Houston's Clear Thinkers

Thanks to my friend Bill Hesson for the link to Mr. Harris' piece.

Posted by Tom at 8:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

An Essential War

Former Secretary of State George Schultz, now a distinguished fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, is inarguably a great American. In this extraordinary Wall Street Journal ($) op-ed, Mr. Schultz uses his depth and experience to give us the big picture on why the decision to go to war in Iraq was the correct one. Mr. Schultz begins by pointing out the devastating effect that Islamic fascists have had on the state system, which is the bedrock of international relations:

Today, looking back on the past quarter century of terrorism, we can see that it is the method of choice of an extensive, internationally connected ideological movement dedicated to the destruction of our international system of cooperation and progress. We can see that the 1981 assassination of President Anwar Sadat, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the 2001 destruction of the Twin Towers, the bombs on the trains in Madrid, and scores of other terrorist attacks in between and in many countries, were carried out by one part or another of this movement. And the movement is connected to states that develop awesome weaponry, with some of it, or with expertise, for sale.

What should we do? First and foremost, shore up the state sy -->

March 28, 2004

Gordon Prather on Richard Clarke and the Vulcans

The always entertaining physicist Gordon Prather pens this piece on Richard Clarke and the "Vulcans" in the Bush Administration.

Posted by Tom at 1:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

American Hustlers

Gordon Wood is the Alva O. Way university professor at Brown University and one of America's foremost authorities on the history and philosophy of the American Revolution, reflected by his brilliant books "Radicalism of the American Revolution" and "Creation of the American Republic." Accordingly, when Professor Wood speaks about American history, we should listen closely.

In this NY Times Review of Books review, Professor Wood opines favorably on University of Pennsylvania professor Walter A. McDougall's new book -- ''Freedom Just Around the Corner'' -- that explains America's enormous progress during the period of 1528-1828 to be attributable largely to Americans' propensity to hustle. As Professor Wood observes:

This unusual book by Walter A. McDougall is the first of what will be a three-volume history of America. If this volume, which covers the period 1585 to 1828, is any indication of the promised whole, the trilogy may have a major impact on how we Americans understand ourselves.

''The creation of the United States of America is the central event of the past 400 years.'' Imagine, he says, some ghostly ship, some Flying Dutchman transported in time from the year 1600 to the present. ''The crew would be amazed by our technology and the sheer numbers of people on the globe, but the array of civilizations would be recognizable.'' China, Japan, India, Russia, the vast Islamic crescent, South America and Europe are not all that different now from what they were in 1600. ''The only continent that would astound the Renaissance time-travelers would be North America, which was primitive and nearly vacant as late as 1607, but which today hosts the mightiest, richest, most dynamic civilization in history -- a civilization, moreover, that perturbs the trajectories of all other civilizations just by existing.''

Professor Wood remarks further:

[Professor McDougall] unabashedly writes of Americans and assumes throughout that there is something called an American character. Only the character he describes may not be what many Americans would want to admit about themselves. Unlike other national narratives, which he says tend either to celebrate or to condemn America -- and in righteous seriousness -- his book aims to do neither. Instead, he wants to tell the truth about ''who and why we are what we are,'' and to tell it entertainingly. His is thus a ''candid'' history. Its major theme is ''the American people's penchant for hustling.'' We Americans, he claims, are a nation of people on the make.

. . . But we have more con men and hucksters than other nations not because we have a different nature or are worse than other peoples. It is just that ''Americans have enjoyed more opportunity to pursue their ambitions, by foul means or fair, than any other people in history.''

Of course, he admits that there are many hustlers in a ''positive sense: builders, doers, go-getters, dreamers, hard workers, inventors, organizers, engineers and a people supremely generous.'' These qualities are what justify Americans' faith in themselves and their destiny in the world. But the negative connotations of hustling and swindling are very strong and dominate much of our literary and popular culture, and, indeed, our entire history. ''If the United States . . . is a permanent revolution, a society in constant flux,'' then, McDougall writes, we would expect all periods of American history at all levels of the society ''to be washed by turgid, overlapping waves of old and new forms'' of what he calls ''creative corruption.''

Because our high and noble ideals of freedom and individual rights contrast so vividly with the often grotesque realities of American life, every period of our history, McDougall says, is marked by disharmony. He then quotes Samuel P. Huntington to clinch his point: ''America is not a lie; it is a disappointment. But it can be a disappointment only because it is also a hope,'' a hope expressed in Bob Dylan's words as ''freedom just around the corner.''

The price of all this hustling was high, and McDougall does not flinch from describing the violence created by the dynamism of white Americans, including the elimination of hundreds of thousands of native people, mostly from disease, and the enslaving of hundreds of thousands of Africans. Other historians have graphically described the chicanery and greed of white Americans in their scramble for power and profit in early America. But these historians have usually written out of anger and righteous indignation. Not McDougall. He cynically, or he would say realistically (since cynicism suggests a moral judgment that human nature might be different), accepts, even celebrates, all the bribery, land-jobbing and double-dealing as the consequence of Americans' having so much freedom.

Professor McDougall's observations particularly resonate with me. Houston has been a wonderful and generous home for my family and me over the past 30 years, and this great city was developed largely by the unwieldly entrepreneurial spirit that Professor McDougall identifies in his book. The freedom that we Americans savor invariably involves risks, and one of those unfortunate risks is the risk of being cheated. But as Professor McDougall reminds us -- just as Sir Thomas More did in this earlier post -- man's attempts to eradicate such wrongdoing often harbors the greater risk of eradicating our freedom.

Posted by Tom at 12:26 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

The ten-year anniversary of the Rwandan genocide

A decade ago, fresh from a disastrous intervention in Somalia, the Clinton Administration and the United Nations failed to intervene in Rwanda, and the result was one of the worst episodes of genocide of the 20th century. In 1994, Rwanda's president was mysteriously assassinated, and an existing civil war between the two main ethnic groups -- the Hutu and the Tutsi -- turned into a campaign of genocide, which the rest of the world largely ignored. An estimated 800,000 people (mainly Tutsis) were murdered in 100 days.

In this interesting post, Daniel Drezner addresses the long-term implications of the world's tepid response to the Rwanda genocide. Given the ongoing genocide currently taking place in Sudan, and the potential for it in places such as Iraq, one is certainly justified in asking: When will the world learn?

Posted by Tom at 7:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Donald Trump: You're fired!

To those who know about his business affairs, Donald Trump has always been more successful as a self-promoter than as a businessman, particularly for those who invest in his projects. This NY Times article reports on the ongoing negotiations between Mr. Trump and the bondholders on his lagging Atlantic City casino properties. Unless Mr. Trump gives up control of the properties, it appears that they are headed for bankruptcy, which would almost assure that Mr. Trump would lose control.

Posted by Tom at 7:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 27, 2004

Scramjets?

This is a cool research project. Update: the test was a success!

Posted by Tom at 1:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Richard Clarke Affair -- Where does the buck stop?

This NY Times article examines an American cultural phenomenon that several historians are noting -- that is, a national culture of shifting blame, which is reflected best in American politics.

Along those lines, several friends of this blog have asked why I have not commented on Richard C. Clarke's testimony earlier this week before the 9/11 Commission. Actually, there are several reasons. First and foremost, numerous other bloggers have already done an outstanding job in tracking the various issues raised by Mr. Clarke's testimony, notably Glenn Reynolds and Daniel Drezner. I could not improve on their efforts.

However, I must admit that I am somewhat frustrated by the way in which the issues that Mr. Clarke's testimony raised have played out in the mainstream media. I concede that much of the media storm is a byproduct of the 9/11 Commission hearings and the related television coverage. Regrettably, most folks do not take the time to research these issues on their own, so their impressions and views toward the issues are often formed through television viewing and commentary. That is unfortunate because television, for business reasons, tends to sensationalize news such as Mr. Clarke's testimony when, in reality, such testimony does not relate anything particularly new. Thus, people who evaluate such issues through the prism of television tend to believe Mr. Clarke is revealing something not previously known when, in fact, he is not.

The fact of the matter is that, long before Richard Clarke's testimony this week, the U.S. Government and intelligence community's failure to deal effectively with the actions and threats of Islamic fascists had been well-documented. Gerald Posner's excellent "Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11" relates how the failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks was systematic and had its seeds for failure sown repeatedly in twenty years of fumbled intelligence investigations and misplaced priorities. Similarly, Laurie Mylroie's "The War Against America: Saddam Hussein and the World Trade Center Attacks: A Study of Revenge" and "Bush vs. the Beltway: How the CIA and the State Department Tried to Stop the War on Terror" both describe in excrutiating detail how the U.S. government's approach to dealing with Islamic fascism has been compromised by restrictions placed on the intelligence agencies and political wrangling. Finally, former CIA agent Robert Baer's "See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism" insightfully relates from the "ground floor" how each administration over the past 25 years allowed the intelligence agencies to become a political football, which directly led to the substandard intelligence that facilitated the 9/11 attackers' success. These are just a few of the recent books that have examined the same issues that were raised during this week's testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

Inasmuch as I have read the foregoing books and several others on these issues, Mr. Clarke's testimony was not particularly insightful or noteworthy to me. I will read his book eventually to compare his insights to those contained in the books mentioned above, and I will post about it when I am through.

However, in the meantime, to the extent that Mr. Clarke's position is that the Bush Administration is more culpable for the 9/11 attacks than any one of the previous five (three Republican, two Democrat) administrations, his position is fundamentally flawed. America's intelligence failures over the past generation have been the result of a litany of bipartisan mistakes. If Mr. Clarke is suggesting that the Bush Administration's failures in this area are any more egregious than those of its predecessors, then he is doing his country a grave disservice and, in fact, is engaging in precisely the type of political posturing that has been so damaging to the intelligence community over the past 25 years.

