Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

Right now, Brett Favre is probably the only man in the world that is ‘readjusting’ his positions more often than Barak Obama. Every day it’s a new story or excuse on why Brett decided to hang it up or why he thinks he should play again.

My personal opinion on the issue is Brett Favre should not be wearing a Packer jersey come September, not because his asking for release makes him a traitor, or that he’s throwing Packer Nation under the bus, but because it’s time for a the team to move in a new direction, which should continue to focus on youth. Brett Favre is now a distraction to the team and is going to cause more harm than good to the organization. Though I would prefer a trade, I think that is impossible and his unconditional release is the best thing for both parties. Brett can’t be traded because he’s owed $39 million on the last three years of his contract and there aren’t a whole lot of teams out there that Favre would want to go to (a.k.a. a Super Bowl contender) where he would start and could afford him. However, if the Packers could trade #4, I don’t think it would be too hard to get a second or third round pick for him.

The last thing on the Packers execs mind should be to allow Brett to be welcomed back with open arms, since the Packers have allowed Brett to become the single biggest distraction in the NFL. Yes, he’s a bigger distraction that T.O. and Randy Moss… probably combined. If the team decides to bring him back, they’ll be faced with a quarterback that will probably quit on the team mid-season if the team starts off 2-5. They’ve invested a lot of time in Aaron Rodgers and its evident that that the team is committed to having Rodgers be the starting quarterback. I’m not saying he’ll be able to lead the team like Brett, I’ll reserve that honor for Brian Brohm, but it’s time to move in a new direction, if for nothing more than the truth that comeback or not, Brett is at the end of his career. Ted Thompson is the type of person that values youth in an organization and the last thing the team needs is a 38 year old Brett Favre, that can’t make up his mind to play or not, to take away snaps from a younger player that deserves a shot. If the Packer brass is stupid enough to bring back Favre this season, all of Packer Nation will have to go through this same process again next off season and the process will drag itself our further, while other capable quarterbacks are forced to wait.

Am I the only one that remembers when Brett slapped Javon Walker around for not honoring his contract and threatening to hold on and demanding to be traded? Three years later Brett becomes the whiney boy that isn’t having fun so he wants to take his ball and go elsewhere. Well I’m sure Javon needs someone to go to the LA clubs with now.

Many other quarterbacks have tried to revive their diminishing careers after the teams that they made their careers established they did not want them. Joe Montana went to Kansas City, Warren Moon had to go through Seattle and Kansas City before he knew to hang it up, Joe Namath went to the Los Angeles Rams to die, and even Johnny Unitas finished his career off in San Diego. Brett should probably take a page out of the books of these quarterbacks and realize that the sun is setting on his career and probably hang it up before he embarrasses himself. But if he doesn’t , I’m sure the Bills, Dolphins or Raiders could want him.

Turning to fans that want Brett back, I think most of them are fools. Holding rallies like the one in West Allis are a complete waste of time and are just silly. The AP did an informal poll on Brett’s return.

Here’s Brett’s interview from On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, in case you missed it last night. I got a few questions on why he would go on Greta instead of a sports station, but Greta is an undying Packer fan from Appleton.

Rumor has it that in tonight’s interview Brett will be trashing Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy.

I ate here once…ONCE. It was an unfortunate mistake that I can still remember. The orange chicken was near deadly. I didn’t even get through the whole thing before I realized the gravity of my mistake. The fact that the orange chicken close to what I imagine a cat tastes like was too much to bare. I think I will have a war like flashback if I keep thinking about it felt like my body was filled with fiberglass insulation… oh the humanity.

Anyways yeah this place isn’t a beacon of cleanliness either.

• There is an accumulation of grease on the filters. Hood filters must be cleaned as often as necessary to prevent the accumulation of grease.
• There are several missing and damaged ceiling tiles in the kitchen and dinning areas. There is some water leaking from the roof. Repair the roof to stop the leaking and replace all damaged and missing ceiling tiles. Do not store or prepare any food under these areas until repaired.

Clean the floors in the kitchen, especially under the equipment on the cook line—much grease accumulation.
• The cooler doors, the scoops used in the flour bins, and the large white bins (used to hold flour, sugar and rice) are dirty with old food debris and need to be cleaned. Also repair the seal on the 2 door upright cooler as it has come away from the door.
• There was no bucket of sanitizer set up anywhere in the kitchen area. Dirty wiping cloths were sitting out on prep tables. Properly set up and maintain sanitize buckets at food prep stations to the proper concentration. Keep the wiping cloths in the buckets in between uses.
• Bean sprouts, cooked chicken and other potentially hazardous foods are being left out on the counters by the cook line. Sprouts were found at 55 degrees and chicken at 58. All potentially hazardous foods must be kept at 41 degrees or below for cold holding. Do not allow food to sit out on counters.
• Cooked mushrooms were found at 81 degrees on the hot hold table in the kitchen. Also there was a large batch of cooked rice sitting on the counter at 118 degrees. All potentially hazardous foods being hot held must remain at 135 degrees or more.
• There is no date marking being done. All ready to eat potentially hazardous foods that are prepared on site must be marked with a 7 day use by date when held for more than 24 hours.
• There were many rat droppings in front of the walk in cooler and the fencing outside. None were noted inside, however the dropping need to be cleaned up and effective pest control measures taken to eliminate the rat activity. There were also possible burrows seen in the cement around the fence. Remove all items along the fence to eliminate any harborage areas as well.
• Raw meat was stored above onion rings and potatoes in the tall cooler behind the cookline. Store all raw animal foods below and away from ready to eat foods and cooked ready to eat foods.
• The soda dispensers were moldy and in-need of cleaning. Remove and clean soda dispensers on a regular basis.

Fortune Cookie say: If you eat here; you may die
Lucky Numbers 3, 56, 9, 13, 64, 18, 42

So usually I would just write a post about something like this myself especially since I was present at the occurrence, but Dr. McAdams has already done so on his MU Warrior blog. His post is a summary and an analysis of what happened in Dr. Snow’s Philosophy of Crime and Punishment class on Thursday, April 3. That class is a prime example of the viewpoint discrimination that is extremely prevalent at Marquette and at other institutions of higher learning around the country, which is why I wanted to link his post here.

I was present in Dr. Snow’s class when my classmate, Greg Karge, was intellectually assaulted in class based on his comments on race and the police. Overall, this class is very discussion-based, which I really do enjoy; however not all viewpoints are equally respected.

As a side note, I wanted to support Greg, but I was afraid that my opinion would also be unreasonably criticized and suppressed. So after the class, especially when I saw the professor pulled Greg aside afterwards and after receiving his “apology” email, I felt that I had not only let Greg down, but I also had failed to stand up against viewpoint discrimination.

I began my morning surf of the web where I do every day, at the Drudge Report. Drudge linked to this story about the number of worldwide Muslims overtaking the number of worldwide Catholics.

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Islam has overtaken Roman Catholicism as the biggest single religious denomination in the world, the Vatican said on Sunday.

Monsignor Vittorio Formenti, who compiled the Vatican’s newly-released 2008 yearbook of statistics, said Muslims made up 19.2 percent of the world’s population and Catholics 17.4 percent.

“For the first time in history we are no longer at the top: the Muslims have overtaken us,” Formenti told Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano in an interview, saying the data referred to 2006.

He said that if all Christian groups were considered, including Orthodox churches, Anglicans and Protestants, then Christians made up 33 percent of the world’s population — or about 2 billion people.

Are there more Muslims than Catholics? Seems so.

But I just spent the afternoon randomly attending my first University-sponsored Mass at Gesu (I always go in the morning) in several semesters, unexpectedly celebrating, along with hundreds of Marquette Catholics, the voluntary entrance of thirty-some students into the fullness of the Catholic faith, among them two full adult baptisms, four (may have been six) conversions to Catholicism, and over twenty Confirmations.

Like everything, these two events have me thinking about economics.

Here we have thirty-some individuals of their own accord voluntarily responding to the call to experience God in the highest manner possible, in the Catholic, Christian faith. It’s a free market-driven decision. In response to their own spiritual need, these men and women voluntarily sought out the one source that can optimally meet their spiritual and religious needs.

And it’s an event that has happened everyday, everywhere for two millennia.

Conversely, a religion whose name literally means “surrender” advances as most do through births but most prominently and recently, through the sword. For modern Muslims, faith is a voluntary measure; unfortunately, this is not the case for all. In fact, the system of conversion throughout history has tended towards forced rather than voluntary conversion.

Which system is built to survive?

Consider, if you can, economic systems of allocating resources. The 20th Century saw just about every system imaginable, from laissez-faire capitalism to social-democracy to collectivism. We kept hearing that freedom was archaic and that people needed to learn to live with more accountability by our government betters.

Of course, Western capitalism eventually prevailed over socialism because freedom is simply a better method of organizing resources. Allowing people the opportunity to freely join their interests and needs to their capabilities drove innovation, growth, and prosperity. Coercion proved unworkable.

Similarly, in the long haul, I’d bet on the religion in the West which made abundance and progress possible in the first place. It won’t need coercion to succeed (though coercion may drive it away at times, see also Europe), because the free market solution that permits individuals to seek the truth in its most highly allocative manner will always end up at the same place.

Congratulations to all those involved in the sacraments of initiation today!

Today Scott Walker released a new commercial which stands to be my favorite Scott Walker video thus far. It’s a parody of the Mac Ads with a good respectable Scott and a mustachioed glasses wearing imposter, which is the Scott Walker Lena Taylor wants you to believe in.

With the ad Scott Walker’s campaign released this statement:

While critics try to tarnish Scott’s positive record, he is on the frontlines fighting for the taxpayers, said Campaign Manager Georgia Maxwell, “His innovative plan to fund our parks would add nearly 20,000 labor hours, while saving taxpayers millions. Beyond this, he remains committed to enhancing our transportation system to grow our community and to attract jobs. His 2008 budget maintained the price of a weekly bus pass from last year. Scott will continue to look for innovative ways to save money and to provide the quality services that we expect”

Walker also posted this video on YouTube showing how is committed to the Milwaukee County Transit System in its current form.

Scott Walker was also the first politician in the state of Wisconsin to make a statement about the retirement of Brett Favre saying: “Brett, thanks for 160 wins, 253 consecutive starts, 442 touchdown passes, 61,655 passing yards and a million great memories. Thanks for making us proud to be Packer fans!”

McCain also mentioned the retirement of Brett Favre.

Brett is waiting on you Lena.

From the sporting sense I think any true Green and Gold lover will remember the time and their location on the fateful moment when Brett Jesus Favre announced that he would no longer play professional football. I got the news a bit later since I was studying this morning, but thankful a bears fan asked me if I was crying about the loss of America’s favorite quarterback. Then I threw on ESPN and my mouth just dropped. Favre retired for a legit reason, to be able to play for 17 years is astonishing, and I can’t blame him for being tired of doing that. It’s going to be sad to see this era end and I’m not sure how I like the idea of Aaron Rodgers be announced as the starting quarterback, but I am proud to have cheered for Brett Favre, owned a number 4 jersey and been able to see him play his entire career in Green Bay. He owns nearly all major passing accomplishments and he’ll be a shoe in for the Hall of Fame. Brett went out on top in my opinion. It’s a real tough to make it to the NFC championship game, and he was smart to not want to try and do it again, because the Packers could have come up short, and Favre would probably have regret coming back. And if you are wondering, yes I did shed a tear. Not exactly because he retired, but because TV showed the December 23rd 2003 rout of the Raiders where Favre went for 399 yards and four touchdowns the day after his father’s death.

Here is the Favre statement on why he is retiring. -Somewhere in the voicemail you can hear Favre say he blames Scott Walker for falling short in the playoffs and for his retirement.

One of my favorite jobs on GOP3.com is posting columns from guests. We provide other students the opportunity to share thoughts on important topics when we believe their contribution would be interesting for our readers. Tom Kamenick, a law school friend of mine, certainly meets that standard with the below piece offered in light of last night’s heavenly happenings.

