News opinion 2008-07-03 Andanh.com

John Minton exemplified character Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:10:30 -0500
Everyone who knew John Minton Sr. had similar words to say about him - namely that he was loyal, a man of character, humble and a man of grace. These words ring true of a man who came from humble beginnings in Trigg County, a student from a one-room house who attended two major universities, where he received multiple degrees, and a veteran of World War II, an educator and a president of Western Kentucky University. The community has lost a fine man in John Minton Sr., who died Sunday at age 86 surrounded by those he loved most, his family. Minton dedicated his life to education and he loved WKU, where he served as president from Jan. 8 to July 31, 1979. During his time at Western, he also served as vice president of academic affairs, associate dean of graduate instruction, dean of the graduate college and vice president of administrative affairs. He came to Western in 1958 as a history professor. He retired from WKU in 1986 but continued to teach part-time. People who had Minton as a professor held him in high regard and that says a lot about the type of man he was. The Rev. J. Rick Bard Jr. gave the sermon at Minton’s funeral Tuesday at Broadway United Methodist Church, where Minton was a member. Bard talked about a man who came from small beginnings and rose to great things. “He understood that his mission in life was to serve,” Bard said. “It was his servant heart that guided him.” Bard talked of a man who was constantly helping others, a man who taught others how to be humble and graceful. “Dr. John understood that we were writing a story that would influence others,” Bard said. “He was a man of strong character, values and dedication.” Bard also talked about Minton’s life as an educator and his time in the military. “When his country called, he left college for the Navy. He said he couldn’t march very well, so he joined the Navy,” Bard said. Bard recalled how a young lieutenant Minton drove a transport boat to the beach during a bloody battle in the Pacific during World War II and how that affected him. After the war, Minton returned home and received his master’s degree from the University of Kentucky in 1947 and his doctorate from Vanderbilt University in 1957. It would take too long to list all Minton’s accomplishments, but what should be known is that he was a wonderful man who deeply cared for others and dedicated his life to this country, to those he educated and to his family. We can only imagine how special a moment it must have been on Friday for Minton when his son, John Minton Jr., become the chief justice of the Kentucky Supreme Court. Our hearts go out to the Minton family and all of Minton’s friends for losing a true gentlemen who gave so much of himself to his country, his community, his family and Western Kentucky University.

Our worst justice Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:10:02 -0500
Why did the Founders bother toiling in the summer heat of Philadelphia in 1787 writing a Constitution when they could have relied on the consciences of Supreme Court justices like Anthony Kennedy instead? Kennedy is the Supreme Court’s most important swing vote and its worst justice. Whatever else you think of them, a Justice Scalia or Ginsburg has a consistent judicial philosophy, while Kennedy expects the nation to bend to his moral whimsy. With apologies to Louis XIV, Kennedy might as well declare “la constitution, c’est moi!” In a 2005 interview, Kennedy said of the court, “You know, in any given year, we may make more important decisions than the legislative branch does - precluding foreign affairs, perhaps.” (He was wise to include the “perhaps,” in light of the recent Guantanamo Bay decision.) He went on to note how judges need “an understanding that you have an opportunity to shape the destiny of the country.” So much for the country’s destiny being shaped by a free people acting through their representative institutions, within certain constraints it enshrines in the Constitution. That wouldn’t allow nearly enough room for what Jeffrey Rosen, in a devastating profile of the justice in The New Republic, calls Kennedy’s “self-dramatizing moralism.” On any politically charged case, we are supposed to wait with bated breath while the famously agonizing Kennedy decides which side he is going to bless with his coveted fifth vote. In so doing, Kennedy believes he is, in Rosen’s description, creating “a national consensus about American values that will usher in what he calls ’the golden age of peace.”’ Observers less besotted with Justice Kennedy than Justice Kennedy might put it differently: making it up as he goes along. Two years ago, Kennedy joined the majority in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case that urged the president to obtain congressional approval for the system of military tribunals at Gitmo. President Bush did, but Kennedy wrote the 5-4 majority decision in this year’s Boumediene v. Bush striking down the system anyway. Kennedy quoted the World War II-era Eisentrager decision - upholding the military trial of German detainees - to show that there were greater practical difficulties back then with judicial interference in military detentions. He left unremarked that the Eisentrager decision unmistakably says - a mere paragraph after his citation! - that the Constitution does not apply extraterritorially: “No decision of this Court supports such a view. None of the learned commentators on our Constitution has ever hinted at it.” Indeed, Kennedy blew through some 200 years of precedent with nary a backward glance. Just another day at the Kennedy Court. It should be no surprise how Kennedy construes the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” It is warrant for the court to exercise its “independent judgment” of “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society,” as Kennedy put it in this term’s 5-4 Kennedy v. Louisiana decision forbidding capital punishment in cases of child rape. The signature of a Kennedy opinion is vaporous moralizing, whatever side he comes down on. In the 1992 Casey decision upholding Roe v. Wade, he waxed poetic about “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of life.” In the 2007 Carhart decision upholding the partial-birth abortion ban, he waxed again, this time about “respect for human life find(ing) an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child.” Evidently, Kennedy goes about his job unburdened by the fact that his views on existence or on the mother-child bond have nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution. But so it goes, as long as the Supreme Court is divided between four liberals, four conservatives and one self-important man who can’t differentiate between his inner compass and the nation’s fundamental law. Kennedy fashions himself an instructor to the nation. And he is - in the arbitrary ways of judicial lawlessness.

Every home a gun; everyone a shooter? Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:10:03 -0500
So everyone has a gun. Let’s start with that idea. Everyone has a gun. What will this mean? In the minds of some people - those who think last week’s Supreme Court decision protecting gun ownership was wonderful - it means if you come after me now, I can take you down. If you try to take what’s mine, I can defend myself - by shooting you dead, if need be. If I’m scared, I don’t need to be, because I have my gun. If you scare me and I want to scare you back, I can, because I have my gun. The next burglar who tries to rape or kill an innocent party? He gets shot instead. The next lunatic who tries to shoot up a restaurant? Five people can take him down from five angles. Everyone has a gun. Everyone can shoot. And as soon as the other handgun laws are dismantled (And great news! Many now can be!), the good guys won’t have to cower anymore. The bad guys will have to worry. This evens the playing field. Hallelujah. Finally, the Second Amendment is interpreted correctly. Our long national nightmare is over. But on the other hand ... Everyone has a gun. What will this mean? In the minds of the other side - those who found the Supreme Court’s decision disastrous - it means bullets flying everywhere. It means people shooting first and asking questions later. It means domestic arguments now resolved with pistols. It means thousands of more guns out there, which means thousands of more guns stolen and used for the wrong reasons. It means 4-year-olds finding Daddy’s gun. It means teenagers, angry and misguided, grabbing guns from their parents’ closets. It means homeowners thinking they’re crack marksmen and shooting the wrong people instead. It means workplace violence and domestic violence. It means suicides. It means the challenging of every gun control law out there. It means the worst interpretation of the Second Amendment, an amendment made during revolutionary times, an amendment about militias, an amendment that was never meant to re-create the Wild, Wild West. It means bad news rising. Our long national nightmare begins. Everyone has a gun. What does that mean to you? I have given up trying to convince people on this issue. Already in this column, I’m sure people are dashing off angry e-mails - and I haven’t even stated where I stand. We love guns in America. Our nation was forged in a revolution. Our western frontier was established with bullets. Our movie heroes fire big weapons. Our video games allow children to go pow-pow-pow. We love guns - more than any other country in the world, something that baffles the rest of the world - and with a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court essentially decided that every American can have one in his or her home. This is the same Supreme Court that the previous week was blasted as being ultra-liberal over prisoners in Guantanamo. This is the same Supreme Court justice, Antonin Scalia, who dissented from that Guantanamo decision by claiming it “will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed,” now writing the majority opinion on this gun ruling, but saying nothing about how many Americans may be killed. Everyone has a gun, the bad guys illegally, the good guys legally. Will this make us more safe or more dangerous? I simply don’t know. But when I read an NRA lobbyist named Chris Cox telling the media that law-abiding Americans had a “God-given right to defend themselves in their homes,” I must take exception. God isn’t in on this. God doesn’t want us armed to the teeth. God didn’t create bullets, gunpowder or triggers. That was our doing. And so is this ruling. It is men deciding more guns are the answer and wrapping that decision in idealism. God has nothing to do with it. So everyone has a gun. That’s the new norm. And when that’s the new norm, perhaps all we can agree on are these two words: Watch out.

Paving the way Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:29:00 EST
Even though The Courier-Journal spent decades ferreting out graft and corruption in the administrations of Democratic governors, partisan critics have persistently continued to ask why the newspaper "only investigates Republicans."