Courtesy of Phil Carter and Mark Kleiman, the most insightful commentary that I have reviewed on the 9/11 Commission hearings to date comes from UCLA School of Public Policy professor Amy Zegart, author of "Flawed by Design" that deals with the national security process. Professor Zegart -- who had Condi Rice as her thesis adviser -- makes the following observations about the national security process, and what happens when government fails to establish clear priorities for the intelligence community:

. . . The [9/11] Commission asked the wrong question. Was terrorism a priority? Of course it was. The real question is how many other priorities both administrations were confronting. I'll tell you: too many.

Clinton wrote a Presidential Decision Directive in 1995 that sought to establish clear priorities for the intelligence community. There were so many in the top tier, they actually divided them into Tier 1A and Tier 1B. But it gets better (or worse). There was also a Tier 0, apparently for the very very very top priorities. Note to self: when you can't list priorities with regular numbers, you haven't really made priorities.

As time passed, priorities were added to the list but old ones were never removed. By 9/11, the National Security Agency had roughly 1,500 formal requirements, and developed 200,000 "Essential Elements of Information." I'm not making this up. See the Congressional Intelligence Committees' Joint Inquiry Report, December 2002, p.49. Intelligence officials told Congressional investigators that the prioritization process was "so broad as to be meaningless."

This is not new. For the past 50 years, there have been more than 40 major studies about the intelligence community. A common theme among them has been the spotty and fleeting attention policy makers have given to setting intelligence priorities. One former senior intelligence official told me that during the Cold War, he was asked about the state of the Soviet economy exactly once, when the Secretary of Defense wanted to convert rubles to dollars for a budget presentation to Congress.

Professor Zegar hits the nail on the head. Rather than finger pointing, the 9/11 Commission needs to recommend a basic procedure by which the government establishes clear priorities for the intelligence community. As Mr. Carter points out, if you prioritize everything, you effectively prioritize nothing. Hopefully, the Committee will rise above the usual political posturing and focus its recommendations on revamping and reinvigorating an intelligence community that we have allowed our political leaders to eviscerate. The success of the war against the radical Islamic fascists depends on it.

Posted by Tom at 1:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

SEC bears down on El Paso

Things have not been going well lately for Houston-based El Paso Corp., as noted earlier here, here and here. Accordingly, yesterday's announcement that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has launched an investigation into El Paso's downward restatement in natural gas reserves earlier this year comes as no surprise.

El Paso's share price has slumped 23 percent since the company last month slashed its proven natural gas reserves by 41% and announced that a financial restatement going back to 2001 was likely. El Paso has already taken a $1 billion write-down with the possibility of an additional $1.5 billion looming. The audit committee of the company's board has launched an investigation by an outside law firm into the reserves cutback, and the outside investigation prompted El Paso two weeks ago to delay indefinitely the release of its fourth quarter results and annual report.

Posted by Tom at 10:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Dr. Bart Smith on the Houston economy

The leading expert on the regional economics of the Houston metropolitan area is Dr. Barton Smith, University of Houston professor of economics and director of the UH Institute for Regional Forecasting. This Chronicle article reports on Dr. Smith's latest report, whose seasonal adjustment model of the Houston economy which predicts an annualized rate of job growth of 2.6 % that, if sustained for the next six months, would translate into about 50,000 jobs. That is the best job growth rate in Houston since 2000.

Twice a year, Dr. Smith gives an oral presentation over lunch regarding the state of the Houston economy at one of the Reliant Park hotel ballrooms. If you are interested in Houston economics or business, and you have not attended one of Dr. Smith's talks, you should make a point to attend one soon. Dr. Smith is a special talent, one of the many professionals who make Houston an enjoyable place to live.

Posted by Tom at 10:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 26, 2004

VDH: We are Finishing the War

Victor Davis Hanson's latest at NRO is here.

Posted by Tom at 6:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Who's to blame for 9/11?

This Daniel Pipes post nails the answer.

Posted by Tom at 4:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Latest Astros acquisition

The Astros announced a deal yesterday to pick up utility infielder, Mike Lamb. As usual, the Chronicle article portrays the deal as another key move by Astros' general manager Gerry Hunsicker to bring in a strong left-handed hitter that will shore up the depth of the team. On the other hand, the incomparable Baseball Prospectus 2004 has this to say about the newly-acquired Mr. Lamb:

Mike Lamb 3b/1B Bats:L Throws: R Born: 09-Aug-75 Age 28 [statistics deleted] The organization (the Texas Rangers) continued to sour on Lamb in 2003. You've heard the story hundreds of times before: A pretty good hitter who can't quite stay far enough right on the defensive spectrum to justify a major league spot. Players like this are drawn by force of nature to the Sacramento River Cats.

Posted by Tom at 3:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Royal/Dutch Shell announces first deal with Libya

Royal/Dutch Shell finally was able to enjoy some good news yesterday with this announcement of a breakthrough deal with Libya's state oil company to explore for oil and natural gas that could give Shell access to as much as $1 billion worth of oil and gas in North Africa. The deal establishes guidelines for oil and gas exploration projects, including onshore exploration and the export of liquefied natural gas. It was the first time in 30 years that Shell had been invited to operate in Libya.

Libya, which is a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, has production capacity of about 1.6 million barrels a day. However, Libya's reserve potential is far larger. Those reserves have been largely untapped because Libya's infrastructure suffered from a chronic lack of investment over the past decade after economic sanctions were imposed in 1992 as a result of the Libya's role in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

Posted by Tom at 6:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Dr. Bill Fields dies

One of Houston's elite group of doctors who were integral to the development of the Texas Medical Center as one of the world's finest medical institutions has died.

Dr. William Fields, a long-time professor of neurology at both Baylor Medical School and the University of Texas Medical School in the Medical Center, died Sunday at his Houston home at the age of 90. Dr. Fields was a pioneer in medical research and testing of the role of aspirin in the treatment and prevention of strokes. In the late 1970's, Dr. Fields directed a major research project at 10 medical centers that established that aspirin may reduce minor stroke symptoms and also the likelihood of catastrophic strokes. Dr. Fields also was the first to assess the clinical value of carotid endarterectomy, which is the surgical removal of the lining of diseased or blocked arteries.

Dr. Fields was a colleague and dear friend of my late father, Dr. Walter Kirkendall, with whom he collaborated on many research projects. Through this friendship with my father, I had the privilege of knowing Dr. Fields, who was a wonderful and engaging man. Dr. Fields and my father were members of a generation of American doctors who revolutionized the purpose of medicine and health care in our society, and we all should pause and contemplate the magnificent contributions that this generation of doctors has given to each of us.

Posted by Tom at 6:34 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

March 25, 2004

Update on the Jamie Olis sentencing

Following up on this earlier post on the sad case of Jamie Olis, the sentence is in -- 24 years. Here is the NY Times article on the sentencing.

Posted by Tom at 7:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

D&O insurers cannot unilaterally rescind

In the wake of recent corporate scandals, several directors-and-officers ("D&O") insurance carriers have sought to rescind policies that were allegedly purchased on the basis of misrepresentations. This WSJ article ($) reports on a recent decision out the Eastern District of Pennsylvania holding that Aegis Bermuda Insurance Co. must pay the defense costs for several directors and officers involved in litigation over the collapse of Adelphia Communications. Although Adelphia's bankruptcy temporarily prevents Aegis Bermuda from taking legal action to rescind the policy, the court nevertheless held that the insurer was required to continue paying legal fees until a judgment permitting recission was obtained:

"'Insurance carriers do not function as courts of law,' U.S. District Judge Michael M. Baylson wrote. 'If a carrier wants the unilateral right to refuse a payment called for in the policy, the policy should clearly state that right. This policy does not do so.'"

Thanks to the 10b-5 Daily for the link to the WSJ article.

Posted by Tom at 10:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Players Championship

Here is an excellent preview of this weekend's Players Championship golf tournament.

Posted by Tom at 9:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The favored religion of the IRS -- Scientology

This Logos post entitled "The chosen people of the IRS?" points to this New York Times article that reports on a California case that has uncovered a rather remarkable preference that the Internal Revenue Service has granted to the Church of Scientology.

Apparently, Scientology parents are allowed to deduct the cost of religious education as a charitable donation under an officially secret 1993 IRS agreement despite a 1989 Supreme Court decision prohibiting such a deduction. In the original case, the Ninth Circuit ruled against the plaintiff's request for a deduction for the cost of Jewish religious education, but when it did so, one of the judges suggested an alternative approach:

"Why is Scientology training different from all other religious training?" Judge Barry D. Silverman wrote in his opinion, adding that the question would not be answered just then because the court was not faced with the question of whether "members of the Church of Scientology have become the I.R.S.'s chosen people." Judge Silverman then recommended litigation to address whether the government is improperly favoring one religion.

"If the I.R.S. does in fact give preferential treatment to members of the Church of Scientology - allowing them a special right to claim deductions that are contrary to law and disallowed to everybody else - then the proper course of action is a lawsuit to put a stop to that policy," Judge Silverman wrote.

So, the plaintiffs filed another lawsuit, and during the course of discovery in that case, a subpoena was issued for a copy of the "secret agreement", but both the IRS and the Church of Scientology resisted producing it. Stay tuned.

As an aside, actor and director Steve Martin hilariously spoofed the Church of Scientology and its heavily Southern California clientele in his underrated comedy from several years ago, "Bowfinger."

