The Bridge Collapse One Year Later: You Get What You Pay For

A year has passed since the August evening when the 35W Bridge in Minneapolis collapsed into the Mississippi River, leaving 13 dead and 145 injured. So where are we today?

The lives of those who survived may never be the same. But they did get a $36.6 million compensation package from the State of Minnesota in exchange for not suing them.

The cause of the collapse (speculation has centered on rusted-out gusset plates) has still not been determined by the National Transportation Safety Board. The NTSB did, however, beat back a challenge by Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) to open public hearings before making its findings known.

Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, who initially rode the wave of bi-partisanship in the days following the collapse before the finger-pointing began, vetoed a bill which would have raised the state gas tax by 20 cents for inspecting and improving bridges and highways. The Legislature thought otherwise, overriding the veto. Six Republicans who dared to vote for the override got the cold shoulder from the governor's party.

That's just one of the 34 bills Pawlenty vetoed in the last legislative session, more than any governor in Minnesota history. (There is an excellent article on this that can be found at citypages.com) It seems Pawlenty, a possible running mate for Senator John McCain on the GOP presidential ticket, cares more about pleasing his "no new taxes" political cronies than in serving his state.

The governor also had to replace his state Department of Transportation commissioner. It seems Carol Molnau, who also holds the title of lieutenant governor, did not do a very good job of managing MnDOT and was the scapegoat for the sorry state of the state's roads. The Legislature gave Molnau the boot, and she was replaced by Tom Sorel.

Remember Sonia Pitt, who went AWOL from her MnDOT job in the weeks following the bridge collapse? The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported in Thursday's edition that Pitt has resurfaced at the Department of Homeland Security, working for the Transportation Safety Administration. I wish I had made that one up.

With the influx of cash coming from the new gas tax (and for who knows how much longer, considering that it now costs at least $50 to fill your tank?), more bridges and roads are being inspected and repaired. Unfortunately, they forgot to check the Maryland Avenue bridge in St. Paul. Twelve hundred pounds of concrete chunks fell from it onto 35E last weekend. Traffic was snarled, but no one was injured.

The 35W bridge itself? It's being rebuilt as we speak, and should be done by sometime in the fall--two months ahead of schedule. The new bridge, at a cost of $235 million, will have more lanes and room for light rail transit.

Through all the tragedy, the politics and the rebuilding, once the bridge reopens and traffic returns to what is considered normal, how many will be thinking about what it takes to get from Point A to Point B without falling into Point C?

UPDATE: The Department of Homeland Security must've caught wind of Pitt's past misdeeds because, as the Star Tribune reports in its Friday edition, she's been fired after a few months on the job. The DHS doesn't always employ the brightest bulbs on the planet, but at least they caught this one.

Barack Obama's Excellent Adventure

Senator Barack Obama, needing to prove he's a viable presidential candidate by garnering a few foreign policy credentials, took a whirlwind tour of Europe, the Middle East, and the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan--with network news anchors Katie Couric, Brian Williams and Charles Gibson along for part of the ride.

Like Bono or Bruce Springsteen, Obama played to huge crowds (200,000 in Berlin!) everywhere he went. He even found time to squeeze in a word or two with a few world leaders. Not bad for a presidential candidate who hasn't been nominated or elected yet.

Meanwhile, back in the States, Republican challenger John McCain was shouting "Hey! I'm over here!" to anyone who would listen. It turns out he really should have taken the week off.

The Arizona senator went on about how Obama refuses to admit that things are actually getting better with the troop surge in Iraq (the jury's still out on that one), doesn't visit wounded soldiers because the Pentagon wouldn't let him bring in cameras (the Illinois senator said he didn't want to politicize their plight), and how he'd rather win an election instead of a war. All this while commenting on the "Iraq-Pakistan" border, and on countries like Czechoslovakia, which ceased to exist years ago.

On Obama's return home, we find the lead he once had in the polls in battleground states such as Minnesota and Michigan is melting away. Is it because McCain's message of essentially staying the course in Iraq is connecting with the voters? Is it because Obama's been acting less like a candidate, and more like the presumptive president-elect?

Or is it the effect of negative campaigning from McCain and his surrogates? If that's true, taking the high road in the age of Karl Rove may end up costing Obama the election in November. Then he'll have to pay for his own tickets the next time he wants to go overseas.

