WE Blog

Wow. these guys are on the ball today. Good morning bloggers. May this be a hateless day!!!

SCOTUS decides on handguns in DC today. Have to say I am betting, with the current judges, the second amendment will be upheld. Should I be wrong, what will the domino effect be?

I think we’ll get 1% cut all the way around, except to what the private borrower pays for interest.

Songbird, I love you for bringing into perspective what’s really important.
*big smile*

According to CSPAN’s on-line schedule, the oral arguments on Heller will be broadcast on CSPAN starting at 10:30 local time. Should be interesting. Ruling expected in June.

My bet, as before, is that it is 6-3 upholding the Ct. of Appeals ruling and striking down the DC law as unconstitutional. Perhaps 5-4, maybe even 7-2, but frankly it is difficult to reach any other conclusion with any intellectual honesty. There is too much history, and too much case law (much of it dicta, to be sure) refering to the 2nd amendment as clearly a right belonging to, in the constitution’s own words, “the people.” And that part of the decision will not break, I suspect, on the usual left-right lines.

The more interesting question, and the real battle, is the level of scrutiny to be applied. No right is absolute, of course, but just what level of scrutiny is to be applied when gov’t actions are challenged as unconstitutional? Again, intellectual honesty would require a recognition that the 2nd protects, as does the 1st, 4th, 5th, etc. a fundamental right, entitled to strict scrutiny. This battle will be much closer, and is the real heart of the case. And the SCOTUS need not take this on; they may wait for another case to answer that question. Likewise, they will not likely take on the issue of incorporation, as it is not presented here, though if the 2nd is held to protect an individual constitutional right, it will be difficult to argue that is is not incorporated against the states.

My, my – we live in interesting times. This is indeed a historically significant argument, and it goes beyond firearms law. Fundamentally, this case goes to whether the constitution mean what it says, or not? Are we a nation governed by law, or not? If the SCOTUS holds that the plain language “right of the people” in fact is not a “right of the people,” well, then the jig at some point is up, and Jefferson’s prediction may well be closer than I imagined. I hope not.

Boxlock – yep, the obamination is going down.

Good post GM!

Because this is DC I’m afraid that if they weasel word the decision like they did with their last decision on iminent domain both sides will be losers.

If they uphold the decision of the appeals court the left will say “. .it’s only DC.” If they don’t, well, who knows?

All in all, a poor case to define any thing concerning the 2nd ammendment.

Anyone know, can you get a C-span feed on the Internet?

Thanks Regular.

GMC, a good summation on Heckler and the potential votes, limitation on the opinion, etc. It will be quite interesting.

Regular, I’m not sure what you mean by “set the case aside”. If you mean could SCOTUS merely affirm the DC Court of Appeals with nothing more in a per curiam opinion, yes, it could. I don’t see that happening.

I’m not one who bets on appellate courts, including SCOTUS. If I was, I think 6-3 in affirming the basic premise of the DC Court of Appeals, that the local ordinance is unconstitutional, with a bit of dicta on “strict scrutiny”, but no holding thereon, awaiting another case. There will be sharp division on this, and thus it will be “ducked” for the time being, IMHO.

Set Aside definition from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_to_set_aside_judgment
——————————

heh heh American Way, good joke. :)

Yesterday at the statehouse:

