Well isn’t this interesting:

Proponents of laws requiring a waiting period before a woman can receive an abortion argue that these cooling off periods protect against rash decisions on the part of women in the event of unplanned pregnancies. Opponents claim, at best, waiting periods have no effect on decision-making and, at worst, they subject women to additional mental anguish and stress. In this article, I examine these competing claims using adult female suicide rates at the state level as a proxy for mental health. Panel data analyses suggest that the adoption of mandatory waiting periods reduce suicide rates by about 10 percent, and this effect is statistically significant. The result is robust to various attempts to control for unobservable heterogeneity and simultaneity.

[Hat-tip: The Volokh Conspiracy]

Misbehaving  police officers are bad enough:

A San Antonio police officer has been accused of sexually assaulting a woman, the second officer charged this year with rape.

How do you lower the bar further?

[A] San Antonio police officer…was charged in July with sexually assaulting a transsexual. He was indicted by a federal grand jury in October.

Some free advice: Better stick to legitimate police work boys. Like giving gun safety lectures to children.

As I write this, it’s hailing in College Station, and that storm system is on its way to Houston. Here’s the radar image:

You might want to strap a football helmet on Junior before you send him out trick-or-treating tonight. And hopefully the Aggies have boarded up their bookstore again.

As I’ve been reporting over the past couple months, Chron editor Jeff Cohen has been dodging questions from his customers. When I asked Chron reader representative James T. Campbell about it, he had this to say:

Well, since agreeing to do it, we’ve had two hurricanes and a World Series. I know he was close to finishing the questions I submitted to him but he got sidetracked by work.

I’ve got news for you, James: Keeping up good, honest relations with the people who keep you in business is work. It’s certainly part of your job, and Cohen ought to consider it a big part of his job, too. It’s not incredibly convincing to say "Gee, news got in the way."

It’s just bad business to promise something to your customers and fail to deliver. Besides, it’s not like the questions were all that hard. Here’s a smattering of the readers’ inquiries:

• Why doesn’t the Chronicle have an on staff convervative columnist to balance liberal Casey?
• why is it that the water level of the main river is never posted? Rio Grande River!!
• Why is it that the majority of business stories are AP/syndicated and not about Houston or written by Chronicle writers?
• Why don’t you have someone in Iraq covering the war? Seems like a pretty Big Story.

See, those aren’t too tough. Not a single math question in there.

CORRECTION: The original headline misidentified Cohen as the Chron’s publisher. Cohen is actually the editor and executive vice president. The real big enchilada is publisher Jack Sweeney. Sorry ’bout that, and thanks to Evil D. for setting me straight.

New York Times columnistette Maureen Dowd was quite pissy and lonely this weekend, as evidenced by her 5,000-word essay lamenting the fact that women are picking femininity over feminism. You know how emotional broads can be.

Matt Drudge, of flashy police light fame, responds with a MoDo caption contest. I’m stealing it and posting it here:

"You know what they say about guys with big feet…"

Leave your suggestions in the comments. Also, feel free to speculate on her cocktail of choice.

Sharif don’t like it:

Death threats to the Egyptian-born actor Omar Sharif have appeared in Islamist forums on the Internet, after Sharif’s appearance as a Christian, Saint Peter, in an Italian biblical epic for television. A threatening message from user ‘bachirma1′ on one of the forums used by jihadi groups linked to al-Qaeda, reads:"In my view Omar Sharif is an infidel - enter here". Inside it continues; "He is a crusader who offends Islam and Muslims and is applauded by the Italian people. I give you some advice, my brothers, you should kill him."

I recommend that all appropriate Casbah-rocking action commence immediately.

In solidarity with other prominent free-thinkers, LST attempted for the first part of today to reject the tyranny of Daylight Savings Time.

Nevertheless, and in response to the forces of space-time continuum consensus, we are endeavoring to change the clocks around here.

Your patience is appreciated.

UPDATED– Correct timestamps should begin later today.

Whether you call it Halloween or “celebration of fall” for you politically correct types, the day does bring out the kooky news stories. To wit:

Dutch Witches Get Tax Break for Studies

Yes, those wacky Dutch are at it again.

Dutch witches are getting a tax break. A court has ruled that the cost of witchcraft lessons can be taken as a tax deduction. Learning to cast spells and brew potions doesn’t come cheap. Margarita Rongen runs the "Witches Homestead" in a northern province. Her witchcraft workshops cost more than $200 a weekend or more than $2,600 for a full course.

What a bargain. It’s a family business too.

"Once you have become a witch … you can pass along the things you have learned," said Rongen. "I have been a witch for 38 years and learned it from my father."

She notes her black cauldron and crystal ball stand at the ready for the next full moon.

She even extended an invitation to a dubious Dutch lawmaker to visit.

"If he would come here and try the divination rod and see how important it is to find things, see that it isn’t pleasant to have earth radiation in your house, feel the forces of the earth, that would be magnificent."

Come and use the divination rod and feel the forces of the earth, eh? Perhaps this woman writes sports headlines as a side job?

Read this.

Heh.

BENZION ADDS– Another contribution by LST to Great Moments in New Media Journalism.

Hey Houston sports fans, if the Astros first trip to the World Series didn’t do it for you, how about the city’s NFL franchise? The Texans finally got win number one on Sunday. Nothing as exhilarating as 1-6.

• Today’s fascinating fact: Dan Rather was born (how appropriate) on this day in 1931 in Wharton.

• We also have a new Supreme Court nominee in Judge Samuel Alito

Feel free to discuss the implications of the Rather-Halloween connection along with the new SCOTUS pick.