Posted by Tom at 9:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Calpers: Seperate audit from other services

When it blew up in late 2001, Enron was paying Arthur Andersen at a rate of about $1 million per week for various professional services, including audit services. Although the final chapter is yet to be written, a good case can currently be made that one of the primary reasons for the demise of Andersen in the wake of the Enron scandal was the firm's compromising of its auditing integrity for the benefit of Enron as a key customer of Andersen's other professional services.

Now, this interesting CFO Magazine story relates how the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Calpers) is opposing Freddie Mac's reappointment of auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers because the company has used PwC for non-audit services. This is a result of a new Calpers policy of withholding votes from audit committee members at companies that allow auditors to perform non-audit work.

The pension fund is also withholding its votes from director Michelle Engler, wife of former Michigan governor John Engler. The former Governor Engler is an executive at Electronic Data Systems Corp., which is a large vendor of Freddie Mac. The pension fund asserts that this business relationship between Freddie Mac and EDS could impair Mrs. Engler's objectivity.

In the small world department, I hired Mrs. Engler in her first job as an attorney out of law school when I was running a downtown Houston law firm back in the 1980's. Michelle was a fine lawyer and is a great person, and Calpers would be well-advised to adopt a more flexible position to keep conscientious and bright people such as Michelle on the boards of companies in which Calpers invests. Knowing Michelle, she would recuse herself from any action that the Freddie Mac board might take in regard to EDS, anyway.

Thanks to the BusinessPundit for the link to this article.

Posted by Tom at 8:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Imports are good

This David Wessel column in the Wall Street Journal ($) makes some good points on the value of imports. Inasmuch as that value is often misrepresented during a political season, Wessel observes:

Let us now praise the virtues of imports.

Consider the clothes Americans buy for the four million babies born each year in the U.S. The typical family with a young child spends about $500 a year on those cute T-shirts, blue jeans and tiny socks. That's $2 billion a year.

Not so long ago, the U.S. had a ceiling on imports of baby clothes. That limit was lifted for most countries in 1998, and for China at the beginning of 2003. Imports of baby clothes more than doubled between 1997 and 2003, notes Ed Gresser, who labors to make the case for free trade for the centrist Democrats' Progressive Policy Institute. Wholesale prices at the ports dropped 28%.

Consumers saved. In the same years, the consumer-price index for all items rose 15%. But the retail price of infant and toddler apparel of all sorts fell 5.2%. Had the price of baby clothes increased as much as the price of everything else, parents would have had to spend about $400 million more to buy as many baby T-shirts, blue jeans and socks as they did last year.

Imports are the consumer's best friend.

You wouldn't know that to listen to public debate: Exports equal jobs. Exports are good. Imports kill jobs. Imports are bad. We must accept imports because only then will others take our exports. Imports are a necessary evil.

* * *
Politicians don't find the appeal to consumers a winner, though. As one Bush administration official confides, it's like telling a textile worker whose job has moved abroad: "Imports allow you to stretch your unemployment check further at Wal-Mart."

* * *
The case for free trade is flimsy without remembering that Americans are consumers as well as workers. It is as consumers that Americans benefit the most. Paying lower prices because of imports is as much of a benefit to American families as getting a raise, even though it never feels as good.

During this political campaign, your "demagogue antenna" should turn on anytime you hear a politician arguing against free trade. In the vast majority of circumstances, such drivel is directed at persuading a narrow interest group for political gain. As Mr. Wessel points out above, everyone else loses.

Posted by Tom at 7:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Professor Balkin on Supreme Court review of Pledge of Allegiance case

Professor Jack Balkin, Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale University, posts this interesting overview and analysis on the issues involved in the U.S. Supreme Court case -- Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow -- in which Dr. Newdow, an atheist, argues that government officials' use of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. Professor Balkin predicts that the Supreme Court will figure out a way to leave the words in the Pledge for primarily political reasons. Although Professor Balkin is much more knowledgeable on these issues than me, I still am not sure about that. With Justice Scalia's recusal, I think there is a real chance of a 4-4 deadlock on the Court, which would leave in place the Ninth Circuit opinion that government officials' use of the phrase in the Pledge violates the Establishment Clause.

On a related note, this transcript is now available of a very interesting and informative disucssion that the Pew Forum hosted last week on the Newdow case, featuring Doug Laycock and Jay Sekulow.

Posted by Tom at 6:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

David Warren on the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin

This typically insightful David Warren piece puts the recent Israeli assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin into perspective within the Byzantine political landscape of the Middle East. Here are a few excerpts, beginning with the moral question:

On the moral question, whether it was right for the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, to order the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, there is no difference from the question whether it would be right to assassinate Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden co-founded Al Qaeda, Yassin founded Hamas. These are organizations which exist for the express purpose of killing people; Qaeda being committed to killing "Crusaders and Zionists" plus bystanders; Hamas more specifically Jews plus bystanders. The question is not whether one should do it, but how.

The Israelis calculate Sheikh Yassin cost them 377 dead and 2,076 maimed -- including only a handful in military uniform. He was known to personally order the hits, and he ordered hundreds of them, both through Hamas and affiliates; culminating in last week's attack on the Israeli port of Ashdod, in which terrorists very nearly succeeded in blowing up large stores of toxic industrial chemicals. That was also the first successful "vengeance operation" (I use Al Jazeera's terminology) mounted from inside Gaza, since the Israelis succeeded in fencing the territory -- a "heritage moment" in Hamas propaganda. Yassin is the reciprocal Israeli heritage moment.

And then the pragmatic issue:

The Israelis are calculating that the advantages of disrupting the management of Hamas, which actually delivers the terrorism, outweigh the disadvantage of providing them with a recruitment tool. Most seasoned observers of the Middle East would guess they got it right. It is certainly the calculation the Bush administration has made, in going after Qaeda's senior management; and it appears to be working -- preventing more terrorist hits than it inspires.

And finally the political analysis:

Strange to say (and I can hear the guffaws of my numerous if inattentive leftwing readers) the assassination was a typically moderate act. Note [Ariel Sharon] killed Sheikh Yassin, and not Yasser Arafat, though the latter is also up to his ears in innocent Israeli blood, and the IDF know where to find him.

The unbelievable truth is that Mr. Sharon is trying to advance the "peace process", by giving Arafat's Palestinian Administration a leg up on Hamas, before their inevitable civil war. For despite all its butchery, even Arafat 's Fatah is the slightly more accommodating party. The only thing that keeps Fatah and Hamas together is their common target of Israel; with Israel removed, they become two scorpions in a bottle. There are big risks in weighing in so decisively, but even bigger ones if Hamas succeeds in its ambition of ruling Gaza after the Israeli departure.

Posted by Tom at 6:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Green Machine

It was noted in this earlier post that it is allergy season in Houston. As this Chronicle story relates, that means everything outside is covered with the green film of pollen. For some, though, there is a silver lining:

For Bill Lawrence, the green film on your hood is the color of money.

"We like to be people-friendly," said the president and chief executive of Bubbles Car Wash. "But I'll be honest. We love pollen. Nothing makes your car look worse than being covered in green and yellow dust."

Posted by Tom at 4:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 24, 2004

Supreme Court takes up important Texas managed care case

The Health Care Blog reminds that oral argument occurred yesterday in the U.S. Supreme Court in an appeal of this Fifth Circuit decision, which involves tort claims against HMO's under the Texas health care liability statute and the HMOs' contention that claims under the state statute are preempted by the federal ERISA statute. The Fifth Circuit previously rejected the HMOs' attempt to use ERISA preemption to remove the tort cases to federal court and upheld the plaintiffs' right to litigate their claims in Texas state courts, which are rarely as corporate-defendant friendly as federal courts. The Supreme Court's decision in this case will address a festering issue in ERISA law -- that is, whether an HMO's medical-necessity determinations are really benefits determinations that are completely preempted by ERISA.

As you might expect, the battered health care finance industry is closely eyeing the outcome of this case. The applicable ERISA provision provides a narrow basis for recovery against plans that withhold a requested level of care and a conservative measure of damages for successful plaintiffs. On the other hand, as is Texas' tradition, Texas tort law provides injured plaintiffs with a more liberal basis for recovery and thus, exposes health plans to far greater economic risk.

So long as HMOs and other managed care units are forced to make mixed coverage and treatment decisions against a backdrop of potential tort liability, opponents of managed care believe that the managed care units would be far less willing to risk limiting or denying care that physicians and patients request. On the other hand, HMO's and managed-care plans view an adverse result in the case as a threat to the financial security of employee benefit plans that extend health coverage to millions of workers and retirees.

Tom Mayo, the health care lawyer who is the author of the Health Care Blog, seems to think that the Supreme Court is leaning in favor of the managed care plans and federal preemption. However, the Supremes are notoriously difficult to read in cases such as this, so follow this one closely.

Posted by Tom at 8:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Bill James is making the rounds

On top of this prior interview and article, the American Enterprise Institute interviews the baseball sabermetrician Bill James. A few excerpts:

TAE: Is Barry Bonds the best player of our era?

JAMES: By far.

TAE: Was Babe Ruth the finest player in the history of the majors?

JAMES: Yes. Mays may have been as good, Honus Wagner may have been as good, Bonds may be as good. But Ruth had more impact.

And another:

TAE: More American kids now play soccer than baseball. And on a Sunday afternoon in the middle of June you can, as I found last summer, go looking for baseball on TV and find everything but, from NFL Europe to women's golf. What, if anything, can be done to halt baseball's slide in popularity?

JAMES: I advocate a Constitutional amendment against playing soccer.