BUSINESS TAX CUTS
For the third consecutive year the Kansas Legislature is moving toward giving businesses, especially big businesses a tax cut. The House gave preliminary approval Friday to a bill providing a $158 million reduction in corporate income taxes over the next five years.
It would reduce the rate by a half a percentage point from the current 7.35% to 6.85%. A final vote is scheduled fo rtoday and passage is expected. The bill also includes a tax increase for some companies by closing two loopholes in the corporate tax law which benefit corporations that are not headquartered in Kansas. Without those provisions, the bill’s tax break would be $112 million bigger. Even with increased revenue from closing the loopholes, the state would still see a revenue loss next year of almost $23 million, a situation many lawmakers found unacceptable, including House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, R-Ingalls. The lost revenue means cuts in state services or a shift of tax burden to individual taxpayers or other types of tax.
Speaker Neufeld promised that a final version of the tax bill would eliminate that loss of revenue by possibly delaying some provisions in the bill that expand investment tax credits and sales tax exemptions for telecommunications and research companies. The percentage of the rate reduction could also be readjusted, he added. Rep. Kenny Wilk, chairman of the House Tax Committee, said reducing the corporate tax rate would improve the state’s business climate and make Kansas tax policy more competitive with other states. “It’s an incremental step to continue positive growth in our economy,” Wilk said. Rep. Jeff Whitham, R-Garden City, said the Kansas rate is higher than most of the surrounding states. “We are trying to encourage businesses to come to Kansas and stay in Kansas and provide more jobs,” he said.
If you want to check the state corporate tax rates, you can go to:
http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/corp_inc.html the Kansas rate, 4% with a surtax of 3.35% on taxable income in excess of $50,000. Missouri has a flat 6.25% rate, Colorado has a 4.63% flat rate and Oklahoma has a 4% flat rate. Iowa’s rate is 6% to 12%, based on the size of the corporation’s income, with four tax brackets. Nebraska’s rate is 5.58 – 7.81%, with two brackets and Arkansas has a 1.0 – 6.5% rate with six brackets. HB 2762 would reduce the surtax rate for corporations with Kansas taxable income in excess of $50,000 from 3.35% to 2.85%. This rate reduction would go into effect starting in tax year 2009, and would only affect income of a corporation that is over $50,000.
Legislative leaders also seem prepared to pass along an $87 million reduction in business taxes resulting from the federal stimulus package approved recently by the Congress. Large corporations would benefit the most from a corporate rate cut because most owners of small businesses use individual income tax returns and don’t file under corporate tax laws. During the past two legislative sessions, lawmakers have cut taxes or offered incentives for business worth $572 million over a five-year period. Among those were measures phasing out the franchise tax and ending property taxes on the purchase of new business machinery and equipment.
Reducing the corporate tax rate, however, may not get resolved until the final days of the session in early May when the Legislature has a more clear idea about future estimates of revenue and expenses.
A 2005 report, released by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, analyzed the state corporate income taxes paid by 252 of America’s largest and most profitable corporations, a follow-up to the groups’ September 2004 study of the
federal income taxes paid—or not paid—by these same companies. The
original report covered 275 Fortune 500 corporations. Of those, 252 fully disclosed their state and local income tax payments. The report found that by 2003, these companies on average failed to include two-thirds of their actual U.S. pretax profits on their state tax returns. That means these large businesses were able to avoid two-thirds of their state corporate taxes.
A shocking 71 of the 252 companies managed to pay no state income tax at all in at least one year from 2001 through 2003—despite telling their shareholders they made $86 billion in pretax U.S. profits in those no-tax years. Twenty-five of these companies enjoyed multiple no-tax years. For example, Toys “R” Us, AT&T, Boeing, Eli Lilly, Merrill Lynch, and ITT Industries paid no net state income tax over the full three-year period.
The data in the report showed in stark terms just how successful large corporations have become at shirking their tax responsibilities to state and local governments, according to Robert S. McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice and an author of the study. He said that the companies have been abetted in this effort by America’s major accounting firms, used heavy lobbying and even threats, and often persuaded state elected officials to become their facilitators. As a result, individual taxpayers and purely in-state smaller businesses are paying a heavy price, in the form of higher taxes, reduced public services and unfair competition.

He’s done.

Barack Obama just finished delivering an inspired speech. One that showed his intelligence and his desire to lead America in a better way to a better place. No one will ever be able to tell me he can’t make a positive difference. He just did! Whether he becomes president or not he will continue to make great contributions to Americans and America.

Everyone who has been paying attention knows I am a Hillary Clinton supporter. I still am. But what wonderful candidates the Democratic Party has to choose from! What a wonderful nominee we will have no matter which is chosen.

