterwards.

On WISN today, I asked the audience what I termed to be one of the toughest questions I’ve ever posed on talk radio: What do you do with kids ages 8 and 9 in a case like this. They’re too young to be tried as adults and to be placed in a juvenile detention center.

The solution isn’t simple, though most callers said the parents need to be punished. I submit and some callers agreed that these kids need to be removed from school, away from the majority of youngsters who are good and want to learn.

Unfortunately, the hand wringers are out in full force, suggesting the kids didn’t mean it, probably were incapable of going through with their devious plot, and it’s probably the fault of TV, movies and video games.

Here are more details.

In 1984, a federal was enacted that required states to set the drinking age at 18 or face losing millions of federal highway dollars.

Over twenty years later, there’s a movement in some states to shun the highway aid and lower their drinking age.

The topic generated a heavy volume of calls during my WISN program yesterday and reaction was mixed, as you might expect.

Lowering the drinking age in Wisconsin would be a horrible mistake.

I have seen the figures from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. By far, the worst drivers are the 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20-year olds.

Lower the drinking age to 18 and you would unleash thousands of potential killers on our roads. The combination of alcohol and car keys for this age group would be deadly.

Giving an 18-year old the opportunity to have a beer is simply not worth it. I’d rather have them legally wait until they’re 21 than see them at their funerals.


NOTE: In the 2005 Wisconsin legislative session, a bill was proposed to allow Wisconsin members in the military as young as 19 to drink. The bill did not get through the Legislature.

This is an awful bill that could become law in Georgia.

The Georgia Legislature wants to mandate thats chools weigh and measure elementary school kids twice a year. Data would be kept on a website comparing the figures from all schools.

This is none of the schools' business. It is a parental responsibility.

As I mentioned on WISN yesterday, lawmakers watch and review legislation in other states for ideas, meaning some Wisconsin legislator could pick up on this one. I hope not.

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:


Senate wants kids on scales
State lawmakers vote to combat childhood obesity by making schools track students' body mass index.

By Andrea Jones
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/01/08

Georgia's public elementary school students would hop on the scales twice a year for weigh-ins as part of an effort to curb childhood obesity, under a bill that passed the Senate on Friday.

The legislation requires schools to track kids' body mass index, a combination of height and weight used to determine whether the child is at a healthy weight. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Joseph Carter (R-Tifton), would mandate that schools post the aggregate BMI information on their school system Web sites and follow state regulations on offering physical education classes.

Carter said more than one in three kids in Georgia is overweight and the majority of schools are not complying with statewide physical education guidelines. "The presence of childhood obesity is staggering," he said.

Carter said the fitness information would be made available just as academic test scores are, so parents could check out how they measure up to other area schools. Children would be weighed in a confidential office setting by their physical education teacher, and their personal information would not become public, he said. The bill stops short of requiring schools to automatically provide their child's data to parents. Instead the information would be available upon request.

"Sally, step into the office, step up on the scale —- that's about as invasive as it gets," Carter said.

In Arkansas, the first state to begin measuring kids' BMIs at school, skyrocketing childhood obesity rates have leveled off since 2003. The measure was part of a statewide plan, including removing soda machines and changing school lunch menus, put together by Gov. Mike Huckabee, who fought his own very public battle with the bulge.

Senators passed the bill 37 to 13 after a first genial —- and then heated —- debate.

One senator jokingly placed a glazed doughnut on the podium as Carter spoke. Sen. Jeff Mullis (R-Chickamauga) strolled up to take a bite, as his fellow lawmakers guffawed from their seats.

A few moments later, a more serious Sen. Preston Smith (R-Rome) said "the long arm of the government" should stop reaching into people's private lives. He called the measure another "nanny bill" that goes too far.

Smith said that schools will pressure children to lose weight and stigmatize them, mimicking what he worried school officials would say: "Come on, pick it up, fat kid, we're not going to get money if you don't!"

As he left the podium, refusing to engage in a debate, Sen. Renee Unterman (R-Buford), who supports the bill, shouted "chicken!" at him.

The bill is another attempt to address childhood obesity with legislation.