Seriously, the problem is that baseball is not a television game, and the television era has not been particularly good to baseball. To be fair, professional baseball tolerates an unconscionable amount of standing around and posturing, and this makes it less exciting than it ought to be and therefore less attractive to young people. I think there's a growing recognition of this, but the problem is that even when one recognizes the problem it's very hard to fix. People in baseball are working on it, however.

And on the issue of "team chemistry":

TAE: Should a team's racial composition ever be a factor when building a club, in terms of "chemistry"? The Florida Marlins reportedly signed Latin players quite consciously because they have a large Latin fan base.

JAMES: It's hard enough to make judgments about baseball players when you make them on the basis of: How fast does he run? How well does he throw? What's he like in the clubhouse? If you start building in irrelevant factors it makes the process not difficult but impossible.

Stated simply, Bill James is a national treasure.

Posted by Tom at 7:28 PM | Comments (0) | The Sports Economist for the link to Mr. Norris' article.

Posted by Tom at 6:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Mike Price, litigation machine

Because of NCAA sanctions, the University of Alabama football team cannot go to a post-season bowl game for awhile. However, that sanction sure does not stop former UA coach Mike Price from getting it on with the current UA president. Priceless.

Posted by Tom at 5:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

UTEP Coach Gillispie accepts A&M basketball job

Billy Gillispie, coach at the University of Texas-El Paso, will be introduced as the new Texas A&M basketball coach this afternoon. Gillispie, 44, is a native Texan who coached at four high schools and a junior college in Texas before becoming a college assistant coach at Baylor, Tulsa and Illinois. He took over the head coaching job at UTEP shortly before the start of the 2002-03 season, and the Miners went 6-24. This season, UTEP was 24-8 and advanced to the NCAA Tournament, which was the biggest turnaround in the nation. The Miners lost their first-round game to Maryland last week in a close game.

Gillispie takes over at A&M from Melvin Watkins, who resigned under pressure after a 7-21 season. In six years under Watkins, the Aggies were 60-112. The Aggies have not been to the NCAA Basketball Tournament since 1987.

Given A&M's alumni support and its proximity to the Houston metropolitan area, it is puzzling that the Ags have not been able to establish a decent basketball program. My sense is that Gillispie is a good hire for the reason that he has deep Texas recruiting roots and the Ags desperately need to establish sound Texas recruiting pipelines. However, Gillispie has his work cut out -- A&M basketball has become a coaching graveyard, and that reputation is very hard to change.

Posted by Tom at 2:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Like a good neighbor

This Chronicle article from yesterday reports on the deplorable grade the Port of Houston was given recently in a review released by the Natural Resources Defense Council, a nationwide environmental advocacy group. It was the lowest grade given to any of the nation's 10 largest ports. Here is a copy of the full report.

For as long as I can remember, the Port of Houston has had a lousy relationship with its neighbors in the eastern part of Harris County, and this report reflects one of the reasons why. "We are up against an opponent that not only has a bad local reputation but at this point also a bad national reputation," said Nancy Edmonson, mayor of Shoreacres. Public officials in Galena Park, another suburban community near the Port, have made similar public statements over the years.

Here's hoping that elected officials take notice of the mess that the Port of Houston has become and do something about it, like appointing some real reformers to the Port's Board. However, I will not hold my breath waiting for that to occur. As we have seen recently with several compliant corporate boards that have overseen disastrous judgment by management, it's easier to appoint friends and political hacks to these boards than people who will really roll up their sleeves and perform the hard work that is the duty of a board member.

Posted by Tom at 6:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

New York City announces ambitious stadium plan

This NY Times article indicates that New York City might finally have decided upon a viable deal to develop the long-awaited West Side football stadium.

Posted by Tom at 5:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Yeah, but we can take it to the hoop!

The NY Times reports that only four of the Sweet Sixteen teams remaining in the NCAA Basketball Tournament � Duke, Kansas, Vanderbilt and Xavier � have posted graduation rates of 50 percent or better for their players.

That's what you get when you mask minor league basketball with the veneer of intercollegiate athletics.

Posted by Tom at 5:04 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Will "The Alamo" be Eisner's Waterloo?

This NY Times article details the troubled development of Walt Disney Company's new movie, "The Alamo."

Although not mentioned in this article, I believe that the movie is based on the Stephen Harrigan's 2001 historical novel, "Gates of the Alamo," which is an enjoyable read. However, the best book on the Battle of the Alamo in the context of the Texas Revolution is "Texian Iliad," a 1996 masterpiece written by Stephen L. Hardin, a professor of history at Victoria College in southeast Texas.

Posted by Tom at 5:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The sad case of Jamie Olis

This NY Times article reports on the sad case of a former midlevel executive of Houston-based Dynegy, the energy company that attempted to merge with Enron and then called off the deal shortly before Enron filed bankruptcy in December, 2001. Dynegy subsequently went into its own tailspin that cost its former CEO his job, but has to date avoided bankruptcy.

On Thursday, Jamie Olis faces a federal probation department recommendation that he serve 24 to 30 years in prison for organizing a scheme to falsify Dynegy's books. Mr. Olis and two former associates at Dynegy were found guilty last year of devising a secret project to disguise a $300 million loan as cash flow. Mr. Olis, a 38-year-old with an infant daughter, declined to strike a plea bargain, choosing instead to take his chances at trial, where he elected not to testify. As noted in earlier posts here regarding the Martha Stewart trial, the strategy of a white collar defendant choosing not to testify during trial is a risky move. In this case, Mr. Olis' lawyers were unsuccessful in their defense of portraying Mr. Olis as a corporate soldier doing as he was told and blaming his Dynegy superiors for the scheme.

If U.S. District Judge Sim Lake agrees with the probation department's sentencing recommendation on Mr. Olis, it would be the most severe prison term for a business crime in recent memory. The two other Dynegy officials convicted of taking part in the scheme struck plea deals before trial giving them maximum sentences of five years. Mr. Olis's lawyers are seeking a sentence of 5 to 10 years, arguing both that he is not responsible for all of Dynegy's losses and also that he has no previous criminal record.

Mr. Olis never rose above a position of vice president for finance at Dynegy after serving as the senior director of tax planning. Unlike defendants in other higher-profile corporate fraud cases, he never amassed a fortune from his time at Dynegy. The most money he made at Dynegy in any year was a salary of $162,000 and a bonus of $110,000, in addition to selling Dynegy stock worth about $200,000.

You can bet that more than a few criminal defense attorneys for former Enron executives will be watching the result of Mr. Olis' sentencing closely.

Posted by Tom at 4:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

John Cornyn and Barney Frank debate (?) gay marriage

Texas senator John Cornyn and Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank spiced a Senate Judciary Committee hearing yesterday by getting into it on the issue of gay marriage.

For what it's worth, I am not sold on gay marriage, but conclusory statements such as those made by Senator Cornyn yesterday do little to advance the political debate over gay marriage. What is his basis for the statement that gay marriage will undermine the institution of marriage? Statistical evidence? Scientific evidence? Or is his statement based on religious opposition to gay marriage? I do not know the basis for Senator Cornyn's opposition to gay marriage, but the only way to have a productive political debate is to support one's pronouncement on the issue with a persuasive (or even non-persuasive, if that is the case) basis for such pronouncement.

This related story deals with an issue that has the divorce lawyers salivating.

Posted by Tom at 4:11 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Chronicle catching up on Shell story

The Chronicle leads with this Reuters News Service story today that Royal/Dutch Shell may face a Justice Department criminal investigation in connection with its oil and gas reserve writedowns over the past two months.

The Chronicle does not exactly have a scoop on this story. The Justice Department announced that it had opened inquiry on the matter on March 16.

Posted by Tom at 3:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 23, 2004

New Medicare projections

This NY Times article reports on the Medicare trustees' report today that Medicare will need to dip into its trust fund this year to pay increasing expenditures and that the program will become insolvent by 2019 unless changes are made in the program. The 2019 go-broke date for the Medicare trust fund is seven years sooner than what the trustees projected last year.

Here is a copy of the entire report.

The trustees report that Medicare's deteriorating financial condition is largely the result of the new Medicare prescription drug law that will increase costs by more than $500 billion over the next 10 years. The trustees also noted that projected lower tax receipts devoted to the program and higher expenditures for inpatient hospital care also are contributing to the growing rse than for the sixth infielder, Orlando Palmeiro was hauled in despite an uninspiring glove and a projected .240 EqA. Was it really that important to give him $750K instead of keeping Colin Porter or Henri Stanley around to play for the minimum? It seems impossible to believe, but given the insistence on re-upping guys like Ausmus and Vizcaino, it seems pretty clear that the front office is using an evaluation system even more peculiar than the A's defensive system.

In this related Chronicle story, Astros' owner Drayton McLane publicly denies the persistent local rumor that he is negotiating to sell the club to Houston restaurateur Tilman Fertitta, CEO of Landry's, Inc.

Posted by Tom at 9:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Methodist trial of lesbian pastor

My buddy J.D. Walt of Asbury Seminary passes along this NY Times article regarding the just concluded Methodist Church trial in which a jury of 13 Methodist clergy members found that a fellow minister did not violate Methodist church law by being in a lesbian relationship.

The prosecution had argued that the case for conviction was cut and dried, because the law of the Methodist church as set forth in the Book of Discipline has included a passage that says homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching." The prosecution called only one witness. On the other hand, the defense team presented over 20 witnesses, including several Methodist legal scholars, who argued that the Book of Discipline and the Bible contain unclear and contradictory passages about homosexual relationships.