Hank –

On the contrary, it’s a perfect case for 2nd amendment litigation. You have chosen plaintiffs – appealing, nice, presentable and respectable Heller, the one now before the court, rather than some scumbag defendant making the argument. Because it’s DC, federal jurisdiction is not at issue, so the issue of incorporation is not before the court (DC’s rather odd and disingenuous argument that the Constitution doesn’t apply there because DC is not a state aside – a dumb argument, in my opinion, and one that will not win any credibility points with the SCOTUS). Thus the issue is squarely presented, as to whether the federal constitution protects an individual right, in a way where the court will find it difficult to sidestep the issue. It is presented with plaintiffs who are persons who’s rights the Court will have no difficulty affirming, rather than a criminal defendant looking for a dodge. And it is presented to a Court which is probably more favorable to an individual right view, which is clearly the view of the founders’ generation.

If not now, when? After the next administration packs the court with “living constitution” make-it-up-as-you-go-along apologists?

“lindainks55″ offers –

“Barack Obama just finished delivering an inspired speech. One that showed his intelligence and his desire to lead America in a better way to a better place. No one will ever be able to tell me he can’t make a positive difference. He just did! Whether he becomes president or not he will continue to make great contributions to Americans and America.”

Well put.

Isn’t it amazing that we have a grown-up running for President who speaks to us as grown-ups? The right wing slime machine had all sorts of hissy fits over ten seconds of one preacher’s sermon and Barack this morning shamed them.

Thanks Hank and Sol. If you read her blog, it’s amazing how much one person can contribute to a community. Anyone who says “I’m just one person” should read about Dane. Then go out and DO something for your community! That would be the best tribute of all.

Thomas Sowell has never hesitated to talk about things he doesn’t know jack sh*t about.

Wright has said a number of objectionable things. The problems with what the characterization (and by the way, this does not just come from the right, this comes from the lazy mainstream media) of what Wright says are as follows:

1) The historical mistreatment by African Americans by white majorities in this country is a fact, and not even a “long ago” fact. Most of the 20th century was witness to lynchings, sundown towns, segregation, Jim Crow Laws, and poll taxes. As recently as 1972, an “experiment” finally ended where African American men were intentionally not treated for syphillis. If you look at the current statistics involving life span, income, employment, and imprisonment, anyone with any semblence of objectivity will realize that the effects of this history are still very much alive. Suspicion by African Americans, particularly those more than 50 years old, for “white America” is not “out there”.

2) What Wright has said reflects anger to be sure, paranoia at times also for sure (the idea that AIDS was developed by the US government is laughable), but what it does not reflect in actuality is blind hatred or for that matter calls for violence. My favorite example of this is the line that has the righties tighties in such a wad; “God Damn America”. What Wright was expressing was anger at how he sees African Americans treated in this country. The UCC does not have the same view of God that more conservative denominations have had, however. He was not literally calling on God to “damn” America. Not like Robertson or Falwell claimed that God actually did actually damn America on 9/11 (and Robertson has ROUTINELY spoken out about threats to America should we not change our ways and beat back the “secularist”, look at his outlandish predictions about the consequences of “gay days” at Disney World). Wright is also not an African American equivalent of Fred or Shirley Roper-Phelps. He isn’t nor has he come even close to consigning white people to hell (he even welcomes white people into his church, and he is part of an overwhelmingly white denomination). Don’t get me wrong, some of what Wright has said is very objectionable (and quite contrary to what Barack Obama has been saying about unity-even to the point that he has been made fun of for it). But, to call Wright someone who constantly peppers his sermons with hate speech is a considerable exaggeration.

3) Guilt by association politics is misleading to the point of being dangerous (but also attractive to opponents). It is easy to overlook that the things that Wright has said that people have objected so strenously to are in fact diametically opposed to Barack Obama’s primary message for this entire campaign. And of course, everyone is vulnerable to it.

http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html

“Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a ‘war’ against the ‘false religion’ of Islam with the aim of destroying it.”

Of course, coming from Mother Jones, some grains of salt are certainly called for. And the fact is, McCain has not demonstrated in anything HE has said that sort of the reckless nonsense that comes from Ron Parsley.

After reading Obama’s answer and response to his critics, I feel that it is imperative to ask the same of McCain.

What response does he have to his embrace of religious kooks and bigots?