Carter made a proposal during the 2006 session, calling for 150 minutes per week of "moderate to vigorous" physical activity for kindergarten through fifth grade, and 225 minutes per week for sixth-, seventh- and eighth-graders. That bill failed.

And in 2005, a bipartisan bill in the House tried unsuccessfully to place a student's body mass index, an indication of obesity, on report cards.

Under the new bill, if school districts don't comply with the new rules, they'd be labeled as "unhealthy school zones" on a state Web site that measures school performance.

The plan has earned mixed reviews from moms and dads.

Todd Slutzky, an associate creative director and father of a 3-year-old, said he sees no problem with schools tracking weight.

"It's not like listing children's IQs or parents' incomes," he said. He said a little accountability wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

"Sometimes," he said, "parents need to be shamed."

Kristen Speckhals, a mother of two from Atlanta, called the bill "totally ridiculous."

"I wish they would stick to teaching history and science and math," she said. "I'm all for health and fitness, but that's a parent's job."

In Arkansas, children are turned around backward before stepping onto the scale so they can't see their own weight, said Debra Pate, a communications specialist for the that state's program.

"By far, it's been accepted by parents and has had no ill effect on children," she said.

Georgia's elementary school children currently take 90 hours of physical education each year, which rounds out to roughly 30 minutes a day, said Dana Tofig, the spokesman for the Georgia Department of Education.

Tofig said DOE has been working with Carter on the bill and supports its intent.

The logistics of collecting and cataloging the data, however, could prove tricky.

"While the intent is good, we do not want to saddle our schools and teachers with more mandates," he said.

The bill now goes to the House.

Staff writer Ken Sugiura contributed to this article.

A LOOK AT THE PROBLEM

> 34 percent of U.S. children ages 6-19 are overweight.

> 17 percent are considered obese.

> For black teenagers, 24 percent of girls and almost 19 percent of boys are obese.

> Almost 20 percent of Mexican-American teenage girls and 15 percent of boys are obese.

> Poverty is a key factor: About 20 percent of impoverished kids are obese.

> Possible consequences: hypertension, breathing disorders, sleep problems, bone and joint complications; greater risk of later developing heart disease and some forms of cancer.

> Up to 45 percent of new diabetes diagnoses in children and adolescents are weight-related Type 2 diabetes.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

She’s the Oregon mayor who posed for a calendar in her underwear.

Remember in my blog I wrote that constituents weren’t happy?

So what happened?

A brand new study was issued today on prisons in America that I assure you will have liberals in a tizzy. From a news release by the Pew Center on the States’ Public Safety Performance Project:

“For the first time in history more than one in every 100 adults in America are in jail or prison—a fact that significantly impacts state budgets without delivering a clear return on public safety.  According to a new report released today by the Pew Center on the States’ Public Safety Performance Project, at the start of 2008, 2,319,258 adults were held in American prisons or jails, or one in every 99.1 men and women, according to the study.  During 2007, the prison population rose by more than 25,000 inmates.  In addition to detailing state and regional prison growth rates, Pew’s report, One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008, identifies how corrections spending compares to other state investments, why it has increased, and what some states are doing to limit growth in both prison populations and costs while maintaining public safety.

As prison populations expand, costs to states are on the rise.  Last year alone, states spent more than $49 billion on corrections, up from $11 billion 20 years before.   However, the national recidivism rate remains virtually unchanged, with about half of released inmates returning to jail or prison within three years.  And while violent criminals and other serious offenders account for some of the growth, many inmates are low-level offenders or people who have violated the terms of their probation or parole.”

The reaction from the left is predictable:


We are spending too much on corrections.

Violent crime is still a problem. We have too many non-violent offenders locked up. It’s all putting a great strain on state budgets.

We need to spend less on correction. We need to lock up fewer criminals.

We need to spend the money we’re spending on corrections on education.

As I talked about on WISN today, lefties always try to frame the argument as corrections vs. education that I feel is a flawed argument.

But let’s play the game.

Using data from this very same report:

At the end of 2006, Wisconsin had 23,431 inmates.

One year later, at the end of 2007, Wisconsin had 22,690 inmates. That’s a decrease of 741 inmates, or a 3.2% decline. Wisconsin is bucking the national trend of locking up more bad guys.