Although it appears that the prosecution may have thrown in the towel on this case before it ever started (one witness? no rebuttal witnesses?), the outcome nevertheless raises an interesting question on the related issue of gay marriage. That is, if Christian churches are allowing their leadership to be involved in gay relationships (note that the Episcopalians recently endorsed a gay bishop), and assuming that those same churches are not ready to endorse gay marriage, then are these churches going to support civil (i.e., non-religious) unions for gay couples?

Posted by Tom at 9:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Allergies? Sinusitis? How to Tell the Difference

It's springtime in Houston. You need to know the difference.

Posted by Tom at 7:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

UH is hiring who?

The University of Houston will announce today that it hiring 58 year old, former University of Texas basketball coach Tom Penders as its new men's basketball coach.

This is one of the most puzzling coaching hires that I have seen in years, particularly for UH, which is famous for giving such coaching icons as Bill Yeoman, Guy V. Lewis and current baseball coach Rayner Noble their first head coaching jobs at a relatively young age and then sticking with them through thick and thin.

Penders was fired by the University of Texas in 1998, and UT couldn't have been happier getting rid of him despite the fact that Penders restored a winning tradition to UT's men's basketball program. UT released Penders when a scandal broke out over his coaching staffs' public release of a player's grades after the player decided to transfer to another school. Penders allegedly authorized the release of former UT player Luke Axtell's grades and then blamed it on others. After the ensuing scandal soured Penders' prospects at UT, Penders received a $900,000 going-away present and soon took the head coaching job at George Washington University, where he lasted two seasons before resigning amid revelations of players using his son's telephone account to make over $1,000 in telephone calls. Penders has recently been a color man on college basketball telecasts.

To give you an idea what type of fellow UH is hiring in Penders, one only needs to recall how Penders left his longtime assistant, Eddie Oran, who now sells cars in Bastrop, Texas, twisting in the wind when Penders left UT:

"If I had done anything illegal or wrong, you think they'd give me $900,000?" said Penders. "It's trumped up and bogus. I'm not going to say anything other than Eddie Oran has to live in Austin and sell cars."

Posted by Tom at 6:43 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Investment firm to buy U.S. Oncology

Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe, a New York-based leveraged buyout firm, announced Monday that it will pay $1.7 billion to acquire and take private Houston-based U.S. Oncology, a publicly-owned manager of cancer treatment centers across the country. U.S. Oncology treats approximately 15 percent of newly diagnosed cancer patients each year through a network of 875 physicians in 32 states.

Posted by Tom at 6:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Well, this is an interesting way to try for a mistrial

One defendant's method.

Posted by Tom at 6:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 22, 2004

Cubbies, it's going to be one of those years

The Astros' archrival in the NL Central -- the Chicago Cubs -- announced today that their star pitcher Mark Prior may need to start the season on the disabled list due to an Achilles tendon injury and could miss 1 or 2 starts. After starting his career with a 3.32 ERA/9 RSAA (i.e., "Runs Saved Against Average") in 19 starts in 2002, Prior had an excellent 2.43 ERA/42 RSAA in 30 starts. He has 2.74 career ERA, compared to his league average of 4.23, and 51 RSAA in 49 games. In short, he is a stud and is the Cubs' best pitcher.

Posted by Tom at 3:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Law Profs on Justice Scalia's recusal decision

This NY Times article has six law professors discussing Justice Scalia's decision not to recuse himself in the Sierra Club case. As one would expect from a half dozen academics, there is a substantial amount of disagreement.

Posted by Tom at 7:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1)

NFL and Union in negotiations over Clarett situation

The National Football League and the NFL Players Association have recently been involved in negotiations to insert language into their current Collective Bargaining Agreement that would require all draft-eligible players to be three years removed from their high school graduation. The proposed rule will not be agreed to in time to affect the draft status of former Ohio State tailback Maurice Clarett, USC receiver Mike Williams, or the six high school players who have entered next month's NFL draft. Rather, the proposed rule is designed to prevent future players who are not three years out of high school from entering the draft.

In my view, unless the NFL gives high school players the right to opt for professional football before being subject to the proposed three year rule in a manner similar to the current Major League Baseball three year rule, then it is likely to be struck down again. Earlier posts on the Clarett case may be viewed here and here.

Posted by Tom at 7:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Rodeo sets attendance record

The Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo announced a new attendance record was set this year as the Rodeo closed Sunday. If you missed my earlier post about the Houston cultural phenomenom known as "the Rodeo," you can read it here.

Posted by Tom at 6:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Forbes 500

This Chronicle article reports on the annual Forbes Top 500 business list..

Posted by Tom at 6:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Qualities of a good football coach

Houston Chronicle sportswriter Mickey Herskowitz passes along this story about those two NFL coaching icons, George Halas and Vince Lombardi:

One recalls the story of George Allen, who was hired off the staff of George Halas in Chicago to coach the Los Angeles Rams.

Halas was furious that the Rams failed to ask for his permission and threatened to take Allen to court. At a league meeting after the issue was resolved, Halas used the occasion to vent his anger at his former defensive coach.

"George Allen," Halas said, "is a man with no conscience. He is dishonest, deceptive, ruthless, consumed with his own ambition."

At that point, Vince Lombardi leaned over to the owner of the Rams and whispered, "Sounds to me like you've got yourself a helluva football coach."

Posted by Tom at 6:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 21, 2004

An evening with John Dowd regarding Pete Rose

In this interesting piece, Will Young relates his evening with John Dowd, the Washington, D.C. lawyer who is the author of the report for the Commissioner of Major League Baseball that concluded that Pete Rose had bet on baseball games while managing the Cincinnati Reds. Nothing earth shattering here, but interesting reading nonetheless. Mr. Dowd's opinion that Commissioner Selig is attempting to find a way to reinstate Rose is, if correct, highly troubling.

Posted by Tom at 12:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The intersection of drug policy and prison policy

This Brent Staples' NY Times Review of Books article that reviews "Life on the Outside, The Prison Odyssey of Elaine Bartlett," Jennifer Gonnerman's new book about how the government's criminalization of its drug policy has led to a large and growing portion of society that is chronically disenfranchised, at enormous societal cost. Ms. Gonnerman, who has wrote extensively about drug policy as a staff writer for the Village Voice, tells the story through the family of Elaine Bartlett, a young mother of four who received a sentence of 20 to life for her selling cocaine to an undercover cop in a motel near Albany, her first offense. As Ms. Gonnerman notes:

The United States is transforming itself into a nation of ex-convicts. This country imprisons people at 14 times the rate of Japan, eight times the rate of France and six times the rate of Canada. The American prison system disgorges 600,000 angry, unskilled people each year -- more than the populations of Boston, Milwaukee or Washington . . .

Ex-cons are marooned in the poor inner-city neighborhoods where legitimate jobs do not exist and the enterprises that led them to prison in the first place are ever present. These men and women are further cut off from the mainstream by sanctions that are largely invisible to those of us who have never been to prison. They are commonly denied the right to vote, parental rights, drivers' licenses, student loans and residency in public housing -- the only housing that marginal, jobless people can afford. The most severe sanctions are reserved for former drug offenders, who have been treated worse than murderers since the start of the so-called war on drugs. The Welfare Reform Act of 1996, for example, imposed a lifetime ban on food stamp and welfare eligibility for people convicted of even a single drug felony. The states can opt out of the prohibition, but where it remains intact it cannot be lifted even for ex-prisoners who live model, crime-free lives.
* * *
Mass imprisonment has not hindered the drug trade. Indeed, drugs are cheaper and more plentiful today than ever. In addition, many of the addicts who are held in jail for years at a cost of more than $20,000 per inmate per year could be more cheaply and effectively dealt with in treatment. What jumps out at you from ''Life on the Outside'' is the extent to which imprisonment has been normalized, not just for adults from poor communities but for children who visit their parents in prison. Spending holidays and birthdays behind bars for years on end, these children come to think of prison as a natural next step in the process of growing up.

Although both major political parties share blame for failing to address America's drug policy in a responsible manner, the Bush Administration's failure in this area -- coupled with its failure to address such major issues as health care finance reform, income tax reform, and environmental policy reform -- provides a solid basis for the Democrats to attack the Bush Administration in the upcoming election. Although the Bush Administration has performed admirably under difficult circumstances in prosecuting the war against Islamic fascists, its performance on domestic issues such as those mentioned above has been abysmal. If President Bush loses the election this November, that lack of leadership on those key issues will likely be the reason why.

Posted by Tom at 11:38 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Rethinking how best to prevent heart attacks

This NY Times article reports on new studies that increasingly indicate that coronary bypass opearations and angioplasty procedures are not as effective in preventing heart attacks in high risk patients than non-invasive treatments such as giving up smoking and taking drugs to control blood pressure, reduce cholesterol levels, and prevent blood clotting. The research reflects that that just one of those treatments -- lowering cholesterol to what guidelines suggest -- can reduce the risk of heart attack by a third. However, only 20% of heart patients follow that approach. As the Times article notes:

But, researchers say, most heart attacks do not occur because an artery is narrowed by plaque. Instead, they say, heart attacks occur when an area of plaque bursts, a clot forms over the area and blood flow is abruptly blocked. In 75 to 80 percent of cases, the plaque that erupts was not obstructing an artery and would not be stented or bypassed. The dangerous plaque is soft and fragile, produces no symptoms and would not be seen as an obstruction to blood flow.

That is why, heart experts say, so many heart attacks are unexpected � a person will be out jogging one day, feeling fine, and struck with a heart attack the next. If a narrowed artery were the culprit, exercise would have caused severe chest pain.

Heart patients may have hundreds of vulnerable plaques, so preventing heart attacks means going after all their arteries, not one narrowed section, by attacking the disease itself. That is what happens when patients take drugs to aggressively lower their cholesterol levels, to get their blood pressure under control and to prevent blood clots.