McCain should explain himself or step down from his candidacy.

“McCain should explain himself or step down from his candidacy.”

No he shouldn’t.

Like I said, the politics of guilt by association is unfair. McCain is the nominee for the Republicans. One “gift” he will get from that is unwanted associations and endorsements.

This is awful for me to say, and I’ll apologize in advance for any offense, but . . . Justice Ginsburg’s voice reminds me of Droopy, the sleepy cartoon dog.

Yes, it’s unfair and irrelevant. And no, it doesn’t speak to the quality of what is said. Just a thought.

The anger and suspicion are real. Perhaps some white folks dont know that, but it is.

It’s real for gay folks too, not of white america but of straight, conservative, republican or religious america.

Are they both sweeping generalizations that are wrong. Yes, we hope. But for some of us, experience doesnt verify that it is wrong. Quite the opposite.

This isnt the first time Obama has had someone close to him play the bigot card. Donnie McClurkin anyone? And now you know why I asked how Obama supporters would feel if someone asked David Duke to headline a fundraiser. I know some of you, like ksag and monkey and captain think that is a false equivalency.

My experience says it is not.

And I’m sorry, I know this is just personal to me, but after all those years of fighting racial bigotry, sexism, and other forms of hate…

I will NEVER forget the sight of those four black ministers testifying AGAINST civil rights and equal protection under the law for gay folks.

Sorry. Explain and equivocate all you want. I was there. I saw and heard it. I remember vividly how it felt. And how I felt about it, and obviously still do.

Do I hold ALL black folks or religious folks responsible? Of course not. But they were speaking for their churches, and they were making the point that being gay is not equal to being black and that comparing the two were wrong.

Sorry. They compared it themselves, and declared themselves superior and MORE deserving of equal civil rights. Some animals are more equal than others, ya know?

There needs to be some SERIOUS outreach from the black community to those THEY have wronged. It works both ways.

Unitl then? Expect more of the same. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

Seems like someone is always being thrown under those wheels…

Isn’t Breyer a Lib? He seems to be leaning toward an individual right!

Excellent post, KSAgnog.

Sowell is a black CONservative. He’s become comfortably rich and respected telling the powers-that-be exactly what they want to hear.

Every community has its traitors and sell-outs.

Speaking of which, GMC70, what does Clarence Thomas’s voice remind you of?

Oh, that’s right . . . he never asks any questions or makes any comments.

Nice work if you can get it, eh?

With Ginsberg, I can see why they don’t allow video in the Supreme Court.

Capn –

And your point is what? Oh, you don’t have one.

Other than, apparantly, that those on the left respect persons of color only when they have the approved opinions. Those whose opinions differ from the party line, they are, in your words, “traitors and sell-outs.”

Nice.

And you have the audacity to refer to others, specifically conservatives, as racists. Your hypocricy, sir, knows no bounds.

CapnAmerica
Posted March 18, 2008 at 11:01 am | Permalink
I hope that the SCOTUS strikes down DC’s gun law.

That way, every Congress-critter, lobbyist, and White House official can enjoy the same feeling of security we the masses have with “concealed carry.”

Hell Capn,

They don;t need concealed carry. They, and many of the celebrities against people owning handguns, much less concealed carry, have paid bodyguards to carry the guns for them. They don;t need guns, they pay someone else to protect them and their family.

First time I’ve “listened” to a SCOTUS case.

VERY interesting.

Go ahead and consider the murder rate in DC!

glasses

Breyer spoke enough for 27 Justices.

Mayor of DC is now braggin about how great the handgun ban is. The DC murder rate is only about 20 times higher then the national average.

BTW, Counsellor, it’s “toe the line.”

That Half a Justice has a hard time talking, Max ROFL

NO do-overs in FL primaries

Ooooops *FL* voters

“FL voters are Pi$$ed”

And perhaps they should be. Talk to their state legislators, who wanted Florida to “matter” and decided to defy the party nominating rules. Oops – the action backfired, big time.

We’ll see what the convention does. Ain’t this fun!!!!!

The Florida State Legislature (under Republican rule), not happy with being lumped together with everyone else on Super Tuesday, moved their primary date up to January 29. This legislation was then signed into law by Florida’s Republican Governor (05/21/07).

The voters had six (maybe seven?) full months to see that their Republican dominated legislature was screwing them out of their votes. Did they notice? Did they take appropriate action?

The Florida legislators were told by the DNC what the rules were and what the punishment for breaking the rules would be. But always remember rules don’t apply to Republicans — IOKIYAR.

So, there seems to be enough blame to go around to everyone involved.

Check out some of Jon Stewart’s thoughts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn8KhaCJDP8

He states: “This election could come down to a lawsuit involving Florida. Hooowwww precendented! Hoooowwww absolutely heard of.”

Linda,

What happened to taking responsiblity for ones actions and not blaming others?

Max I’m not surprised you’ve never listened to a SCOTUS trial. Sad that it took THIS to get you to pay attention.

Ginsburg deserves respect, it is incredibly offensive to me that one would even consider making fun of her looks or her voice. Of course men only do that to women in positions of authority. Must be some blow to their ego, so sure, make fun of something physical about them.

Everything I can think to use in “the google” brings up bunches of stories from 2000. I surely don’t want to get bogged down in that story of Florida’s voting history again.

So far, I’ve found that the rules of the DNC were unanimously passed in 2006 by nearly 450 Democratic party activists across the country – including Florida.

Do you have a suggestion for where I can find the vote counts on the legislation that set the Florida primary date for 2008?

Oh I’ve read sevearl SC cases Pmom, just never took the time out to listen to one before. Took a long lunch today and listened to most of it.

You can put your claws back in now.

Jessica Rizor, 31, of Washington, PA was convicted
last Tuesday of first-degree murder, which carries an automatic life sentence, as well as concealing the death of a child and abuse of a corpse. She threw her newborn daughter in the garbage in 2004 and told her then-husband to dispose of the bag, which she said was filled with Thanksgiving leftovers. The girl had been born alive, but suffocated in the garbage bag.
Her shyster claimed Rizor suffered from “depersonalization disorder,” which is prevalent in women who do not recognize they are pregnant. Rizor was not found to be insane, however, and so now pays the penalty for her crimes.

I can’t find the vote count when the Florida legislature set their 2008 primary date outside the rules.

I still contend there is plenty of blame to go around. And absolutely NOTHING I posted earlier isn’t true. Every word is true even if the Democratic legislators also voted for the primary date in January.

The legislature shouldn’t have been arrogant. Rules are rules and they knew what the rules were and what the consequences were. Setting the date in January didn’t serve the voters of Florida well.

The voters should have protested BEFORE the primary date. The date was set the previous May. Don’t they have some responsibility to make sure their vote counts?

Maybe Floridians need to hold themselves accountable — all of them from the legislators to the voters. If they want their votes to count maybe they have to play by the rules like everyone else.

They’re behaving like children who want attention — and if negative attention is all they can get… Where are the adults?

Linda –

It may have been a voice vote. I do know that I saw an interview (CNN) with one of Florida’s democratic legislators who freely admitted that the measure passed the Florida House (I believe it was the House) unanimously. Again, I don’t know if that vote was recorded; it would not be uncommon for a measure with such overwhelming support to pass on a voice vote and not a recorded vote. But that’s how I learned of it.

It also appears (same CNN report) that mail-in votes, as were being proposed, are illegal under Florida law if a candidate or nominee was being chosen. Further, law bars the State of Florida from sharing their voter rolls with a private entity to do another vote, such as one done by the respective candidates. And it’s clear the State will not pay for another vote. That kinda puts the Florida democrats in a pickle, huh?

You’re exactly right: they chose to do what they did, knowing the consequences, believing that the national parties were bluffing. They weren’t. For the Republicans, that turned out not to matter much. For the Democrats, it’s gonna matter a lot. But they made their bed. If the national parties want to try to exert any control over their nomination process, I think the DNC has to stick to its guns here; otherwise, states will willy-nilly ignore the rules, and all bets are off.

