Patriot askedeth: “What do you think of this article?”

Thinker102 answerdeth, following an excerpt from the article: ********The warriors would not even know who their counterparts are. The only thing binding the participants together would be a shared belief—in the God of the Bible and our Christian civilization, in these United States, in strictly limited government and Free Enterprise, in the country that minded its own business; that walked softly but carried a big stick, where private property is sacrosanct.**********

Problem is, the closer you follow the bible, the more of a totalitarian state you wind up with.

The reasoning in this paragraph and some of the ones that follows seems very much like that behind the OK city bombing. Carried to the extent advocated, this creates a climate of fear for *everybody*, which ultimately destroys, not builds.

And…

…`Communists’? Uh…dead and gone with the cold war, at least in the US.

This guys diagnosis is off, and his proposed cure is worse than the disease.

elderly male followed with: This Screed reminds of certain aspects/requirements for a former job I held. The training, if one did not have it already, required one to write two essays: one, to slant or justify a certain position on a subject which would be given; two, then criticise or rebut that original position based upon a defined change in Policy. Put another way; justify ANY one position given to you then REWRITE the same thing based upon new instructions given to you. I’m sorry to say I was better at doing this than I would have liked to be, i.e., at the top of my form I could write Communistic crap almost as well as some of the Party Hacks.

I chimed in with: “I have argued that collectivism was (and is) fundamentally incompatible with the vision that undergirded this country’s founding. The New Deal, however,inoculated the federal Constitution with a kind of underground collectivist
mentality. The Constitution itself was transmuted into a significantly different document…1937…marks the triumph of our own socialist revolution…Politically, the belief in human perfectibility is another way of asserting that differences between the few and the many can, over time, be erased. That creed is a critical philosophical proposition underlying the New Deal. What is extraordinary is the way that thesis infiltrated and effected American constitutionalism over the next three-quarters of a century. Its effect was not simply to repudiate, both philosophically and in legal doctrine, the framers’ conception of humanity, but to cut away the very ground on which the Constitution rests… In the New Deal/Great Society era, a rule that was the polar opposite of the classical era of American law reigned.”

So saideth Janice Rogers Brown, one of the Judges in the middle of the current Filibuster fight in the Senate. (The looming ‘Nuclear Option vote’ — which is one to override a ruling of “What, are you joking?” by the Senate Parlimentarian on the question of whether a Judicial Filibuster is Unconstitution– were it to be done under a blind vote, would fail.)

1937 being the year the Supreme Court started ruling FDR’s programs Constitutional. (I believe there was a relatively dramatic shift by one of the Supreme Court Justices from generally holding the programs unconstitutional to holding them constitutional… pressured by the looming crisis over FDR’s fairly odious Court Packing Scheme — I don’t know… That probably is a good year for some to start in with the date that everything went to Hell and we became defacto Communists and the Court became “Activist Judges”. Probably sooner… Turn back the clock to the McKinnley Administration.)

Uncle Blabby followed with: Mention the Rooseveltian threat to take the Court to 15 members and every Journalistic Protagonist?? will immediately thunder forth how because of this action THE PEOPLE TURNED AGAINST ROOSEVELT AND HIS PFOUL SCHEME PHALED! Crap! I say again, Crap! What actually happened is as you said, one of the Justices, a former Conservative, changed his vote to Roosevelt making the Court 5/4 in Roosevelts favor, the result being there was no longer any reason to “pack the court”. I have also forgotten what caused the Justice to switch his vote but it was BECAUSE of Roosevelt and something he influenced in someway. I remember seeing in an historical document somewhere, I’m too lazy to look it up again, a Newspaper headline reading, “A Switch in Five Saves Nine”, a pretty good headline, at that!

And elderly male finished with: He misquoted the phrase, it should read, “A Switch In Time Saves Nine”. Look in Public Choice, Springer, Vol 113, pages 301-304. Abstract Title reads, A Switch In Time Saves Nine, Institutions, Strategic Actors, and FDR’S Court-Packing Plan, by Carson, Jamie L. and Kleinerman, Benjamin A.

