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
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- ANTI on Let immigrants run
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- gster on Open thread 11/23
- LonnythePlumber on Health care reform would save state money
- aldenrw on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Too many exemptions
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
Open thread 6/13
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted June 13, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
205 Comments
See this YouTube video of what Paul McHugh had to say and what Paul Morrison wants suppressed from the public:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mviFMpy_sBU
Olathe Daily News, June 13, 2007http://www.olathedailynews.com/News_photo/News1.shtml[This link will be stale in a day or so]AG demands that witness not speak on Tiller caseBy Jack Weinstein/The Olathe News
“Attorney General Paul Morrison did all he could to prevent Paul McHugh from speaking Tuesday night except serve him with a court-issued gag order.”
“In a letter to McHugh, Morrison told the Johns Hopkins professor of psychiatry not to add to the comments he already has made to media regarding the George Tiller abortion case.’We hereby demand that you cease and desist from any and all such statements as they threaten our ongoing investigation and violate the privacy of the women whose medical records you reviewed,’ Morrison wrote in the letter.”
Fox 4 Kansas City gives some additional info:http://www.myfoxkc.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=BE043919B326D74148CBCDC42DDDD110?contentId=3475022&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1Late-Term Abortion Case Witness Ordered Not To Speak Publicly
Last Edited: Tuesday, 12 Jun 2007, 9:31 PM CDT
“OVERLAND PARK, KAN. — Attorney General Paul Moron (sic) ordered Dr. Paul McHugh to cease and desist from speaking publicly, as he did last night to FOX 4, about the records on Wichita Dr. George Tiller and late-term abortions.”
“McHugh said the records don’t justify late-term abortions under Kansas law. Morrison said Dr. McHugh’s statements threaten the possibility of charges against Tiller, and violate patient privacy rights.”
“Dr. McHugh was in Overland Park Tuesday night speaking to a public forum. He’s an expert witness hired in the first case filed against Dr. Tiller.”
“The panel was at an event sponsored the pro-life group women influencing the nation and Dr. McHugh did not show until nearly an hour after the program began. When he did arrive, he explained his lateness.”
Interesting Meadowlark…
By definition a psychiatrist is a Medical Doctor and a licensed in Psychiatry at the PhD level. His video testimony is quite telling.
It goes to the heart of the cases described and I think Dr. Tiller should be gravely concerned about his deeds and his Medical License.
There appears to be attempts to falsify claims on medical records to justify a procedure.
Regardless of the medical procedure involved, I don’t see how AG Morrison can delay action against Dr. Tiller because it is clear to me that there was a falsification of medical records.
And it is just as clear that Phill Kline got Bill O’Reilly access to those private medical records but I don’t see you calling for Phill Kline’s head on a platter. Why?
Obviously this psychiatrist is a hired gun for the pro-life movement; so any testimony he gives should be treated with a grain of salt.
McHugh has already expressed his bias against abortion in the past. It’s no surprise that this protector of pedophiles, who is employed by the Vatican, is helping Kline promote a religious agenda.
Kansas Meadowlark, Republican –The best way to start a new day is with a good long laugh, thanks!!
…there are none so blind as those who will not see.
“…I don’t see how AG Morrison can delay action against Dr. Tiller because it is clear to me that there was a falsification of medical records.”Posted by: Republican | June 13, 2007 at 01:24 AM
And you sure are the blog expert on falsification.
Looks like its gonna be one of those days!! Mama said there’d be days like this…
Check out Ben’s letter to the editor in today’s Eagle.
DOUG — I dont think Kline knows how to have anything other than religious agenda… Problem is, he wants everybody to buy his definition of religion!!
Holy Christ–insurgents (supposedly Al Qaeda operatives) bombed and destroyed the minarates of the Askariya Shiite Shrine in Samarra.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Or, maybe more appropriately, “insurgents” bombed and destroyed the minarets. Given the increasing likelihood of a pre-emptive strike by Israel and the Bush Administration against Iran, this is a dangerous precursor and a provocation.
Scary as hell to think about where this could go, although for the time being, at least, Al-Sistani has called for calm.
Yesterday, in Wichita’s Delano neighborhood, I drove down Osage Street … located about two blocks west of the traffic circle on West Douglas in front of Hatman Jack’s store … south from Douglas to Maple.
At first I thought the street had been hit by a Greensburg type monster tornado with grotesquely butchered trees and discarded branches lying along the street right of way. Or the result of a misguided trajectory of a space rocket test.
I resisted the impulse to run into a nearby building to ask what had happened.
Then down the street, I spotted the cause … a tree trimming truck of Asplundh (sp?), the tree butchering company apparently hired by Westar to clear tree branches from their overhead power lines.
Perhaps the operators were having a contest to see how terrible they could mangle the trees. After all, they are growing on the City’s right of way so adjacent property owners have no say in the matter.
Wichita is certainly no candidate for a “Tree City” award.
The need to bury the powerlines.
{ give-up their graft money and do some good }
CF, where are you getting this?
“Given the increasing likelihood of a pre-emptive strike by Israel and the Bush Administration against Iran, this is a dangerous precursor and a provocation. “
JWink,
Perhaps you’ve never lived in a neighborhood where the power goes out every time the wind blows over 40 mph. The power on my block used to go out five or six times every summer – it got to be so bad that we bought and permanently installed a generator. Finally, though, after quite literally years of complaining, Westar trimmed the trees out of the power lines.
Know anyone who wants a used generator?
JWink,
That’s not the only trees they butchered. It makes you wonder why they are doing such a hack job on the trees. I’ve seen them cut back on branches that were 18 inches in diameter and at least a good 15 feet from the power lines.
That cut zone may be in the easement, but to cut down to 20-30 year growth mark leaves one ugly mess of trees.
I agree with ED, they need to bury the power lines, problem solved and the city would look 100% better.
Mary,
Who is going to pay for that?
CapnAmerica,
this must be your guy then…
“Ron Paul called for bringing home U.S. troops and an end to a welfare state that benefits only big business at the expense of the poor and the middle class…”
Tom, have you noticed how much road construction there is right now? I say let’s pull back on that a little and put the money elsewhere.I can’t drive down any flippin’ street without having to maneuver around the orange cones!
Good morning allAs the topic of gambling gets hotter as we approach the vote on Aug 7th the casino opponents are hard at it.
http://kansas.com/news/story/95045.html
I have not heard too many weigh in on this here. Anybody have any thoughts?
Mary,
Burying power lines is more complex than what happens at the street. If neighborhood lines are buried, then the feeds to every building _also_ have to be buried. That means digging up every yard, every parking lot, every sidewalk in front of every building along the line-burial route. In some cases, the newly-buried lines aren’t going to be able to reach the current meter/breaker box location, so all of _that_ will have to be rewired. Who pays?
Hey Tom,
How much do you want for the generator?
When push comes to shove I can always run a line from my motor home into the houlse.
Went to an auction a few years ago and bid on a natural gas generator that sat on a pad next to the house. New in the create. I quit bidding at around fifteen hundred dollars.
When I got home I checked it out on the internet and it was worth around $12,000.00. It also had the switchgear required to tie into the house breaker box.
There has been a few times I wished I had it!
Trees. We are on Sedgwick CO Coop. It costs about 12-15 hundred dollars a foot to bury the lines. They don’t want to trim your trees, they want to cut them down!
Hank
My advise on the anit-gambling groups?
Dont blow them off as nut jobs without a chance. They may be nut jobs, but they sure have a way of getting their folks to the ballot box.
I dont know much about your arena vote, and we all know what happened with the religious jihad on the hate amendment, but it is usually easier to get folks to vote nay than yea.
In Hays, where kids get their first drink at their own baptism and their last drink before they leave the house in an ambulance, the NAYS managed to get Sunday liquor sales repealed.
And you know, Cindy Duckett says they get their voting “motivation” every Sunday in the pews.
Dont underestimate the religious jihaders. The same folks who vote against gays and Sunday liquor sales will be the same hard core group that votes against gambling.
Good night and good luck!
Hey Mary,
Last fall the HOA and the improvement dist. looked into burying our few lines that still are above ground.
To make a long story short, it ain’t going to happen!
Hank
The link to Ben’s letter in the WE.
http://kansas.com/205/story/94686.html
SolDevo–
Yes, indeed. Ron Paul is the only Republican who hasn’t bought the corporate-fascist line: “what’s good for Halliburton is good for America . . .”
CF2K–
Welcome back and domo arigato gozaimasu for you comments.
Capn,I don’t think he CAN be bought. Strong on the constitution, small gov’t… Got me thinking RP08.
By the by, don’t know if you support him or not. Nasty rumor about Obama and making diesel fuel from coal. If it turns out to be true, think his campaign fund has dirty money?
Sol — And just what Spin Dr. has been putting out a new Obama rumor this time?? And what is BAD about making diesel fuel from coal??
Chas.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901503.html
What makes coal bad? Get a clue chas.
Hank,
Selling the used generator was a joke. I’m sure we’ll be glad we have it sometime in the future!
http://hnn.us/articles/37781.html
“Much of the western United States has been experiencing a severe drought for nearly a decade, and the future only looks drier. One of the conclusions of the new United Nations study on global climate change is that wet places on the planet will probably get wetter and dry places, like much of the American West, will become even more parched. John Wesley Powell is rolling over in his grave.
snipIn 1878 Powell wrote and submitted to Congress his Report on the Arid Lands of the United States. It was a blockbuster as scientific reports go. Powell told Congress that if the West was going to be settled at all, the region would require an extensive plan for water management and allocation.
snipEvents proved Powell right, of course, though being right has never been a path to political success in America. Americans have a long and rich tradition of shooting the messengers bearing bad news. Drought hit the arid lands in the 1880s, creating the first large-scale farm crisis in the nation’s history. “In God we trusted, in Kansas we busted,” so the expression went at the time.
snipAfter World War II, farmers on the plains dealt with the natural cycles of rain and drought by pumping water from the Ogallala aquifer, a vast underground lake, to irrigate their fields. It’s the agricultural equivalent of paying your mortgage with a credit card — the bank catches up with you eventually.