Yet, researchers say, old notions persist.

"There is just this embedded belief that fixing an artery is a good thing," said Dr. Eric Topol, an interventional cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

Posted by Tom at 7:42 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

March 20, 2004

Q&A with Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is accepting email questions on his new website and answering them when he has the time. The following is an insightful answer to one of the current questions:

Question: The wealth and power that Rome accumulated within a couple of generations, it seems, led to two civil wars and the destruction of the Republic. I feel as though our political situation is becoming as partisan and could very well end in some type of civil strife within another generation. Am I way off base here?

Hanson: I can�t quite adjudicate all your comparisons, but I share your worry about polarization and think this next campaign will be the nastiest in some time. I didn�t really dislike personally Bill Clinton, although I felt he weakened the United States abroad. But there were many on the Right who did�and gave him no fair hearing, especially about his commendable though belated attack on Milosevic. Yet, their animus has been trumped by Bush-haters. And we are now in a spiral whose logical end is sort of frightening.

Posted by Tom at 7:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

David Warren: One Year Later

David Warren's latest is "One Year Later."

Posted by Tom at 12:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Great article on the Martha Stewart saga

One of the most important -- yet most difficult -- things for an attorney to do in private practice is to advise a valuable client not to do something that the client really wants to do. As Jeffrey Toobin brilliantly relates in this New Yorker article on the downfall and trial of Martha Stewart, that dilemma was one of the primary reasons that Ms. Stewart's case went awry. Mr. Toobin details the questionable representation that Ms. Stewart received from Wachtell Lipton during, and in preparation for, her initial interview with the Justice Department, and the disastrous effects of her co-defendant attorney's cross-examination of the prosecution's main witness during trial:

On the scale of highly publicized misdeeds in the past decade, Stewart's trade must rank among the most trivial. She netted only about fifty thousand dollars more on the deal than if she'd held the stock for another day, and, as she told me, her ImClone holding constituted .03 per cent of her assets. It seems almost implausible that such a misstep could send Stewart to prison and lead her company to ruin, and that this happened with the help of the best and most loyal people that money could buy.

* * *
On February 4th, . . . [Wachtell Lipton partner John] Savarese and an inexperienced associate at Wachtell, Lipton accompanied Stewart to her interview at the U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan. Confident that she could truthfully refute the charge that Waksal himself had tipped her, Stewart told investigators the fabricated story about the pre-existing agreement to sell ImClone at sixty. Worse, Savarese allowed a second interrogation, on April 10th, during which Stewart again lied about the sixty-dollar agreement and asserted, falsely, that she couldn't remember whether she was told on December 27th that the Waksals were selling. To be sure, it was Stewart, not her lawyer, who lied to the investigators, but Savarese had allowed his client to take an immense legal risk

* * *
Through the early part of the trial, Peter Bacanovic's lawyers generally deferred to Morvillo, much as their client did to Stewart. Bacanovic's lead lawyer, Richard Strassberg, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney in Manhattan, who is now with the firm of Goodwin Procter, presented Bacanovic's opening statement, but he shared substantial responsibility for the defense with David Apfel, a Boston-based partner at the firm. Apfel, who is fifty-one, had a distinguished career as a federal prosecutor in Massachusetts, where in 1997 he won the John Marshall Award, the Justice Department's highest award for trial work. In the late nineties, he turned to private practice, and, at the lectern on February 4th, he proceeded to give life to the courtroom adage that the best prosecutors do not always make the best defense lawyers.

Apfel organized his notes, stared down Faneuil on the witness stand, and snarled at him, "Mr. Faneuil, let's get a few things straight right away."

Thus began a catastrophically ineffective cross-examination. . .

I continue to agree with Professor Bainbridge that prosecutorial discretion should have mitigated against a prosecution of Ms. Stewart in this case. But as this article points out, Ms. Stewart and her advisers' failure to address her actions in selling the ImClone stock in a forthright and honest manner bears much of the responsibility for Martha's demise.

Thanks to Evan Shaeffer for the link to the New Yorker article.

Posted by Tom at 10:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Latest Coup

The New York Times has its faults, but it continues to be one of the best sources of international news reporting. Today, Times foreign correspondence Michael Wines writes this incredible story about the latest coup attempt in Equitorial Guinea, the poor Western African country that has been the site of an oil and gas drilling boom over the past decade. The entire story is the stuff from which entertaining movies are made, and the following will give you a flavor for it:

This malarial West African dictatorship quashed another coup attempt this month, which is like saying the corner 7-Eleven served up another Slurpee. Quashed coups (five since 1996) are a political staple here, so routine that some say the government stages and then quashes them to burnish its image of invincibility.

But the coup this month was different. Nobody could make this coup up.

The coup attempt of 2004 features a dysfunctional ruling family, a Lamborghini-driving, rap-music-producing heir apparent and a bitter political opponent in exile who insists that Equatorial Guinea is run by a gonad-eating cannibal. It is said to involve a Lebanese front company, a British financier, an opposition figure living in exile in Spain and some 80 mercenaries from South Africa, Germany, Armenia and Kazakhstan.

With such a polyglot cast, this whodunit has become almost a parlor game among Africa watchers. Not since Christmas 1975, when Moroccan palace guards shot 150 suspected plotters in the city soccer stadium to a band's rendition of "Those Were the Days, My Friend" has a botched takeover set tongues wagging so briskly.
* * *
. . . [t]oppling Equatorial Guinea's government would be no mean feat, because removing the president would barely scratch the surface. The military is peppered with Mr. Obiang's cousins and nephews. One of his sons is the natural resources minister. A brother-in-law is ambassador to Washington.

A brother, Armengol Ondo Nguema, is a top internal security official and, according to a 1999 State Department report, a torturer whose minions urinated on their victims, sliced their ears and rubbed oil on their bodies to lure stinging ants.

Finally, a second son, Teodoro Nguemo Obiang, is the infrastructure minister and his father's anointed successor. To the dismay of some relatives, he also is a rap music entrepreneur and bon vivant, fond of Lamborghinis and long trips to Hollywood and Rio de Janeiro, who shows few signs of following his father's iron-fisted tradition.
* * *
The entire plot, he said, was hatched by Severo Moto, an Equatorial Guinean opposition figure and longtime fomenter of quashed coups who lives in exile in Madrid. Mr. Moto's coup was said to be financed by $5 million from a British businessman, washed through a front company in Lebanon.

Mr. Moto makes no secret of his hatred of President Obiang: on Spanish radio this month, he called him a demon who "systematically eats his political rivals."

"He has just devoured a police commissioner. I say `devoured,' as this commissioner was buried without his testicles and brain," he said, adding that Mr. Obiang hungered for his body parts as well.

"We are in the hands of a cannibal," he warned.

Posted by Tom at 9:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 19, 2004

Putting with Tiger Woods

Tiger Woods is the best golfer in the world, has won 40 professional golf tournaments, and is worth several hundred million. Chris Riley is one of the best putters in professional golf, but has won only once on the PGA Tour and is worth several hundred thousand. Riley was asked this week about his bets with Tiger during their putting contests that they often engage in before rounds:

"When me and Tiger putt, I say, 'How much we putting for?' Tiger says, 'Whatever makes you nervous.' So, that's usually like $5.''

And when Tiger Woods says "whatever makes you nervous," he means whatever.

Thanks to Mr. Poon for the link to Riley's quote.

Posted by Tom at 9:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Can't say that I ever really thought about that question

Why is Fleetwood Mac the least influential great band of all time?

Posted by Tom at 8:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Health Care Market

Arnold Kling at EconoLog carries on an interesting discussion of health care finance with Steve Verdon in which Arnold makes the following common sense observation:

A free-market but compassionate health care system would provide vouchers for catastrophic insurance coverage, but eliminate all other subsidies, including the tax-advantages for employer-provided health insurance.

Posted by Tom at 8:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Spring, anyone?

I know more than a few lawyers from the Midwest and Northeast who relate to this week's Stu's View cartoon:

Posted by Tom at 1:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Opinion continuing freeze on Skilling assets

Following on this post from yesterday, here is U.S. District Judge Sim Lake's opinion continuing the freeze on former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling's assets pending further order of the Court in Skilling's criminal case. Essentially, Judge Lake rules that the freezing of assets does not amount to a forfeiture, which can only be done after a conviction. Moreover, Judge Lake reasons that Mr. Skilling is free to make a motion that the frozen assets are not the ill-gotten gains of his alleged wrongdoing and are necessary to pay his defense and living expenses.

Posted by Tom at 10:09 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

VDH on the History of Democracy

Victor Davis Hanson's latest National Review Online op-ed is online. As usual, the entire piece is well worth reading, and Professor Davis concludes with the following observation:

Indeed, we are in one of the rare periods of fundamental transformation in world history � as the United States has pledged its blood and treasure in both a dangerous and daring attempt to bring the Middle East, kicking and screaming, into the family of democratic nations and free societies. So while American soldiers fight, build, patrol, and sometimes die in Iraq and Afghanistan, the world at large � the Saudi royal family, President Musharraf, Mr. Khaddafi, the mullahs in Iran, the young Assad, the kleptocracy on the West Bank, and the weak and triangulating Europeans � wonders whether the strong horse will prove to be the murderous bin Laden and his Arab romance of a new Dark Age, or George Bush's idea of a free and democratic Middle East.