Let me tell you two true stories. The stories are remarkably similar, although 500 years separates them.
Near the turn of the 16th century, Christopher Columbus, on one of his later trips to the new world, became stranded in the West Indies. He begged and bargained with the natives for food and supplies, and they were happy to oblige, for they had plenty to give and sought harmony between their peoples, and it was good. Things went well at first – the two peoples traded and gave each other gifts, and they lived side-by-side in peace.
But Columbus’s crew was greedy and thought the natives weren’t giving them enough, so they raided the native’s villages and took what they wanted. The natives, furious at the way they were treated after their hospitality, stopped sharing their food with the rest of Columbus’s crew.
Columbus was knowledgeable in many of the advanced sciences of the time, and thought he would use that knowledge to appear prophetic and divine to the ignorant natives. He demanded a meeting with the native chief, and told him that the natives had angered the Christian God, and that there would be signs of His displeasure; He would show His anger by darkening the moon and painting it blood red that night.
And lo, that prophecy came to pass! That very night a total lunar eclipse occurred! The primitive, pagan natives, not understanding the science of revolving and rotating bodies in space, were terrified, and promised to give up even more food in supplies if Columbus would intercede with his God on their behalf. Columbus went to his ship, calculated how long the eclipse would last, and came out mere minutes before the eclipse began to recede and proclaimed his God appeased. Upon his words, the moon began to brighten and lose its bloodied appearance, and the natives rejoiced and obeyed Columbus’s every command that followed.

Now I will tell the story again, this time in our own, supposedly advanced, era.
The environmentalists came to the people and begged and bargained with them to give up things that they enjoyed, and the people were happy to oblige, for they had plenty and wanted harmony with nature, and it was good. Things went well at first – the sacrifices were minimal and they made great improvements in the environment.
But the environmentalists were greedy, and thought the masses weren’t giving up enough, so they demanded more and more sacrifices. They used their power in government to take things the people weren’t willing to give. The people, furious at the way they were treated after their good-faith cooperation, chafed at these demands and cried out against them.
The great leader of the environmentalists was knowledgeable in the advanced sciences of the time, and thought he would use that knowledge to appear prophetic and divine. So he spoke to the unwashed masses, the unbelievers, the ignorant, and proclaimed that they had angered his god, the god of global climate change, and that there would be signs of his displeasure; he would show his anger by causing changes in the weather, catastrophes and calamities.
And lo, those prophecies came to pass! Some places got colder and some got warmer! Hurricanes, tornadoes and floods all occurred! Cold climates experienced snowstorms, hot climates experienced droughts! The primitive unbelievers, not understanding the science of natural climate cycles, were terrified, and promised to sacrifice even more of their property and lifestyles.
This modern story, however, is unfinished. Who knows whether Al Gore and his crowd will ever declare their god satisfied, or whether they will keep demanding more and more sacrifice in the name of their religion.

And vote smart on Tuesday.

My wonderful conservative friends, do the intelligent thing and vote in the Democratic primary, not the Republican primary. McCain has the GOP nomination in the bag. Voting for Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee (gag) might give you more ideological satisfaction, but having someone like Barack Obama as president could prevent a solid conservative from being in the White House for a long time. Your vote would mean a lot more by voting for the weaker of the two Democratic nominees. This is code for: VOTE FOR HILLARY.

There is method to this madness. Barack Obama is clearly a more formidable candidate and would have a greater chance, I think, to win the presidency against a Republican like McCain. Obama is a lot more liberal than Hillary and is crazy enough to think he is “above politics.”

I have become convinced that an Obama presidency would be far worse than another Clinton one. If Hillary does get the nomination and the presidency, I don’t think she would change all that much despite some of her rhetoric. She has an agenda and I think will be forced to negotiate. Of course she will stump for socialized medicine and universal health care but I do not think she could push it through if people really urged Congress to vote against her proposals. I also think this could give the GOP an opportunity to put a better conservative candidate up in 2012. And I’m sure many of you know who I have in mind!

Hillary is such an extremely divisive figure that I think she could get trounced in the general election. So many people have such a visceral reaction to her that they would never vote for her no matter who the opponent was. She would lose the women vote. In Iowa, the only women group she won was the 60+ years bracket. So for those of you who can’t stand the idea of her in the White House can maybe rest easier. McCain is more popular among moderates, independents, and Democrats and is a less polarizing figure. I think he has a great chance of being elected over Hillary, and less so than if he were put up against Obama.

Finally, as a side note, John McCain does not stand for conservative values or governance. He is on the wrong side of a few very key issues (immigration, poltiical speech, etc). I personally would rather have four years of crappy Democratic policy via Clinton than four to eight years of pseudo-crappy McCain policy and then have liberal Democratic administrations for the next four election cycles.

For several of you, I have already pitched this proposal and a few of you are already doing what I plan to do. For those I haven’t talked to, hopefully you consider this option. But of course the most important thing to do is just vote on Tuesday!

Mark Steyn had a great article on Barack on Saturday. Read it - hopefully it gives you a better idea about what Barack is about.

Sunday Morning, the Marquette University E-board held a secretive meeting at Miss Katie’s Diner. At this meeting I can only assume what they plotted and conspired. However in some sort of unbelievable coincidence, Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton, along with Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin and Lieutenant Governor Diane Lawton, showed up for brunch as well. My theory is that both groups met at Miss Katie’s Diner with intent to turn over all of Marquette University College Republicans to the Democrats in some sort of shady breakfast deal. As is seen in the video, the secret yet, incompetent attempt on behalf of the e-board to turn over the party failed as Clinton paused for a photo op and handshakes with all of them. I want to know what they got paid to sell out the college party.

I’m not worried personally, even if they are plotting to hand over Marquette to the democrats, I trust that any MUCR that votes for Hillary will get hit with a sock full of nickels. That is a campaign promise. Vice Chair Luke Fuller defended his breakfast saying “the words ‘I’m voting for you Senator’ never came out of my mouth,” implying that it did from other e-board members, who should see the prior statement.

And no one needs to be concerned about my loyalties. I was smart enough to stay in bed (till 1pm) intend to keep any CRs from melting as they vote for Hillary.

Since I live with both Luke and Allison so those two still in the shower by the time I got up, and the strong smell of sulfur was coming from the bathroom indicates they may not fully support the plan to ruin MUCRs. I can’t speak for the rest of the assumed traitors.

As many of you may have seen, the Wisconsin Catholic Conference is in a bit of turmoil over the “Compassionate Care for Rape Victims Act.” The Conference, which represents Wisconsin’s bishops, is officially neutral towards the bill, which has been interpreted in Madison and the media as a “green light” for the bill (Consider: GOP State Rep. Terry “Musser, who considers himself pro-life, has said his own qualms about the legislation were assuaged in large part once the Wisconsin Catholic Conference, the public arm of Wisconsin’s bishops, said it did not object to the bill.”). After legislative action by the state Assembly, however, Madison Catholic Bishop Robert Morlino, joined by La Crosse’s Bishop Jerome Listecki, has issued a personal appeal to legislators to oppose the bill.

Key to the whole discussion has been a battle about “legal opinions” by the attorneys for the five Catholic dioceses. According to a report in La Crosse’s Catholic Times, “[Wis. Cath. Conf. Exec. Dir. John] Heubscher said the WCC’s neutrality is based on the unanimous opinion of the state’s diocesan attorneys that a current conscience exemption contained in Wisconsin Statue 253.09 would allow Catholic hospitals and individual physicians to ‘opt out’ of the possibly abortion-inducing treatment the legislation would require.”

In this blog post, I intend to render an alternative legal opinion of my own (though admittedly I’m a few months from being a lawyer).

December 30, 2007

Dear Wisconsin Bishop X:

You have asked me to render an opinion as to whether the Compassionate Care for Rape Victims Act, A.B. 377, would force Wisconsin’s Catholic hospitals to administer emergency contraception in an abortifacient manner. I answer that it likely would.

As you know, A.B. 377 as introduced did not contain a conscience clause exemption for religious hospitals. When the bill came before the Assembly Judiciary Committee, the Republican majority on that committee, under the leadership of Chairman Mark Gundrum, added conscience clause protection to the bill. That exemption did not survive on the floor of the Assembly; an amendment to add that protection failed before the whole Assembly. Thus, the current version of A.B. 377 does not contain a conscience exemption for religious hospitals.