In the West, the region Powell spent a lifetime studying, no quantity of boosterism, or political grandstanding or individual will can create more water where there isn’t enough. Denying a problem doesn’t make it go away.”
http://hnn.us/articles/37781.html
Burying cable isn’t all that expensive. It surely isn’t $12,000 a foot.
The problem is that stabbing electrical lines underground in neighborhoods that they have no idea where the underground infrastructure is like is a problem. In a place like Delano, there wasn’t very accurate records and just guessing where to stab can when it can cause serious problems.
I suspect that they will get better at this in the future. With newer technology, they can be able to navigate through almost anything.
I will suspect that most power poles (overhead lines) will be put underground within 100 years.
Good point Joe. I think that is why you see them buried out in the suburbe but not downtown as much. As you correctly note, once you start digging who knows what you will find.
I think improved subsurface radar might help in that. However, there is also another problem: you will be cutting roots of the trees when you dig.
Retro-fitting is always difficult.
Joe,
Hank said 12 _hundred_ per foot, not 12 thousand.
One other thing: It’s not just electrical that would have to be buried. Phone and cable services would have to go underground at the same time, with all the costs and challenges I outlined upthread.
Again – who pays?
Time now for another “Bush Family Evil Empire: Scandal Du Jure”
Bush’s Drug Use Forced Him to Go AWOL during Nat’l Guard Service
1. Bush used family connections (father was a Senator, grandfather was a Senator) to join the Nat’l Guard instead of having to face a possible draft: “A review of Bush’s military records shows that Bush enjoyed preferential treatment as the son of a then-congressman, when he walked into a Texas Guard unit in Houston two weeks before his 1968 graduation from Yale and was moved to the top of a long waiting list.
“It was an era when service in the Guard was a coveted assignment, often associated with efforts to avoid active duty in Vietnam. Bush was accepted for pilot training after having scored only 25 percent on the pilot’s aptitude test, the lowest acceptable grade.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7372-2004Feb2?language=printer
2. In 1972, the Air Force instituted mandatory drug tests during mandatory physicals. After that date, GW Bush never took another physical. The Times of London reports that the Guard grounded Bush after he failed to get his annual medical exam, which included a urine test and extensive questions about drug use.
http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/06/20/trail_mix/
“In August 1972, Bush was suspended from flying because he failed to complete an annual medical exam.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7372-2004Feb2?language=printer
When asked (sort of) about drug use in 1998, GW said this: “If you’re asked specifically about marljuana or cocaine [use in your past], what’s the answer?
GW: “I will say [that] what I did as a youth is irrelevant to this campaign. What is relevant is, have you grown up, and I have.”
(Newsweek, November 16, 1998, U.S. Edition, Pg. 46)
3. Bush never showed up for service in Alabama–instead he went AWOL during a time of war.
“A month later, Bush requested to be assigned to a different unit in Alabama and was approved. Although he was required to attend periodic drills in Alabama, there is no official record in his file that he did.
“According to the records, Bush had been instructed to report to William Turnipseed, an officer in the Montgomery unit. ‘Had he reported in, I would have had some recall and I do not,’ Turnipseed, a retired brigadier general, told the Globe in 2000. ‘I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had a first lieutenant from Texas, I would have remembered.’”
“His officers at Ellington Air Force Base wrote in May 1973 that Bush could not be given his annual evaluation, because he ‘has not been observed’ in Houston between April 1972 and the following May.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7372-2004Feb2?language=printer
*****
The record is clear — while ordinary boys got drafted and died in Vietnam, Senator-son George W. Bush got preferential treatment for the champagne unit where he was taught how to fly on the taxpayer’s dime.
When drug testing was instituted in ‘72, Bush made himself scarce and NEVER TOOK A DRUG TEST.
When asked about drug use in the past, the Hypocrite-in-Chief just says “no . . . I won’t answer”.
This has been your Bush Family Evil Empire: Scandal Du Jour.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7372-2004Feb2?language=printer
This isn’t my city, so just an outsider’s observation. Are the lines above ground to provide easy access for a dynamic city foot print? i.e. building’s occupants changing/needs changing – demand changing, technologies changing?
With the lines above ground, it makes these changes easier as opposed to being underground?
Here you go Meadowlark, I’ll just copy/paste what I wrote yesterday.
Morrison told the doctor to stop public discussion of patient’s private medical records or face consequences. That isn’t witness intimidation, that’s the law.
Posted by: political_mom | June 12, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Looks like the OR website didn’t point out what the good ‘doctor’ said about his view of abortion:
“Lots of psychiatrists, including me, do not believe there are any pure psychiatric reasons that justify abortion,” McHugh said.
That’s an opinion, but legally, according to SCOTUS, is incorrect.I have to wonder if McHugh believes there is ever a reason for abortion AT ALL.
Obviously, the welfare of the mother’s mental health is of no consequence to him.
Sol–
The only thing that exposed lines are good for is making it easier for the power to go out in an ice storm and for people to get electrocuted from a downed line.
And it also looks hideously ugly.
Go to Europe and you can see what the world looks like without billboards and power lines.
But it’s cheaper . . . heigh ho.
nytimes.com/2007/06/13/health/13cancer.html?ref=usJune 13, 2007 NYTimes
Symptoms Found for Early Check on Ovary Cancer
Cancer experts have identified a set of health problems that may be symptoms of ovarian cancer, and they are urging women who have the symptoms for more than a few weeks to see their doctors.
The new advice is the first official recognition that ovarian cancer, long believed to give no warning until it was far advanced, does cause symptoms at earlier stages in many women.
The symptoms to watch out for are bloating, pelvic or abdominal pain, difficulty eating or feeling full quickly and feeling a frequent or urgent need to urinate. A woman who has any of those problems nearly every day for more than two or three weeks is advised to see a gynecologist, especially if the symptoms are new and quite different from her usual state of health.
Doctors say they hope that the recommendations will make patients and doctors aware of early symptoms, lead to earlier diagnosis and, perhaps, save lives, or at least prolong survival.
But it is too soon to tell whether the new measures will work or whether they will lead to a flood of diagnostic tests or even unnecessary operations.
Cancer experts say it is worth trying a more aggressive approach to finding ovarian cancer early. The disease is among the deadlier types of cancer, because most cases are diagnosed late, after the cancer has begun to spread.
This year, 22,430 new cases and 15,280 deaths are expected in the United States.
If the cancer is found and surgically removed early, before it spreads outside the ovary, 93 percent of patients are still alive five years later. Only 19 percent of cases are found that early, and 45 percent of all women with the disease survive at least five years after the diagnosis.
By contrast, among women with breast cancer, 89 percent survive five years or more.
Noooo . . . not abortion!
Abortion is murder. No, it’s not. Yes, it is. No, it’s not. You can’t prove it. Yes, I can. No, you can’t.
That about sums it up.
Please . . . let’s give abortion a rest.
Please . . . let’s give abortion a rest.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | June 13, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Yes, i agree.
Sorry Capn I cannot and I will not.
It’s a woman’s health and rights issue, something that more people should be taking an interest in now that SCOTUS is trying to hurt women in all areas.
Someone you know may someday need a choice. It may be a matter of life or death.
Dear Capt.,
Every new scandal brings me more hope for ‘08!
The more the lefty looseys campaign against and malign GWB the better chance the republicans have of winning!
Bush, unlike slick willie, aint running for anything again.
Hank
Hank–
GW is the leader of your party. He represents everything worth opposing: unending war, the power and priviledge of wealth, arrogant power, a legal double-standard, corruption and cronyism.
He’s a republican to the core. Oh, yeah.
And, pray tell, how does your discription of Bush differ from Hillary or the goracle or the Breck girl or. . . . . . ?
Just wondering.
Hank
Al Gore . . . enlisted FOR Vietnam, EARNED a college and a law degree, balanced the budget and reduced the national debt, increased wages for workers for the first time in decades, and isn’t the worst freakin’ president ever.
Ksfarmgrrl. You are right! It is the religious right that are organizing against the Casino in Sedgwick County. Mark Karrs is the leader of the group, a big Republican hack with Phil Kline and Bonnie Huy ties.
They are the same group that did successfully have gay marriages ban a constitutional amendment.
While the anti-casino people cloak themselves with various business leaders and trying to push the case of economic benefits, that isn’t their true reasons for going against a casino. It is a moral and a religious one.
Organizers of the re-vote arena group are also in the anti-casino campaign. I believe JWink is part of the anti-casino organizers as well. Jwink along with his close buddy Darrell Leffew and Troy Newman of Operation Rescue and the Kansas Republican Action Assembly are all teaming together to get the casino voted down.
Al Gore did all that? When?
Want to talk about special privileges in the Army? Only man in Viet Nam with his own full time body guards when he went to shit!
And you call being a butt-boy for willie a resume enhancer?
On almost every thing you want to make a comparison between the goracle and GWB, GWB wins!
More and more hope!
Hank
Ron Paul served in the 60’s – Flight surgeon.
Ron Paul tells the truth to the people.
He has never voted to raise taxes.He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.He has never voted to raise congressional pay.He has never taken a government-paid junket.He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.He voted against regulating the Internet.He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
One photographer Alan Leo said that Gore’s fellow soldiers were told to “look out for him.”
That’s having “body guards” in CON world.
Meanwhile, going AWOL and refusing drug tests is just fine for their guy.
IOKIYAR.
Right, Sollie.
In other words, Ron Paul isn’t a lying hypocrite like the Republican front runners.
This is why he is ridiculed at every turn and will be crushed.
“I was never ordered to be a bodyguard. As far as I know, Gore never had any bodyguards,” Leo told NewsMax.com.
Self-confessed “pro life” and “pro family values” Ron Paul wants to legislate women’s uterus’s and people’s bedrooms.
When oh when did the Republican Party become the party of busybodies?
I noticed Capn has been writing on stories decades old. Let’s see what did he phrase that about the abortion topic…
Please . . . let’s give articles on Bush a rest. He’s been in office for over six years, kicked butt on two of your Democratic nominee hopefuls.
No one cares about what happened in the 60s and early 70s with Bush
Get over it.
Gonzo’s not out of the woods yet, and neither is bush.Two former White House officials subpoenaed By Thomas Ferraro31 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Two former White House officials were subpoenaed on Wednesday as part of the congressional probe of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ firing last year of federal prosecutors.
ADVERTISEMENTSenate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont issued subpoenas for testimony and documents from former White House political director Sara Taylor.
Leahy, in letter to Taylor, said she has until June 28 to turn over the paperwork and is to appear before his committee on July 11.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), meanwhile, issued subpoenas for documents and testimony from former White House counsel Harriet Miers. She was ordered to appear July 12.
The subpoenas set up a possible court fight between Congress and the president, who has vowed to oppose any attempt to force current or former aides to provide sworn testimony.
“The White House cannot have it both ways — it cannot stonewall congressional investigations by refusing to provide documents and witnesses, while claiming nothing improper occurred,” Leahy said.
The two Democratic chairman also issued subpoenas for other White House documents relevant to their investigations, which critics have denounced as political witch hunts.
Democratic and some of President George W. Bush’s fellow Republicans, however, have questioned if politics played a role in the dismissals of the nine U.S. attorneys, one of whom was replaced by a former aide to Bush political adviser Karl Rove.
Earlier this week, Republicans blocked a Democratic bid to obtain a symbolic Senate vote of no confidence in Gonzales, who has admitted mishandling the matter in testimony on Capitol Hill.
Bush continues to back Gonzales.
Tom,
Care to back that up or are you talking trash? Give it a shot Tom. Know what you are speaking about before you slander.
Sol,
We covered this the other day. He _SAYS_SO_ on his own website. I even posted the link, remember?
Nope. repost?
“While serving in Congress during the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dr. Paul’s limited-government ideals were not popular in Washington. In 1976, he was one of only four Republican congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president.
During that time, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary measures. He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values.”
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about/
Sol — Look like maybe Obama’s interest in Coal is to lower our dependence on foreign oil, and just maybe, to provide more jobs for American workers who would build the coal>diesel refineries..
Might not be such a terrible rumor, except for the Nutty Greenies… Moderate greenies might not object that much
Chas,Coal has a large carbon foot print. It takes too much energy to convert coal to diesel. Carbon wise, it is worse for the environment. It is a stupid move.
Tom,Ron Paul is against abortion, yes. He also feels it is a STATE matter and not a federal issue. So if he is elected, Roe v. Wade is safe on a federal level. You will have to contend with your state.
So no, you are incorrect, he does not care what you do in your bedroom.
I am trying to find that link.
And as an aside, Conservatives have outnumbered in congress for how long? We have had a hard core Christina in office for how long? We now have a fairly conservative SCOTUS. And what exactly has changed on Roe V Wade? It is a talking and polarizing point that shallow people love to jump on. In the end, it doesn’t really matter does it? It hasn’t changed. It won’t change in the foreseeable future. Just mud for shallow people to sling.
Is that the best you can do to slander Ron Paul? If that’s it, he should be your primary candidate.
Chas,Have you ever seen a coal strip mining operation? Ever heard of black lung? Do you really want to put American’s down in pits and scare the landscape?
How about we leave the coal where it is and find clean alternative renewable fuel sources.
Coal-to-diesel. Not really new technology; Fischer-Tropsch.
Indirect liquifaction via syn-gas; not dissimilar to what Germany used during WW2 and what South Africa has used.
An interesting twist we worked on years ago was ‘in situ’ gasification of steeply-tipping beds underground; then F-T on the syn-gas produced.
My only real problem with this is the overall carbon issue.
[edit] AbortionAn obstetrician by trade, Paul is pro-life. Paul holds that the United States Constitution does not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. He believes that his pro-life stance aligns with his libertarianism, by viewing abortion as aggression against a person. “Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures.”[52]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Abortion
Ben,
WHAT?????
try coming down about 50,000 feet to a layman’s level. I feel like I’m in an airport.
From the same page Tom, this should interest you.
“Nevertheless, in order to offset the effects of Roe v. Wade, he voted in favor of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.[53] He once said, “The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.”[54]“
Sol,
“Pro family values” is the code phrase for every bit of anti-gay legislation that’s been offered and/or passed for the last 25 years. As one of the targets of that phrase, I know _exactly_ what it means.
Please tell me how quoting someone’s own words, from their own website, is somehow slanderous.
So Tom,
Still want to discuss how Ron Paul will have ANYTHING to do with –
“Ron Paul wants to legislate women’s uterus’s and people’s bedrooms.”
Actually, Wichita entertained an idea of coal gasification during the 70’s.
This of course was during the decade when Leftist of that era was trying to scare people on the pending dino-oil depletion. Saying that we only had 10 years of oil left and etc.
Because Tom, you read into something.
Code words Tom? Do you have your own secret decoder ring too?
“He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.[53] He once said, “The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.”[54]“
Sorry …
Coal (largely carbon, come hydrogen and other crud) – burn in an oxygen-starved atmosphere with water present …
Create CO and H2 gas (’town gas’ or ’syn’gas’)
React those over a reduced cobalt catalyst (preferably made from cobalt carbonyl with just a little Ruthenium added) and you make hydrocarbon fuel.
We developed a similar process to convert methane (natural gas) to a super-clean diesel. This was designed for remote locations such as Cabinda.
I do believe Jimmy Carter endorsed the book “Population Zero” and its statements on oil disappearing from the earth in ten years contrary to what oil industry geologists were stating at the time.
I have facts Tom. Facts and acts to back up my statements. You have code words. Huh.
“He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.”
THAT, Sol, makes Ron Paul the most dangerous radical running. He wants to overturn Griswold v. Connecticut by legislative fiat!!!
Not a chance. No way.
I think at least a part of the mess they had to clean up when they built the new parking structure for the Chamber was from an old turn-of-the-century coal-gas plant.
Sol,
Once again, you have taken a discussion between the two of us to the level of personal attacks.
F*ck off.
Thanks.
What about the “Population Bomb” book that was widely endorsed by members of the left during the time also. Which he stated that everybody would starve to death if we didn’t do something radical about curbing population growth of humans.
The author’s math and theory has been largely discredited by the scientific community, although the Population Bomb is still circulated as a “must read” by members of the left.
ahhhh…
You touched Tom’s tender bone SolDev; he brought in the “G” word now. You’re toast now. :D
Rev. Terry Fox can now be found as a greeter at Wild West World. He seems to just walk around during business hours saying hi to people.Oh how the mighty have fallen.
Hey Ben! Probably a very interesting read to dig through the Special Collections archives at WSU.
http://specialcollections.wichita.edu/collections/ms/95-01/95-1-A.HTML
Thanks Joe, I had forgotten the proper title of the “Population Bomb,” perhaps unconsciously on purpose. :D
Stalker,
Maybe he has delusions of being Yul Brynner.
I think Wild West World is going to have a tough time making a profit and surviving. Yet another Park City failure.
Unless they do something to turn it around. Lower the admission price, have free parking, better rides, cheaper concessions prices and etc.
When your theme park is only $10 cheaper than Worlds of Fun, there is no comparison of the reasoning for charging so much to enter a small theme park.
Joe,
But how else will the Etheridge’s bankroll Terry Fox’s politicized church?
Tom,Your knee jerk liberalism is kicking in. Radical? If leading by the constitution is radical, then I guess you just might be in the wrong country.
Abortion should be a STATE’S decision, not a federal decision. If the matter directly affects citizens, then the matter should be decided by the states. Think that is what the founding fathers were aiming for isn’t it?
A problem that Etheridge will have to face. Perhaps televangeling can help.
Sol,
Re-read the summary of Paul’s bill. Look up Griswold v Connecticut. Read about it.
PS Tom,
You were the one talking about code words. When you back up your arguments with ‘code words’ you leave yourself WIDE OPEN to ridicule.
“Under the 9th and 10 amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.”
Ben — Where is the Chamber parking garage now located??
LOL SolDev
If you want to dismiss Tom’s accurate reading of a Republican running to be the GOP POTUS nominee, self-professed “family values” legislator, as merely a “secret decoder ring” interpretation, then it’s you who’s nuts.
These “family values” guys in the GOP are out for one goal: to control the sexual behavior of Americans. If that means they have to appropriate every American uterus to do so, then fine. They’re down with that.
When guys like Dobson and Robertson control the GOP primary (and they do), then you betcha it’s safe to assume any GOP candidate who’s for “family values,” including Ron Paul, ain’t exactly a friend of women and gays.
This is a no-brainer, LOL.
Hell, this is the wing of the GOP that ran on a constitutional amendment explicitly excluding certain human rights for gays, remember?
Wing-o, dude. Get a clue.
Pedant,
Try looking at facts and acts before you sling labels…
“Under the 9th and 10 amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.”
“He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.”
So Pedant, Ron Paul wants to place the authority where it belongs, in the states, and that makes him a radical Pro-Life right winger?
How exactly is that?
He’s running in the GOP primary as a “family values” candidate.
That’s how.
You gotta watch what these guys DO, Sol, not what they say.
Pedant,
You are no better than Tom when you come here apouting that “family values” is about controlling sexual behavior.
Chas – just north of their building – across the street from the Broadview.
Appreciate the compliment, Nathan!
I might have to look those up Joe. I find ‘local’ coal gasification like that to be dubious for a number of reasons. On the other hand, trash-to-fuel or trash-to-energy can be very attractive.
Pedant,
Did you read my post? The bill that Ron Paul introduced?Wouldn’t that be representative of what he is DOing and not just saying?
Knee jerk party liners never fail to impress. Follow tag lines. No research. Research what YOUR candidates have done. Look at their voting history vs. what comes out of their mouths. Then do the same with Ron Paul. He DOES what he SAYS. Look it up.
Also: Paul’s never voted to raise taxes?!?
Hell, that’s a bug not a feature. After all, lowering taxes isn’t the answer to everything. Sometimes raising taxes is the right thing to do.
It appears Paul is ignorant of this basic fact.
Yeah, well then I guess Paul will NEVER vote to raise taxes.
Hell, that ain’t a thinking candidate. In fact, it’s the epitome of knee-jerk behavior.
Hey Pedant,
I am not always against raising taxes, but it should be the last resort. The first should be to control and prioritize spending, don;t you agree?
Ben — FYI — What used to be just north of that location, was both the Rock Island Depot, and the Missouri Pacific Depot… I do not remember there EVER being anything like a coal gasification plant of any kind at that location… lived here all my life..
How is that knee jerk? Which party does that? Who is he mimicking?
There once was a huge warehouse for grease and petroleum products over southwest of the Civic Center… It burned in one hellatious fire, that destroyed the old Wichita Forum… which ended up in the building of the Civic Center and Downtown Library..
Agreed, littlejohn. And I’ll go you one more: I agree with small-gov conservatives who argue that too often government grows by taxing the less better off to benefit the far better off. Definitely happens.
But Ron Paul has NEVER voted to raise taxes?!?
That’s just knee jerk behavior.
Pedant.. I believe you are very right on Ron Paul’s tax vote record.. hard to beleive, but he is far too much of a Libertarian to ever vote for tax increases..
Lower taxes, less government. Yeah, what a stupid idea. What party are you with???
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Lower_taxes_and_smaller_government
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget either. Pretty stupid huh? Can your candidates state the same?
Sol — I am a left leaning Libertarian, with antidisestablishmentarian tendencies… Whew… cant type that one very fast…
Sol, you can search here far and wide and you’ll never see me say I’m “with” any party 100% of the time.
But one thing for sure: sometimes, SOME times, raising taxes is the right thing to do. For example: war.
A candidate who’s never voted to raise taxes isn’t living in the real world, or lacks experience.
And you show me a GOP candidate who calls himself a “family values” candidate — with an independent streak! -Sol sez — but who’s never voted to raise taxes and I’ll show you a guy who pretty obviously putty that can be molded to the party line.
And that party is Dobson’s party, et al.
Chas,Relating to religion?
I dont believe Libertarian is a religion, Sol… not last time I looked…
Check his voting record pedant. In his 10th term and hasn’t swayed? Putty? Steel.
an`ti`dis`es`tab`lish`men`ta´ri`an`ism (?n`t?`d?s`?s`t?b`l?sh`men`târ´?`?n`?z’m)n. 1. the doctrine or political position that opposes the withdrawal of state recognition of an established church; – used especially concerning the Anglican Church in England. Opposed to disestablishmentarianism
SollyYou know that I agree with you that Ron Paul is an excellent candidate for president. However, the GOP has lost so much credibility with moderate liberals that everything is questioned. This is a big problem for the Paul campaign. Best thing you can do to support him is to give out the info you have and let others make up their own minds. You will not be able to defend all the accusations that will be brought up in the discussion. I see you working hard to inform people about Dr. Paul. But you can’t go banging your head against the wall for those that simply distrust anybody with a (R) beside their name. You can thank GW for this apathy.
Well, thats nice you know how to use a dictionary… But it still isnt a “religious” matter, as much as a political one… I for one WANT the State to recognize an established Church… Thats how churches in THIS country can be tax exempt… by being recognized as a Church!!
LOL, uh Sol. If Paul is truly “steel,” then he don’t stand a snowball’s chance in Dobson’s hell otherwise known as the GOP.
Dobson’s looking for putty. You see, it’s DOBSON who’s the steel.
Hell, this argument is a waste of time because Paul hasn’t got a chance IF he’s .
I get cold chills whenever any group… or organization.. starts to throw around the phrase “Traditional Family Values.”
I want to know Which Tradition??What KIND of Family??And the Values of which generation??
Far too many times, “Traditional Family Values” used during most election cycles… is just a catch-all phrase for ONE group of ideas.. which dont speak for all people of this, or most any other nation…
Chas – not real sure. It was sort of before my time but I vaguely recall hearing something about a facility there about a century or more ago. Interesting that such crud could stay that long.
Polynuclear aromatic ‘chickenwire’ is very recalcitrant to decomposition; fortunately is also does not migrate.
Pedant & Mike,
I understand the GOP has wrecked things. Miserably wrecked. I used to be a GW apologist and thought I was a republican. When I started researching Dr. Paul, I found out how mistaken I was.
I also started to see how non-party affiliated he is. I also saw the GOP had already decided that I would vote for Romney and it really pissed me off.
I think Ron Paul can do more for America than Hilary or Obama. He was an unknown, but has been gaining traction, even though the MSM tries to dismiss him.
I appreciate people who research him and try to defame him. At least you are researching him. I bet you find more about him that you like than dislike.
It is disgusting to see the party liners reject him. The liberals because he is on the GOP ticket. The conservatives because he pretty much goes against everything that the GOP is doing.
We have a real choice in this election. Take a step back, deep breath, and look at what is in front of you.
Interesting that it is so many Republicans who want to destroy Ron Paul.
I will take a ‘wait and see’ attitude toward him until I know more.
It’s not disgusting SolDev, it’s called freedom of choice. :)
Ksfarmgrrl. You are right! It is the religious right that are organizing against the Casino in Sedgwick County. Mark Karrs is the leader of the group, a big Republican hack with Phil Kline and Bonnie Huy ties.
They are the same group that did successfully have gay marriages ban a constitutional amendment.
While the anti-casino people cloak themselves with various business leaders and trying to push the case of economic benefits, that isn’t their true reasons for going against a casino. It is a moral and a religious one.
Organizers of the re-vote arena group are also in the anti-casino campaign. I believe JWink is part of the anti-casino organizers as well. Jwink along with his close buddy Darrell Leffew and Troy Newman of Operation Rescue and the Kansas Republican Action Assembly are all teaming together to get the casino voted down.
My response to Joe Williams:
Mr. Williams, you really should have your facts correct BEFORE you publicly expound your thoughts. Please, in the future,be very sure. And you may contact me anytime. As a matter of fact, let’s get together and hold a public debate. We were set for one a few weeks ago but you did not show up. What stopped you?Your friend, Darrell E. Leffew
Ben,
I learned enough from what Sol posted earlier:
“He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.”
The targets of that law are obviously Griswold v Connecticut, Roe v Wade, and Lawrence v Texas.
I don’t care _what_ party label he uses. Paul wants, by legislative fiat, to throw out 42 years of court precedent regarding contraception, choice, privacy, and due process.
No effin’ thanks.
Repub,Enjoy the freedom the GOP gave you by ‘being the decider’ and forcing Romney on you.
Wait and see…
So Tom,
I decide what you think (from another thread) and now I do your research for you. Would you like help breathing too?
Okay Sol, Ron Paul won’t make the cut off, wait and see. :)
“He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.”
I can’t see how this law could possibly be constitutional. Our Constitution provides us with the recourse to petition the court system. I am not lawyer (but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night) but I just can’t see how a law preventing a citizen from using the court system could be legal.
If a law such as this were to pass and be constitutional, what would prevent any special interest group from passing a similar law regarding firearms, taxes, eminent domain or any other subject?
Saw O’reilly’s goons ambush Dr Tiller … at a Quick trip 3 blocks from my house. Wish I had been there as I am nearly every day. I could have told the Faux news crew and Billos goons what I think of them.
Hey has anybody heard if there is an organized protest to bushs visit Friday?
Paul wants, by legislative fiat, to throw out 42 years of court precedent regarding contraception, choice, privacy, and due process.No effin’ thanks.Posted by: Tom | June 13, 2007 at 01:21 PM
Tom,You are emphatically incorrect. He wants to give the power to the states and to the people of those states to vote on the issues. If you want to have LESS say in what happens to you – read gay marriage and abortion – then let the Federal Gov’t own you. Own your decisions. Own your rights.
OR, you can vote on them in your own state and have a stronger say in the matter.
Do you think Kansas would take away your right to contraception, choice, privacy and due process? If you do, you are in the wrong state.
WS,
It is expressly outlined in the constitution. Dr. Paul is a constitutionalist.
“Under the 9th and 10 amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.”
Darrell – I would add that at least some of the anti-arena people are NOT anti-Arena. The KWCH and eagle polls make that clear.
That’s my point Repub. And you are ready to go cast your vote for Romney? Wouldn’t it be nice if you had a choice or even a voice in the matter?
“It is expressly outlined in the constitution. Dr. Paul is a constitutionalist.”
If that is true, Mr. DevVB, then a whole host of laws could be deemed unconstitutional. If in fact that is true – not questioning, just stating – then we should/could see a blizzard of lawsuits.
Sol, I never said I was voting for Romney or any other candidate. I have made some choices by characterizing their platform, but no choice has been made.
Besides, I think I already stated that Ron Paul likes to play the “blame America game” a bit too much. It wreaks of Liberal Leftism too much for my tastes.
Do you disagree that out foreign policy prior to 9/11 pissed off some Muslims?
If you are voting republican, and Ron Paul doesn’t make the cut, you will vote for Romney. It has been decided for you. Giuliani has no chance. The GOP will use him as the front man to take the hits and heat for Romney.
our*
WS,
Article 3, Section 2, says this in part:
“[T]he supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
Some people like to interpret that as a way for the Congress to strip the courts of their power to review _acts_ of Congress. This is what Paul’s HR4379 was attempting to do.
Here’s a good article describing the intent of laws like this:http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/181240/3/
9th amendmentThe enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
10th amendmentThe powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.
Tom,Can you find a link that describes Ron Paul’s bill in the same light? Specifacly HIS bill.
By the way, y’all are going down the wrong road. This will not keep the SCOTUS from hearing cases (at least in Ron Paul’s bill). It will keep the Federal Gov’t from making blanket laws applying to all the states. Each state in turn passes its own laws. If the laws are unjust, there is no reason why they can not be petitioned to SCOTUS. SCOTUS hears the case, and decides on the STATE issue, not a blanket ruling for all 50 states.
Sol,
Go to thomas.loc.gov, click the “Search Multiple, Previous Congresses” link, check 109th, put in “4379″ and search.
Once there, you’ll find this language:
(3) Article III, section 2 of the Constitution of the United States gives Congress the power to make `such exceptions, and under such regulations’ as Congress finds necessary to Supreme Court jurisdiction.
(4) Congress has the authority to make exceptions to Supreme Court jurisdiction in the form of general rules and based upon policy and constitutional reasons other than the outcomes of a particular line of cases. (See Federalist No. 81; United States v. Klein, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 128 (1872)).
(5) Congress has constitutional authority to set broad limits on the jurisdiction of both the Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts in order to correct abuses of judicial power and continuing violations of the Constitution of the United States by Federal courts.
(11) Congress has the responsibility to protect the republican governments of the States and has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts over matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
And yes, Sol, Paul’s bill would block SCOTUS from review.
Actually, our dysfunctional media plays a very large part in deciding who becomes our president.
Consider how MSM ignored Romney’s false claim that the war happened because IAEA inspectors were not allowed into Iraq.
‘Ignoring Romney’s Iraq falsehood, Wash. Post called Huckabee’s Reagan remark the “Gaffe of the Night” ‘http://mediamatters.org/items/200706060013
Read the whole thing Tom. If you do you will see that it says EXACTLY what I have been saying. The states have their own laws. Read section 3
It limits SCOTUS from taking away rights under the constitution.
This whole bill quotes the constitution.
Do you no longer want to be governed by the constitution?
Any legal beagles out there today? GMC? VT?
govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-4379
(7) Supreme Court and lower Federal court decisions striking down local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion have wrested from State and local governments issues reserved to the States and the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(8) The Supreme Court and lower Federal courts threaten the republican government of the individual States by replacing elected government with rule by unelected judges.
(9) Even supporters of liberalized abortion laws have admitted that the Supreme Court’s decisions overturning the abortion laws of all 50 States are constitutionally flawed (e.g. Ely, `The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade’ 82 Yale L.J. 920 (1973)).
(10) Several members of the Supreme Court have admitted that the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisdiction is indefensible (e.g. Zelamn v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639, 688 (2002) (Souter, J., dissenting); Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 861 (1995) (Thomas, J. concurring); Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384, 399, (1993) (Scalia, J. concurring); and Committee for Public Ed. And Religious Liberty v. Regan, 444 U.S. 646, 671 (1980) (Stevens, J., dissenting).
(11) Congress has the responsibility to protect the republican governments of the States and has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts ***^^^***over matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.***^^^***
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON JURISDICTION.The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court–(1) shall not adjudicate–(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).
SEC. 4. REGULATION OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION.The Supreme Court of the United States and all other Federal courts–(1) are not prevented from determining the constitutionality of any Federal statute or administrative rule or procedure in considering any case arising under the Constitution of the United States; and(2) shall not issue any order, final judgment, or other ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the several States and their subdivisions.
It limits SCOTUS from taking away rights under the constitution.Posted by: SolDevVB | June 13, 2007 at 02:19 PM
Which rights?
Do tell…
Giuliani’s law and lobbying clients have included Saudi Arabia, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., and chewing tobacco maker UST Inc.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272201,00.html
As I said – read section 3
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON JURISDICTION.The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court–(1) shall not adjudicate–(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).
Huh…
That doesn’t answer my question. What rights was SCOTUS trying to take away?
OMG Tom,You go on a rant about this bill taking away your rights, probing into your bedroom, blocking SCOTUS review.
Look, you’ve got the bill in front of you. If this bill were passed then the SCOTUS would not be able to tell you that abortions are illegal. That you can not marry a man. That you can not start a church for the knee jerking liberals.
Tom, until you take off your liberal glasses and see that there are REAL candidates that run under the GOP flag, this is hopeless. Can you not read what I JUST posted?
At least ONE real candidate anyway.
It limits SCOTUS from taking away rights under the constitution.Posted by: SolDevVB | June 13, 2007 at 02:19 PM
You still haven’t answered my question, Sol. What rights was SCOTUS trying to take away?
Jesus wept Tom,
OK, real slow for you. Lets say some idiot found grounds to ban gay marriage. He is able to get the SCOTUS nod. This bill that Ron Paul passed would disavow that. The SCOTUS can not take away rights granted by the constitution. Abortion being one of those. Should Roe v Wade be overturned and abortion outlawed, this bill would prevent that.
Starting to see the light Tom? Ron Paul is fighting FOR your constitutional rights. He wants every right given to you under the constitution to be protected and not detracted by any court or law.
This bill that Ron Paul passed = This bill that Ron Paul presented
Sol,
In my lifetime (and probably yours), SCOTUS has been the last line of defense in civil and individual rights. I’ve cited three _LANDMARK_ rulings by SCOTUS that are directly threatened by Paul’s bill. They all guarantee individual rights that states had seen fit to take away.
The best you can come up with is a hypothetical that hasn’t even happened. Since I’ve been able to give _you_ specifics, I’d like some in return.
Again: What specific rights has SCOTUS been trying to take away – especially in the context of HR4379?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._ConnecticutRoe v wadehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
OK Tom,I’ve cut and pasted the bill and the link to the bill. How is it exactly that the bill would impact any of your cited cases? I’m tired of explaining to you. Tag, you’re it.
Mind you now Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist. He has 10 terms worth of voting records to back it up.
You haven’t even researched him. This should be interesting.
SolDevVB-
I think you ar discounting some real concerns about this. particularly in the portion about past judgements. The law is a complex structure, based not just upon passed legislation, but also by case law. To do away with past rulings in such matters throws the whole legal system into disarray.I think I undersand his attempt, to put back things in the proper federal/state relationship. However, I fear it is much too late for that
Tom-
I read Griswold, and I think i would side with the dissent. I think it would have been much better to leave it to the states, but I am not a lawyer. I understand your concern, and rightly so, about any legislatiion that would overturn Griswold and hence it’s children.However, the federal government, and SCOTUS, has overplayed it’s hand, and some people feel the need to address it. i fear it is too late. We must try and work with what we have. However, to overturn Griswold,or even Roe v wade, would not make those activities illegal,only turn it back to state legislatures, constitutions, and courts, where I think it probably belongs.
9) Even supporters of liberalized abortion laws have admitted that the Supreme Court’s decisions overturning the abortion laws of all 50 States are constitutionally flawed (e.g. Ely, `The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade’ 82 Yale L.J. 920 (1973)).
(10) Several members of the Supreme Court have admitted that the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisdiction is indefensible (e.g. Zelamn v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639, 688 (2002) (Souter, J., dissenting); Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 861 (1995) (Thomas, J. concurring); Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384, 399, (1993) (Scalia, J. concurring); and Committee for Public Ed. And Religious Liberty v. Regan, 444 U.S. 646, 671 (1980) (Stevens, J., dissenting).
(11) Congress has the responsibility to protect the republican governments of the States and has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts over matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
matters that are reserved to the States and to the People by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
SEC. 4. REGULATION OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
The Supreme Court of the United States and all other Federal courts–
(1) are not prevented from determining the constitutionality of any Federal statute or administrative rule or procedure in considering any case arising under the Constitution of the United States; and
(2) shall not issue any order, final judgment, or other ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the several States and their subdivisions.
Catch y’all tomorrow. Have a good evening.
Tom, no hard feelings brother. Good debate. Wish we could have seen eachother’s points a little more clearly. I truely don’t believe that Ron Paul would take away any of your rights granted inder the constitution. He has a perfect voting record defending the constitiution.
Anyway, y’all have a good evening.
Littlejohn,
The US Constitution doesn’t enumerate rights, and in fact makes that point in the 9th Amendment. It says what rights the Framers felt were so important that they needed to be protected explicitly instead of implicitly. So of course, there’s no “right” to privacy in the Constitution, just as there’s no right to free speech in the Constitution, either. Read the Bill of Rights – each amendment says what the government may _not_ do. They do not say what the people _may_ do.
The key concept here is that rights are inherent to the people, not conveyed by law. The Bill of Rights doesn’t convey rights – it tells the Government “don’t even dare mess with these inherent rights.” That’s reinforced by the plain language of the 9th Amendment, which declares all rights not listed are still “retained” by the people. To abrogate any individual rights, the government must show a compelling public interest before it can do so (such as yelling “fire” in a crowded theater).
In Griswold, did the State of Connecticut have a compelling interest in denying married couples their inherent right to privacy in their own bed? _NO_. Do we really want to go back to the day when state legislatures could regulate the most intimate and private relationships between consenting, even married, adults? _NO_.
If what we do in bed with our spouses is subject to the most invasive kind of regulation, there are no barriers _at_all_ between the government and the people. We become subjects of the state, to be ruled by the whim of whoever happens to be in power.
No thanks.
Looks like the fall out from Jack Abramoff is still ongoing, I wonder if Gonzo has intervened for any of bush’s buddies?The head of a Republican environmental advocacy group was charged with tax evasion and obstructing a Senate inquiry as part of the Jack Abramoff corruption investigation. The woman, Italia Federici, was named in a two-count criminal information, a document that usually indicates a guilty plea has been negotiated. Prosecutors said Ms. Federici served as a go-between for Mr. Abramoff, the once-powerful lobbyist, and J. Steven Griles, who was deputy interior secretary in President Bush’s first term. She is accused of lying to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which in 2005 was investigating Mr. Abramoff’s dealings with the Interior Department. In March, Mr. Griles became the highest-ranking Bush administration official convicted in the lobbying scandal when he pleaded guilty to obstructing justice.
Hello?
There’s also the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law.
Does it conflict with States’ Rights sometimes? You betcha. That’s why SCOTUS justices get the big bucks.
Repetitively cutting-and-pasting your favorite clause from the Bill of Rights is a fool’s game. The law is constantly challenged and reevaluated by individual cases and judgements, decisions and dissents, politics and the whims of passing fancy.
Is it a messy, sometimes muddled way to run a country? You betcha! If you want efficiency, brush up on your “Mein Kampf.”
I’ve been villified as a dreaded “Liberal” because I tend to reside in the reality-based community. No amount of so-called “Pro-Life” legislation is ever going to eliminate abortion; women have sought to terminate pregnancies since they first started getting pregnant. The “Immigration” problem has always been with us; just with different varieties of immigrants. There used to be signs outside pubs in New York that said, “No Dogs or Irishment Allowed.” Religious dogma, political philosophies, and moral prejudices have always been manipulated to make women subservient or inferior to this or that standard of “civilization.” There’s always someone willing (and too often succeeding) to impose myth or legend or tradition over the facts at hand.
We who are loyal and patriotic Americans really need to come to grips that we’ve picked a pretty flimsy way to run a government. (And, no. This isn’t a “blame America first” concept.) For all their proclamations of the conservative philosophy of the primacy of states’ rights, “conservatives” jumped at the opportunity for the SCOTUS to override Florida’s soveriegnty to get George WMD Bush into to the White House on a 5-4 vote. For all the “strict constitutionalist” rhetoric of the “conservative” movement, the “conservative” political party in America sanctioned removal of the Constitutional right of habeus corpus; indeed ceded any number of Constitutional rights to the whim and fiat of one George WMD Bush.
Ron Paul is cute because he appeals to idealists; Libertarians who must think the Interstate Highway System is a natural stone formation. He promises no taxes for manna from a heavenly federal government but is lauded for “integrity” when he declares, “Read my lips: No new manna!” Libertarians are basically those who want to smoke dope and not pay taxes.
Tom-
I understand your argument, and I agree with your argument’s goals. My disagreement is with the federal courts deciding an essentially state issue. If we are to delegate everything to the feds, why bother with the state governments or state court system.The tenth amendment specifically limits the federals to powers expressly identified in the Constitution, all others being held by the states or the people.
LTP-
you are right, it is a messy way to run a country, any country, especially one the size of the United States. And there will always be arguments about proper jurisdiction, or proper deciding. Hurray! I got no problem with that. I got no problem with dissent. I got a problem with those that choose to shut down dissent and discussion. I also agree that overthrowing Griswold or Roe would be disastrous. Because I disagree with Griswold does not mean I seek to overturn it. Utter chaos would result. As I posted, we must go on from where we are.
Tom –
Althought the “p word” isn’t black-ink law in the Constitution, I’ve long been convinced the Right to Privacy permeates the Bill of Rights.
I used to joke about 3rd Amendment activists. Taken at face values, “quartering troops” is such an 18th Century concept to make just about everything on the page seem to be an anachronism. (I really don’t wan’t to start a gun-rights flame war here, but the fact is: the 2nd Amendment at its most liberal interpretation of Original Intent grants individual American citizens the right to keep and bear single-shot, smooth-bore, barrel-loaded, flintlock muskets.) It is an enumerated “right” deemed just as important as the prohibition of quatering troops.
But wait! What is the underlying message of the 2nd Amendment? Gun rights activists will scream and clammor their 2nd Amendment rights give them the right to carry a fully-automatic AK-47 down the frozen food aisle at Dillon’s.
If that is the message of “Original Intent,” fine. But that also means the 3rd Amendment essential says, “A man’s home is his castle.” And the 4th Amendment builds on that concept, protecting against unreasonable search and seizure.
The Bill of Rights pretty much says what you do is none of the government’s business unless the government jumps through some hoops to *PROVE* it’s their business.
For the last six-and-a-half years, indeed since the “Republican Revolution of 1994,” I’ve seen so-called “conservatives” hell-bent on empowering government to reduce the rights of people.
This isn’t about States’ Rights, or “the government closest to the people is best,” or (for sure!) “the government that governs least…” No, the reason I’m a Liberal is because so-called “conservatives” have long ago stopped being conservative. They’ve become would-be oppressors. They must be restrained.
It’s the American Way.
It’s all in there, in the Constitution of the United States of America.
“the reason I’m a Liberal is because so-called “conservatives” have long ago stopped being conservative. They’ve become would-be oppressors.”
Which is exactly why I left the Republican Party two years ago.
Tom-some of us in the Republican party still want you back.
“CF, where are you getting this?
“Given the increasing likelihood of a pre-emptive strike by Israel and the Bush Administration against Iran, this is a dangerous precursor and a provocation. ”
Posted by: SolDevVB | June 13, 2007 at 08:22 AM”
Sol, Don’t you read the Jewish newapapers? They’re screaming for the US to bomb Iran, even that G-D Lieberman is all over TV saying that Iran is killing American soldiers { he said that 7 times on “Face the Nation” }.
Israel is one lie after another. Don’t they EVER tell the truth?
“I agree with ED, they need to bury the power lines, problem solved and the city would look 100% better.
Posted by: Mary Caruso | June 13, 2007 at 08:32 AM
Mary,
Who is going to pay for that?
Posted by: Tom | June 13, 2007 at 08:34 AM”
The so-called “war” is costing billions a week, and that money needs to be spent right here at home rather than on Israeli greed.
Perhaps Tom refused to sweep out his “log cabin” is the real reason he left the Republican party. :)
Littlejohn,
As sincerely as I can say it, Thank you. :)
Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude in the Republican Party these days is too much like that exhibited by the 5:20pm post by “Republican.”
I still maintain some very close ties to, and working relationships with, moderate Republicans both in and out of elected office. You recall my conversation with Farmgrrl the other day, of course, where I talked about irritating Democrats with my line-crossing ways.
But the sad truth is this: Right now, I can do more _inside_ the Democratic Party than I can do _outside_ the Republican Party.
That was certainly a childish remark on his part, Tom, but you handled it well. I sure in his or her own juvenile way, he thinks that was witty and deserving of the attention he craves.
Perhaps we should take up a collection and buy him a cat to give him a bit of attention.
Wait. That would be cruelty to animals.
Sorry, my bad.
Tom, your debate skills are fantastic, I only wish I could be as persuasive as you.
Your points are dead on, and I, as a democrat, sure do appreciate you being on our team now.
Tom,
Here for a second.
So Ron Paul believes in giving the states the right to govern its citizen’s rights under state law. Can you please explain why that is a problem for you?
The Republicans have morphed into neocons which in turn have attacked themselves to the Zionist Cult hiding behind both the Jewish and Christian Religions.
The result is mindless group of goons with an insatiable craving for power, and total disregard for the rights or humanity of others.
They are worthless barbarians with atomic, biological and chemical weapons and must be stopped before they destroy the rest of us.
One thing about us Liberals, we’re able to learn.
Remember back in the 90s, when the Limbaugh-tomized Masses were whining and crying about how such a “liberal” Bill Clinton was? Then all of a sudden, he reached across party lines and helped produce Welfare Reform (which pissed off true liberals). The “conservatives” immediately started bleating, “He stole our issue!!”
Limbaugh, Gingrich, O’Liely, Faux Noise Channel, DeLay, et al… have all thrived in making government an Us vs Them proposition. The politics of division.
True Liberals — not necessarily all Democrats, since they’ve been attacked for more than 20 years by the Right Wing Propaganda Machine — the *TRUE* Liberals understand not every “conservative” concept is bankrupt. (Even if, these days, that’s the way to bet.)
Nope. There are plenty of traditionally conservative philosophies that even the worst of us Liberals need to keep in mind. One is the threat of an all-too-powerful and potentially oppressive government. That’s a George WMD Bush policy that makes me a bit hinky. Forget warrants for wiretapping. Forget habeus corpus. “The Constitution is just a piece of paper” has somehow taken over “conservative” policy.
If “conservatives” would live up to their rhetoric, they might be relevant. But it’s becoming ever more obvious that “conservative” rhetoric exists to win elections.
“Let’s build a 700-mile-wide fence along a 1,700-mile-wide border to keep brown people from crossing!” To those who now consider themselves to be “conservatives,” that’s a rational argument.
“A ‘pre-born’ life’s rights is more important than am *existing* life’s.” To those who consider themselves “conservtives,” it’s all there in the Bible… somewhere.
If you (according to the Bible) are Daniel and ‘love Jeremiah more than any woman or man,” it really doesn’t matter because Leviticus declares that homosexuality is an amboniation on the order of eating a ham sandwich or a shrimp cocktail.
Ah! But two people in love who want to commit themselves to a contract of mutual wealth, dependency, reliance, shared-wealth, emotional devotion, etc… somehow cannot achieve that goal because of their genitals?
Sorry, “conservatives.” I can’t find that prohibition in either the Constitution of the United States of America or in your holy scriptures.
And I’m sorry, “Cons.” But I think you’ve manipulated traditional “conservative” rhetoric for too long in achieving the goals of multi-national corporations which have absolutely no loyalty to the United States of America. I’ve obsserved the former “conservative” movement transformed into a distortion of what I expect America to be: a government *of,* *by,* and *for,* the *people!* Not for the corporations; not for the stockholders, not for the consumers, not for the producers… for the *people.*
That means brown people, too. That means women people, also. That means babies who’ve happened to have chosen the wrong parents and depend on “welfare” to get fed. That means a guy who shoplifted a slice of pizza and is serving a life sentence in Folsum Prison when Paris Hilton who gets out of a 45-day sentence (for triple parole violation) after a day and a half.
Ronald Reagan Conservatism was born by that less-than-astute-but-politically-effictive brain that was rotting away even when he was elected. Still, he should be admired for reminding us of what America’s supposed to be.
No one who calls him/herself a “conservative” these days has anything in common with Ronald Reagan’s dream.
“Conservatives” have owned Congress and the Oval Office and the Supreme Court for 12, 6, and 20 years, all told.
The so-called “conservative” party — the Republics — have not only not delivered, they have refused to even achieve delivery — of the goals they say they hold sacred every even-numbered year in the fall leading up to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
I used to think conservatives, as much as I disagreed with them on the specifics, might have something to contribute to social and political discourse.
I used to be able to understand what “conservatives” say they advocate. I’ve even adopted some of the concepts “conservatives” say they advocate.
But if they don’t live up to their so-called principle, why should I bother with them?
It’s become “who wins and who loses?” for a movement that’s been taken over by right wingnuts.
This is no longer the America I was a baby in; when the most respected general of WWII warned us against the military-industrial complex. This is no longer the America I grew up in; when people were shot dead for having a dream. This in no longer the America I became a man in; when a President had the audacity to tell the American people that we needed to come up with an alternative to Arabian oil. This is no longer the America I hoped for; when rhetoric somehow convinced people there was a “Goldens City on a Hill.” This is no longer the America I voted for; that produced 8 years of prosperity and expected the most wealthy to pull a bit more of the load for those unfortunate. This is no longer the America George WMD Bush promised; that wouldn’t engage in Nation-Building or foreign interventions without an exit stragegy.
Frankly, I’m not sure this is the America I was led to expect.
America, given all the tools and ideals and philosophies to be right, has become wrong.
Don’t give me your “Love it or Leave it” crap. Been there, got the t-shirt.
We’re just not *AMERICA* anymore. And that’s sad.
Darrell! Are you not a member of the Kansas Republican Action Committee?
Tell me where my facts are not straight on this one?
Interesting…
“The Brutal Fatwas in IsraelFahmi Howaidi, Arab News
“It is worthy of further consideration to consider the Israeli fatwas that my Palestinian colleague Salih Al-Tuhami observed. Conservative Jewish thought and tradition say that in case the country’s laws contradict the rabbi’s fatwas, the fatwa must be implemented and anything the government says is worthless. That’s the opinion of Rabbi Elie — who is one of Israel’s senior rabbis — who is supported by the majority of his peers.
These Jewish fatwas are responsible for instigating religious Jews against Arabs. Last year, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, former Sephardic chief rabbi and an influential authority among conservative Jews, issued a fatwa asking the Israeli Army not to flinch from killing Palestinian civilians in the context of the ongoing military campaign against armed groups resisting the occupation. He mentioned in his fatwa, which received special attention from religious media outlets and hundreds of pamphlets distributed inside synagogues in Israel. that all Palestinians must be murdered, even the ones who are not participating in the war against terrorism. This wasn’t enough for the revered rabbi, who said that this was not only a fatwa, but a religious duty from God that Jews must follow.
After that, one of the most important Jewish rabbis issued a fatwa that allowed his students in one of the Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank to steal the agricultural produce grown by Palestinians. It said that everything in the West Bank belongs to the Jews, giving them the right to confiscate such properties. This fatwa was implemented and his students confiscated the agricultural yield of the Palestinians.
Rabbi Dov Lior, chief rabbi of Hebron and Kiryat-Arba, did the same when he issued a fatwa that allowed Jewish settlers to poison the livestock and water wells owned by Palestinians in neighboring cities and villages. The settlers didn’t hesitate in implementing the fatwa. Not a single day passed without Palestinians finding dead sheep and poisoned water.
On the other hand, a group of prominent Jewish rabbis addressed the Israeli defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, saying that killing enemy civilians was “normal” during wartime and that the Israeli Army should never hesitate to kill non-Jewish civilians in order to save Jewish lives. “There is no war in the world in which it is possible to delineate neatly between the population and the enemy’s army, neither in the US war in Iraq, the Russian war in Chechnya, nor in Israel’s war with its enemies,” the rabbis said.
The rabbis quoted a Talmudic ruling, which states “Our lives come first.” In their famous letter, the rabbis warned against what they called Christian preaching in dealing with conflict. “The Christian preaching of ‘turning the other cheek’ doesn’t concern us, and we will not be impressed by those who prefer the lives of our enemies to our lives,” they said.
These tense times have influenced a number of other fatwas from rabbis about underestimating the lives of Arabs and humiliating them. Yediot Ahronot newspaper reported on July 25, 2002 that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the current spiritual leader of the Shas political party in the Knesset (Israel’s Parliament), said that until Christ the Savior arrives, he will send all Arabs to hellfire. “Why doesn’t Ariel Sharon do what needs to be done? He’s scared of the people of the world. But when the Savior Christ comes, he won’t fear anyone. He will send all the Arabs to hell.” Yosef described Arabs as snakes and said Jews should not trust them.
It’s no wonder that one of the rabbis — Isaac Ginzburg — published a book entitled “Baruch the Hero” to immortalize the name of Dr. Baruch Goldstein who perpetrated the 1994 Cave of the Patriarchs massacre in the city of Hebron, killing 29 Arab attendants of the Ibrahimi Mosque (within the Cave of the Patriarchs) and wounding another 150 in a shooting attack.
As for Rabbi Eli Albaz, who is one of the distinctive Eastern rabbis, he never misses an opportunity to attack Islam and condemn the Prophet (pbuh). He insists on complaining in front of his audience by telling jokes that address Muslims and Palestinians and using filthy language to attack Muslims. And Rabbi Eliyahu Reskin continuously ridicules the reconciliation attempts to create dialogue between Jewish rabbis and Arab officials. He believes that the only language of dialogue between Muslims and Jews should be bullets. He feels that without convincing the Arabs in general, and the Palestinians specifically, settlement can’t be forced upon Israel so the efforts of peace are worthless.
It’s true that from a legal perspective, the rabbis’ fatwas concerning political issues don’t exert much influence. But their words, that come from their religious backgrounds, have a huge impact especially with the increasing dominance of religious parties that have developed tremendous political power that cannot be underestimated. Therefore, their fatwas influence more than religious people and are used to pressure political decisions. It’s true that conservatives, whether the followers of Zionism or from the ultra-Orthodox movement, make up 28 percent of the Israeli population, yet more than 50 percent of the inhabitants of the country introduce themselves as conservatives. These people empathize greatly with Jewish religious authorities and pay attention to what they say.
What’s interesting is that all the laws and systems in Israel have never tried, not even once, to address those rabbis or question them about their racial discrimination. Not only that, but these rabbis, who are involved in this discrimination, are given great prominence in Israeli politics. Decision makers in Israel compete with each other to earn the endorsement of rabbis, and to be close to them.
When one examines these fatwas and their influence in instigating and serving the Zionist schemes and its evil goals, one can’t help but feel sad and bitter when compared with the fatwas that are preoccupying Muslim scholars. The latter provoke gossip among people and divert their attention from what’s vital and fateful, making them regress instead of moving forward.”
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=97460&d=14&m=6&y=2007&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good nite, and good luck!!
WSCLARK: IS THE S FOR SAMBO?
Dee dee DA DA DAH DAH de duh DA DAH . . .
*****
Brilliant analysis, MonkeyHawk.
Thanks for that.
MonkeyHawk-
I see the best of America everyday. I see it when Obama and Hillary stand before the Ameican public as candidates for the highest public in the land. I see it when the high officials of companies like Enron go to jail, when government officials go to jail, when people like Paris Hilton are even charged. There have been days in the past none of that would have happened.I see it when the guy next to me is a Muslim, and the guy behind an atheist. I see it when two gay guys walk down the street holding hands. I see America when buffoons like Kline are kicked out of office.I see it everyday when a Greensburg happens, and yes, even a Katrina. When people from all over this great land descend upon such places with tools in hand, ready to work. I see it when the neighbor has a heart attack just befor harvest, and everybody chips in time and equipment to get the ailing persons cut. I see it every time I drive by the Lords Diner. I see when I see the faces of volunteer and paid fireman, and emts. When people will get out of their beds, and help a neighbor and need, then drag their tired butt to work. I see it when people like the founders of companies can become rich by what they produce. I see it when police in NYC are held accountable, and on and on an on. I see it when thousands of students graduate from high school and college each year. When thousands of men and women put on the uniforms of the United States Military, and stand ready to serve. I see it when Wal Mart hires those that have learning problems, and less than normal iqs, to gather carts. I see America when we go to Kosovo, when we send food, and money, and supplies to Indonesia when there is a catastrophe like few have seen. I see America.
I see America because I open my eyes and look. I do not look for perfection, because it is not there. Is it perfect, no. Am I, or you? no. I look for inprovement, for reaching towards the ideal, when even a buffoon like Al Sharpton gets his day.
I see America. I am proud of AMerica, with all it’s warts. So sorry that you can;t see the same.
See, “littlejohn,” –
I’m grateful to have been born in the United States of America but for all its good elements, “proud” just doesn’t seem to fit for me.
I admit to being proud of certain accomplishments I’ve contributed to. But it seems to me misplaced pride to bask in the glow of my grandfather’s achievements. A loose use of the word might allow me to be proud of grampa, but it’s up to me to come up with something on my own that I can truly be proud of. I read Shakespeare or watch Katharine Hepburn act and, I confess, I’m a bit proud to be of the same species. But that pride doesn’t translate into any personal attribute for me as an individual.
In that way, I’m proud to be an American citizen. American citizens have accomplished some pretty remarkable — large and small — triumphs of spirit and mind and will.
But I overstep my ego when I start taking credit for Thomas Jefferson’s eloquence, or Benjamin Franklin’s wisdom, or George Washington’s courage, or Abraham Lincoln’s vision, or Thomas Edison’s perception.
And even if I admire those great Americans for what they achieved and allow a little pride that I’m on the same team, I’d be less than honest if I didn’t accept some of the shared blame for, say, the Ku Klux Klan. There’s nothing quite more “American” than racism, terrorism, and self-righteous hatred of “others.”