Posted by Tom at 9:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Top Ten signs your Supreme Court Justice is on the take

From last night's show, David Letterman's Top Ten Signs that Your Supreme Court Justice Is On The Take:

10. Begins every case with, "We'll start the bribing at ten thousand."

9. His written opinions always have several mentions of the thirst-quenching taste of Mountain Dew.

8. Regularly convenes court at the dog track.

7. Asks, "Does either attorney plan on inviting me on any hunting trips?"

6. For a Supreme Court Justice he certainly is mentioned on "The Sopranos" a lot.

5. All the bling bling.

4. His last article in the "Law Journal" was about finding the right fence for your stolen goods.

3. When you have a meeting with him in chambers, frisks you for a wire.

2. He's on the Forbes 500 List between Bill Gates and Oprah.

1. Already declared Bush the winner of the November election.

Which reminds me of this old trial lawyer joke:

Taking his seat in his chambers, the judge faced the opposing lawyers.

"So," said the judge. "Each of you has presented me with a bribe."

Both lawyers squirmed uncomfortably.

"You, attorney Mohanty, gave me $50,000," observed the judge. "And you, attorney Venkat, gave me $60,000."

The judge reached into his pocket, pulled out $10,000, and handed it to attorney Venkat.

"Now that I'm returning $10,000 to attorney Venkat," exclaimed the judge proudly, "I'm going to decide this case solely on its merits!"

Posted by Tom at 9:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

11th Circuit excludes expert accountant's lost profits testimony

This Eleventh Circuit decision affirmed the trial court's exclusion of an accountant's testimony on lost profits, which is a common way in which business plaintiff's attempt to prove economic damages. In this particular case, the accountant's estimates were based gross sales and gross profits without any deduction for expenses (one wonders how he could have testified as to profits without deducting expenses?). At any rate, the trial court and the 11th Circuit ruled that the accountant's opinion was inconsistent with the law of lost profits under applicable Georgia law and that it relied on methods not generally accepted in the accounting community. Interestingly, the 11th Circuit upheld the trial court's exclusion of the testimony even though the defendant's Daubert objection was not raised until trial. Waiting until trial to raise a Daubert objection is risky and generally not a recommended strategy.

Posted by Tom at 8:41 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Cubs were lucky (or is Jimy Williams chronically unlucky?)

Allen St. John in this WSJ ($) article today analyzes Major League Baseball's top teams from last season with baseball statistician Bill James's Pythagorean Theory, which concluded that a team's run differential (runs scored vs. runs allowed) correlates closely with its winning percentage. Unfortunately, the 162 game MLB schedule does not provide enough games to even out all the bad bounces and bloop singles (i.e., bad luck). So, Mr. St. John calculates each team's Pythagorean winning percentage -- which largely eliminates the effects of luck -- by taking the square of the total runs they score in a season and dividing it by the sum of runs scored squared and runs allowed squared. Some of his observations:

Luck, it turns out, was a big factor in pennant races last year. In the world of P-Wins, four playoff teams -- including the World Champions -- would have watched October baseball from their Barcaloungers. The American League Central would have been taken by the White Sox (who had three fewer wins than their P-Win total would indicate, resulting in a P-Win differential of -3), not the Twins (whose real wins topped their P-Win total by five -- a differential of +5). The Mariners (-6) should have edged the As (+1) in the AL West. In the National League, the Phillies (-5) should have blown past the Marlins (+3) for the wild card. In the NL Central, the Cubs (+2) would have finished third, behind the Astros (-8) and Cardinals (-4).

This year, it's a new ballgame. That's because of a corollary to Mr. James's theory -- luck evens out. Teams that fall short of their P-Win total one season tend to bounce back the next year. Teams that exceed their P-Win total often slip back the following summer

What do P-Wins tell us about the coming season? Looking past the personnel changes, the numbers still tell an interesting story. In the AL East, the margin between the Yankees (+4) and the Red Sox (0) should wither. The Twins should find the White Sox in hot pursuit. In the NL West, Seattle seems primed for a playoff run, likely at Oakland's expense. And in the NL East, look for the gap between the Braves (+4) and Phillies to get very small.

The NL Central poses an interesting problem. While most of the P-Win differential is due to luck, that isn't the entire story. Cubs manager Dusty Baker has a career P-Diff of +18, i.e. his teams have won 18 more games than the numbers would suggest. Astros skipper Jimy Williams has a career P-Diff of -24, with just one season in which his team exceeded expectations. The NL Central this year may prove Branch Rickey's adage: Sometimes luck is the residue of design.

Meanwhile, this interesting MLB.com article describes how many MLB clubs are finally adapting sabermetrician principles to evaluation of baseball players.

Posted by Tom at 7:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Seitel reorganization plan confirmed

Houston-based geophysical seismic company Seitel, Inc. obtained Bankruptcy Court confirmation of its chapter 11 reorganization plan in Delaware yesterday. Seitel filed a chapter 11 case last year after a change in accounting rules relating to valuation of its library of geophysical seismic resulted in a substantial writedown in the value of that library, which is the company's main asset. The case was also spiced by some colorful allegations regarding the company's former CEO, and Warren Buffet's failed takeover attempt during the chapter 11 case.

Posted by Tom at 6:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Memorable Zoo trip

It must have been one wild zoo trip for those at the Dallas Zoo yesterday.

Posted by Tom at 6:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 18, 2004

Skilling assets remain frozen

U.S. District Judge Sim Lake refused today to lift a freeze order that the Enron Task Force had obtained on $55 million of former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling's assets pending further order of Judge Lake. I will be interested to review Judge Lake's opinion on this issue. Given the government's sledgehammer approach to the criminal case against Skilling, freezing his new worth while he defends himself appears to be an unfair restriction. On the other hand, Judge Lake is a very fair judge, so I expect good reasoning in this opinion. I will post it when I get a copy.

Posted by Tom at 9:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Victor Davis Hanson on Spain, Europe, America and the Middle East

FrontpagMag.com interviews the always insightful Victor Davis Hanson regarding the recent events in Spain and the Middle East, and how Americans and Europeans have reacted to them. Thanks to Occam's Toothbrush for the link. The entire interview is a must read, but one sentence about what could defeat America stands out:

I am talking about a secular religion of anti-Americanism brought on by our very success that allows such utopianism and cheap caring-and it does weaken and tire our efforts to win this war.

Posted by Tom at 5:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

How low will Royal Dutch/Shell go?

In this stunning announcement, Royal Dutch/Shell today downgraded 250 million barrels in reserves to less certain reserve categories and decided not to book 220 million barrels that it had earlier classified as reserves. Although small in comparison to Royal Dutch/Shell's earlier writedown, the timing of this latest reserve writedown is certain to increase scrutiny of the company's management practices.

As noted here and here, Royal Dutch/Shell is already the subject of Justice Department and SEC investigations regarding its earlier reserve writedown.

Posted by Tom at 4:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Who is Ken Venturi?

This post from awhile back addressed the dust-up that has occurred between Arnold Palmer and Ken Venturi over Venturi's recent allegation in his new book that Arnie had broken a rule (might we say, cheated?) on the 12th hole of Augusta National on his way to beating Venturi to win his first Masters Golf Tournament in 1958.

Well, Arnie's Tour event -- the Bay Hill Invitational -- is this week. And, as you might expect, a reporter asked Arnie during his annual pre-tournament interview about Venturi's allegations. The King's response was classic:

Reporter: "Mr. Palmer, what is your reaction to the issue at Augusta raised in Ken Venturi's new book?"

The King: "I don't know what book you're talking about. I don't know a thing about it. I really don't, and I'm not really too interested. That's my comment. Next question."

Posted by Tom at 11:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Justice Scalia refuses to recuse himself

Here is Justice Scalia's opinion refusing to recuse himself in the Supreme Court case involving his hunting buddy, Vice-President Cheney. Here is the Sierra Club's motion to recuse that prompted Justice Scalia's opinion.

Posted by Tom at 10:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The poor health of Russians

Tyler Cowan over at Marginal Revolutions has this interesting post about the Russian health care system, which has been in the news because of recent reports regarding the decreasing life expectancy of Russian men. Tyler's post contains several good links and solid analysis of the reasons for this crisis in Russian health care.

Posted by Tom at 10:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Medicare prescription drug controversy intensifies

The Bush Admininistration's conduct in promoting the Medicare prescription drug legislation last year is coming under increasing scrutiny. Already of dubious financial merit, this NY Times article reports on the opening of a House inquiry into bribery allegations that are based on a Republican congressman's public comments made immediately following the close vote last year over the controversial bill.

In related news, this WSJ ($) article and this NY Times article report on the controversy swirling around Richard Foster, Medicare's chief actuary. Mr. Foster was warned last year that he could be accused of "insubordination" if he shared information with Congress about the White House-backed prescription-drug bill without the approval of his politically appointed superiors, according to e-mails from the top aide to Thomas Scully, who was then the Bush Administration's administrator for the health-care program. A WSJ copy of the email can be reviewed here. The gist of the story is that Mr. Foster was pressured to reduce the estimated ten year cost of the Medicare prescription drug program by about 30% in order to make it more politically palatable. While Republican leaders say the allegations are overblown, no one doubts that release of the higher cost estimates last fall would have probably killed the prescription drug bill, which only passed by one vote after hours of arm-twisting in the House in November.

Again, my sense is that the Bush Administration's handling of health care finance issues is a major, and largely underappreciated (at least by administration officials), political problem for the administration in the upcoming election.

Posted by Tom at 8:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

UAL bankruptcy - Will it ever end?

This NY Times article and this WSJ ($) article report on the postponement of confirmation and consummation of United Airlines' reorganization plan in its long pending chapter 11 case. UAL has been operating under chapter 11 since December, 2002, and it's exit financing and debtor-in-possession financing commitments expire on June 30. Although UAL is probably too big for its institutional creditors simply to give up on it, this is clearly a business that is in trouble, and no sure bet to make it even after emerging from chapter 11.

A related NY Times story reports on the daunting problems confronting UAL competitor, American Airlines.

Posted by Tom at 7:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Shelby Steele on gay marriage

Hoover Institute fellow Shelby Steele writes this Wall Street Journal op-ed in which he criticizes the notion that the gay marriage is a civil rights issue analogous to that of the struggle to end racial segregation in America. Mr. Steele, who favors civil unions for gay couples, nevertheless does not favor gay marriage. The entire op-ed is well worth reading, and here are a few of Mr. Steele's poignant observations:

But gay marriage is simply not a civil rights issue. It is not a struggle for freedom. It is a struggle of already free people for complete social acceptance and the sense of normalcy that follows thereof -- a struggle for the eradication of the homosexual stigma. Marriage is a goal because, once open to gays, it would establish the fundamental innocuousness of homosexuality itself. Marriage can say like nothing else that sexual orientation is an utterly neutral human characteristic, like eye-color. Thus, it can go far in diffusing the homosexual stigma.

In the gay marriage movement, marriage is more a means than an end, a weapon against stigma. That the movement talks very little about the actual institution of marriage suggests that it is driven more by this longing to normalize homosexuality itself than by something compelling in marriage. . .

But marriage is only one means to innocuousness. The civil rights framework is another. To say that gay marriage is a civil rights issue is to imply that homosexuality is the same sort of human difference as race. And even geneticists now accept that race is so superficial a human difference as to be nothing more than a "social construct." In other words, racial difference has been made officially innocuous in our culture, and its power to stigmatize has been greatly reduced. Evidence of this is seen in the steady, yet unremarked, rise in interracial marriage rates for all of our races. So if gay marriage, like race, is about civil rights, then homosexuality is a human difference every bit as innocuous. Thus, America should treat homosexuality like it treats race and give gays the "right" to marry as it once gave blacks the right to vote.
* * *
The civil rights movement argued that it was precisely the utter innocuousness of racial difference that made segregation an injustice. Racism was evil because it projected a profound difference where there was none -- white supremacy, black inferiority -- for the sole purpose of exploiting blacks. But there is a profound difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. In the former, sexual and romantic desire is focused on the same sex, in the latter on the opposite sex. Natural procreation is possible only for heterosexuals, a fact of nature that obligates their sexuality to no less a responsibility than the perpetuation of the species. Unlike racial difference, these two sexual orientations are profoundly -- not innocuously -- different. Racism projects a false difference in order to exploit. Homophobia is a reactive prejudice against a true and firm difference that already exists.

Institutions that arise to accommodate these two sexual orientations can never be exactly the same. Across time and cultures, marriage has been a heterosexual institution grounded in the procreative function and the responsibilities of parenthood -- this more than in either love or adult fulfillment. Marriage is simply the arrangement by which humans perpetuate the species, whether or not they find fulfillment in it.

The true problem with gay marriage is that it consigns gays to a life of mimicry and pathos. It shoehorns them into an institution that does not reflect the best possibilities of their own sexual orientation. Gay love is freed from the procreative burden. It has no natural function beyond adult fulfillment in love. If this is a disadvantage when children are desired, it is likely an advantage when they are not -- which is more often the case. In any case, gays can never be more than pretenders to an institution so utterly grounded in procreation. And dressing gay marriage in a suit of civil rights only consigns gays to yet another kind of mimicry. Stigma, not segregation, is the problem gays face. But insisting on a civil rights framework only leads gays into protest. But will protest affect stigma? Is "gay lovers as niggers" convincing? Protest is trying to hit the baseball with the glove.

The problem with so much mimicry is that it keeps gays from evolving institutions and rituals that reflect the true nature of homosexuality. Assuming, as I do, that gays should have the option of civil unions that afford them the legal prerogatives of marriage, isn't it more important after that to allow quiet self-acceptance to lead the way to authentic institutions?

The stigmatization of homosexuals is wrong and makes no contribution to the moral health of our society. I was never worried for my children because they grew up knowing a gay couple that lived across the street, or because several family friends were gay. They learned early what we all know: that homosexuality is as permanent a feature of the human condition as heterosexuality. Nothing is gained in denying this. But neither should we deny that the two are inherently different. The gay marriage movement denies this difference in order to borrow "normalcy" from marriage. Thus, it is a movement born more of self-denial than self-acceptance, as if on some level it agrees with those who see gays as abnormal.

Meanwhile, in this Atlantic Monthly piece, Jonathon Rauch argues that principles of American federalism call for the gay marriage issue to be determined on a state-by-state basis.

Posted by Tom at 7:44 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

GOP, think this one over again

This Chronicle story reports on the comments of Texas GOP chairperson Tina Benkiser's statement Wednesday that Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle's (a Democrat) failure to investigate former Democratic Attorney General Dan Morales proves that Mr. Earle's current investigation into Republican House race financing is politically motivated. Earlier posts on this investigation can be reviewed here.

However, there is one big problem with Ms. Benkiser's allegation: Mr. Earle deferred to the Justice Department in Mr. Morales's case, which investigated, indicted, and convicted Mr. Morales.

This earlier post criticized the Texas Democratic Party chairperson's comments regarding Governor Perry. These statements by the GOP chairperson are just as bad. I know several Republican prosecutors in Texas, and they all have high regard for Mr. Earle. Ms. Benkiser should have checked with them first before making her disingenuous public statement.

Posted by Tom at 7:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The cost of Skilling's defense

The Chronicle leads with a misleading headline today regarding the $23 million that former Enron CEO and COO Jeff Skilling has set aside to pay the cost of his defense in Enron-related matters. The Chronicle article suggests that the $23 million is absurdly high, which it is not. Mr. Skilling is the subject of a 35 count criminal indictment that could lead to effectively a life prison sentence if he is convicted. Moreover, Mr. Skilling is a defendant in dozens of civil cases arising from the ashes of Enron. The review of documents alone relating to his criminal case is a monumental task. And to make matters more complicated, the prosecution in Mr. Skilling's criminal case is attempting to constrict Mr. Skilling's ability to pay his defense team.

$23 million may be extraordinarily high defense costs, but Enron is an extraordinary case. This is an example of the Chronicle leading with a story where there really is not one. The Chronicle would be much better served by addressing the Enron Task Force's highly troubling "sledgehammer" approach to prosecuting former Enron insiders, in which the prosecution files so many duplicative criminal counts against the defendant that the defendant has to risk what amounts to a life prison sentence in order to defend himself. That approach raises important issues of fairness and due process that the media covering the Enron prosecutions have ignored to date.

Posted by Tom at 6:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 17, 2004

UT Prof and NRO: Things are not always as they appear

Earlier today, I blogged this post about this National Review Online op-ed by Hunter Baker, who is described in the preface of the article as a "Texas freelance writer." Mr. Baker's article is highly critical of UT Law Professor, Brian Leiter, for Professor Leiter's earlier criticism of the student author of a Harvard Law Review note that was complimentary of Baylor philosophy professor Francis Beckwith's new book, "Law, Darwinism, & Public Education." Professor Leiter subscribes to Darwin's Theory of Evolution, while Professor Beckwith is as proponent of what is known as the "Intelligent Design Theory," which is an outgrowth of creationism.

At any rate, my earlier blog was critical of Professor Leiter, not so much because of his views on evolution, which he presents very well. Rather, I was critical of the Professor's accusation that the student author of the Harvard Law Review note had engaged in academic fraud, which I did not think was clearly reflected by the note.

Well, the student reviewer may be pristine as driven snow, but Mr. Baker -- the author of the National Review Online piece -- is not. Turns out that Mr. Baker is a graduate student of Baylor Professor Beckwith! And to make matters worse, Mr. Baker did not bother to disclose his close association with Professor Beckwith in his NRO article.

In the last paragraph of his NRO article, Mr. Baker suggests that Professor Leiter owes the student author of the Harvard Law Review note an apology. I initially agreed with that sentiment. However, now I apologize to Professor Leiter for my earlier post, and suggest to Mr. Baker that he owes him one, too.

Posted by Tom at 5:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

It must be Bill James week

Following on this recent post, this MLB.com piece provides more background on Bill James, the original sabermetrician and the pioneer of statistical analysis of baseball. As noted in this prior post, the best current book published annually about baseball is the direct result of Mr. James' statistical analysis of baseball.

Posted by Tom at 11:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

10:23 AM |

As I write this, KPMG-Belgium has not decided how to respond to the First Circuit's decision. However, non-compliance could result in severe sanctions, such as entry of judgment or a fine. This will be an interesting case to follow.

Thanks to the 10b-5 Daily blog for the pointer to this case.

Posted by Tom at 10:05 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

UT Professor criticizes Harvard Law Review

Brian Leiter is the Joseph D. Jamail Centennial Chair in Law, Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Law & Philosophy Program at the University of Texas at Austin. Professor Leiter advocates a Darwinian materialist vision of the world from his weblog, The Leiter Reports. Professor Leiter is also the author of The Philosophical Gourmet Report, which is a respected ranking of graduate philosophy programs in academia.

Hunter Baker reports in this NRO article, Professor Leiter recently criticized Harvard Law Review and Harvard law student Lawrence VanDyke for giving Baylor professor Francis Beckwith's new book, "Law, Darwinism, & Public Education," a positive review in the January 2004 issue of the Harvard Law Review. In the following passage, Professor Leiter accuses Mr. VanDyke of "scholarly fraud", which Mr. Baker reasonably interprets as an indictment if the student reviewer were ever to seek an academic position after finishing his education at Harvard: