Author: hankkalet

Liberals like me are supposed to be really worked up about this so-called docudrama about Sept. 11. Liberals are angry that the film blames President Clinton and lets President Bush off the hook. Liberals are supposed to be incensed over the mutilation of fact and truth. And I get all that. I agree that what has been reported about the film makes it appear that it will be a Bush propaganda piece.

But I just can’t get that worked up about it, especially given the way we libs rushed in to defend the terrible Reagan docudrama that canned by CBS back in 2003. The film was supposed to be pretty unflattering toward Reagan and caused the conservative media to freak out. Liberals were aghast at the response.

So here we are three years later and liberals (including some blogs like Talking Points Memo that I truly respect and others that I read on a regular basis) are braying over another docudrama — only this time it is one that offends our sensibilities.

I don’t disagree with the criticisms. But I wonder whether engaging in this kind of fight after defending the Reagan film leaves liberals open to the charge of hypocrisy. I think we have to stop agitating for it to be pulled, but also speak up loudly and clearly about its inaccuracies while demanding equal time from the network.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

I’m not sure how I feel about this, but I seem to be leaning toward supporting it.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment is reviewing plans tonight for a diner at the corner of New Road and Route 1, on the northbound side adjacent to the jughandle. The plans call for a 6,000-square-foot building on about 2 acres.

A couple of things to consider:

1. A diner will bring traffic — though something is likely to be built at the corner and it will act as a traffic magnet, as well.

2. There is a paucity of culinary options in town — especially given our physical size and the number of people living here. And diners tend to have good food and plenty of variety.

So the question, I think, will come down to the plan’s specifics — will there be enough parking, enough buffering and will it be designed to minimize the traffic impact?

First, let’s get answers. And then we’ll see where this leads.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

There are changes afoot on this year’s local electoral landscape. Richard Kish, who won a write-in campaign during the June primary to earn the Republican mayoral nod, has announced that he is moving out of state and will be dropping out of the race. I don’t have much — he announced his decision this morning in an e-mail. We’ll be posting updates to the South Brunswick Post’s Web site as we get them.

How this will affect the race is difficult to say. A tough primary battle has shown that there is enough dissatisfaction with Mayor Frank Gambatese to potentially make him vulnerable — though with the enormous amount of cash at the Democratic Party’s disposal and the general weakness of the local Republican Party, I suspect Mr. Kish would have had a very difficult, uphill climb.

And the new mayoral candidate, Lynda Woods Cleary, has a lot to prove. I don’t want to prejudge the race, but she was not a particularly strong candidate two years ago. She has had plenty of time to learn the issues, though, and other candidates have remade themselves into strong contenders after poor first showings.

That said, this cannot be good news for a party that had tremendous difficulty finding candidates to run this year.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Cynicism reigns and Americans lose. The president announced today that he was transferring some of the most obvious and dangerous captured terrorists to Guantanamo — just in time for hte 2006 election.

Here is an interesting take from Salon and one from Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Here is a good post from The Opinion Mill on the proposal from Assemblyman Sean Kean (R-Monmouth) to allow New Jersey pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense Plan B contraceptives — “the morning-after pill” on moral or ethical grounds.

Supporters offer an interesting argument, though one that ultimately fails. They want us to believe that they are safeguarding the rights of pharmacists and other healthcare providers. It is, supporters say, similar to granting pacifists consciencious objector status.

Only it’s not. The decision to claim consciencious objector status does not deprive others of their rights; the decision by a pharmacist not to dispense a prescribed med, however, does. Imagine, as The Opinion Mill points out, if this were applied to other medications: “If a pharmacist knows one of his customers is a glutton, perhaps he should be able to deny him cholesterol-lowering medications,” thereby encouraging him to eat a healthier diet.

That’s absurd, of course, but it also is a logical extension of the argument made by those who support legislation like Assemblyman Kean’s.

Ultimately, this is not about health or protecting the delicate sensibilities of healthcare professionals. It is about imposing morality on others and has dangerous potential for society:

Kean’s proposal would undermine civil society by turning private medical decisions into an opportunity for moral grandstanding. A pharmacist’s license is not a license to play community moral arbiter, and if handling certain kinds of medicine offends him so badly, he should find another line of work.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick