Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
Open thread
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted May 3, 2007 at 1:06 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
164 Comments
Why is Tiahrt so angry? He votes against appreciation those who educate children:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.con.res.112:
And he votes to slaughter horses so they can be put into our food:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.249:
Hates education of children and hates horses (but apparently loves horse burgers). Oh yeah, he also voted against funding our troops in the field, probably because they didn’t donate enough to his campaign.
Oh sure Doug I suppose you would also question him if he voted to slaughter child and educate horses!Some people are never pleased…
sorry children..
In 06′ he voted for a bill that removed 2 Billion from the Military personnel budget (funds for housing, hospitals, etc ..)
Who will challenge him in 08?
Nothing wrong with horse meat; makes for a very tasty burger. Meat is meat. Back in the early 1800s, prairie dog was a delicacy back east until people found out It was prairie “dog”.
You’d be amazed what you can eat if you’re hungry enough.
Horse meat is delicious! I recommend not naming the horse before it goes to market though.
Hank
“And he votes to slaughter horses so they can be put into our food:”—————-
Boyda and Moran voted likewise.
The Librats are eating their own….
Remember that nutty Cindy SheeRidesHerSonsCoffin? She’s still alive and kicking, although her fifteen minutes of fame is almost up, and she leads her merry band of pointy-hat leftists in denouncing Hillary.
Question is – what is poor Cindy going to do if Hillary gets the nomination in ‘08? lol
[quote]How many times have you been arrested?Seven.
Are you friendly with any members of Congress?I’m very friendly with many members of Congress: John Conyers, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Dennis Kucinich and Jim McDermott.
Who are your favorite politicians?I like them all equally.
Least favorite?Let me try and narrow it down. I’ll tell you who my least favorite Dem is, and it’s Hillary Clinton.
Why Clinton?She has been an unflinching supporter of George Bush’s war. She thinks she has to act like a Republican to win this election.[end quote]
more interview here:
http://thehill.com/20-questions/20questions-profiles-cindy-sheehan-2007-05-02.html
The Librats are eating their own….
Remember that nutty Cindy SheeRidesHerSonsCoffin? She’s still alive and kicking, although her fifteen minutes of fame is almost up, and she leads her merry band of pointy-hat leftists in denouncing Hillary.
Question is – what is poor Cindy going to do if Hillary gets the nomination in ‘08? lol
[quote]How many times have you been arrested?Seven.
Are you friendly with any members of Congress?I’m very friendly with many members of Congress: John Conyers, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Dennis Kucinich and Jim McDermott.
Who are your favorite politicians?I like them all equally.
Least favorite?Let me try and narrow it down. I’ll tell you who my least favorite Dem is, and it’s Hillary Clinton.
Why Clinton?She has been an unflinching supporter of George Bush’s war. She thinks she has to act like a Republican to win this election.[end quote]
more interview here:
http://thehill.com/20-questions/20questions-profiles-cindy-sheehan-2007-05-02.html
I know it’s off “topic,” but given the couple of Bloomburg “mayor’s” group threads recently, and the dishonesty inherent in Bloomburg’s position, I though you all might like to get it right from the horse’s mouth. The actual column requires registration so this is from another site, but it links to the column, and you can register and read it all if you like.
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/05/atfe_sets_recor.php
Bottom line: Bloomburg’s claim that the Tiahart Amendment prevents firearm trace data from being shared with local law enforcement is a bald-faced lie. This is all about Bloomburg’s agenda, not any sort of glitch in the law.
I’m so sick of politics. I’d like to see all primaries and the electrical collage thrown out the door. I’d like to see a dozen people running for president who would be elected with a total vote of everyone through out the country, enough of this electrical collage BS. I bet you the turnout at the polls will triple!
Electrical collage?
Either you’re jerking our chains, or you meant “electoral college”
If you buy your cigarettes on line and did not pay the Kansas state tax on tobacco. The state knows who you are and will track you down and send you a nasty bill for the taxes! Gee your Patriot act at use?
Tony–
You are right, my friend. The electoral college makes the minority vote in every state meaningless.
Kansas hasn’t voted for a Democratic president since LBJ. This is very discouraging for democratic voters here. They see, rightly, that a democratic vote for president is almost a waste of time.
I still do it of course, but that’s the reality.
Similarly in a strong Democratic state like Massachusetts or Vermont, Republican voters have the same problem–why bother?
It’s an archaic and stupid system that advantages rural states over urban ones.
If we didn’t have it, George Worst-President-Ever wouldn’t be in the White House now, and American troops wouldn’t be dying like flies in Iraq.
Writerdog,
I have a solution: Quit smoking.
:::runs for cover:::
Capn,
There’s lots of reasons Bush is in the White House, not least of which is the fact that Gore lost his own home state of Tennessee. Had he won Tennessee, Florida would have been an oddball footnote. Blaming the electoral college system makes as much sense as when the radical conservatives blame the “liberal media” for the nation’s ills.
…and while governor leadership and the republican controlled ks legislature fiddle… our water supply continues to decline. But it seems we are not alone in that predicament.
Thirsty world captures investors’ attentionWed May 2, 2007 10:25AM EDT
By Christine Stebbins -Analysis
CHICAGO (Reuters) – The need to feed up to two billion more people by 2025, booming industrialization in developing countries like China, and a warming climate seen threatening the world’s most precious natural resource has investors serious about water.
“Regardless of what happens to the economy — you can bet and bank on a predictable demand for water. It is a product that is essential to life,” said Deane Dray, who analyzes water markets for Goldman Sachs in New York.
“People will largely pay ‘whatever’ because it is life-sustaining and there is no substitute. You put all those together, it is very clear why companies are enthusiastic about water.”
The United Nations Human Development Report for 2006 said that by 2025, if current global water consumption continues, more than 3 billion of the world’s 7.9 billion people will be living in areas where water is scarce.
Indeed, conflicts over water rights are already going on in dozens of areas from sub-Saharan Africa to the Middle East to Australia, India, eastern Asia and the U.S. Southwest.
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN3045559...
And in Kansas?
Damn the water. We have tax cuts to worry about. And the queers to keep in place. And guns. And domestic partnership registries. And all abortion. All the time.
Those operation rescue types are gonna be mighty thirsty someday.
“Boyda and Moran voted likewise.Posted by: GSheridan | May 03, 2007 at 07:53 AM
Dont you just love when the republicans are called out, the cry of “boyda did it too” is the answer?
Isnt Jerry Moran a republican too? Breaking Reagan’s eleventh commandment?
Sounds a lot like “clinton did it”. The other republican white meat.
The Republicans want to have their high horse and eat it, too.
(Okay, that was bad. But still fun)
Can’t stand horsemeat. It’s got that sweetish, almost gone bad taste to me. I have nothing against others doing it, although I much prefer horses as animals than cows. Horses are far more sociable, and at least on the surface, far more intelligent.
Global Warming Buffoonery.
I’ve noticed that realclimate dot org has taken down from their website about temperature driving CO2. The reason is that their theory that CO2 drives temperature is totally defeated by science.
The science in long term ocean cycles as well as the arctic ice core samples prove that temperature drives CO2 increase.
So as much as the GW religious fanatics such as Cosmos wants everyone to believe, they have got it exactly bass ackwards from what real science says that happens.
Temperature drives CO2 increases.Not the other way around.
“The Republicans want to have their high horse and eat it, too.
(Okay, that was bad. But still fun)”
Bwah-hahahahahahahaha! That might be the highlight of my day!