Proof of progress Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:29:00 EST
Some signs of excellence are conspicuous and some are not. For example, the physical transformation of the University of Louisville's James Graham Brown Cancer Center -- at a cost of $29 million -- was apparent to those at the grand reopening in May.

Short on cash? You should look nearby for cheap thrills Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:27:00 EST
Sometimes you just have to make do. I learned that on this year's vacation. Regular readers know that I make a visit each year to Germany, where some of my relatives live, and sometimes we decamp for tourist destinations like a Czech castle, North Sea beaches or Alpine lakes. This year we were all short of cash, so we made do with what was nearby and inexpensive.

Bush's parting shots Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:36:00 EST
George W. Bush's presidency seems exhausted and irrelevant, but that's a dangerous illusion. The Decider remains in command of the world's most advanced and powerful military force, and he has just a few months to tie up what he might consider loose ends -- a thought sobering enough to send Amy Winehouse to rehab.

Wayside Christian Mission's difficult move Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:29:00 EST
For the past 40 days, some of us felt like the Israelites must have felt wandering in the wilderness. Many have asked why it was so difficult for Wayside Christian Mission to sell its property and just move on. The answer may be difficult to "feel," but it is simple to state.

Arena design Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:28:00 EST
I am just heartsick after viewing the newest rendition of our arena's design. For the first time, I saw the revision of the river frontage -- it reminded me for all the world of a giant microwave oven that blocked the view of our beautiful night skyline and lights. The proximity of the arena to the bridge destroys the symmetry and balance with the rest of the city.

Web-exclusive reader letters Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:28:00 EST

Readers' views Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:02 EDT
Clean up now, don't wait for third strike

It should be apparent to Lexington's elected officials and residents that we have created environmental problems through 40-plus years of urban sprawl, a lack of unified and integrative city planning, designing and building against nature, and maintaining dependence on coal and petroleum.

Our environmental problems have come home to roost publicly as we have received two strikes:

First, we violated the federal Clean Water Act and must comply with the consent decree that will result from the November 2006 lawsuit by state and federal governments on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Second, the Brookings Institution reported that Lexington has the largest carbon footprint of the 100 largest metropolitan areas in the country.

We now stand at a fork in the road, and we must ask ourselves what we can do individually and collectively to prevent a third strike.

Going green will reap green rewards Wed, 02 Jul 2008 03:13 EDT

Turn on local talk radio and you are likely to hear the modern equivalent of the flat-earthers and Luddites of yore. Fake experts, far-right bloviators and ill-informed talk show hosts are out to persuade you to ignore the massive weight of scientific evidence that climate change is real, serious and now upon us.

These climate deniers will be merely a footnote in history. The world agrees that climate change caused by human activities will cause irreparable economic, social and environmental harm if we do not act rationally and quickly to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

To address the challenge of climate change, we must create a low-carbon, sustainable economy, one that does not deprive future generations of a decent life. The transition to a new, sustainable economy presents businesses with great opportunities.

The sustainability transition is already occurring. Venture capital is flowing to renewable energy development and manufacturers of green products. Corporations are appointing high-level sustainability coordinators to oversee operations. Wal-Mart convened a sustainability summit to persuade its suppliers to reduce energy and materials consumption.

Sick system of health care Wed, 02 Jul 2008 03:13 EDT

Imagine working all your adult life, but still having to line up before dawn in hope of getting a free eye exam or dental care for yourself or your child.

Imagine being relieved to have 22 teeth pulled in one day.

Imagine this in a country that spends far more per capita on health care than any other, but still leaves millions of people with no preventive care and captive to charity when something goes wrong.

Imagine this, and you understand why health care worries weigh so heavily on voters' minds this year.

Academic witch hunt Wed, 02 Jul 2008 03:13 EDT

The Family Foundation has unfortunately and incompetently taken on the job of designing research and course content at the University of Kentucky.

That's the net effect of the foundation's smear campaign against a few professors who work in fields that the organization doesn't seem to think should be discussed in polite society or, apparently, anywhere.

Within the limits of its non-profit status, the foundation has the right to engage in free speech. Likewise, the university, members of the legislature and citizens have every right to ignore that speech, as they should.

The foundation has chosen to focus on six UK professors who teach, research and engage in other activities related to same-sex couples, abortion and queer theory. The foundation sent fliers to state legislators questioning whether state money should be used to support the professors' work.

Chinese Dir