Savage (And Society) Doesn't Respect People With Special Needs

Michael Savage, a radio talk show host who thinks nothing of offending liberals, gay people, Catholics and Muslims on his nationally syndicated program--a practice that has either lost him sponsors or gotten him fired--took aim recently at those who are living with autism, which is considered a developmental disability that has been diagnosed in at least two million people, mostly school-age children.

Not much is known about autism, and I am in no way claiming to be an expert. Some people believe it is caused by diet or other factors in the child's environment. Others think it's a scam perpetuated by the pharmaceutical companies, willing to charge families an arm and a leg for drug treatment.

Savage told his radio audience that, among other things, the typical autistic child is "a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out", and also blames the lack of involvement by fathers. That should come as news to the families (whether the parental unit is intact or not) who have a hard enough time trying to care for--and cope with--a child who faces a lifetime of difficulty.

Savage is right about one thing: Autism has become the affliction of the moment in the news media. Not a day goes by when we don't see some network or publication do a story about autism and its effects. Just this past week, the CBS station in Minneapolis (WCCO-TV) did a series of reports on it.

What bothers me about stories involving people who are differently abled, or are living with a fatal disease is the patronizing tone they take. It's like they're being put on a pedestal. They can do no wrong. They could, for example, be entertained for the day at a zoo, or meet their favorite ballplayer, and it's covered on TV as a substitute for real news. In other words, they're treated more like circus freaks and adorable animals instead of human beings. Cue the violins.

Then there are the feel-good fundraisers, whether its a "fun run" or a dangerous stunt, all in the name of charity. If people knew what a bottomless pit some of these organizations are, some of whom have more interested in raising money than in finding a cure (at least not in our lifetime), they'd be putting their money to better use. Such as buying a tank of gas.

Society does the same thing, masking the condition of those who aren't considered "normal" in such inoffensive nomenclature (such as "differently abled" or "living with fill-in-the-blank") that nobody else knows what they're talking about.

What I hope I never see is some misguided individual, after seeing one of those "beating the odds" stories on TV, deliberately poison himself or severing his limbs in a bid to attract attention.

People like Michael Savage would love to go back to the days when anyone who doesn't look or sound "normal" are hidden away someplace, not bothering anyone. Thank goodness we don't live in that world any more. What we need to do is to show a little more courtesy and respect to the folks who just happen to use wheelchairs and need a little more help than the rest of us, and to save the superhero stuff for the movies.

"Nipplegate" Four Years Later

The world stood still on Super Bowl Sunday 2004 in Houston, as Justin Timberlake made good on his promise during the halftime show (lyrically speaking) to have Janet Jackson "naked by the end of this song", titled "Rock Your Body". Boy, did he ever. Everyone got a good look at one of Jackson's breasts. Parents, decency groups and the National Football League went nuts over it, eclipsing what turned out to be a pretty good football game, won by the New England Patriots over the Carolina Panthers.

The Federal Communications Commission, in its zeal to dumb down everything in broadcasting to the level of an eight-year old, fined CBS (which televised the game) $550,000 for failing to catch the exposed breast in a timely manner. The network took the FCC to court, and on Monday got the fine overturned by a federal appeals court in Philadelphia, which said the commission had overstepped its bounds.

The FCC has not said whether it will take this case to the Supreme Court.

So what else has happened to the players involved since "Nipplegate"?

CBS, and the rest of network TV, now go to ridiculous lengths to keep foul language and other questionable behavior form America's eyes and ears. People are bleeped so often that you can't understand what they're saying. But the networks have no problem running ads for erectile dysfunction remedies, or the prescription medication featuring mature women wearing nothing but white sheets.

MTV, which produced the halftime show, is no longer in that business. They'd rather concentrate on reality shows such as The Hills and The Real World.

The NFL now books classic rockers like Paul McCartney, Tom Petty and the Rolling Stones for the Super Bowl halftime show, putting the chances of another "wardrobe malfunction" as low as a repeat performance by the New York Giants. Who can they drag out of semi-retirement for this year's game in Tampa?

Justin Timberlake's career has been on the upswing. Besides bringing sexy back, he's appeared in two movies that we know of (Black Snake Moan and The Love Guru), and recently hosted the ESPY Awards show on ESPN.

As for Janet Jackson, it seems her career has plunged along with her neckline. Her recent CD's have tanked in sales and with the critics, trying to stay relevant in a world of Rihannas and Beyonces. It seems misery loves company in the Jackson clan.

The Joke's On The New Yorker

Satire is defined in Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary as "a literary work, holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn", and "trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly".

That's what The New Yorker tried to do on the cover of its latest issue, with a cartoon mocking the stereotypes and perceptions some people have of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, and his wife Michelle. Obviously, they didn't do a very good job.

If you've seen the cartoon (and who hasn't by now?), you know what we're talking about. If you haven't, then let me be the millionth person to describe it to you: There's Obama wearing a traditional Muslim wardrobe. Michelle is wearing a 1970's era Afro with bullets draped over her shoulder, holding a machine gun, ready to perform a fist bump. The American flag is burning in the fireplace, with a portrait of Osama bin Laden on the mantle.

Laughing yet? Obama, his Republican opponent Senator John McCain and most media pundits have attacked the cartoon as offensive. An editor for The New Yorker made the rounds on TV, trying to explain what was meant by the cartoon. But that's like trying to explain a joke that wasn't funny to begin with.

At least nobody's getting killed over this. Remember the controversy over cartoons of the prophet Mohammed that were published in Dutch newspapers? Editors and cartoonists feared for their lives as angry Muslims took to the streets.

We live in a hypersensitive culture, where everyone is afraid to laugh at the foibles of some individual or group (which helps explain why there are so few sitcoms on TV). Part of the problem lies with Obama himself. With his biracial background and career dedication to "making a difference", it's hard to mock him without being offensive about it. (It's probably better to let the Chris Rocks of the world handle that one) Also, with Obama's thin resume, we don't yet know him all that well. Compared to all that, John McCain is a barrel of laughs.

One of Obama's recent attempts at lightening up was when he allowed his two daughters to appear on the TV show "Access Hollywood" with him and his wife. As it turned out, the Senator wouldn't have done it had he known that the show is syndicated by NBC Universal, which then played highlights of the interview on "Today", "NBC Nightly News", and MSNBC.

The New Yorker is an upscale magazine that has been publishing for over 80 years, and is best known for its literate articles, and for its cartoons. Many great writers and artists have passed through here, including James Thurber and Charles Addams. In this political year of a less sophisticated era, the satire they put across may have hit a little too close to home.

Brett Favre: Will The Pack Turn Their Back On Him?

A few months ago, Brett Favre announced his retirement from pro football amid much fanfare and a sea of tears. All of Green Bay Packer Nation was in mourning, team flags lowered at half staff, and Favre was being nominated to their version of Mount Rushmore with Vince Lombardi, Bart Starr and Curly Lambeau.

There were a few skeptics out there (most of them working for ESPN) who weren't buying Favre's act, and they had reason not to. Every year, it seemed, Favre took his sweet time in deciding whether or not he should suit up for another season. Retirement rumors were taking on Shakespearean connotations. Will he or won't he? That is the question. Then Favre reported to camp, and the world was turning on its axis again.

Now it is mid-July, days before training camp opens for the Packers and the other National Football League teams. Brett Favre is crying again, this time to Greta Van Susteren of Fox News Channel (BREAKING NEWS! Is Favre a Republican?). He was bawling about those meanies in the Packers organization who won't let him play football again, and was rebuffed in his attempt to get a release so he could play somewhere else.

The Packers management assumed, like most everyone else, that Favre was done playing. They've committed themselves to Aaron Rodgers, who has been Favre's understudy, as the new starting quarterback But they've also gone as far as to accuse the Minnesota Vikings--their biggest NFC North division rival--of tampering, alleging that Favre has had contact with quarterbacks coach Darrell Bevel, who used to work for Green Bay.

So Favre wants to play football again. We get that. What we don't get is how he put his once (and future?) team in a bind concerning his status. Do the Packers welcome him back with open arms, taking the risk of cheesing off Rodgers? Do they release Favre, knowing he might sign with either the Vikings or Chicago Bears? Or do they trade him to a team outside their division?