Isn’t this fun? I am so looking forward to watching the convention. And it’s been a long time since a convention (in either party) had anything really substantive to do.

parkay

I can’t be the only one that is getting tired of your grafitti.

Now you feel free to spew your crap here. But as long as you NEVER stand for or debate your posts, they are largely worthless.

If you don’t like abortion don’t have one.

What’s the matter, Parkay? Tabby got your tongue?

What a shame – because your on-line moniker brought back some memories. Because I’m a very, very bad girl.

And bad girls do certain things with Parkay very, very late – in the dark with no one to call their own.

Oh, this is getting sick. I’ve never seen “Last Tango in Paris.” I don’t ever want to see “Last Tango in Paris.” I never WILL see “Last Tango in Paris.”

I don’t even like butter, anyway. Except when it’s drizzled on my hot, steamy popcorn at the movies – fresh from the popper!

Good lawd – I gotta sign off for the day. I need to be disciplined fer shure.

Good luck to radical extremist legal system abuser Gietzen on his lawsuit – let us know how it turns out Parkay!

Songbird … hmmm … sounds like fun!

And Parkay – I doubt there would have been any media stink at all if you placed a stink bomb at your own home or place of business.

Max –

There ya go, you found the gory details. And yup, it sure sounds like the poor, poor democrats were really abused by those mean old Republicans on this one! ;)

The irony about both FL and MI: Consider their impact if they had scheduled their primaries on successive Tuesdays in late March.

NCAA and NIT start tonite!! Actually, NIT has already started!! Gonna be a great year!!

Capn

Why would Thomas need to ask any questions. The case is clear. The only thing we learned today is how the decision might come down. As I said a few days ago, oral arguments are for show in most cases.

Aaron Kerr at the Volok Conspiracy

“I tend to think that Heller is an example of advocates not really mattering in the biggest cases. This argument isn’t Dellinger v. Clement v. Gura; it’s Roberts v. Souter v. Kennedy v. Scalia v. Breyer. The Justices have thought through these issues for weeks if not months, and they know pretty much where they come out; none of the advocates seem to be getting much traction, but that’s because the Justices are totally up to speed. I think this happens relatively often in the Supreme Court’s biggest oral arguments, actually. By the time of oral argument, the lawyer could have read from the phone book for a half hour and obtained the same result.”

http://volokh.com/posts/1205857785.shtml

“This isnt the first time Obama has had someone close to him play the bigot card. Donnie McClurkin anyone? And now you know why I asked how Obama supporters would feel if someone asked David Duke to headline a fundraiser. I know some of you, like ksag and monkey and captain think that is a false equivalency.”

I personally have a much more serious problem with the McClurkin incident than the comments of Jeremiah Wright, because McClurkin’s comments were made at an Obama fund raiser. That being said, Obama himself has said some things that I have a problem with. Obama’s strategy has been obvious, and Hillary Clinton has also engaged in it. The lesson of the elections of 2004 for Democrats in the eyes of both Obama and Clinton was the consequences of neglecting self proclaimed Christians. They see a chunk of African American voters who generally vote Democratic but hold theologically and socially conservative viewpoints, as well as some blue collar workers, feeling out of step with the socially liberal image of the Democratic Party. The problem is that they overlooked something else that was revealed at the same time. Namely, that the fastest growing population of voters are those who label themselves secular left. Now, it is very true that the secular left voters will never form a majority in this country, and indeed apparently were soundly rejected in 2004. The problem was, few Democrats bothered to ask themselves WHY this group was the fastest growing group. Some Republicans were actually faster to see the danger on the horizon than Democrats were. And sure enough, PART of the reason why Republicans lost big in 2006 was because of the Christian Right and coalition conservatives overplaying their hand (it was at least, I think, as big a reason as dissatisfaction with the Iraq War). McClurkin’s comments were offensive. And one reason why McClurkin’s comments do bring Barack Obama’s judgement into question with regards to him were because McClurkin’s presence at the rally was controversial beforehand for what he said, and then McClurkin went ahead and opened his mouth to repeat his standard (probably self hating as well as bigoted)nonsense anyway.

http://www.thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/obamas-gospel-concert-tour/

