Column: All abused - and not a mark on any of them

Ever come across a news item and think, "well, it's about time," then follow it as the story progresses over time and starting think, "well, that's going too far."

One example might be the FLDS compound in Texas.

Frankly, the lifestyle of these folks gives me a genuine case of the willies. Polygamy is bad enough (please, haven't these men suffered enough having one wife?), but forced marriages of young teen girls to much older men they might be related to is just a little over the top.

So, yeah, it was an "it's about time" moment when the Texas Rangers moved in on the FLDS compound in Eldorado. And then ....

Well, there is the matter of the telephone call that prompted all this and the uneasy possibility the unidentified 16-year-old girl has never been to Eldorado and never met anyone affiliated with the FLDS. And maybe she's not 16 but actually an adult with a history of bogus calls.

And then there's the matter of Child Protective Services swooping in and rounding up every child - hundreds of them - and a judge who must have missed that class on burden of proof taking custody rights away from the parents and sending the kids all over Texas.

Just how did that judge determine every one of those children has suffered some kind of abuse that would warrant them being separated from their parents?

And now Texas CPS is taking newborns from their mothers, as was reported by the Associated Press in Tuesday's Miner.

The mother has been in custody and treated as a minor since last month, though the people holding her in custody don't know if that's the case.

OK. So, does CPS routinely send agents to Texas hospitals daily to find out if any minors had given birth, and if so does CPS take the infant and mom into custody?

If not, why the double standard?

There's something fishy going on in Texas, and it's stretched far beyond the walls of the FLDS compound at Eldorado.

• • •

John McCain apparently missed the memo from the bureaucr - oops, scientists at the U.N. who decided that global warming isn't happening after all, or is at least on hold for 15 years or so. McCain came out on Tuesday with a pledge to do something about global warming, and I took that news with a sense of relief. Maybe this means McCain is turning his attention from eviscerating the First Amendment, as he did with McCain-Feingold.

Of course, no matter what McCain decides to do regarding global warming, it won't be enough - at least according to the Obama and Clinton campaigns. Both are promising to do way more damage to the economy to save us from the phantom threat that is global warming.

Which brings me to an Obama sound bite on the news recently, the one where he pledged to spend $50 billion on alternative energy. I'm sure Clinton and McCain have similar schemes to throw at us.

To date, though, none of them have slipped and said anything about having a five-year plan or 10-year plan, or mentioned anything about running dog capitalists or investing in Great Leap Forward tennis shoes. (I read that last one somewhere years ago, the same place where the classic line, "Come to where the labor is - Mao-boro Country" appeared.) But Clinton has talked openly about "managing" the economy, and I'm sure she'd do just as well as any politburo has.

Can annual crop failures due to drought be far behind?

This is not a good year for people who yearn for a presidential candidate who believes "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" is not the right way to appeal to voters.

Instead, we've got Lefty, Lefty and Confused.