The World Around You

Another bizarre death, as reported on the Atlanta Journal-Constitution website,

Oilman Colin McMillan, who was awaiting Senate confirmation as Navy secretary, died at his ranch from an apparent gunshot wound, and investigators said Friday it might have been self-inflicted.

Mr. McMillan was obviously very close to not just President Bush, but Papa Bush, Vice President Cheney, Bob Dole and others.

McMillian had run Permian Exploration Corp. in Roswell, chaired President Bush’s New Mexico presidential campaign in 2000 and served as an assistant defense secretary under Bush’s father. The son nominated McMillan in May for the Navy post, which had been vacant since Gordon England left in January to become deputy secretary of the new Homeland Security Department.

President Bush said he and his wife were “saddened by the death of our good friend.”

“Colin was a public servant and patriot,” Bush said.

McMillan was a member of the New Mexico House of Representatives from 1971 to 1982 and ran for U.S. Senate in 1994, losing to incumbent Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman in a bitter and costly campaign.

“His death is a loss to us in New Mexico. It is a loss to the country,” Bingaman said on the Senate floor. “He was well-respected for his straight dealing and his integrity.”

McMillan served in the Marine Corps from 1957 to 1972 and was assistant defense secretary in the early 1990s, when Vice President Dick Cheney was defense secretary. He was also state chairman for Bob Dole’s presidential campaign in 1996.

If it was suicide, we have to ask what could possibly push a 67 year old man about to assume a very high government post to kill himself? If there is a question about the cause of death than we have to ask, what would cause someone to take him out?

There is quite a bit of discussion going on at the DMN.com (Dallas Morning-News) Blog about poll data released by the Pew Research Center on Religion and Politics. There is a lot of interesting, and frankly frightening, data here, especially with regards to the Islamic faith.

In the current poll, 44% of Americans say that Islam is more likely to encourage violence than other religions, up from 25% in the March 2002 poll. This opinion is as prevalent among better educated individuals and those who are more knowledgeable about Islam as among the less educated and less knowledgeable. And where white evangelicals once stood out for their belief that Islam is more likely to encourage violence, there are fewer religious differences now.

In 2002, more highly committed white evangelical Protestants than people of other religious traditions held this opinion ­ 41% compared with 25% of white mainline Protestants, 24% of white Catholics, and 24% of black Protestants. Seculars were least likely to hold this view; only 18% agreed in 2002. Today, evangelicals and mainline Protestants have the same opinion: 51% of evangelicals and 50% of mainline Protestants agree that the Islamic religion is more likely than others to encourage violence, while this opinion also has grown among white Catholics (39%), black Protestants (37%), and seculars (38%).

What has caused this increase? What influence do the ongoing attacks in Iraq have to do with these numbers?

The numbers on gay marriage are also interesting,

While a majority of the public continues to oppose gay marriage, support has been gradually building over the past few years and the intensity of the opposition has been declining. Overall, 53% say they oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally, while 38% favor the idea. But support is up from 27% in 1996, and strong opposition now stands at 30%, down from 41% in 1996.

There is a growing gap of opinion on this issue along racial and religious lines. Opposition to gay marriage is widespread among white evangelical Protestants and blacks, and opinion within these groups has changed little over the past seven years. White evangelicals remain the most firmly opposed on this issue: 84% opposed it in 1996, 83% do so now. And opposition among African-Americans is also unchanged (65% opposed gay marriage in 1996, 64% today).

By comparison, seculars, white Catholics, white mainline Protestants, and Hispanics have become increasingly open to the idea of legalized gay and lesbian marriage. Opposition to gay marriage among white mainline Protestants dropped from 63% seven years ago to 44% today. White Catholic opposition also dropped 19 points (from 60% to 41%) over this same time period. Even among seculars, who were more supportive of gay marriage than most other groups in 1996, there is less opposition today: 46% opposed gay marriage in 1996, compared with only 30% who do so now. And while most Hispanics (54%) oppose gay marriage, this is somewhat lower than in 1996 (64%).

Again, these changes raise more questions than answers. What’s causing this shift? Have the recent Supreme Court cases had an impact? Has the image of homsexuality changed significantly in just one year?

Paul Krugman has a few choice words for Alan Greenspan in this morning’s NY Times,

n his July testimony to Congress on monetary policy, Alan Greenspan was cautious but _ adjusting for his usual funereal demeanor _ quite upbeat. “Although the uncertainties of earlier this year are as yet not fully resolved,” he declared, “the U.S. economy appears to have withstood a set of blows. Not surprisingly the depressing effects of recent events linger. Nevertheless, the fundamentals are in place for a return to sustained healthy growth.”

O.K., I cheated: those quotations come from his testimony in July 2002, not July 2003. Needless to say, “healthy growth” failed to materialize. Undaunted, he said pretty much the same thing last week _ and the result was to reinforce a huge sell-off in the bond market, which may undermine the very recovery he predicted.

I used to be a great admirer of Mr. Greenspan. But something has gone very wrong with the maestro.

It’s about time that people start holding people responsible for theactions they take and the words they speak. How many times is Mr. Greenspan going to get away with stating that we’re on the “verge”? When does it become the boy who cried wolf?

James points to a couple of interesting points about the constitutionality of the California recall election.

Well, you knew Alfa would not remain quiet for long, Alfa says its taxes will rise $9 million under Riley’s plan ,

Officials at Alfa Insurance Cos. estimate Gov. Bob Riley’s tax plan will raise their taxes $9 million and result in policyholders paying more.

More than half of the increase will come from a proposed new tax on repair and installation services, company officials said.

“These costs will trigger increased premium costs for our customers as repair costs increase,” said Al Scott, senior vice president.

Alfa insurance and its sister organization, the Alabama Farmers Federation, are opposing Riley’s plan in the statewide referendum Sept. 9.

“We are working to educate our policyholders and the public about the effects of this plan,” Scott said.

A spokeswoman for an organization supporting Riley’s plan said neighboring states have a service tax without skyrocketing premiums.

“It sounds like they’re threatening their customers,” said Marty Sullivan of the Alabama Partnership for Progress.

There is no reason legitimate reason for premiums to increase, but you can bet they will now if the plan passes. Alfa has just given itself a built in excuse to increase their profits by increasing premiums.

This morning’s Mobile Register has the following story (Board members ask that 2-year college meeting be canceled),

Two members of the state Board of Education asked that a gathering of two-year college employees set for today in Hanceville be canceled, saying it’s an improper rally for Gov. Bob Riley’s $1.2 billion tax and education reform plan.

But the meeting will go on as scheduled.

The members of the State Board of Education have every right to object, but this meeting has been publicized for some time. It reeks of grandstanding to object to it the day before when nothing can be done.