Still, Obama’s own stands on this issue are pretty much indistinguishable from Clinton’s. Also, if one wants to continue with the affiliation issue, the UCC is one of the more enlightened Christian denomination on this issue in the world.

http://www.ucc.org/assets/pdfs/1991-RESOLUTION-ON-AFFIRMING-GAY-LESBIAN-BISEXUAL-PERSONS-AND-THEIR-MINISTRIES.pdf

http://www.chuckcurrie.blogs.com/chuck_currie/2007/10/senator-barack-.html

“And I’m sorry, I know this is just personal to me, but after all those years of fighting racial bigotry, sexism, and other forms of hate…

“I will NEVER forget the sight of those four black ministers testifying AGAINST civil rights and equal protection under the law for gay folks.

“Sorry. Explain and equivocate all you want. I was there. I saw and heard it. I remember vividly how it felt. And how I felt about it, and obviously still do.

Do I hold ALL black folks or religious folks responsible? Of course not. But they were speaking for their churches, and they were making the point that being gay is not equal to being black and that comparing the two were wrong.

“Sorry. They compared it themselves, and declared themselves superior and MORE deserving of equal civil rights. Some animals are more equal than others, ya know?

“There needs to be some SERIOUS outreach from the black community to those THEY have wronged. It works both ways.

“Until then? Expect more of the same. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

“Seems like someone is always being thrown under those wheels…”

First of all, your post was excellent, and I greatly appreciated it. Also, let me be clear. I think that supporting Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama because of the McClurkin incident is a valid reason for doing so. I said that it was not a deal breaker for me, and it is not, but it was still an example of very bad judgement. I just think there have been some comparable acts of bad judgement from the Clinton campaign. My disagreement with you has largely been over the Geraldine Ferraro incident (I think her comments were egregious and offensive for reasons I have described elsewhere). To a lesser extent, I also disagree with you about Obama and the, for lack of a better word, lightweight factor. I personally would have preferred that Al Gore would have run again. I think the contrast of Gore running after eight years of the Wanker would have stood out. But, I actually like both Obama and Clinton. She is more substantive on policy (although he is no lightweight) and my attraction to him is that, despite some of the things that he has said, he really does understand the idea of concentrating on people’s similarities instead of differences, and I think he is smart enough to use that against those who would capitalize on divisive candidates.

To a certain extent, my greatest concern is not the “Right Wing Wurlitzer” so much as the shallow punditry and even more shallow reporting that passes for political commentary these days. That, I think, all too often favors sound bite campaigns with no substance.

I think the devils are people like Tim Russert and Cokie Roberts who concentrate almost exclusively on the horserace aspects of a campaign. Coverage of campaigns should be done using the factcheck as well as the horserace model.

I am still thinking (although I don’t know) that there might be a Ted Haggard moment in McClurkin’s future.

Sorry Linda.

Found another link on Florida.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1829

From instigator to victim. It was a Dem who introduced the early primary bill in Florida.

1Florida Democratic Legislators sponsored the bill to move the primary to January 29th;

Jeremy Ring, Democrat, introduces primary bill

2.Florida House Democratic Legislators voted in committee three times for the bill to move the primary to January 29;

3.All but one Florida House Democratic Legislator vote on the floor to move the primary to January 29; and,

The one conscientious NO vote

4.Florida House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber stated, after receiving a call from DNC Chair asking for help in opposing setting the primary date before February 5, “I don’t represent Howard Dean.”

5.Florida House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber stated, after offering an amendment to move the primary to February 5th, that the only reason he offer it was “to show that there was an attempt to state within the Democratic Party rules.” The amendment failed on a voice vote with no debate being offered.

6.Florida Senate Democratic Legislators voted in committee to move the primary to January;

7.Florida Senate Democratic Leader Steve Geller stated on the Senate floor that he was offering an amendment to move the primary to February 5 only because he was threatened by DNC Chair Howard Dean. Sen. Geller than mocked his own amendment which failed on a voice vote without any debate.

Whoops. Long link that didn’t wrap on this page. You can copy/past the link manual and it works.