Yes, corrections is expensive.

What’s the price tag in Wisconsin?

In fiscal year 2007, according to this report, Wisconsin spent $890 million, or 6.7% of the state’s General Fund.

How does that compare to education spending in Wisconsin?

In fiscal year 2007, Wisconsin spent $1.214 billion on education.

Education is always half of the massive state budget, spending that is above the national average. Education doesn’t get shortchanged in Wisconsin.

As for the high cost of incarceration, it would be costlier to let inmates out earlier and lock up fewer criminals.

Senator Mary Lazich makes the case: we can’t afford to not lock them up.




CFSW HAS WORKED HARD TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY- NOW IT'S TIME TO SAY THANK YOU !


And yes, tickets will be available at the door if you decide you'd like to come out and just party with some very nice people! 

Remember Kyla Ebbert?

She was the young blonde who was tossed off a Southwest Airlines flight because she was wearing this outfit:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






A male airline employee informed her the outfit was inappropriate.

When Ebbert asked nicely what was wrong with her ensemble, she was told, "Everything."

Once the world saw the outfit, Southwest was wiping the omelette off their corporate face.

Now Southwest is in the midst of another, "Too sexy to fly" controversy.

Here are SOME of the details.

OK.

That's one account.

Now.....

Here is a statement issued by Southwest Airlines:


"Southwest Airlines would like to set the record straight regarding a situation involving two female Customers, Ms. Sarah Williams and Ms. Nisreen Swedberg, on Flight #3600 from Tampa Bay to Los Angeles on February 14, 2008. During this flight, the Flight Crew and several witnesses confirm that Ms. Williams and Ms. Swedberg's unruly behavior was touched off by an occupied lavatory. After banging on the door, Ms. Williams and Ms. Swedberg became verbally abusive and threatening toward the Customer who had been using the lavatory.

When Our Flight Crew addressed the situation with Ms. Williams and Ms. Swedberg, the two Customers continued their threatening behavior and abusive language. At this time, the Flight Crew requested that local police meet the flight upon its arrival in Los Angeles. The police questioned several witnesses, as well as Ms. Williams and Ms. Swedberg, who were later released. Contrary to reports, we did not ban these Customers from flying Southwest Airlines.

Our Employees must maintain a Safe and comfortable environment onboard the aircraft at all times. Despite some news reports, this story has nothing to do with Ms. Swedberg and Ms. Williams' appearance, but rather, their use of what other Passengers tell us was profanity and threatening behavior onboard one of our flights. Finally, we would have gone out of business a long time ago if we discriminated against beautiful women -- or anyone else for that matter. We carry almost 100 million Customers a year, and they are all beautiful in our eyes."


Based on what we know, in my view Southwest dropped the ball on Kyla Ebbert. That outfit is conservative using 2008 standards.

Southwest did get it right when employees objected to behavior on an airline flight that would have been unacceptable pre-9-11. Those 18 year old women didn't act like adults but instead behaved like spoiled brats. Probably accustomed to getting what they want with little discipline from Mommy and Daddy, they thought their demand sof rbottled water NOW and a toilet NOW should have been honored because the rest of the plane wasn't as drop dead gorgeous as they were.

Prediction:

This isn't over.

Mommy and Daddy have to talk to their lawyers.

After all.

Poor darlings had to wait for a glass of water and to use the bathroom.

Oh, the outright discrimination.

Oh my goodness.

The blatant discrimination.

It's tough being so good looking.




CFSW HAS WORKED HARD TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY- NOW IT'S TIME TO SAY THANK YOU !


And yes, tickets will be available at the door if you decide you'd like to come out and just party with some very nice people! 

While filling in for Mark Belling on WISN Monday afternoon, I talked about photo ID. I referenced a blog Senator Mary Lazich posted earlier this month about a major study by American University that shows photo ID’s are not obstacles to voting.

Then I discussed how Wisconsin is going to blow a golden opportunity to finally adopt a photo ID requirement because Democrats who control the state Senate will not allow a vote on a constitutional amendment on photo ID to take place before the current legislative session runs out on March 13^th.