Lead-in as reads, “long heralded as a misuse of Presidential Power that nearly undermined our constitutional ….”

Then reads, “Using an analytic narrative framework, we offer an alternative theoretical account of the events and argue that Roosevelt used the proposal to obtain his immediate goal: a shift in policy direction of the Court. Our framework is supported with historical evidence suggesting that all of the actors… etc, etc.”

I’m weary of any victory of such an artifact as “Centrism”. It’s not to say that there is “nothing in the middle of the road but road kill”, but it is to say that too often a false metaphor has been foistered upon us altogether.

The media loves the “Center”. But, to a great extent, they define what this point is. The public always loves to consider themselves right there … in the center… not too far left, not to far right, but oh-so-independant. Generally, they don’t really pay attention, and talking heads come out at you and chime out a “Center Ground” benefitting the powerful for the masses to stand in.

Oh, Compromise is good. You work to get the most acceptable part of the two competing sides, while limiting to the extent that you can what you consider the worst part of the other side. Settle on half a loaf with too many poppy-seeds instead of no loaf. Call this Moderation. Centrism, on the other hand, is a cynical game of constant calibration… which falls you to the point where the powers that be want you to be at.

Imagine a debate about how to handle an impovershed neighborhood. One side suggests a series of tax initiatives and business incentives to attempt to spur economic growth within this poverty-strickened part of town. The other side suggests a systematic execution of the neighborhood and creation of Concentration Camps. This is an extreme example, but find for me a Center here.

What amuses me most about the “Great Compromise” made by McCain — Warner — Nelson — Lieberman, et al is the laudotory praise of the Press. I won’t judge the Democrats’ calibrations, though they were in a politically weak position. I’d like to hope that this throws Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson past the finish line in his deep red state (perhaps more important a distinction, Diebold state) race. But keeping in mind what this compromise was…

To avert a vote to declare a completely fictious premise that Judicial Filibusters are Unconstitutional. Sometimes, in trying to see the forest for the tree, you lose sight of the tree. The Republican position was an absurdity. The deal… to avert this Constitutional Crisis that the Republican Party and Bill Frist were ready to create… more or less places the deference of when the Democrats may filibuster future judges on the seven Republican dealmakers. They get to decide the definition of “extraordinary circumstance“, and good grasp on falling back in line with Bill Frist on the “Nuclear Option” if such a time merits. Such is the Center. Such is the game of the Centrist Democrats, and for that matter the Democratic Leadership itself in this deal.

Do with that what you must.

Can someone please come up with a joke involving Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai? I know the punch-line, but I don’t know the set-up.

The punch-line is “Poppy-cock”, a reference to the struggling nation’s main cash crop. The set-up eludes me. As does the reason that I want such a joke.

A google news search for Dean’s Sunday Meet the Press appearance shows a weird tilt in news items. Here are the news sourches for the front page:

NewsMax.com (Right-wing)
MSNBC (they, naturally, have the trascript.)
Kansas City Star
Men’s News Daily (Right-wing)
GOP-USA (I believe this is where Jeff Gannon worked, when all is said and done. Right wing.)
The Moderate Voice. (“Centrist”, an annoying designation meaning always calibrating your politics to a supposed “center”.)
Washington Times (Right-wing, though it’s an interesting article.)
Media Matters for America. (After 4 pages, we have a left-wing source.)
Red State (Right wing)

At any rate… Evidentally Dean defended his “moral values”, and disconcertingly wrapped up into that phrase religious bonafides against a charge that his supporters are, on the whole, more secular and less church-going than the public at large. A charge which, by the way, is largely true. For his part, I have no clue the depth of Dean’s religious convictions. A Democrat can get farther in the Party Primaries than a Republican — who, by necessity, must profess Jesus as the greatest Philosopher.

Bush recently made a political appearance / commencement speech at Calvin College in a college town in Michigan. Prompting some pundits to ask “Why’d he choose that college?” — a bit more liberal than Bush’s bread and butter — affiliated with Calvinism, best known to many as half the duo of the comic strip “Calvin and Hobbes” — is Bush trying to reach out beyond ultra-conservative Evangelicals in his Christian Crusade?