BRAMANTI ADDS: Jeremy beat me to it, but I’m going to add my stuff anyway. Today’s random spooky facts:

• The average Halloween costume this year cost $38.11, up $10 from last year.
• Anoka, Minn. is the "Halloween Capital of the World."
• Scottish kids say "The sky is blue, the grass is green, may we have our Halloween" instead of "Trick or Treat."

And today’s trivia question: What was the first wrapped penny candy in the U.S.?

A couple of blasts from the past…

Matt Forge Toon Archives

E-mail Matt

Arguments Against the Texas Marriage Amendment are Poorly Worded

A common meme bouncing around the Texas blogosphere and media is the insinuation that proposition 2, the Texas Marriage Amendment, is “poorly worded” and would put traditional marriage itself in jeopardy. So, let’s have a look-see at the text of the amendment and see what this kerfuffle is really about (Click here to see the full amendment language).

"(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

Opponents say that section b is “poorly worded”; claiming the restriction on “legal status identical or similar to marriage” could invalidate all marriages in Texas. Attorney General Gregg Abbott is on record declaring, “In my legal judgment as Attorney General of the State of Texas, this argument is wholly without merit,” (click here for a full copy of his statement).

First, the Attorney General says state courts are bound by legislative intent and he cites the legislative intent of proposition 2 to safe guard traditional marriage. Personally, I also have a hard time visualizing 100 Texas House and 21 Texas Senate Members, many of whom are practicing attorneys and social conservatives, voting for a resolution that would make Texas a big hippy commune.

Attorney General Abbott, who has successfully argued before the US Supreme Court, goes on to say

“The plain language of Proposition 2 does not reflect any intent to annul traditional marriage. …Traditional marriage – between ‘one man and one woman’ – is not ‘identical or similar to’ marriage; it is marriage.”

I believe the correct, legal term for this finding is “D’uh!”

Another way to look at this language is to consider identical twins, Tommy and Terry. They look the same and sound the same. However, they are two, separate beings and may, in fact, have very different ambitions, gifts, desires, experiences, beliefs, and values. Tommy is identical to Terry, but Tommy is not Terry.

Of course, all the talk about the amendment being “poorly worded” from Margot Clarke and other homosexual activists is just a ruse to confuse voters. Instead of engaging the issue head on and making a case for why legalizing alternative forms of marriage could be a good idea, prop. 2 opponents resort to contrived robocalls.

Though, I also suspect that those holding to the “poorly worded” stratagem are simply groping about for a compromise position that reconciles conflicting desires. On one hand, they want to appear open minded and tolerant to their liberal friends. On the other, they know legalizing alternative forms of marriage is a bad idea for many reasons. The “poorly worded” maneuver enables them to be both for and against prop. 2.

It is so nice today, what are doing inside in front of your computer?

Oh well, since you are here, comments are open for the weekend!

Possible Topics:

• What is the difference between being "Borked" and "Miered"? Do you care?
• What are you going to be, if anything, this Halloween? How about your kids?
• Is  the whole "Plame/CIA/Perjury/Scooter" thing just an inside the Beltway deal?
• It has been a rough week for President Bush. If you had 5 minutes with him, what would you tell him?

Have a great weekend!

Amendment Endorsements from Austin

Below is my humble attempt to make sense of these measures, share my thoughts on how I’ll be voting and why. Click here to see the full text of the amendments.

Prop. 1: Against. I’m generally against the state government subsidizing a private business.
Prop. 2: For. I’ve blogged extensively on why I support this proposition here.
Prop. 3: Against. This sounds like semantic gaming designed to allow the state and local governments to finance private enterprises under the rubric of economic development.
Prop. 4: For. This would enable judges to better protect victims (like those of domestic abuse) against defendants who demonstrate a willingness to violate parole.
Prop. 5: For. The wording is a little vague. This measure would allow exceptions from the legislature’s current rate setting regime, namely commercial lenders and borrowers. I don’t think the government should be in the rate setting business.
Prop. 6: For, but who cares. This allows additional representation on the SCJC. What do they do? What effect to they have? Why is this a constitutional amendment?
Prop. 7: For. This arrangement enables senior citizens to get some of the value out of their house prior to selling it. This should allow for more flexibility in financial planning.
Prop. 8: Uh, what? Why is this here again? According to press reports, there are pending lawsuits related to this issue. I wonder how this amendment got 2/3 vote in the Legislature given that annoying, little factoid. I’ll vote against.
Prop. 9: Against. Regional Mobility Authorities (RMA), in my opinion, are unelected bureaucrats that have the power to increase the amount of money taken out of your bank account. Now, someone wants to increase the amount of time they can serve?

By the way, what does it say when the liberal Austin Chronicle agrees with me on 4 of the 9 amendments? Are they beginning to see the light, or are all these years of living in the Weird City starting to get to me?

Click here for more detailed explanations and my endorsements on the Travis County bond elections.

I just can’t let this lie. After reading Matt’s post on Hastert’s new blog, I have to respond to this comment:

They [oil companies] haven’t built a refinery here in America since the 1970’s. They’ve built refineries overseas, but nothing here at home.

We want some answers and you folks out there in the blogosphere do too. When are new refineries going to be built here in America?

Gee, I wonder what happened in the 1970’s to stop oil companies from building new refineries. Could it be…

THE CLEAN AIR ACT?!!!

Until Hastert comes with reforms to the Clean Air Act, making it so that it longer places economically impracticable restrictions on new refineries, he should shut the heck up.

When will new refineries be build in America, Mr. Hastert? When you get off your fat, bloated bureaucratic hiney and start changing the regulations!It’s blaming the victim, Mr. Hastert. You might as well shoot somebody and blame them for bleeding.

Ok, I feel calmer now.

Next Page »