Jill's review of the bills provides an analysis of what the legislation's effects might be. If someone actually reads the bills, Jill's analysis isn't far off!

It's unusual and rare when Jill even makes a spelling error. We publish the column at www.american-reporter.com, and with that disclosure, let me say that characterizations of legislation are notoriously subjective, just as are characterizations of a bill's potential effects. This is just an effort by liberals to knock down someone they think is a conservative out there batting for Arnie or Tom. In fact, Jill's a self-described "radical centrist" - and I have decided that's what I'm going to call myself, too! People in the middle are pretty fed up with the back and forth over nothing when the substance goes overlooked.

Here's one Stewart missed: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33847

(Thanks for the earlier post about me getting the highpoint of Kansas. Since then I've gotten two drive-ups (WV, PA), a 7 1/2 hour slog (NY), a short but steep tractor road (MD), and a short but nice 2nd/3rd class one (VT). I'm considering trying ME this week and NH Fri, Sat, or Sun.

For completeness' sake, I also got OH and IN.

I very much enjoy Jill Stewart’s columns. Her point of view is thought-provoking and usually objective. However, when it comes to the California Correctional Peace Officer’s Association (CCPOA), the union representing California’s prison guards, her objectivity goes out the window.

For example, in her January 23, 2003 column, Stewart called the CCPOA “the most bizarre prison guards’ union in the nation.” Its members, Stewart added, were “freaks of history and circumstance, lightly trained men and women” who, “though their positions require only a GED,” wield enormous power.

Questioning the intelligence of CCPOA members seems to be one of Stewart’s favorite tactics. In a more recent column (4-21-2004), Stewart notes again that guards, who “require no more than a G.E.D. and simple training, fail to control gangs or raging drug use in certain prisons and practice a code of silence.”

Certainly Stewart is justified in questioning whether a labor union should wield so much power in Sacramento and in speculating about the guards’ ability to do their jobs, but she weakens her argument by resorting to name calling and insinuating that an entire class of people are stupid. Even if we assume her generalizations to be correct, do the “highly educated” have more of a right to wield their political power and influence than do “regular folks”?