Agreed Lynz. Tom, THAT’s funny and I dont care who ya are…
The US House is currently debating (it’s live on CSpan right now) adding “sexual orientation” to the Federal Hate Crimes statute. The usual radical conservatives are busy arguing against it.
I’d buy their bullshit under one condition: Just one of those bastards stands up and votes to REMOVE protections for religion from the current hate crimes statute.
Until that happens, it’s just anti-gay bullshit.
“Until that happens, it’s just anti-gay bullshit.”
True enough Tom. But listen to some of them try to deny that they are anti gay.
And even more frightening? Listen to the ones who are PROUD of their homophobia.
A dominionist is a dominionist is a dominionist….
Farmgrrl,
Dan Lundgren is now standing on the floor of the House comparing homosexuality to NAMBLA and child molesting. He just called this bill the NAMBLA PROTECTION ACT.
Jesus would slap the shit out of him.
I haven;t been following the debate, but in general I am not for hate crimes legislation. Thatbeing said, I really don;t care why you committed a crime. It doesn;t matter to me one iota whether you beat the snot out of someone because a) you wanted their money b) you didn;t like the color of their skin c) you didn;t like the color of the clothing d) you didn;t like their music.You deserve to be punished. The punishment should generally be equal for all reasons–although I understand not completely possibleOne person getting beat up is not better than another, or worse than another.
KSfarmgirl-Wht is a dominionist? Never heard that term before?
Tom–Sounds like Lundgren is trying to scar people into voting his way. Education would be more proper. The guy should just shut up and listen
Heheheheheheeheh!
Well you know, linking ANYTHING to nambla is a favorite wingnut strategy.
Look on this blog how they love to trash the ACLU by creating a false issue of support for nambla. Funny, they dont say the same thing about the ACLU’s defense of oxyrush.
And creating the false link of being gay to being a pedophile is another of their favorite wingnut talking points. Except, of course, with mark foley.
Whatever. Creating those false guilt by association things is going to work really well in 08. I’m sure the wingnuts will LOVE to be associated with the utter failure of bushco.
Or any frog marches that might be on youtube. heheheheheheh!
Well geez Tom, didn’t you know that homosexuality and pedophilia are the same damn thing?
>>BIG EYEROLL<<
I hope Lundgren gets a raging case of mouth herpes.
Littlejohn,
There’s nothing quite like being targeted for violence for no other reason than religious beliefs, skin color, or sexual orientation. When violent haters target someone for those reasons, it goes beyond just gaining “fruits of the crime,” such as the $20 in my pocket.
It’s done to intimidate anyone in the targeted group, it’s done to teach us our place in society, it’s done to silence us and stop us from exercising our civil rights.
Hate crimes strike at the very heart of the values that make America great.
You can read to your heart’s content about dominionism here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
Or you can google “dominionism” and pick some interesting articles.
Absolutely littlejohn. A crime is a crime is a crime.
Point A; There should not be a hate crimes bill. It’s stupid and illogical.
Point B: But if Congress thinks it necessary to have hate crime legislation, sexual orientation, within limits, should be a protected class. (not NAMBLA!)
If they are forced into acknowledging Point B, maybe they will get point A.
My own opinion is that dominionism is the direct opposite of religious tolerance. I like the definition that says it is a “movement” to replace the constitution with the christian bible.
Outlander,
There is *already* a Federal hate crimes statute. It protects your free exercise of religion. It protects people who are vicimized because of their skin colors. This law already exists.
Again, I’ll buy the radical conservative argument that a crime is a crime is a crime JUST AS SOON AS THEY VOTE TO REMOVE RELIGION.
Like I said Tom, there should not be a hate crimes law.
Outlander,
Fine. Call Todd Tiahrt’s office right now, and tell his staff he needs to offer an amendment to the Hate Crimes bill that would gut the current language, and strip all protected classes from current statute.
His Wichita office number is 316.262.8992. His DC office number is 202.225.6216
Good luck.
Dems wont release most of the wording in the now being discussed Immigration bill but right now it allows in 100 million people.
This alone should get some attention But Im guessing as long as the media pushes the continued destruction of the country we wont hear much of it. Harry Reid refuses to relese the bills wording for folks to read. Bits and pieces are getting out but here is what is up for grabs so far…
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1076.cfm
GMC70,
Your earlier comment wasn’t “off ‘topic’”. This is Open Thread.
Which is why I’m going to say this: If anybody is considering taking a driving vacation out West this year, and wants to see amazing nature, go to Great Basin National Park just west of the Nevada-Utah border.
The Great Basin was once an inland sea. The park represents what used to be an island in this sea. It’s surrounded by parched desert. As you drive up a steep winding road to the park, the land changes from sage and scrub to fir, lodgepole and ponderosa pine forest. Going from 5000 feet to 11,000 feet, the temp in early July drops from 100 to 60 or even 50. Shirtsleeves to jackets in a half-hour trip.
There are snowfields, alpine meadows and frigid-water trout streams. The park has moose, elk, beavers, black bears and even grizzlies.
The park also has some of America’s greatest stalactite and stalagmite filled caverns.
If you can hike, you can see bristlecone pine trees that are more than 4000 years old–they were little sprouting seedlings in the time of Mesopotamia’s and Egypt’s glory, long before there was a Greek or Roman civilization. A thousand years before the Old Testament was written down. These trees were living before Moses, and are still living. They survive in a hostile windswept, mostly cold environment. Their trunks are twisted and gnarly, survivors that they are.
Kind of puts human history into a different perspective.
Often you can see more than 100 miles into the desert. At night, you will see more stars than you ever imagined. The Milky Way blazes from horizon to horizon.
If you have the opportunity, give it a visit. You’ll remember it for the rest of your life.
Yes, we support stripping out everyone from a “hate crime” bill. There should not even be such a thing as a hate crime. Its a feel good term thought up by the usual Liberals. Another version of the usual liberal white guilt phase.
Why are the liberals against enhanced drug sentences, but FOR enhanced hate crime laws…?
If someone shoots you, I thought it was against the law already? If someone shoots you to steal your car or because they dont like your hair cut, isnt the fact they shot you , already against the law…?
Why they did it is of no consequence at all to anyone. Except for investigators to search for motive in their investigation.
Once they get the motive they can search for that type of person. But after that, the punishment should be the same.
So you are saying if I get shot for my car, that is less important cause you got shot cause you are gay,or disabled or black etc.
How is that…?
Guy against hate crimes…lemme guess.
White, middleclass, majority religion, majority sexuality, majority status all around….never been the target group of a hate crime in his entire life…
Mark – you are absolutely correct. That little-known National Park is beautiful.
Or that maybe he never wants to be a victim or play a victim like the Liberal Left constantly do.
P-mom,
Guess who all the speakers against this bill have been?
Male. White. Except Lundgren, southern. One woman from Oklahoma.
Speakers for: Almost every African American in the House. A few of the Jews. People who know what it’s like to be targeted for hate crimes.
Go figure.
P_Mom,Why are you searching for lables?
Republican,
What do you call someone who has been brutally beaten, tied to a fence, and left for dead?
Apparently, not a “victim.”
Republican,
What do you call someone who was tied to the back of a pickup truck, and dragged for miles until his limbs were torn from his body and finally decapitated?
Apparently, not a “victim.”
I hope the hate crimes bill takes into account old decrepit disabled people too.
Especially the mentally ill Vets.
You fail to realize that there are factors that lead a crime to be more heinous. Motive. How easy the prey was…
You have to admit, when you hear of an 85 year old lady being raped and beaten, it makes you MORE angry than when it is someone else.
Tom,Try googling ‘hate crimes against whites’. Google is about the only place you will find them as the press and police refuse to label them hate crimes.
Why is everyone so hung up on labels? Label a crime a hate crime. Label a homosexual ‘gay’. Label a dark skinned AMERICAN a ‘person of color’. Boy, for trying so hard for everyone to be equal, y’all sure do love to throw around labels.
P-mom,
Disability is included in the bill.
Ah now I knew you were going to throw the equality thing back on me.
It is sad that you cannot see the equal value of a person, and still see that the person for who they are, is still a target.
More fun at the Justice Department:
http://www.kansas.com/519/story/60037.html
WASHINGTON – The Justice Department is investigating whether its former White House liaison used political affiliations in deciding whom to hire as entry-level prosecutors in some U.S. attorney offices around the country, The Associated Press has learned.
Such consideration would be a violation of federal law
P_Mom,Of course they are targets. There are many targets of hate crimes. Just don’t see the need to label people. Why do you?
Sol,
Because the people who *commit* those crimes label their victims, and target them specifically for who they are.
Tom,So why do we never hear of a *hate crimes* perpetrated on whites by blacks?
TomRepublican would call him a card carrying, socialist, whinning liberal. And he would complain about all the noise that guy made while being dragged to his death. He would point out that the unfortunate African-American male should have been true to his convictions and just decided to live. Then he would place the blame further on the African-American by telling everybody that the guy is going to be ok. Because he believes it to be true.
What is so wrong with a ‘label’?
Does that indicate anything negative? I am a mother, woman, middle aged, handicapped, blonde (dyed), blue eyed, deist, short, fat…
a label means nothing. Except when people hate you for any of the above.
oh and very very tired…exhausted.
SolPlease enlighten me to any “hate crime” that was perpetrated on a white person by a black person. Remember we are speaking of “hate”. Not robbery or any other M.O.
Don’t you like being labeled as an American?
I mean really, we’re all just people so let’s just toss ot all the labels, American, Christian, terrorist etc.
It’s official everyone! There are no terrorists, we’re all just people now! Yay!
…But seriously folks…People are what they are, whether they have a label or not…”a rose by any other name…” yadda, yadda, yadda.
P_MomOr except when you expect different treatment for your label.
Night P_Mom.
Mike,Do your wn research. Use the google
GMC,What have CC guys got to hide? If you have done nothing wrong why fear being on a public database. If CC is funded on the peoples dime shouldn’t we [the people] have access to the data base. Look at everything else that is a matter of public record?
What gives? What is so special about CC people as a group that requires “privileges”
Mike,Do your own research. Use the google.
Sol,
Race is already protected under the current hate crimes statute. Why don’t you ask Alberto Gonzales or John Ashcroft why no prosecutions against African Americans have been brought because of hate crimes against “whites?”
If there are black people committing hate crimes against white people, they should be subject to the same penalties as anyone else.
As a legal matter, hate crimes are problematic. I’d oppose them, for all classes. It requires a prosecutor to prove motive.
Generally motive is not an element of an offense; it’s important only as a “who dun it” point in determining who likely committed the crime, but it is NOT an element that must be proven. It thus makes the charge, particularly the enhanced “hate crime” charge, more difficult to prove.
It doesn’t matter, legally, WHY you beat the crap out of someone, only THAT you did – unless it is labeled a “hate crime.” To use the Wyoming crime (Shephard? Was that the name? I forget) or the Texas chain dragging case, as recent notable examples: Isn’t the crime despicable and disgusting in and of itself? Is it “more” bad that they drug a man behind a truck because he was black? Would it be less horrible if they drug him to, say, send a message about enforcing loan sharking debts? Doesn’t the heinous nature of the act speak for itself?
Second, hate crimes come uncomfortably close to thought crimes. We don’t punish people in this country because of what they think (though there are those, I think primarily on the left – yes, I’m biased – who would like to. . . ). A person can be a racist ass, but it’s not a crime. Frankly, the Constitution protects his right to be a racist ass. Beating a man to death is a crime. WHY you beat the man to death is ultimately irrelevent; he’s no less dead, and the crime is no less criminal.
No, hate crimes are ultimately merely pandering. They make us feel good, and we get to tally up our political correctness points.
Now, I’m sure that I’m gonna be told I’m not entitled to an opinion because I’m, as it’s been phrased -
“White, middleclass, majority religion, majority sexuality, majority status all around.”
Exactly how is that relevent? Are only certain persons permitted to think about certain subjects? I’ve given you legal rationale for my position; attack it, not me. More to the point, how do we justify hate crimes? How does such an offense not amount to “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others?” Are some lives more important than others? If a person is murdered out of revenge rather than race, is the revenge killing less illegal? Less worthy of punishment?
Or less likely to get a headline. . . .
There have been cases of hate crimes with blacks on whites. And they have been prosecuted.
Speaking of which, did you see the riot in LA with the police beating the heck out of the Latinos?
It looked really bad…but then at the end of the report it said something like 10 protesters were injured, and something like 25 police!
Uhmm…something isn’t adding up here. Either the protesters were afraid to come forward, or the police are counting a scrape on their finger. Or the reports neglected to show the whole story.Maybe the cops were fighting that way because they HAD to.
GMC, usually you won’t find those kind of despicable crimes against someone other than a target of a hate crime. They use it to instill fear into others. They use it to send a message. It certainly does send a message doesn’t it? Which is why we need these laws. To send a message back.
Interesting, farmgrrl.
How you and other flaming libs can twist any fact to suit your nitwitery.
“And creating the false link of being gay to being a pedophile is another of their favorite wingnut talking points. Except, of course, with mark foley.”
This little statement of yours is evidence that the liberals never miss a chance to defame a homosexual republican while at the same time anointing their queers as saints.
Their is absolutely no evidence that Mark Foley was a pedophile. None. However, the libs had to make that connection or otherwise they would be obvious hypocrits.
No dear, calling Foley a pedophile was an entirely untrue leftwing talking point.
Hank
GMC,
The law already makes distinctions in charging and sentencing. Look at the different categories of murder – in almost every one of them, motive is a factor.
Again, I repeat my call for opponents to immediately work to remove “religion” from the current Federal hate crimes statute.
They’re taking amendments on the House floor right now. There’s time for you to call Todd Tiahrt’s office (I posted the numbers upthread) and demand this change.
Wow, from the sound of things here lately, from imus to hate crimes, that kkkarl rove must have set the strategy for 08.
The return of the poor persecuted majority. The return of the angry white man.
Woo hoo. Let’s party like it’s 1999…
Tom, Political Mom, and others
You are right, though it wasn’t necessarily addressed to me, that I am plain vanilla. I am white, middle aged, middle class, main stream religion and heterosexual. I have lived most of my life incommunities that are essesentially (with a few execeptions) homogenous. I have never been targeted for anything other than being a “newcomer” My point of view or experience is somewhat limited. First of all, let me say that if all the other stuff is included in “hate crimes” legislation, then sexual orientation should be included as well. And I am not afraid that Nambla will get their sicko crap added. Fair is fair.My contention is that hate crimes penalties are in themselves, not fair. If we go by equal protection, then the fact that if a person gets beat up because they are one of the protected classes and I get beat up and I am not,then the guy that beats the protected class citizen gets a heavier sentence essentially puts a greater value on them than me. I think that is wrong. I don;t care about labels, or whatever. Neither do I excuse the beating, the killing, of anyone because of blah, blah, blah.The people that killed mathew Shepard, the people that dragged and killed the african american guy, all deserve the death penalty.It makes it no worse that they were what they are.