The constitutional amendment must pass two consecutive sessions of the Legislature, and then be approved by voters in a statewide referendum.

After the Legislature approved three photo ID bills, only to see all three vetoed by Governor Doyle, the constitutional amendment requiring photo ID was introduced on May 3, 2005. The state Assembly passed the amendment, 57-36, on November 1, 2005. The state Senate then passed the amendment, 19-14, on March 9, 2006.

The amendment must now be approved in this, the current session of the Legislature before it can go to voters in a referendum. On April 17, 2007, the state Assembly approved the amendment, 54-43. Now the amendment must be approved by the state Senate, but its fate is all but dead. Democrat leaders in the Senate are refusing to schedule the amendment for consideration.

Wisconsinites would certainly vote to change our state constitution, if they had the chance. According to a statewide survey released by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute in October 2005, “Wisconsin residents, by a 63% to 30% margin, clearly favor a constitutional amendment to require photo ID’s for voting. This number is slightly less than general support for the measure where 69% of the residents support requiring photo ID’s to vote, while only 27% oppose such a requirement.”

The measure could have been on the ballot April 1, 2008. Thanks to Jim Doyle, who pressured Senate Democrats, former Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson, who could have scheduled the measure for a vote when she was in charge of the senate, but didn’t, current Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker, and Senator Spencer Coggs who chairs the senate Elections Committee and refuses to hold a hearing and executive session on the amendment, state voters are being denied an opportunity to vote on the idea.

Remember that.

Remember who prevented this popular, common sense requirement from becoming law.

That was the discussion on WISN on Monday.

The very next day, the Milwaukee Police Department’s Special Investigations Unit issued a lengthy report regarding the widespread voter fraud in the City of Milwaukee in the November 2, 2004 election.

Here’s a brief excerpt from the “Recommendations” portion of the report:

“It is the opinion of the Task Force investigators that more than any other recommendation we could make, our investigation has concluded that the one thing that could eliminate a large percentage of fraud or the appearance of fraudulent voting in any given Election is the elimination of the On-Site or Same Day voter registration system.”

Two paragraphs later, the report adds:

“As an alternative, if On-Site registration is to continue in its present form, then the presentation of a government issued identification card that includes the voter’s name, address (including city) and date of birth should be presented before that person is allowed to register and vote.”

Here's the entire report. (H/T: Brian Fraley)

Everyone in the state realizes that an important piece to restoring honesty and credibility to our voting system is to require photo ID…..everyone, that is except Jim Doyle, Senate Democrats, and Democrats who support voter fraud because they feel they benefit.



CFSW HAS WORKED HARD TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY- NOW IT'S TIME TO SAY THANK YOU !

 

Depends who you ask.

If you ask most reasoned Americans, they'll tell you the suicide bomber.

Ask some egghead professor.........that's a different story.

Obesity is more dangerous than terrorism......one of the conclusions reached at an international conference today in Sydney.

Fine.

The next time someone's bombing your country, don't call the U.S. begging for help, until your homeland is overrun with people who couldn't exhibit self-control.

Don't call us.

Call Richard Simmons.



CFSW has worked hard to protect your family- Now it's time to say thank you!

 

It was called unnecessary, an overreaction, discriminatory and unfair.

Mayfair Mall management felt the need to implement new rules that required teens 17 and under to be with an adult after 3:00 p.m. on Frday and Saturday.

Rowdiness is down. Crime is down. More adult shoppers are back. Sales are up.

Shocking.

Here is the Business Journal story I talked about on WISN today.

Now they need to enforce the policy everyday.



CFSW has worked hard to protect your family- Now it's time to say thank you!

At Relevant Church in Ybor City, Florida, it won’t be the typical Sunday church service today. Parishioners have been told that the subject matter today and the next few Sunday’s will be………….AHEM!!.......quite different.

I spent an hour on this subject on WISN the other day and I was impressed at the quality of the callers who refrained from snickering and off color remarks.

The message to have sex more often coming from the pulpit isn’t all that frequent (At my church, it has never happened). But the message, surprisingly, isn’t new.

On WISN I also referred to a 2006 article about San Diego minister Joe Beam who holds seminars telling Christians it’s not good enough just to have sex. It has to be quality sex.

From the article, in my view, it’s difficult to argue with Beam’s message:

“It’s a simple one: Sex is good. Good sex makes people happy. It deepens relationships. So it helps marriages last and that pleases God and makes society better.”

Here is the article on Joe Beam that while I discussed on WISN, I edited carefully.

DISCLAIMER: The article does contain some adult material that some readers might find offensive.

 
Yesterday while filling in for Mark Belling on Newstalk 130 WISN, I spoke about an ESPN documentary that was broadcast during May 2007. The documentary prompted the NCAA to enact a new rule that prohibits colleges and universities from rescinding female athletes’ scholarships because they become pregnant.

ESPN reported that at Clemson University, “At least seven current or recently graduated student-athletes terminated their pregnancies, primarily because they were afraid of losing their athletic scholarships.”

One of the athletes tried to seek counsel from a university administrator when she found out she was pregnant.

ESPN reported this about that meeting, quoting the athlete:

"She was just like, 'You know that's going to be hard? Everything that you got … gone,'" the athlete said, recounting her conversation. "And she was like, 'Just think about your options. You know Coach isn't going to give you back your scholarship just like that. If she finds out and if you decide to keep it, that's gone.'"

The student-athlete said she was asked to sign a team document prior to the 2005 season that stated: "Pregnancy resulting in the inability to compete and positively contribute to the program's success will result in the modification of your grant-in-aid money."

The document the athlete was forced to sign was roundly criticized as gender discrimination, a clear violation of Title IX.

Cassandra Harding signed a similar document at the University of Memphis. The document listed all the possible scenarios that could lead to a loss of scholarship. Getting pregnant was one of them. When her coaches found out Harding was pregnant, her scholarship was stripped immediately.

Here is the ESPN report that also has videos.

As a result of the ESPN investigation, the NCAA has approved a new rule to help female athletes who feel coerced to get abortions. The rule that goes into effect August 1, 2008 prevents schools from taking away scholarships from women that get pregnant.

The rule only prohibits schools from dropping scholarships during the year the athlete gets pregnant.

One of the many callers on the topic asked, “What about the breeders?” What about female athletes who keep getting pregnant?

Under the new rule, schools could still take away scholarships for future years from students who become pregnant and don't have an abortion.

Here are more details on the new rule, a good step by the NCAA. 

Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the case of whether potential errors in administering lethal injections to death row inmates constitute cruel and inhumane punishment.

Not surprisingly, two inmates on death row in Kentucky convicted of brutal, vicious, heinous crimes are asking the court to hear this case. They question the lethal injection used in Kentucky that calls for the administration of four drugs: Valium, which relaxes the convict, Sodium Pentathol, which knocks the convict unconscious, Pavulon, which stops his breathing, and potassium chloride, which essentially puts the convict into cardiac arrest and ultimately causes death.


Of the 38 states with the death penalty, 37 use lethal injection. Nebraska still uses the electric chair. Lethal injection was instituted in the late 1970’s as an alternative to the chair and gas chamber.

The New York Times reports lethal injections have become “troublesome.”

The paper says, “Leading medical organizations have told their members not to participate, and lawyers for death-row inmates have produced evidence showing that in the absence of expert medical attention, there is a substantial risk of error in administering the combination of anesthesia and paralyzing drugs necessary to bring about a quick and painless death.”

The inmates who were able to get their case heard before the Supreme Court are Ralph Baze and Thomas Bowling.

Let’s examine what these two convicted criminals did.

Regarding Ralph Baze, the USA TODAY reports:

Arthur Briscoe went to Baze's home, on a ridge off Little Hardwick Creek Road, on Jan. 30, 1992, to serve four warrants from Toledo, Ohio, according to 1992 news accounts.

The warrants stemmed from charges that included retaining stolen property and felony assault.

Baze acknowledges being agitated by Briscoe's visit, knowing that his wife's adult children — with whom he was feuding — had told the local authorities about the Ohio warrants.

Baze admits he was armed with a semi-automatic rifle, and pointed it at Briscoe as he came onto his property.