In rendering this opinion, there are three key sources of authority: Wis. Stat. 253.09, the legislative history of A.B. 377, and Wisconsin Constitution Article 1 Section 18.

EXISTING CONSCIENCE PROTECTION

Wis. Stat. 253.09(1) reads: “No hospital shall be required to admit any patient or to allow the use of the hospital facilities for the purpose of performing a sterilization procedure or removing a human embryo or fetus.”

Wis. Stat. 253.09(2) reads: “No hospital or employee of any hospital shall be liable for any civil damages resulting from a refusal to perform sterilization procedures or remove a human embryo or fetus from a person, if such refusal is based on religious or moral precepts.”

The question is whether the administration of emergency contraception, otherwise known as the the morning after pill or Plan B, in a hospital emergency room would constitute “removing a human embryo or fetus.”

The same words are used in two other conscience protection statutes - for registered nurses (441.06(6)) and for doctors (448.03(5)(a)). No Wisconsin case definitively resolves what those words cover. The closest we have is a footnote in a Wisconsin Court of Appeals case that identifies 253.09 as “addressing a hospital’s refusal to honor a patient’s request for an abortion.” State ex rel. Angela M.W. v. Kruzicki, 197 Wis. 2d 532, 547 n.8 (Ct. App. 1995). Those who want A.B. 377 to apply to religious hospitals would argue that EC does not constitute an “abortion” as that term was used by the Court of Appeals, and thus a court has already decided EC is not covered.

Medical science confirms that emergency contraception can have the effect of preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb of the mother. This functions as a chemical abortion in Catholic moral theology.

However, this may not bring EC under the scope of “removing a human embryo.” The word “removal” may be interpreted to require implantation. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says that pregnancy does not begin until implantation. Federal case law also adopts this interpretation of implantation as the beginning. This is also defensible from a plain language standpoint: you cannot remove something unless it is first present. Based on these sources, a Wisconsin court could conclude that mandated administration of EC does not force a Catholic hospital to participate in “removing a human embryo.”

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

It is presumed that the Legislature in enacting new laws acts with full knowledge of laws already on the books. Kindy v. Hayes, 44 Wis.2d 301, 314 (1969). Certainly the legislative debate surrounding A.B. 377 brought 253.09 to the attention of the Legislature. Yet the Legislature specifically rejected conscience clause protections for religious hospitals on the floor of the Assembly.

Moreover, after the addition of conscience protection in the committee stage, the bill’s sponsors spoke out. State Rep. Marc Pocan, the primary Democratic sponsor, said that the conscience exemption “guts and nullifies the legislation.” State Rep. Terry Musser, the primary Republican sponsor, shared Pocan’s sentiments. (Madison Capital Times, Sept. 19, 2007).

Based on the floor rejection and sponsors’ statements, I conclude that the Legislature did not intend for there to be an exemption for religious hospitals from the Act’s mandates.

A JUDGE’S RULING

“[I]t is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that conflicts between different statutes, arising by implication or otherwise, are not favored and will not be held to exist if the statutes may otherwise be reasonably construed. Strong v. Milwaukee, 38 Wis.2d 564, 570 (1968).” OAG 42-77. In this Opinion, the Attorney General of Wisconsin said that a later law dealing with the administration of contraception amended without specifying an earlier statute limiting the administration of prescriptions drugs to pharmacists.

Based on the legislative history, these canons of construction, and the Attorney General’s OAG 42-77, I expect that a Wisconsin court would hold that “removal” requires “implantation,” and thus 253.09 is no protection from A.B. 377’s mandate that all hospitals provide EC.

WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION

If a Wisconsin court determines that Catholic hospitals are required to administer EC under the Act, as I believe it would, the hospital could respond by asserting its rights under Wisconsin Constitution Article 1, Section 18, the religious freedom provision. “The right of every person to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of conscience shall never be infringed; nor shall any person be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry, without consent; nor shall any control of, or interference with, the rights of conscience be permitted…” The Wisconsin Constitution’s religious freedom provisions are more expansive than the U.S. Constitution’s free exercise protection. State v. Miller, 202 Wis. 2d 56 (1996). These protections may be found to provide a constitutional right for religious hospitals to be free from state mandates to provide certain kinds of procedures. The hospitals would have to affirmatively assert this right after the state sought to enforce AB 337.