If a middle aged guy having the hots for 16 year old boys isnt the same pedophilia as nambla, I dont know what is.
Now, this is the part where hank says all foley did was send emails to 16 year old boys who are considered “of age” in one of foley’s many jurisdictions. He never actually touched a boy.
Whatever. No hair splitting from me today. The only folks who think foley was NOT a pedophile are the hard core 20 percenters.
And you know you never win an arguement with them. Skunks and pissing matches and all.
Republican’s sister has autism. His cousin has Down’s.
Shoot. If you have any medical condition, just start talking about it and Republican will one-up you with a personal anecdote of sick family member.
And check this bullsh*t: “I believe it is called NLP or NELP, something to that effect.”
He can remember what he scored, but he can’t remember the NAME OF THE TEST.
Funny, you’d think if anything stuck in your mind, it would be the name of the test.
But wait, there’s more:
“Guess what? I made in the top 0.1 percent of all scores for that year.”
WOW! That is so similar to this:
“Heck, I had a son that scored 167 on the Stanford-Binet IQ test. I was told that that was the highest at that time in Wichita.
Posted by: Right Angle | August 28, 2006 at 07:13 PM”
The coincidences and improbabilities just never stop from Republican, do they?
.morg
Bloomburg’s group has nothing to do with CC. The data refers to trace information involving firearms and where they are sold, if they turn up used in a crime. For obvious reasons, law enforcement wants that info as a investigative tool. For equally obvious reasons, such data should not be released to the public so as not to undercut those investigations.
Bloomburg’s group is not law enforcement, and is not using said data for a law enforcement purpose. He wants same for harassment of dealers, manufacturers, and owners of firearms. And we all understand his ultimate goal, his protests to the contrary notwithstanding. He, and Brady and Co., would “reasonably” regulate the 2nd amendment to a dead letter, given the opportunity.
So I probably don’t have to explain why so many so deeply oppose a national “database” of firearms owners, a de facto registration. As do I.
At least until the SCOTUS clearly and unequivicably recognizes that “the people” means, indeed, “the people.” In ALL the Constitution.
GMC correctly raises the legal rationale for opposing characterization of a crime as a “hate crime”. Proving motive, as is necessary in such a case, beyond a reasonable doubt makes a prosecutor’s job just that much tougher. A good defense counsel should be able to defend and defeat many “hate crime” prosecutions on this alone (not the underlying crime, but classification as a hate crime), assuming the client kept his mouth shut while being interrogated.
I am one for whom the jury is “still out” on hate crimes; there is, in my opinion, something especially heinous where a victim is selected due to ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Saying that, assuming a homocide, is this more heinous than a killing by enforcers employed by a loan shark, to borrow GMC’s example.If so, then is society served by imposing another hurdle to conviction for a “hate crime”?
If it is society’s determination that certain criminal acts are to be defined as “hate crimes”, then let’s widen the scope of the statutes and include sexual orientation in the list. Should this be undesirable, repeal all “hate crime” legislation. To me, it’s as simple as that.
Mike one crime of blacks on whites that immediately comes to mind is the Carr brothers. If robbery was the only object they could have been in and out in no time. Instead they terrorised their victims for over 12 hours raping the women, doing perverse things to the men and then to top this off took them to a snow covered field and shot them intending to kill them all.
Did they do this because of any other reason than that they hated what their victims were, white, middle class men and women. Were they charged with a hate crime. Of course not.
I am for labeling a crime as heinous because that is what this was. To label something as hate means you have to be inside the perpertrators head at the time he/she committed the crime. How do you do that?
Whatever happened to “Turkman,” the Iraqi tribesman that loved the United States for invading and occupying his country and hates liberals?
Man, I miss that guy.
And funny thing, JM said he was stationed in Turkey . . . another one of those coinky-dinkies.
How many people got charged with a hate crime last year?
Two?
Let’s move on to something that matters . . .
ksgrm raises the point that GMC and I are attempting to make; were the actions of the Carr brothers a “hate crime”, or were they just heinous crimes in and of themselves, with the shootings at the end intended to eliminate witnesses? Were these crimes committed due to the economic status of the victims, irrespective of the race of the victims and perpetrators? Would we be having this discussion if the victims of the Carr brothers had been middle class African-Americans?
Something that concerns me more that this argument are news items on the back burner this morning.
Administrators at a Minnesota state financed university announced that they will be adding foot washing stations on the university property to make it easier for their Muslim students to practice their relegion.
A public school in California has segregated their students into female and male classes because the Muslim parents don’t want their kids to be educated together. This isn’t done in the Muslin relegion.
And I think the following is just to funny for words.
Last month, Philip Thompson, an aide to Virginia Senator Jim Webb was arrested trying to bring a gun into the building where Webb’s Senate office is located. At the time, there was much speculation that the gun that Thompson was carrying was, in fact, Webb’s which Thompson had been given earlier that day before Webb left on a flight from Reagan National Airport.
Today, those charges were dropped and the reason is really quite puzzling:
Prosecutors today dismissed the gun charge filed last month against an aide to Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) who was caught bringing a loaded pistol into the Russell Senate Office Building.
U.S. Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor said in a statement late today that his office had concluded that the essential elements of the charge — carrying a pistol without a license — could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Filed in D.C. Superior Court, the dismissal brings to an apparent end an embarrassing episode for Webb, a gun rights advocate, and the aide, Phillip Thompson, a former marine who serves as Webb’s executive assistant.
Now I am for conceal/carry but to plead ignorance as an excuse for carrying a loaded weapon into a government building in over and beyond belief.
Hope you see the danger in these situations.
Where is the outrage from our separation of church and state people? Where is the outrage from our gun control people?
Thank’s for clearing that up GMC.
Tom:
Just where did you get your law degree?
Motive is NOT an element of the offense, nor does it differientate between various degrees of murder. The various degrees are based upon the level of premediation in committing the crime. The more premeditation, the more serious the offense.
It IS a sentencing factor, as are any number of other considerations. And if a factor (such as hate) is used to enhance a sentence beyond it’s statutory maximum, said must be proven to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, per Apprendi. But that may be done post trial, at a sentencing hearing, separate from the elements of the crime offense.
You’re simply, as a matter of law, Tom, wrong.
ksgrm, as to the segregation of students by sex in a public school in L.A. due to parents’ religious beliefs, that shouldn’t be happening. Period. If the parents want this, let them send their children to a private school for those of Islamic faith.
Regarding the Minnesota university, I’ve no problems with this as long as there is a chapel on campus which allows students of other particular religions an easier way to practice their religions; if there is not, then the foot washing stations should go.
Regarding Senator Webb’s aide: you just can’t make this stuff up.
Gotta go. It’s been enlightening. Keep up the good work.
GMC,
I don’t have a law degree, and I wasn’t writing a brief or arguing a case before a court. I said the law already makes distinctions, which is true. You called it “premeditation,” I called it “motive.” While your semantics are absolutely correct, and I used the wrong word, my point remains: The law makes distinctions about how and why a crime is committed in determining charges and sentencing.
I’m watching the vote on C-SPAN, and I didn’t see Tiahrt make his motion to gut HR1592 and replace it with language striking “religion” from the current Federal hate crimes statute.
Imagine that.
How come the Eagle hasn’t covered the postponement of the District I candidate interviews “until further notice”?
I have seen some school districts segregating classrooms by sex – not for religious reasons but so the students won’t be distracted by each other. Don’t really know if i think it is a good idea but at least the ones I read about had nothing to do with any religion.
On the ‘foot-washing’ issue I think VT hit it well. As long as there are reasonable accomodations for all then it should be OK; otherwise NO.
At MIT we had a non-denominational chapel surrounded by a moat. It could be used by anyone. That, in my opinion, is the way to go.
VaughnI tend to agree with you and GMC on this. The Carr brothers actions were disgusting and they should put them to death. However, I do not believe that their crime was racially motivated. More economic opportunity and not so much about race. If the prosecution could have linked them to a hate group or the living victim could have testified to the fact that the perps were racially motivated then I am sure the proper charges would have been filed.
I apologize to all of the majority that this law may never protect. But when I was a child, I was the only black kid in my neighborhood and got a crash course in race relations. It is very unnerving to know that people hate you because of your race or sexual orientation. And those people that commit crimes against those minorities simply because of one’s race or sexual orientation deserve a harsher punishment.
Please don’t try to judge what it is like to walk in another man’s shoes. I don’t try to pretend to know what it is like to be a white-hetro-middle class male. Please do not pretend to know what it is like to be me.
On the hate crime issue:
Add another layer to Vaughn’s thought. In Kansas, juries are instructed in “lesser included” offenses as a matter of law. But I don’t think that’s the same in all jurisdictions. Thus, if I prove the crime, but fail to prove racial animocity as motive, I put at risk my entire case, at least in some jurisdictions.
Thus the safe move as a prosecutor is NOT to charge the “hate crime” but to seek enhance penalties, using the hate motive at sentencing where the underlying prosecution is not at risk. In Kansas, there is no specific “hate crime,” but racial, etc. animus is a factor to enhance sentencing, to seek a Hard 50 sentence or depart from the guidelines sentence, for example.
As a practical matter, how does one prove WHY one commits a crime. I can prove that you did it. I can prove that you planned it, by your actions. But unless the criminal provides clear evidence of same in his crime (i.e. scrawling racial messages on the body, etc), it is difficult if not impossible to look in side that head and know why.
This is perhaps why said crimes are so rarely prosecuted as same.
No, ultimately, hate crimes are not about protecting minorities. They are about legislators, and us, “feeling” we are accomplishing something. They’re feel good, PC legislation.
Tom, there’s a WORLD of difference between “premeditation” and “motive.” They are most certainly NOT semantics, or just different words for similar ideas. They are separate and apart notions, having little to do with each other.
One may premeditate with any number of motives. One may have any number of motives, and not premeditate at all. Different animals.
Been interesting. Lunch is over; back to wading through the &#%@.
I seem to remember some line about draining a swamp, and alligators . . . . .
GMC – I think the place where ‘hate crimes’ might prove useful is in dealing with accomplices. Thus you might be able to go after enhanced charges against someone in the KKK, Muslim brotherhood, Bloods, etc for fostering SYSTEMATIC activities of hate.
GMC,
I’ve already conceded your point on “premeditation” v “motive.” I’m not an attorney, and used the wrong words. You keep missing my point, however.
You said “hate crimes are not about protecting minorities. They are about legislators, and us, “feeling” we are accomplishing something”
I completely disagree. Crimes of hate that target people for their characteristics or religion are meant to intimidate entire communities. They’re meant to keep the larger target, besides the individual victim, from exercising their civil rights. They’re meant to harass and demean those of other faiths. They’re meant to teach us where our place is, and that place is one of silence.
A hate crime goes beyond its immediate victim, and as I said upthread, strikes a blow of violence against the values that make America great.
Republican,
“I’ve noticed that realclimate dot org has taken down from their website about temperature driving CO2. The reason is that their theory that CO2 drives temperature is totally defeated by science.”
LIAR.
Their old post is still up. And CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
‘What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?’http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores
AND they posted a NEW one a few days ago, about 4th down on their home page.
‘The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)’http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-lag-between-temp-and-co2/
Republican: “Temperature drives CO2 increases.Not the other way around.”
I’m sorry that you are unable to understand very SIMPLE concepts.
In the PAST, warmings were triggered by a change in orbit, and other factors.
The warming caused an increase in CO2, which AMPLIFIED the warming triggered by the other factor(s).
If CO2 had not increased, there would have been LESS warming.
But THIS time, humans have caused the increase in CO2 that is triggering the warming. AND we’re adding methane, CFC’s, SF6, etc..
The warming driven by human-added GHG’s will probably cause (as in the past) natural increases in CO2 and other GHG’s — which (as in the past) will AMPLIFY the warming.
And a DROP in CO2 below normal could trigger an ice age,http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/wethring.htm“The rise of the Appalachian Mountains may have caused a major ice age approximately 450 million years ago, an Ohio State University study has found.
The weathering of the mountains pulled carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere, causing the opposite of a greenhouse effect — an “icehouse” effect….It also reinforces the notion that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are a major driver of Earth’s climate.”
I wonder what happens when you heat up an open bottle of Coke?
Do the CO2 molecules heat up the Coke by themselves?
Or is there some other factor. :)
Oh, and check this link out how Real Climate is in a state of denial.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/barton-gets-it-wrong/
And those people that commit crimes against those minorities simply because of one’s race or sexual orientation deserve a harsher punishment.
Please don’t try to judge what it is like to walk in another man’s shoes. I don’t try to pretend to know what it is like to be a white-hetro-middle class male. Please do not pretend to know what it is like to be me.
Posted by: Mike | May 03, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Please don;t think i am trying to lessen your experience, or try and understand it. I cannot. However,this country’s ideal is equal protection under the law. Admittedly, it is never lived up to that promise, but hate crimes legislation doesn’t add up to equal protection under the law. Your life is not more valuable than mine because of your skin color. Tom’s is not more valuable than mine because of his sexual orientation. To me, that is what hate crimes legislation does. I just don;t believe it is any less heinouse to kill someone for $20 than it is because they are a class that is disliked by another.However, again, if we are to have such legislation, it should include every clase of people that have can be identified as “needing” protection because of the ridiculous bias of others.
http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=CEDBR&p=/Forecasts/2007KSSum/
This is the 2007 employment forecast for Kansas.
btw, that link was a result of searching for “temperature drives CO2″ using Google. But its okay for Cosmos to call me a liar.
Time will tell in the next ten years, when Cosmos and his GW religious fanatics will slither down their holes to once again scheme something with consensus science instead of real science.
Tom:
I understand your point of a hate crime striking at the larger target. And you may well be right.
But I don’t prosecute “larger target” strikes. I prosecute specific acts, against specific individuals. WHY they did it may be useful in the “who dun it” part. But requiring it as an element makes the prosecution more problematic, and re-enforces the notion that some lives are more protected, and thus worth more, than others.
Gotta get back to work. Last post, I promise.
completely disagree. Crimes of hate that target people for their characteristics or religion are meant to intimidate entire communities. They’re meant to keep the larger target, besides the individual victim, from exercising their civil rights. They’re meant to harass and demean those of other faiths. They’re meant to teach us where our place is, and that place is one of silence.
Posted by: Tom | May 03, 2007 at 01:04 PM \\
Tom– I agree. And unfortuantely, crimes have often been excused because they were against “just another _______ “(fill in the blank)
Crime against another should never be excused. Period. That’s my contention. Enforce the law, regardless if you didn;t like the victim, or the victim was not like you, or whatever. That’s all I am saying. However,
“A hate crime goes beyond its immediate victim, and as I said upthread, strikes a blow of violence against the values that make America great.”
Makes an interesting thought, one I shall ponder upon
Ah, farmgrrl,
I see that you are unable to respond directly to my point. Instead you must continue with the liberal lies and bullshit.