The answer to that question is: yes. And Michigan is home to a currently poll-weary Democratic Governor. And a vulnerable Democratic Senator. And a razor-thin Democratic to Kerry vote. And a rust-beltian economic / cultural mix. And those mid-west snow-belt states are key to Republican’s hopes of Cultural Expansion (the “Coastal Elites” badge is a bit scarred by the existence of that trio of Canadian-border hugging northern tier states — Illinois appears to be too far gone, but Minnesota and Michigan aren’t quiet as shaky).

So, you rebrand Christianity to rebrand Michigan. Funny that.

Item #1:

“I wish it had never happened,” Jones said.

Like many things about Jones, freedom fries lend themselves to caricature. They are an emotional response to a complex problem, easily reduced to a ticker line on CNN.

But Jones now says we went to war “with no justification.” He has challenged the Bush administration, quizzing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other presidential advisers in public hearings. He has lined the hallway outside his office with “the faces of the fallen.”

Jones represents the state’s most military congressional district, running from Camp Lejeune along the coast through Cherry Point, up to the Outer Banks.

“If we were given misinformation intentionally by people in this administration, to commit the authority to send boys, and in some instances girls, to go into Iraq, that is wrong,” Jones said. “Congress must be told the truth.”

Jones is no favorite of the White House these days, or of his fellow Republicans, particularly those in leadership roles. The same impulse that prompted him to get mad at the French now makes Jones criticize the war and, lately, House ethics rules. Jones accepts that his emotions cost him influence, but he insists he can live with the consequences.

Item #2: Fox News Network Ratings, the offical television cable network of “Freedom Fries”,

Oct. 2004: 1,074,000
Nov. 2004: 891,000
Dec. 2004: 568,000
Jan. 2005: 564,000
Feb. 2005: 520,000
Mar. 2005: 498,000
Apr. 2005: 445,000

Okay. A word on this pair of entries in a bit.

Red State Democratic Governors: Janet Napolitano Arizona, Kathleen Sebelius Kansas, Kathleen Babineaux Blanco Louisiana, Brian Schweitzer Montana, William Richardson New Mexico, Michael F. Easley North Carolina, Brad Henry Oklahoma, Philip N. Bredesen Tennessee, Mark R. Warner Virginia, Joe Manchin West Virginia, David D. Freudenthal Wyoming

Blue State Republican Governors: Arnold Schwarzenegger California, M. Jodi Rell Connecticut, Linda Lingle Hawaii, Robert L. Ehrlich Maryland, W. Mitt Romney Massachusetts, Timothy Pawlenty Minnesota, George E. Pataki New York, Donald L. Carcieri Rhode Island, James H. Douglas Vermont

New England’s slate of governors is strikingly Republican-filled, despite the fact that the region is now solidly Democratic in its presidential voting. (And mind you, woe to the party whose base in the Northeast.) The state of Massachusetts has not elected a Democratic governor since Michael Dukakis’s woefully pulled the plug on his political career.

But I should note a few things regarding the culture wars. Connecticut is barreling its way toward adopting language for same sex couples to if not have marriage rights, have the bastard watered-down step-son the “civil union”. And that case is closed in Vermont (the state that now looks like the most liberal in the nation– also puzzlingly enough the most rural). You almost suspect that the governor of Massachussets would go for such a thing, better to mollify himself to fight for the holy tax-cut, were it not for his eyeing a presidential bid.

I have read that the governor of West Virginia may as well be Zell Miller is his party labeling. I suspect the governor of Louisiania may as well be John Beruex. (This list is quite comical in its battle against Lincoln… but all Southern States look a lot like that.)

The situation in Kansas, and how they managed to elect a Democratic governor (and how they are likely to re-elect him) was touched upon in the book What’s the Matter With Kansas. The dominant party — the Republican Party– is split, the right wing (and may I add poorer) who keep battling Evolution and cultural issues of the type are despised by the Moderate (may I add, richer) Wing of the party. The split has not disappeared — hence a moderate-liberal abortion-supporting capital punishment-opposing Democrat is probably going to win re-election.