McCain needs more than a physical to show he’s a viable candidate. He needs his mental acuity and faculties tested.

Your new wiki link didn’t work even by copying and pasting so I went looking again. Those long link addys need to be run through TinyURL.com first. Found a couple of really fun things. The kind that make you shake your head.
—————————-

Many of you may recall that after the tussle between the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court the final difference in votes, as certified by Katherine Harris, was…537! In fact I believe many newspapers the day after the certification had big headlines with either “537″ by itself or as part of the headline. Newsweek had a huge “537″ on the cover.

That is the very House Bill that some Dems now claim will disenfranchise Florida voters because of the DNC’s sanction for moving up their primary date has the same numerical designation as the eventual vote difference in Florida 2000.

Of course the Dems don’t have much to hang their hat on if they are going to claim the Republican-controlled legislature is at fault. Since out of the entire legislature voting on House Bill 537 only 2 out of 157 voted against moving up the primary date there is really no conspiracy that can be claimed.

So if, in the end, the absence of Florida’s 185 delegates is seen as the difference the DNC and Democrats will look back at House Bill 537 as the deciding factor…a ghost of Florida 2000.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1981680/posts
——————

And this:

“Today is an example of how government is supposed to function. Without partisanship and without political advantage,” said U.S. Representative Robert Wexler. “Governor Crist and the State Legislature have come together and delivered an election system that is a model for the nation. One person, one vote — guaranteed — with a paper record to prove it.”
http://www.govtech.com/tt/articles/120761

Tinyurl, I’ll have to remember that.

I tried copying the whole link above and pasting it, and it did work for me though.

I’ll try Tiny next time though.

Jon Steart: “Imagine, someone talking to us about race as adults.”

Max: “Obama’s defense of Rev Wright is that Rev Wright is an Angry Man!

“Obama used the word Angry 10 Times in this speech.

“Obama’s revealed he’s an angry man too. Just what we need, a radical screaming angry man as POTUS.

“He’s gonna save us ya know. Remember, Barack said he’d establish his Kingdom right here on Earth!”

Then there are people like Max.

Right, because Obama uses the word angry as a descriptor in respect to African American feelings (also he did in respect to “white” peoples’ feelings), he is a radical screaming angry man.

Classic Harry Frankfurt bullsh*t. Say something without any regard whatsoever to it being true.

Max, people like you are Republicans’ worst nightmare. You are at least as distasteful as people like Jeremiah Wright.

Max = scroll over territory

“Max also = Glyn / GSheridan”

That’s what I thought you thought.

Did you see my response to you awhile back detailing why I think that Max isn’t Glyn/G. Sheridan? The main difference is that G. Sheridan, while very conservative, was not a religious conservative (in fact, on evolution discussions she definitely did not take the side of creationists) while Max appears to be across the board coalition conservative. For example, when he (I think it is a he) accuses Chas. of being demon possessed, I think he is serious. The other thing that I thought distinguished the two was that I saw G. Sheridan as more of a troll (someone who said outrageous things to get angry responses), but now I am not so sure. Max seems to be showing off some trollish tendancies lately (although Max has always shown a willingness to throw fire bombs).

Are you privy to information that definitively identifies Max as G. Sheridan?

Are you privy to information that definitively identifies Max as G. Sheridan?
————–
No, I’m not. My first ever blogging experience was on another board where a Glyn posted. I read for the requisite months and finally got up courage to post. Lucky me, my post was directed at a post made by Glyn. Well, she tore me a new one! I, after crying my eyes out, went back to reading for another while. It all ended up coming out eventually and apologies were exchanged and we moved on. Moved on to this board in time. But on this board I got here first and when GSeridan arrived I recognized her from the very first post. Same with Max.

She is very intelligent and well educated. She can easily take either side and be convincing. I think in her new persona she knows what she is doing as always.

Oh, and I’m a tiny bit braver today. And some days I don’t wear my heart on my sleeve. ;-) I still tend to take it all much tot personally which is pretty stupid. The one lesson I’ve learned well is that is my problem, and not any other posters problem! I disappear from time to time to lick my wounds.