Unlike you, let me respond point by point to your BS post:
“If a middle aged guy having the hots for 16 year old boys isnt the same pedophilia as nambla, I dont know what is.”
Interesting statement. It attempts to defame Foley with half truths and out and out lies. First of all, NAMBLA is an association for queer pedophiles. Their slogan, “Eight is too late.” tells most people all they need to know about these perverts. The only reason for someone like you to bring these perverts into a discussion about Foley is to defame him with an association that does not exist. A lie. BS. Shame on you farmgrrl, if you’re not smart enough to know this we are.
“Now, this is the part where hank says all foley did was send emails to 16 year old boys who are considered “of age” in one of foley’s many jurisdictions. He never actually touched a boy.”
Several lies in this little statement. You’re attempting to set up a straw man to knock down because you can’t argue the facts. Hank never said anything about emails. No evidence that Foley ever sent any emails to ‘16 year old boys’. No evidence that he ever sent any inappropriate emails to any under age boys. Ever. this little statement of yours is a lie within a lie! Shame on you farmgrrl. It’s obvious that you put your politics of character assassination above your sense of decency.
“Whatever. No hair splitting from me today. The only folks who think foley was NOT a pedophile are the hard core 20 percenters.”
The only folks that think Foley was a pedophile are the ones that don’t pay attention. The liberals that used Foley as a talking point in the last election don’t really consider him a pedophile, he was just an excuse to avoid talking about real issues.
“And you know you never win an arguement with them. Skunks and pissing matches and all.”
Bring facts to the argument! Argue the points! By your statements, you are either a fool or think the good people on this BLOG are fools. Shame on you farmgrrl. You are better than that.
Hank
Cosmos is at a loss, because without radiant factors in the equation, his pet theories on GW don’t work.
My premise is absolutely correct, one needs radiant energy first to generate heat. It’s the sun stupid. :D
Latent heat, radiant heat, convective heat…such new concepts. ROFL!
Republican – what you are describing is called a “positive feedback loop”. This is one of the mechanisms whereby change can accellerate: CO2 – rising temps – CO2 – etc. CO2 and temps end up driving each other.
For example: rising CO2 traps IR radiation, thereby increasing T. Increasing T then dries soils, carbon therein oxidized, increasing CO2.
Another feedback is ice-albedo: Increasing T melts ice. That reduces albedo; resulting in less reflection of sunlight – thus further increasing T.
realclimate is not ducking anything. The reading is a bit difficult but it is all there.
To paraphrase GMC70 at 12:32: “Just where did you get your science degree?”
An aside to GMC (and VT etc): I have worked with many attorneys who tend to try to “practice science”; then they complain when I “practice law”! ;^)
Littlejohn, GMC, Vaughn…
Thank you for your thoughtfulness on the hate crimes issue.
And now I’m off on another road trip, this time to Lawrence, and then to KC. Have a nice day, bloggers.
Tom- Be safe and enjoy
There are new regulations from the U.S. Department of Education that do allow single sex educational offerings for some reasons:
http://www.singlesexschools.org/legal.html
The ACLU is against this idea, not surprisingly.
http://www.aclu.org/womensrights/gen/13134prs20040303.html
Through my google searching, I was unable to find any story about Muslims segregating their children for religions reasons in public schools in CA or anywhere else. I tried various search terms and generally looked at the first 4-5 pages of returned sites.
Anyone know of a link? Would like to see it.
In my searching, I was able to find that Muslims are against opposite sex teachers teaching sex education. Also, they have some resistence to same sex dressing rooms like those required in U.S. gym classes.
“A public school in California has segregated their students into female and male classes because the Muslim parents don’t want their kids to be educated together”
I Googled this and could not find any evidence that this is true. Please provide a link.
BTW – If we do not want to accommodate Muslim students with foot washing, why should we make Christmas a Holiday?
Also, they have some resistence to same sex dressing rooms like those required in U.S. gym classes.
Posted by: Steven Davis | May 03, 2007 at 01:41 PM
What?
The old ‘positive feedback loop’ BS. No evidence that it exists, no way to incorporate it into the computer models. It’s just a way to excuse the fact that minute increases in CO2 can ‘possibly’ cause big problems.
Scientists currently have no way of determining the buffering effect of water vapor in the water vapor in the atmosphere on the ‘positive feedback’ effect of the CO2.
The liberals have a great political tool in GW. They have a way to scare us for generations without ever seeing the results of their hysterical BS.
Hank
Exposure to genitalia is considered a sin in Islam – hence the outcry over Abu Ghraib.
Republican,
“My premise is absolutely correct, one needs radiant energy first to generate heat. It’s the sun stupid. :D”
I’m sorry that you are unable to understand the importance of Earth’s greenhouse effect.
Hate crimes against women have been happening since the dawn of time, it’s called rape. Is this part of the hate crime legislation?
No Hank; you are wrong. They ARE working it into the computer models. In fact, these loops are crucial to understanding Milankovitch cycles.
Just because they are DIFFICULT does not mean they are FICTION.
The WINGNUTS have a great political tool in the GWOT They have a way to scare us for generations without ever seeing the results of their hysterical BS.
I guess I still I don;t understand the dressing room thing. At first, I read the post incorrectly. I thought the post said “same dressing room for both sexes as required” I went, what the hell happened here? I sure as heck missed the revolution on that one. Then, I read WSClarks post, and I understood My understanding, but I don;t get it still. Do they just want NO dressing rooms? Or dressing rooms with the opposite sex. (that probably depends on how old they are , huh :)
So Ben,
Do you admit that there are many buffering processes that are in effect concerning the atmosphere?
Do you also admit that scientists currently have no real understanding of the effects of water vapor in the atmosphere as to its effects on your ‘positive feedback loops’.
If you take one factor and one factor only and call refer to its positive feedback characteristics and have absolutely no understanding of the numerous other factors that prevent it from becoming instantaneously catastophic in effect on the climate then it is worse than FICTION.
Hank
lj – I think the issue is that for some any sort of exposure is a problem. In many cases womens showers are separated while mens are not. I think for some more ‘fundamental’ types they all should have separate stalls.
In fact, I know men who are paranoid that some gay guy might be eyeing them …
In Islam, neither sex is allowed contact, physically or visually with another’s genitalia, from either sex. For example, a man is not allowed to urinate in the presence of another.
We could defeat all of the fundamentalist Muslims with a “Braveheart” style attack.
(Pssssssssssst – that last part was meant to be humorous.)
Ben–Thanks, I get it now. Took me awhile I guess. Myself, not worried about the eye… (just a joke, ok?)
Hank – I have ALWAYS said that there are both buffering factors and accellerating factors. And I have always sought to include all of them.
That is why deciphering Milankovitch was so important. The external variations result in ZERO net change in solar insolation yet trigger glacial-interglacial cycles. Feedback loops were the drivers. The current “super-interglacial” is being further driven by both anthropogenic CO2 (and other gases) inputs as well as feedbacks and other factors.
Like I said; just because it is complicated doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. If you go out there and read the scientific literature you will find all the factors considered.
Paleoclimatology is fascinating. Applying that to today is even more so … and frightening.
Dr. Huie,
As I said previously, radiant heat is the basic premise…
Without the radiant heat, feedback loops cannot occur. If you take heat out of the equation, CO2 suspends and does nothing.
I will go with the larger amount of naturally caused CO2 as a factor in Global Climate. It is huge amount when compared to man-made CO2 amounts.
Speaking of albedo effect, I need to buy some sun-block, may go to the coast for week. :) Can’t be having the red lobster look.
BTW, Cosmos doesn’t believe in the Paleo-Climatologists I point to. He says their science is bad, like he would know. He relies on op-ed pieces from his religious fanatic scientists. :D
“The service sectors will add about 7,400 jobs, a 1.3 percent increase.”This is the 2007 employment forecast for Kansas.
Posted by: .morg | May 03, 2007 at 01:14 PM
That means that there will be plenty of jobs at McD’s, fries with that anyone?
There is nothing wrong with service jobs, especially if you don’t have the education or experience to get a better paying job.
Obviously that is true Rep. If we ‘turned off’ the sun nothing would matter any more. The point is that with that energy source constantly inputting energy the temperature is then determined by the gases in the atmosphere. Were there no greenhouse gases at all we would be an icehouse. Too much and we become a hothouse. (Both terms have been used in the paleoclimatology literature to describe such climates)
As for the one cosmos ‘disses’; so do the vast majority of other climatologists. Unfortunately they remind me of the industry scientists who swore to Congress that cigarettes are not bad for you nor addictive. Remember them?
By the way – there are also some good-paying service jobs.
The difference Dr. Huie with the tobacco scientists, is that they worked for or were paid by the Tobacco industry.
I’ve read the pieces on the claim that AGW scientists work for oil, but only have found a very small number. That allegation is mostly false, but often rung like a brass bell by the GW alarmists.
I guess which ever of us lives the longest will find out who is correct. I’m ordering my fountain of youth water from Asymmetrical Aquifer Corporation to ensure my longevity. :)
From looking at .morg’s link, the greatest growth in the service sector has been in the medical services/(private) education fields. Not denying there might be jobs at McDs, et al, but are these new jobs, or jobs to be filled due to terminations of those who had filled them?
I haven’t gotten into the GW argument because I honestly don’t know much about it. I wouldn’t be surprised that there is GW, but I’m not convinced that Humans can do anything to stop it. Partly I believe that there shear volume of all of us on this planet is overloading mother earth, and she has to give (and eventually wipe us out). On yahoo this morning I saw an article about 2 villages in Thailand that are being swallowed by the sea. Seems to me that isn’t a good sign.
Dear Ben,
“Paleoclimatology is fascinating. Applying that to today is even more so … and frightening.”
I aggree that it is fascinating. I also aggree that it could be frightening…without faith in God!
However, I’m not sure that you can apply any of it to today. The cause and effect of the extreme climate changes of the past can only be speculated on. Speculated on with less knowlege of what was going on then than now.
The only thing we can know for sure about the extreme climate chages of the past is. . . man had nothing to do with them!
Hank
This is a little more in depth,this deals with current job vacancies.
http://www.dol.ks.gov/HOME/NewsReleases/2007/2006%20Job%20Vacancy%20Survey%20(Jan%2016,%202007).doc
Republican,
“btw, that link was a result of searching for “temperature drives CO2″ using Google. But its okay for Cosmos to call me a liar.”
Why didn’t you just post that link? The problem is VERY obvious.
RC’s “barton” page was not “taken down”. The link was probably renamed after blogdig linked to it. Or the connecting link is broken.
1st Google hit for “temperature drives CO2″ is,http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/April2007/27/The_lag_between_temperature_and_CO2___Gore_s_got_it_right_.html
Compare blogdig’s link name, title, date, and quoted section to,http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-lag-between-temp-and-co2Note RC’s page quotes Joe Barton.
Google “04/barton-gets-it-wrong/” — only 2 hits, RC and blogdig.
opps try this one:
http://laborstats.dol.ks.gov/reports/jvs2006/2006jvs_std.pdf
Republican,
“BTW, Cosmos doesn’t believe in the Paleo-Climatologists I point to. He says their science is bad, like he would know. He relies on op-ed pieces from his religious fanatic scientists. :D”
Would you PLEASE stop LYING about what I post!
Republican?! LYING?!
No! It can’t be true . . .
Actually, when does he NOT lie?
Which coast are you going to, Republican?
Not Mississippi’s GULF Coast, is it?
Because while you’re there, you can say hi to JM . . .
Hank – we CAN apply to the present and future. That is what science is all about.
There is nothing wrong with service jobs, especially if you don’t have the education or experience to get a better paying job.
Posted by: Republican | May 03, 2007 at 02:32 PM
Of course there is nothing wrong with it, unless it is a person who is NOT 18 years old, NOT single, NOT the father or mother of a child. The problem I have with an abundance of low paying jobs and very few higher paying jobs is that when people cannot support their families, they end up needing state assistance. A family cannot survive on $6 – $7/hr.
A joint post from “The Sandbox” by four USAF logistics officers assigned to the Army in Afghanistan about their year together there. Complete with pictures.
http://gocomics.typepad.com/the_sandbox/2007/05/the_four_amigos.html
My 41st Birthday!
R.I.P James Brown was born on this day. Greg Gumbel CBS sportscaster, Frankie Valli, Bing Crosby.
Tiger Woods father died last year on this day. Thanks to Earl Woods. I wouldn’t watch golf without Tiger.
Born on a Tuesday under the astrological sign Taurus.Life path number is 3.
The Life Path 3 indicates that you entered this plane with a strong sense of creativity and with wonderful communication skills. Achievement for you most likely comes through engaging your ingenious expression. A truly gifted 3 possesses the most exceptional innovative skills, normally in the verbal realm, writing, speaking, acting, or similar endeavors. Here we are apt to find the entertainers of the world, bright, effervescent, sparkling people with very optimistic attitudes. The bright side of this path stresses harmony, beauty and pleasures; of sharing your inventive talents with the world. Capturing your capability in creative self-expression is the highest level of attainment for this life path.
Life is generally lived to the fullest, often without much worry about tomorrow. You are not very good at handling money because of a general lack of concern about it. You spend it when you have it and don’t when you don’t.
—
I have concerns about Millions of dollars that are desired for my projects! I can’t spend it when I don’t have it!
I do find a few dollars, $10 or $20 in a pocket of jeans or pants, don’t know when I “lost” the cash, occasionally. Lack of concern about small cash is accurate.
I’m on my LIFE PATH properly described.
Happy Birthday, Mrage!
Today is also my granddaughter’s birthday. And my sister’s birthday. And my Aunt’s birthday. And my daughter’s birhday.
You’re in good company!
Mrage, many happy returns for the day (and many, many more).
Happy Birthday Mrage. I find it interesting that you know numerology. I haven’t met a lot of people who are interested in it. I’m a 5 Lifepath btw.
Happy Birthday, Mrage.
God, you’re old.
I’m mean that in a good way.
:)
Happy birthday also Mrage. Although I have no clue about the numerology.
Now, this is more like it; dare I say more important (potentially) than the NIAR funding from the Legislature?
$2 million gift to fund a new engineering program at WSU.
http://www.kansas.com/197/story/61223.html
The problem with singling out certain ‘groups’ for special victim status effectively undermines one of the greatest foundations our nation was built upon; the idea that as Americans we are due “Equal Protection Under the Law.”
Then it goes on to attempt to punish ‘thoughts.’ That’s simply ludicrous.
I agree with Tom that some folks with an agenda may commit a crime against a specific group in order to try to frighten them.
But the answer isn’t to punish the thoughts of those folks.
Do they deserve a harsher punishment? If so – make the punishment for ALL the crimes of that kind – the same. Then, no matter WHO drags WHOM until their heads rolls off – they will be punished the same.
The decapitated head of a black, a gay, a woman, etc, is not more valuable than the head of a white man, but these laws seem to indicate they think so.
Just punish the crime, especially ANY violent crime severely – for anyone.
Where does the law say that someone can be punished for a “thought?”
Intent is always a consideration when a crime is prosecuted.
For example, if I have a history of threatening conservatives and then I go out and run one over with my car, then back up over him again, the prosecution would argue that I meant to kill him and therefore was guilty of First Degree Murder.
If I just clipped him and he died, they would argue that I was guilty of Second Degree Murder.
If I had never said that I wanted to do harm to a conservative, they might argue that deliberately hitting a conservative with my car would constitute Manslaughter.
Now, if I was not paying attention and I ran over a conservative, they might want to charge me with negligent homicide.
And if a conservative ran out in front of me and I failed to stop in time and hit and killed him, they might give me a ticket for failing to have control of my vehicle.
And if one just fell from the sky and I hit him, they would just let me go because I didn’t do anything wrong.
Regardless, there would be a dead conservative under my wheels.
It is all a matter of intent.
The same scenario applies to hate crimes – was the victim singled out strictly because of his race, color, creed, religious affiliation or sexual orientation?
Sorry about the wording of the sentence above, it was not very clear, apparently. As someone else says above, the most devout Muslims apparently prefer private dressing rooms.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Given the lack of support, I am wondering it the Muslim gender segregation story is an urban/internet myth. Plenty of certain types of people would want to believe it is true – which may explain its continuation.
I tried to find a source for the segregated school comment, SD, and I could not find anything. It is so ridiculous that it hasn’t even made the Snopes roster of Urban Legends. I think this is just more of “people making up stuff.”
Thanks for the Happy Birthday’s!
WS..wow, glad to know so many in your family have the same birthday.
I had an ex girlfriend who was big on numerology and astrology. Only to guide her in relationships, nothing about proving her future.
Her mistakes weren’t foretold.
We matched, but broke up for practical reasons. Life paths went in different directions.
The “stars” and numbers can’t tell the future.
I can be described in some ways with numerology and as Taurus.
It’s descriptive information, but doesn’t explain all of my personality.
Anyone interested, type Life Path in a search engine. Websites exist to determine your Life path number.
TDT…5 and 3 Life path, can get along pretty well, its said!
Some Life path numbers I can’t get along with, its said…4, 7, 8 & 22.
“Where does the law say that someone can be punished for a “thought?”"—————-
What exactly do you think hatred is, WS?
The “hate” part is only in conjunction with an act of violence. No one is to be punished for simply hating gay, blacks, etc.
Problem is, WS, the hate part, when in conjunction with specific ‘groups’ is deemed to be worse than the hate (intent) no matter how vicious the rage of the perpetrator….if the victim is NOT covered by the blanket of protection.
That’s sheer stupidity, and a renouncement of our “equality under the law”premise.
I am not aware that the Hate Crimes bill makes the intent to harm a specific individual a greater crime than the actual act. I will have to either research it or ask that you provide a link.
Maybe you ought to research it then, because what is the sense of providing specific protective status, if it means nothing?
In schools, so-called hate crimes are punished much more severely than the same crime, minus the protection status.
How silly is that?
And they aren’t even taking the time to determine if hatred against the victim as a member of the ‘group’ is even in evidence…they just immediately label the act because of the victim’s status – and the perpetrator is punished that much more severely.
That’s wrong anyway you slice it.
WS:
I think I take your meaning. But as a legal term of art, “intent” to a prosecutor is a very different thing than “motive.” Intent is the choice to do the act; it makes the charged act a criminal act because it is a volitional act. It has nothing to do with WHY one does the act. It is that one can, and does, form the decision, form the intent, to commit the act. The lack of intent generally means there is no crime.
I think you’re confusing evidence of motive – NOT an element of the crime – with intent, which IS an element of the crime. Your history of hating conservatives may be evidence of motive. But to your first example: when you back up the car to run over your victim again, that shows a clear INTENT to kill, REGARDLESS of your motive.
Just an FYI.
For anyone who bothered to watch it,
‘Beck’s global warming special dominated by industry-funded “experts,” serial misinformers’http://mediamatters.org/items/200705040001?f=h_topic
Some additional info on the experts(sic),Marlo Lewishttp://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=338
Timothy Ball, Patrick Michaels, and Chris Horner,http://www.desmogblog.com/bios-and-research-on-glenn-becks-global-warming-disinformation-special
Bjorn Lomborghttp://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/ucs-examines-the-skeptical-environmentalist.html
Perhaps I used the wrong terms, GMC, so I will concede the point, but I do believe that the penalties should be more severe if my sole motivation for doing harm to someone is based on their race, color, creed, religion or sexual orientation.
The Hate Crimes bill would allow Federal involvement in a crime was committed based solely on the covered categories. There is absolutely no “thought police” intent and the bill points that out in explicit language.
Hate crimes do happen and those affected deserve better. If we as a nation are willing to tolerate this, against mostly our fellow citizens, then we have completely lost the moral high ground. We would be no better than the Taliban or the Iranians.
Here are the facts:
Although the vast majority of Hate Crimes reported in 2005 were cases of Racial Bias (4,691 offenses), the level of Sexual-Orientation Bias is still quite significant with 1,171 offenses. That is only slightly less that the incidents of Religions Bias (1,314) and more than bias based on National Origin (1,144)
And here is a report from USA Today…..
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-03-hate-crimes_N.htm?csp=34
I don’t disagree, WS. Just don’t make “hate” an element of the offense. Doing so simply makes the prosecution more difficult.
As a prosecutor, I will charge only what I can prove. Absent some blatent expression of racial animus inherent in the crime, proving “hate” is extremely difficult, and thus adds a problematic element to the prosecution. If a poster above is correct (Capn, I think) that’s probably why hate crimes are rarely prosecuted.
If the crime warrants, it should be, and I hope will be prosecuted, no matter the motivation of the offender. The victim is no less dead.
Language notwithstanding, I do think there is an element of “thought police” here, WS. I’m not defending hate; far from it. But statutes like this in effect prosecute a point of view (a despicable one, certainly) over and above the ACT, the crime. We generally punish ACTS, not thoughts. That, to me, is problematic in a society which defends freedom of thought and expression above nearly all else.
I also, as a matter of constitutional construction, object in principle to the federal gov’t expanding its criminal prosecution anyway. It’s too large as it is. Police powers, and criminal prosecution is the classic police power, are generally State powers. Art. I, Sec. 8 provides no general police power. So how do we constitutionally justify such use of power? With the Commerce Clause (again) I suspect. And tell me, with a straight face, just how criminal prosecution is reasonably and ratinonally related to regulation of interstate or foreign commerce?
Unfortunately, we abandoned the notion of a limited federal gov’t long ago. Damn it.
And I’m way past my bedtime. Nite, Nite.
“If the crime warrants, it should be, and I hope will be prosecuted, no matter the motivation of the offender. The victim is no less dead.”————
This is truly the crux of the entire situation.
It appears, folks, that it has been recommended that Bush veto the new hate crimes legislation. There is good cause to do so. First, it appears that the legislation may well be unconstitutional. See U.S. v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, where the SCOTUS rejected an attempt to frame criminal acts in a commerce clause justification.
Why not simply amend the 1968 hate crimes law to include sexual orientation? That statute includes a requirement that the victim be engaged in a federally protected activity, giving Congress a nexus to regulate. This new statute casts a much wider net, and thus is probably unconstitutional.
Add to this the “thought crimes” element, and the difficulty of proving a “hate” motive, and you have bad law. Good intentions does not necessarily translate into good law.