Oklahoma elected its Democrat as a result of the issue of cock fighting. To each state their own.

I might add that as a whole, the approval ratings of the Republican governors are falling and getting into the negative terrority, and the approval ratings are generally positive. Or so I’ve read. Schwarzenegger is the most famous and spectacular example. (On the other hand, Granholm — who was elected to much acclaim and is sort of the counter-Democratic example to change the “born in the USA” rule for running for the Presidency — has taken a ratings beating herownself.) [a quick note, if I recall right, Survey USA’s polls have a Republican bias. Not dramatically, but go ahead and edge a point either way.)

As for the Senate seats: I’m a bit puzzled by how North Dakota sends two democrats — one moderate, one amongst its most liberals — to the Senate. Arkansas seems to owe its Senate delegation indirectly to Clinton — winning in 1998; the other coming through with a sex-(and may I add: hypocrisy) scandal hitting the incumbant (the one victory the Democratic Party received in 2002). West Virginia simply has two old guys. Pennsylvania will likely shed its way back to “purple” status when Bob Casey defeats Rick Santorum (a project of the 1994 election cycle) next year. (I might add that the party delegations of the Senate show something Grover Norquist and the like know well in mapping strategy: if you go to the 50-50 election of 2000 or the 51-49 election of 2004, the States are divided 30-20. Hence, I believe we oughta either abolish the Senate or abolish the Electoral College, since they’re kind of redundant in their “check and balances” role… but pretend like I didn’t say that. For the moment, just consider that in the troubles coming ahead in the Senate’s upcoming vote to override the Senate Parlimentarian’s “What, are you kidding?” decision on the matter of whether filibustering judges is an unconstitutional practice.)

“Going to see the new Star Trek — I mean Star Wars movie?”

“Maybe. I never saw the last two and I’m not really a fan, but this one has been getting good reviews.”

(‘Not really a fan’ is a bit of an understatement. I do know that I’ve seen Star Wars — the first one — a few times over a decade ago, but I have no memory whatsoever of having seen Return of the Jedi or Empire Strikes Back. Not to say I haven’t seen them in my childhood, but I don’t remember. All of this is moot, since the guy I was conversing with obviously isn’t much of a fan either, hence the ‘Trek’ gaffe.)

“Episode One was shown the other day on tv.”

“Right. I saw that.” (Briefly flicked past it — was on last week Saturday or Sunday afternoon. I have seen some the movie, overviewing nephews and niece, and it looks pretty bad.)

“You know who I liked — that Jar Jar Binks. He cracked me up.”

“Really? Jar Jar Binks really isn’t that popular.”

“Yeah, I read that. But I just laughed. I love that voice and that slapstick!”

There you go, fanboys. A Jar Jar Binks fan. You didn’t think such a thing existed, did you?

“What the Democrats are doing is “the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942 saying, ‘I’m in Paris. How dare you invade me. How dare you bomb my city? It’s mine.’ This is no more the rule of the senate than it was the rule of the senate before not to filibuster.” — Rick Santorum

The comments around the blogosphere tend toward the outrage shown by some, including Senator Rick Santorum, about the moveon contest, which included a couple entries about Adolf Hitler.

As for the matter in question about the looming “Nuclear Option” — read through this. Comparable to the second lowest part of the Franklin Roosevelt Administration (the lowest being the Internment of Japanese citizens) — his Court Packing Scheme. I must point out that at least in Roosevelt’s case, his hubris was borne out from just having come out of an electoral victory where he lost all of two states (Maine and Vermont) — quite a popular figure (and quite an unpopular Supreme Court, I may add). At the moment, Congressional Opinion Polls show Congress at the lowest level of popular esteem in over a decade. The president’s approval rating comes in in the low 40s — and the election he’s coming out of was won by a hair.

On the other hand, perhaps hubris isn’t the issue here. Everyone who thinks for even a second knows that pendulums swing around in politics, and the goal here is simply to get as much as you can when you are in power: judges are appointed for life, and they absolutely poitively need to put in place, by hook and by crook, for when your political ideology loses favour.