After that initial confrontation, Baze said he turned toward the cabin to leave and his wife saw Briscoe start to reach for his gun.

During a 1992 interview, Baze's wife Becky, who has since died, told The Courier-Journal that she grabbed the deputy's arm and yelled for her husband to run.

He did, and Briscoe got into his cruiser and went down a hill to call for backup.

That's when Bennett, who also was Briscoe's brother-in-law, responded.

Accounts differ on what happened next.

Baze said the lawmen returned to the ridge and began shooting after seeing him walk out from behind a brush pile to surrender. He claimed he was shot in the leg by their first shot and was forced to fire his own weapon.

"I grabbed my rifle and we go to war," Baze said. "These two men are trying to kill me."
But Deputy Robert Mathews, who was then a Stanton police officer and among the first on scene, said Bennett tried to talk Baze into putting down his weapon, but Baze started shooting.

Bennett was shot in the back as he tried to seek cover in the backseat of his police cruiser, Mathews said.

Baze doesn't dispute that.

"Only thing I know is these guys are shooting at me," Baze said. "I know the second he got rearranged he was going to try to kill me again. So I did not hesitate to shoot him."

Briscoe had moved behind the front of the cruiser, trying to shoot at Baze from a covered position.

"Every time he put his head above the car, I tried to put a bullet between his eyes," Baze said, adding that when he reached the front of the cruiser, Briscoe turned to run, while at the same time turning back to shoot.

"I shot him in the back," Baze said. "At that moment, it was the only shot I had at him."

As Briscoe lay on the ground, Baze said he walked up and shot him in the back of the head. Then he grabbed both officers' weapons and ran.

The other inmate involved in this case, Thomas Bowling in 1990 rammed the car of a couple. He got out and shot the couple and their young son as they sat inside their car. He then returned to his car, but walked back to the victims' car to make sure they were dead, and then drove away. The young son did survive.

In a case of incredible irony, Baze is now begging for leniency. This criminal who murdered two law enforcement officers, one in cold-blooded execution style, is now saying a needle in his arm is too cruel.

Click this link and scroll down to a video of interview clips with Baze and listen to how he says he should not have to suffer.

Here's another video with interview clips.

I concur with Ray Larson, a prosecutor and blogger in Kentucky who writes:

“Every now and then a newspaper story, editorial, or television report appears about some group attempting to keep some killer, who has been sentenced to death, from having to face execution.

The essence of these reports or opinions is that because the killer had a hard life or sad childhood, he shouldn’t have to pay the ultimate price for slaying an innocent human being. Over and over we are told by these writers, reporters and other anti-death penalty activists that a grim upbringing somehow excuses a vicious and brutal murder. They tell us that if we don't feel compassion for these condemned killers, we are not as righteous as they are.

We never hear one word on behalf of the innocent victims of these killers; only that we should show sympathy and understanding for the killer. Where is the compassion for the victim’s family and friends whose lives have been permanently shattered by the murderer?"

Supreme Court of Kentucky records say, “Baze and Bowling have not demonstrated by a preponderance of evidence that the method of execution by lethal injection in Kentucky inflicts unnecessary physical pain. Evidence was considered that other drugs were available that may decrease the possibility of pain but the constitutional provisions do not provide protection against all pain, only cruel and unusual punishment. Although alleged that there are other drugs which may further assure the condemned person feels no pain, there is no requirement to select the least severe penalty so long as the penalty is not cruel or unusual. It has not been demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the method of execution in Kentucky by lethal injection inflicts unnecessary psychological suffering.”

This is a major case with major ramifications.

Quite frankly, if criminals like Baze and Bowling do suffer some pain while the lethal injection is being administered, I have no problem with that.

And if lethal injections are tossed out, remember the death penalty is constitutional.

Seriously, how are we then supposed to execute people on death row?

Where does most of the money go that the federal government spends?

Earmarks?

The war in Iraq?

Not even close.

It goes to people who think they have it coming to them.

Jacob Sullum of Reason Magazine sums it up nicely.

I'm still skeptical, but the LA Times makes the case that the United States is stepping up its efforts to clamp down on illegal immigration.

As a result, we're making strides, to the point where illegals already here are telling others to stay away.