All I’m saying is America isn’t living up to its promise. Americans in general are good people even when Americans as a whole have lost track of our ideals and goals.
I don’t think “Republican” or “Hank” or even you, “littlejohn,” are evil. It’s just your political views are skewed by decidedly un-American prejudices. Politics does that to some people; it becomes a matter of who wins the horse race rather than what can be accomplished by a coalition of commonwealth.
The issues du jour involve political policies that think we can go halfway around the world, point guns at people, and make them believe (as we say we do) in democracy. That faith in one theology’s explanation of the inexplicable is clearly superior to any and every other viewpoint.
I see the good of America, “littlejohn.” There’s a bunch of it. But I can imagine there are plenty of Chinese people who see the basic goodness of China; that there are Muslims who’re convinced they have a superior grasp of the grand scheme of things; that maybe Chevy trucks are better than Fords, or vice versa.
What breaks my heart is the tendency of so many people to think *THEIR* opinion is the only worthy one.
That’s just about the most un-American mindset I can imagine. And it’s rife in contemporary political discoures these days.
And that makes me sad.
MonkeyHawk, another of the “blame America First” crowd.
Hey Hank! Guess what, we veterans are un-American according to Monkeyhawk.
I wonder how many times he has stood reveille at daybreak all over the world? How un-American of us Hank!
It’s just your political views are skewed by decidedly un-American prejudices. Politics does that to some people; it becomes a matter of who wins the horse race rather than what can be accomplished by a coalition of commonwealth.
Please define wherre my poitical views are skewed by decidedly un-American prejudices
Thanks
Littlejohn and Monkeyhawk,
I found both of your original posts to be heartfelt and moving. In a very real sense, you’re both right.
The great American experiment in freedom and liberty has, I would bet, surpassed the wildest imaginings of our nation’s founders. We have one of the most open and egalitarian societies in all of human history, and it’s one that’s been built on a foundation of respect for individual rights, free speech and press, free religion, and due process and rule of law for all.
Is it perfect? No. Do we sometimes take two steps back for the two steps we just took forward? Yes.
Like Littlejohn said, we’re not perfect. We’re 300 million incredibly diverse people trying to get along in a hostile world. Are there people trying to take us back, instead of forward?
As Monkeyhawk pointed out, there are people who thrive on making the debate “us vs them,” and using a very dogmatic view of faith and religion to force their beliefs on others.
Let’s not turn this into a mud-slinging contest. The optimists need to recognize why some are bitter and pessimistic. The cynics need to accept part of the optimists view as well – that we’ve come a long way, and can go further.
Tom, KS, LJ,
We need to get to work. We need to get this country back on track. We DO have a lot to be proud of, and as well, we have a lot to be ashamed of.
The US has lost face with the world community. We need to get that back. We need to start that process here at home. We need to get our back yard cleaned up before we go dipping our fingers in other people’s back yards.
Start with ‘08 – as we will no doubt get nothing done before then. Start with the next president of the United States. Vote smart. Vote wise. Let’s put someone in that office that is willing to roll up sleeves and get hands dirty. Work on unifying this great nation. This nation under one flag, not a political party.
How would you know that America has lost face in the American Community Sol? How many countries in the world have you visited or spent any length of time in?
European politicians, regardless of who elected them are notorious for catering to their equivalent of our Liberal Left so they can score in the “we are not aligned with the U.S.” column.
The common people who I have met love the U.S. and are eager to meet, trade and exchange ideas.
You seem to be buying into the load of crap that the Liberal Left is spewing.
I find it amazing that people who say the most about how the World thinks about the U.S. have never crossed the U.S. border. Yet, they become self-acclaimed experts on the matter.
Repub,I spent 10 years in the Army.
KoreaGermanyHondurasPanamaEnglandSaudi ArabiaIraqKuwait
And you?
Whoops – Egypt too
Operation Bright Star
Sol,
Thank you for your service to our country.
Basically Sol the same places, but add about twenty more because I was an aircrew member and had access to more places.
Why are you buying into this what other countries think of America? If you actually got out into the local economies and experienced the people, you will find their attitudes are much different than what is reported by the MSM.
I met a lot of “barracks rats” while I was in and was simply amazed how they hated the country they were in, but they never managed to leave the post or base they were on from two to four years that they were stationed, except to go get drunk at some bar.
Viewing the World through the bottom of a beer glass is not exactly getting a full view of what’s going on.
Tom,Thanking a serviceman is awkward. I did nothing special. I don’t think many of us know how to react. Maybe thank us by living free and continually striving to help our nation.
-But thanks, and … you’re welcome?
It’s just awkward !!!
World: New U.S. Poll Shows Opinions Of America Increasingly Negativerferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/03/ad2a6e1c-fcb0-4680-acc5-0c17bdd0841c.html
I have been to the US and it is beautiful but the people are self-centred, highly opinionated, morally limited and with Christian righteous, pro-Jewish values. It is scary how the country can become a dangerous weapon under a president with such a limited and narrow bandwidth.
I’d like to see more comments from residents of Iraq, Libya, Afganistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Croatia, Laos, Indonesia, and the other 30 or so countries the US has bombed since the end of the World War II. Any country the US cannot exploit or control it bombs back to the Stone Age.
To Krista Little in the USA: we don’t hate the American people nor does your cute name fill our hearts with fear. We hate what your government has done, because we see the disastrous outcomes of their policies on the rest of the world. We fear them, because they are unstoppable and determined to stubbornly continue on the same course regardless.
America: a wonderful country full of genuinely nice people who are controlled and ruled by some exceptionally greedy individuals.
The USA’s only real contributions to the rest of the world are McDonalds and war. I can very well do without both.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/wtwta/2997248.stm
Pew asked its respondents to give favourability ratings to five nations: America, France, Germany, Japan and China. America came bottom of everyone’s list everywhere except in India, where it was top, Poland, where it was in the middle and China, where it came above Japan. The British view France and Germany more favourably than they do America. China is more popular than the United States throughout Europe.
normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2005/06/opinions_of_ame.html
Why am “I buying into it?” Because it is true. And it is the political leaders we need as allies. As more and more countries shun us because of our foreign policy, the less support we will have when push comes to shove.
Let’s say Iran nukes us. Had we not repelled the majority of world leaders, they would be banging on our door looking to help us. How many of them now would say “That’s what they get for meddling?”
Okay Sol, I see your view point now.
Get your opinions by Poll and then run your life accordingly.
Iran wouldn’t be that stupid Sol. They would more than likely attack Israel or some other U.S. ally.
If Iran decided to use nuclear weapons against the U.S., the deserts of Iran would be turned into glass and Iran would no longer exist.
So, let’s get real Sol. Iran will only bully people they know they can intimidate.
Or do you need a poll to confirm that Sol?
Sol,
I wasn’t trying to make you uncomfortable; I knew the gratuitous insults from the troll would be coming.
And there they are.
::sigh::
Do I need a poll to confirm? Uhm, nope.
You asked… wait wait wait, let’s say that again. YOU asked about the world opinion of America. How better to show you than polls. But now you want to turn that against me? Nice tactics there Repub.
Iran was a scenario. Did that escape you? How about the outcome of said scenario?
As we are both servicemen, it is childish to think that I don’t know a little about our nuclear capabilities.
You still failed to address our foreign policy and how it has alienated us from the rest of the world.
Please, try again.
The 4.4 billion dollars proposal being authorized by the U.S. Senate to build border fences is strictly eye wash in order to get the amnesty for illegal aliens bill passed.
The Senate cannot appropriate the funds to pay for building the fence, only the House of Representatives can do that.
If the American people are hoodwinked by this shell game, then they will have been greatly deceived by yet another funding authorization that can’t be used.
For those who don’t understand, it’s like making a check out for an amount and not signing it, because they are not the account holder.
The House of Representatives are by Constitutional assignment hold the power of the purse and the only ones authorized to sign the “check.” The Senate cannot sign the “check.”
Don’t be fooled, be wise.
I didn’t fail to address foreign policy Sol. Our foreign policy in Iraq and Iran has been the same since Bush I.
Even Clinton and his administration thought Iraq was a menace.
Don’t make me provide a link to that video again showing all of those Democrats making statements about Iraq.
Or are you saying Sol, all of those good Democrats had horrible foreign policy as well?
The Dems were in power for eight years and set the foreign policy with repercussions that still exist to this day.
How’s that working out for you Sol?
Which foreign policy did Bush I pursue in the first Gulf War? Oh, yeah, to leave Iraq out of it. Why is it Repub that Bush I didn’t pursue Saddam at that point?
Why did Regan pull out of Lebanon? Oh yeah, because trying to bring a democracy to an Arab nation is a fool’s errand.
Yup, most people were all for going after Saddam. Whether for WMD or just because of how he treats his people. Point is, it was a mistake to do it the way we did. It was a mistake to not realize we could not go in and win militarily (which we did quite handily) and utterly lose our asses politically. Read establishing a democratic government and policing their streets?
Why are we policemen in Iraq Repub? Why do we have our troops doing a policeman’s job in Iraq?
How’s THAT working out for YOU Repub?
“There’s nothing quite more “American” than racism, terrorism, and self-righteous hatred of “others.”
Unfortunately, there is some of this, but it is not a more American trait. Study the japanese culture who have not believed and still question anyone japenanes is human, study the French who think the world still revolves around French culture and won;tallow their Muslim residents anywhere near French citizenship, study the Moslem empires, and their penchant for “convert or die” attitudes. Terrorism is or was a way of life in Ireland, Palestine, Isreal, yada yada yada. THe Hutus and the whatever killing each other in Africa, The cambodian killing fields. The chiliean death squads.Unfortunatey, killing and hatred and humanity go hand in hand. The United States is remarkable in that it is so large and so diverse, that terrorism is not a way of life, regardless of isolted instances.
anyone japenanes is human = any one not Japanese is human
I stretched that just a bit, but xenophobia IS an inherently japanese trait.