….
Radio host Glen Beck: Hang on, let me just tell you what I’m thinking. I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out — is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus — band — Do, and I’ve lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, “Yeah, I’d kill Michael Moore,” and then I’d see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I’d realize, “Oh, you wouldn’t kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn’t choke him to death.” And you know, well, I’m not sure.

And thus to paraphrase Fox News after a low-level scandal involving Randi Rhodes: Clear Channel Apology: Is it enough, or is it time to get tough?

(Incidentally, I just googled Glen Beck, and came up with this funny letter to the editor to an Idaho newspaper:

I read with interest your letter that was published in Wednesday’s paper decrying liberal media bias. The only part that anyone who reads, listens to radio or watches television could agree with is, “We, the people, deserve non-biased reporting in all our news.” We certainly do not have non-biased reporting.
I am trying to decide, while living in southeast Idaho, where the liberal media push is coming from. […]

The Liberal Idaho Media. What are you gonna do?

…………….

Hacket saying someone in class molested pig, forcing me to consider classmate committing beastiality. Disturbing!

That’s what I wrote for my Senior Year High School year book for “most memorable moment”. To an extent, I was trying to outdo my brother, whose “Drank Jolt Cola, and was wired for the rest of the day” garnered a comment to me a year from a student looking through old yearbooks. My comment stood out, and there appears to have been a bit of “iffyness” on the part of the Yearbook staff. For his part, my conversation with the teacher went like this. “That’s a pretty interesting ‘memorable moment’.” “Indeed.” (A few people post-graduate have read it, and commented “They let you write that?“)

The editing job on the passage confused me. They inserted a “to be” between “classmate” and “committing”. What that clarifies is beyond me, and further it seems to confuse matters: is the classmate a future classmate of mine? And, if they’re going to move the word-count past the 15 words that was imposed on me, why not stick a “Mr.” before “Hacket”?

There really isn’t much of a story beyond those 15 words. I was taking an Auto Shop class (mostly a scheduling accident). I wasn’t paying attention to the teacher as he was talking about some prankery someone apparently had on FFA students (that’s “Future Farmers of America”). A student (his nakename wasn’t “Squirt”, though it might as well have been) made a wise-crack that I didn’t catch — and the teacher responded tersly with words that popped me to attention: “Molested a pig.”

After a classroom of kids popped up to attention, and gave a “Wooah” reaction, we went to the shop, and that was the last I ever heard of anything. I regret not popping in by saying, “Define ‘molest’.”

Horsley did not stress the “deliverance” from his poking Elsie, as much as he emphasised that everyone who lives on a Georgia farm engages in bestiality. I am sure the farmers of Georgia are none to pleased. He even went so far as to try and get Colmes to enjoin his behavior.

I… guess… bestiality happens. (I note a comment spam I deleted today full of links to bestiality-related porn.) But to suggest that everyone on the farm is doing it offers up the basic problem with Horsley: he has a perverted view of what normal sinners are doing… and, mind you, I believe he loves the photos of bloody fetuses that he’s likely to wave around in a strangely sexual way.

It’s easy to destroy the tired argument chimed in from the religious right (Neal Horsley on down to Senator Rick Santorum) that goes First Homosexuality, next Bestiality. As children can’t consent, animals can’t either. I’m more head-strong on protecting the innocence of children than animals, I may as well admit, and I can envision a hyper-libertarian argument that… oh, never mind.

As for Horsley’s further kvetching on the matter of “doing anything that moves” to include “a warm watermelon in the pasture” (or a location of creepy specificity)– it reminds me that there was a popular movie made a few years ago with a teenager having sex with a pie, which means … I guess masturbation into food happens somewhat regularly. But please don’t tell me about it. (I happen to hate Joe Matt’s comics.)

I just realized that the blog entry entitled “Frog. Boiling. Slowly. Pot.” gets bombarded with comment spam from cooking and recipie sites.

Now that’s target marketing!

(I might also mention that the entry about “Media Whores Online Watch Watch Watch Watch” has gotten comment spam from something akin to “Bus Stop Whores”.)