Judge Roberts and other stuff

This is a picture of East Jerusalem. I can't figure out how to put a picture at the bottom of the posting, so you can look at it at the beginning :).

Nothing much is going on right now: the Roberts confirmation hearings are over and no one knows when the Senate will vote on his appointment. So, in the absence of having anything interesting to say about Capitol Hill, let's move on to other topics.

Gas prices are rapidly declining. However, it doesn't look like they will ever return to those halcyon days of 1.50 prices. I could be wrong, but I don't expect it.

Someone has finally sued "Extreme Makeover" because they refused to make her pretty. Actually, the complaint alleges a little more than that - not only did they refuse to make her pretty, they caused her sister to commit suicide. This is an article you have to read to believe. I'd rather like to follow the case and see whether some judge throws it out for failure to state a claim. (on a 12(b)(6) for all you crazy law students out there!)

Here's an interesting thing about Roberts: Mayor Bloomberg of NYC opposes his appointment because, get this, he can't tell if Roberts would be for or against a woman's right to choose whether or not to have a baby. My roommate and I discussed this last night, and I want to issue a small challenge to all 'pro-choice' persons out there: would someone, in a civil manner without hysterically pointing to the possibility that some woman will be dragged into a back alley to get an abortion or the right of a woman to have autonomy over her own body, please explain to me how not having the right to an abortion keeps women from having the right to decide whether or not to have a child? And no pointing to the rape victims either - that's a discussion for another day.
Speaking of abortion: I found this great article that talks about the fact that actions have consequences, and we wouldn't expect to be able to eat as much as we please without possible health and weight problems; nor would we expect to not eat at all and not have serious health consequences. I really wish I could find the article, but I can't, so you'll have to take it on faith that it was a good article. Bottom line: actions and choices have consequences, there are some you wouldn't dream of getting out of (because of the impossibility), so why do we expect to get out of these?

OU football: there are reasons to be comforted even in the face of two seemingly insurmountable losses. However, we will probably be lucky to win 6 games this season. If Bomar keeps getting better (I concede that this week was an exponential improvement over the last game) and we can get rid of stupid mistakes, we may not be too bad at the end of the season. [I'm not as hopeful as some people I've talked to, though - we still look pretty bad.] And look out next year after these players get some playing time in! And, in OU news, apparently the coaches have decided to play Paul Thompson as a WR. How do you go through spring training, an entire summer, and fall practices and not know that the guy you have starting the first game at QB shouldn't be there?

And, who believes Iran when they say they don't have any and are not seeking the technology to create any nuclear weapons? (and get this: it's because the religion prohibits it - someone find me that sura in the Koran)

I'll leave everyone with this verse this afternoon: "Yet the LORD longs to be gracious to you; he rises to show you compassion. For the LORD is a God of justice. Blessed are all who wait for him!"