Favre has had a long and successful career in the NFL, leading the Packers to seven division titles and two Super Bowl appearances, and breaking nearly every record a quarterback could have. But now he is pushing 40. His body can't take as much punishment as it used to. If he comes back now, he risks becoming an old, washed up athlete who didn't know when to leave the stage. Or he could amaze us once again, like he's been doing for the last few years.

At this moment, Brett Favre is losing his hero status, even in the great state of Wisconsin. His whining has turned him into just another spoiled brat athlete, and people are tuning him out. Heck, I don't even want to see him in a Vikings uniform. There's a reason why nobody likes to see a grown man cry.

Ventura Decides He Won't Be Senator Turnbuckle

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura milked his appearance on CNN's Larry King Live for all it was worth Monday, keeping the audience in suspense about whether he'd run for the U.S. Senate as an independent. Then the answer came. No, Ventura said, he would not run unless God told him to do it. And unlike certain politicians, Ventura's no churchgoer.

Apparently, God must not have returned Ventura's call because his political adviser Dean Barkley (who has been driving a bus until now) is running instead. Barkley has had a little experience in the Senate, having been appointed to the job by then-Governor Ventura in the wake of the plane crash that took the life of Senator Paul Wellstone in 2002.

Ventura said he made his decision based on what a Senate campaign would do to his family. He's still seething over a 2002 report that claimed his son had a wild party inside the Governor's mansion. He hasn't talked to the Minnesota media since. Also, he lives most of the year in Mexico, which would create problems when it comes to residency requirements.

If Ventura had run, he would have found that being a senator is even more demanding than running a state. As an independent, he'd be isolated in a sea of Democrats and Republicans. And he'd add the national media to his list of jackals, But he'd still be welcome on Larry King.

Also, Ventura would have found (if he didn't know this already) that not much gets done in Congress unless they roll over and play dead for President Bush. That's why we have wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and why the telecoms can't be sued for government wiretaps on American citizens, among other things. Ventura would have a tough time getting anyone to chair hearings on what really happened on September 11, 2001.

Republican incumbent Norm Coleman has a big lead in most polls over Ventura and Democratic-Farmer-Labor challenger Al Franken, no matter who is in the running. The DFL is so concerned over Franken's losing ground that Priscilla Lord Faris, daughter of former Federal judge Miles Lord, is running against him in the primary.

We've seen Franken's latest TV ad, in which he tells us he'd make sure elected officials don't resurface as lobbyists if we'd only vote for him. If this Senate thing doesn't work out, Franken has a future as the next Michael Moore.

As for Coleman, his new ad mentions that he helped return NHL hockey to Minnesota. That's true. Except he was the Democratic mayor of St. Paul at the time.

While Jesse Ventura chills out on the beaches of Baja California, counting the money he made from his latest book, his supporters (and detractors) will be left wondering what might have been.

"Greatest American Dog" Is All Too Human

The new CBS summertime show Greatest American Dog (currently running on Thursday nights) is more mixed breed than purebred when it comes to reality shows, and that's going to disappoint animal lovers who were hoping for something better.

The 12 dogs (or "canine companions", if you prefer) and their owners who were selected for the show are sequestered at a posh estate serving as "Canine Academy", complete with every amenity a dog could want. The owners who brought them? Well, that's another story. Each of them seem to have their own issues about themselves and their relationships with their pets, and they're not always pretty.

The first "Dog Bone Challenge" is a game of musical chairs--last dog sitting wins. After that, the winner and the owner got to sit in a luxury suite while everyone else had to stay in one room. Then said winner got the chance to banish some unfortunate soul and his dog to three nights outside in an oversize dog house.

Let's see . . . that's one part Big Brother (minus Julie Chen and the skanky behavior), and one part Survivor for sending the loser to its version of Exile Island.

And then there's the Best In Show challenge with a panel of judges (two of them from dog magazines) deciding who should be eliminated--that's one part America's Got Talent. This week, it was a talent contest between three teams designed to show off their dogs' skills.

Team Aloha (the one wearing grass skirts) won high praise from the judges for the well-coordinated performances between owner and dog.

Team Disco Dogs (the one representing everything you hated about the 1970s) was a disaster, with host Michael hogging the spotlight at the expense of his Boston Terrier Ezzie. No wonder they called it the Me Decade.

Team Bark 'N Wag High (here's hoping Disney doesn't consider making High School Musical Reunion, with its characters aged ten years) was a mixed bag, with the guys in the group doing better with their dogs (dig that skateboarding bulldog!) than the women did. It didn't help that one of the women contestants physically manipulated her dog into sitting down, which one of the judges pointed out was a no-no.

The first to get sent home were Michael and Ezzie, which came as no surprise. What was a surprise is that the competition, instead of singling out the best performances, was set up to eliminate the weakest. There is no Worst In Show at Westminster.

Greatest American Dog is a show that belongs more on the Animal Planet channel than on CBS, which probably conceived this puppy as an attempt to get something on the air during the recently-concluded writers strike. Perhaps it needed better breeding.

Can The Metrodome Inflate McCain's Chances?

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois is scheduled to accept the Democratic nomination for President August 28 at the home of the Denver Broncos, Invesco Field at Mile High, in front of 76,000 of his closest supporters and delegates, and with the Rocky Mountains as his backdrop.

The symbolism of the event was too good for the Democrats to pass up. Not only will it be the second time the party's nominee makes his acceptance speech outdoors (John Kennedy was the first, at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum in 1960), but it will also fall on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr. proclaiming that he had a dream.

The rest of the Democratic convention will take place at Denver's Pepsi Center, now considered to be too small to support Obama's growing legions.

So where does that leave Senator John McCain of Arizona, who is scheduled to accept the Republican nomination in St. Paul a week later? It would be at the Xcel Energy Center, home of the NHL Minnesota Wild, before a relatively intimate gathering of around 20,000.

Will the GOP counter by moving McCain's acceptance speech to the Metrodome in Minneapolis? Here's why they should, and why they should not consider it.

First, why they should:

• The Metrodome has hosted a Super Bowl, two World Series, two NCAA men's basketball Final Fours, rock concerts, and a Billy Graham crusade.
• It seats 63,000 for football. You can squeeze in a few more people in there.
• No need to worry about weather.
• Better security.
• More bathrooms. (Insert your own joke here.)
• TV networks and other news services would finally get the name of the city right.

Next, why they shouldn't:

• The official name of the stadium is the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome. Humphrey was a Democrat.
• Which would you rather have as your backdrop? A Teflon dome or an open sky?
• Like rats on a sinking ship, the Minnesota Twins and the University of Minnesota Golden Gopher football team are ditching the Dome in the next couple of years for their own stadiums. And the Vikings might follow if their stadium plan ever gets past the Minnesota Legislature.
• The Metrodome has often been criticized for being a cheaply made, oversized living room that few people love. That seems to describe the GOP, too.
• Minneapolis would once again snatch glory from the arms of St. Paul.
• McCain's oratory skills pale next to Obama's. That's like putting the guy who won American Idol up against Bruce Springsteen.

McCain's people say that their candidate doesn't care much for speaking in front of large gatherings, preferring the town hall meeting format instead. If this were any other election, that might have worked for him. But if the Senator from Arizona wants to win in November, he needs to pull out all the stops just to compete with a rock star.

Spending The Weekend With Juno, Homer and Six Different Dylans

Just for a change, I decided to go to my local video store (I'm not telling you which one) to rent a few movies. Having left the multiplexes to the teenagers and film geeks years ago, I figured there's no movie out there that couldn't wait until the DVD release. Roger Ebert I'm not, but here's what I thought of these movies anyway.

There Will Be Blood (R) Daniel Day-Lewis won the Oscar for Best Actor playing an independent oil man in early 20th century America, partially based on the Upton Sinclair novel Oil, and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson. In the story, we follow Daniel Plainview (Day-Lewis) as he seeks his fortune in California in spite of a greedy preacher and a hearing-impaired son, whom he hoped would take over the business someday. The movie is stylishly produced and acted, and worth sitting through two and a half hours. And you'll also learn what's behind the catchphrase "I drink your milkshake".

Juno (PG-13) This is what might have happened if Daria Morgendorffer were a pregnant teenager. Ellen Page plays Juno MacGuff, a wisecracking 16-year old who gives up the child she clearly wasn't ready to take care of to surrogate parents portrayed by Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner. Diablo Cody, for all her hipness, wrote a surprisingly conservative screenplay that sends a pro-life message to teenagers, which may or may not ring true in real life. For this, she won an Oscar for best original screenplay. Hey, adoption's a big deal in Hollywood these days--as long as the kids come from a Third World country.

I'm Not There (R) is, quoting the box the DVD came in, "inspired by the life and songs of Bob Dylan". In other words, it might look like a biography or a documentary, but it really isn't. Six different people, including Richard Gere and Cate Blanchett, play various versions of Dylan during his life and career. The film is as enigmatic as Dylan himself, but do watch Blanchett's performance as the mid-60's era Dylan, for which she was nominated by the Motion Picture Academy for Best Supporting Actress.

The Simpsons Movie (PG-13) is based on the long-running Fox animated sitcom. Homer Simpson, just like on TV, is a big fat idiot who creates an environmental disaster that endangers the city of Springfield and forces his family to go on the run. Unlike TV, it takes an hour and a half to tell. As a longtime Simpsons watcher, I thought the animation (it was done on computers!) and the writing were an enormous improvement over the TV show, which has seen better days.

The movies go back tomorrow. Oh well, I guess it's back to Deadliest Catch.

The July 4th Report: Yeah, We're In a Recession

As the United States celebrates its 232nd birthday with parades, barbecues, baseball, fireworks and people like me exercising their right of free speech, it's time to look back on the first half of 2008.

Wars are still being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, with no agreement on how to gracefully get out. Oh, and there's the small matter of capturing the man the government believes made all this necessary in the first place.

The presidential campaign has come down to two senators, a young African-American man from Illinois and an old soldier from Arizona. When they're not sniping over the quality of each other's patriotism, they have yet to convince voters of the substance behind the promises they made in order to get elected.

Gas prices are now over $4 a gallon, which is being blamed in part on oil speculators and rising demand in China and India. Since oil is so integral to the nation's economy, an ingredient in almost everything we buy, the price of goods and services goes up. Plans are afoot to develop new energy sources that are more environmentally friendly, but nobody's come up with a better (and cheaper) alternative to oil.

Foreclosures are another reason why the American economy is down. Never mind people who tried to pay for those McMansions they couldn't afford to live in. It's the people who can't find a place to live in, period.

The so-called "experts" disagree on whether or not we're in a recession. If you're unemployed, lose your house, and are trying to decide if paying for groceries is more important than filling up the tank, then yeah, we're in a recession.

The catastrophic flooding that recently hit the Midwest had us wondering: If a disaster occurs in a part of the country with no major cities, a mostly homogenous population that hasn't been scattered around, and no civil unrest that we know of, does it make a sound? We know two places: the grocery store and the convenience store, where corn prices just went through the roof.

So enjoy your hot dogs, ballgames and fireworks displays this weekend. Just remember how much you ended up spending on them to boost America's economy.

The Supreme Court Makes Gun Owners' Day

The U.S. Supreme Court recently weighed in on the ongoing gun control debate, deciding 5-4 (that's conservatives on the bench to "liberals") to overturn a ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., assuring every American the right under the Constitution to lock and load in the name of self-defense. What they didn't say is how it should be done.

The immediate impact will be felt in the cities and towns where gun bans are already in place. Organizations such as the National Rifle Association plan to file legal challenges to get them overturned.

The long-lasting impact will be felt by anyone who has ever been robbed, raped, randomly shot, had a heated argument, ended their own life, had curious kids, etc. Not much self-defense going on, is there?

The Second Amendment of the Constitution, vague and open to interpretation as it is, reads: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Since most of that militia happens to be fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment, and there are never enough police, ordinary folks are on their own.

Gun control sounds like a pretty good idea in theory. In reality, anyone who is desperate enough to want a gun usually finds a way to get one, whether it's stealing or fibbing on your background check. The end result can usually be found on the police blotter of your newspaper, or leading the late local news, to be followed by coverage of the funerals and the criminal trial.

Of course, Supreme Court justices and most elected officials have round-the-clock protection, so they seldom have to worry about nutjobs who want to do them harm. Do they really care about the fact that some neighborhoods in America now resemble Baghdad or Kabul instead of Mayberry? Any plans for a "surge"?

Most of all, are we willing to confront the conditions that make lethal weapons necessary in the first place? We don't want a police state (though some might say we're already in one), but we do need to establish that just because you have the right to own a gun, it doesn't mean you have to use it.