Thus, I suggest that Wisconsin’s Catholic bishops oppose A.B. 377. Emergency contraception may act as a chemical abortion by preventing implantation of a fertilized egg, and this would violate Catholic moral teaching. Yet a Catholic hospital would be forced to provide EC to rape victims under A.B. 377. It is likely that a Wisconsin court would find that Wis. Stat. 253.09 does not protect religious hospitals from the mandates of A.B. 377. Thus, the best strategy is to avoid this moral dilemma is to stop the passage of A.B. 377.

Sincerely yours,
DANIEL R SUHR

(I also owe a hat tip to Professor Augros).

Two things first: 1) I have not blogged in over six months - I apologize. 2) For those of you who have been reading for a while, you may know I am pretty obsessed with the idea of Newt Gingrich running for president.

I have not been paying much attention to the 2008 presidential race up until trecently. On the Democratic side, I am pretty sure it would be next to impossible for Hillary Clinton to NOT be the nominee. On the Republican side, things are a little more interesting, but I would say a little bit pathetic. Every few months, there is a new craze over who will save the party and stand up against the Hillary machine. First it was Rudy Giuliani, then it was Mitt Romney, now (and soon to be not) it is Fred Thompson. The election is a little less than 14 months away and we’re already trying to choose our candidates.

I still think it is imperative for Newt Gingrich to run for president. If he does, he could serve the country, the conservative movement, and the Republican party in a similar way that Barry Goldwater did in 1964 when he ran against LBJ. But instead of making conservative values popular for the first time, he’d reinvigorate those values, make them popular again, and translate them into effective policy solutions.

To be honest, I think the ills within the Republican party were self-created. After the 2004 elections, it seems to me that Republicans got complacent with having the power in all three branches of government, did not get anything done, and lost a bunch of key political battles. Along with recent scandals and some ineffectiveness of the Bush administration to communicate policies to the public, the Republican party in general also really just abandoned their conservative ideals of small government, lower taxes, and individual liberty. At this point, there is little substantive difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

With that said, I believe that Republicans are most likely going to suffer more losses in 2008, including the White House. Hence, I think it would be best to put up a nominee like Newt who could reinvigorate and excite the conservative base of the Republican party and clear the way for a more conservative candidate in the years to come (maybe as early as 2012). Republicans have been forced to promote candidates who are not really even conservative (i.e. Giuliani, Romney, McCain, Ron Paul, the outspoken libertarian and foreign policy appeaser) and candidates who have no idea what they’re doing (i.e. Fred Thompson, the next “Reagan” who cannot even verbally distinguish his views from those of the other candidates). Newt, not Thompson, would fill the conservative void in the race. He has the practical political skills and the innovative ideas. He is the best among both parties in communicating his stances and policy proposals.

Despite his skill and potential, Newt’s chances of winning against Hillary are slim. Politically speaking, Newt has some political baggage (stepping down as Speaker, marriage issues) that might hinder his chances of winning. Hillary’s campaign machine is extremely well-organized. Nevertheless, it would be best to put up a candidate who actually stands for something and could be an effective leader. I’d rather put a candidate like Newt and lose than put up a candidate like Romney or Giuliani and lose.

In 1964, the Republican Party had a choice between Nelson Rockefeller, the Governor of New York and the longtime leader of the GOP’s liberal-moderate faction, and the conservative Arizona senator Barry Goldwater. The party chose Goldwater who stood for principles of small government, individual liberty, lower taxes, ones that were beginning to become more mainstream after over three decades of the FDR liberal establishment.

Goldwater was not elected and America barely got through the disasters of the LBJ/Carter years. I think we could tolerate another Democratic administration. I think if a Democrat got into the White House, especially if it is another Clinton, then the conservative movement and the Republican party will work harder to fight for sound public policies and to win political battles. Republicans need to re-learn that conservative ideals are American ideals and that leftist liberalism is completely out of step from the American mind and political tradition.

Win or lose, a Newt Gingrich bid for the presidency would be transformative for the American political process, general political dialogue, the conservative movement, and the Republican party.