Today I awoke to the news that some Sixty Six Year Old nut job from Illinois decided he was going to make a point of embarrassing himself and his causes by killing or at least wounding a bunch of Republican Congressmen and Senators who get together at 7am to play baseball in Va.
It turns out that this guy was a Bernie Sanders supporter. Hence with a Congressman (Scalice-R-La.) who is the Majority Whip in the House (and thus in the Presidential line of Succession), in surgery for a gunshot wound and 3 other aides and Capital Police Officers shot, everybody decided now was not the time to come together as a nation and pray for the wounded, but instead it is time to blame each other for this idiot going off the main beam.
Frankly there are a number of things that could be going on here with the shooter, one James Hodgskins III of Illinois. He could have decided he wanted to go out in a blaze of "glory" or that he wanted suicide by cop. He could have been a troubled soul that finally lost his last marble. He could be a nut that wanted his shot for 15 minutes of fame and for everybody in the country to hear about his causes. The list of reasons this guy might have engaged this way could number in the millions, but one of those reasons is NOT because of anything any pundit, politician, or publicity seeking provocateur said.
Let's get this straight. Hodgskins didn't act because of something Bernie said or Trump said or because he didn't like the way they voted on an issue or even because in his twisted little mind he thought he was going to lose his healthcare, Viagra or library card.
He was not caused to do this because of Rush Limbaugh or Jeff Sessions or James Comey. Brexit and the Mexican wall had NOTHING to do with this. He wasn't channelling Al Franken or Elizabeth Warren. The acts this morning were the acts of a psychopath and could just as easily been caused by his bad hair day as by anything else. DO NOT SUBSCRIBE REASON TO A MENTALLY ILL PERSON.
Unless one can show a conspiracy to do this, or a contract to kill (think "button man" from the Mob) then this was a random act of crazy and looking to place blame on anybody's word is just a self interested attempt to cast dispersions on people you do not like. Fact is nothing anyone said would have caused him to do this or stopped him. That is because his reason for doing this is personal to him. The idea that something someone said "drove" him to act is nothing more than an excuse and minimizes both the danger he was to others and it gives into him, because it gives him power he never had in life, to try to get others to change their behaviors and opinions through his actions.
Seeking to shame Tim Kaine for saying we have to fight Trump "in the streets" is not why this happened. Showing a picture of a bull's eye on Gabby Gifford's face in a campaign piece, while in extremely poor taste, did not cause her sick twist of a would be assassin to act the way he did. No, they do this for reasons if exposed we would find in the darkest corners of their twisted brains. Now is not the time (actually it is never the time) to blame the free speech of others for the actions someone takes unless they are duty bound to follow an order. (Think Army Capt. following commander's orders.)
When I see people blaming others for this tragedy because they may have "radicalized" or suggested it was okay, or made it easy for him or any of the myriad of other stupid things people have said or are going to say about this, I realize, they are not leaders. They do not understand what happened, but they are scared little people trying to convince others of their own importance to compensate for their own inadequacy to shut down their actual opposition. I am not reading them, I am not listening to them and I cannot be persuaded by their ranting. I am looking for leaders. Let's see if there are any in my Twitter Stream, or among my Facebook friends or on the news tonight. I am not planning on finding too many but I can always hope someone out there is smart enough to realize what stuff like this does to our Bill of Rights and are willing to speak out against it.
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 14, 2017
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Going Rogue: Who in the Hell is Watching the ATF??
Okay I am back, for a while I guess. Somehow my long term writers block seems to have lifted. Lets hope it stays this way for a while.
We have spent most of the year looking at how the NSA is really an internal spying organization run by former military men whose level of paranoia while likely defensible is waaaayyy to high to actually run a spying agency in a democracy. Thanks to Edward Snowden, we now know that the US government has since 2001 been doing an really good job acting like the KGB of 1955. Now this comes as no surprise because for a nation that prides itself on talking about civil rights, we suck at providing them to anyone who isn't in our view when we look in the bathroom mirror.
Nevertheless, while the NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI and main Justice (Just us?) Dept. have all been seriously scrutinized these last few months by the libertarian (and only reluctantly by the main stream) press, our old friend of merry makers, the original set 'em up and blow them up gang over at the AFT (Bureau of Alcohol Firearms and Tobacco) (remember WACO? RUBY RIDGE?? FAST AND FURIOUS??????) have been on the down low... until now.
Seems that the agency hasn't had a real director since 2006. That is 7 years... for the last two years the "acting director" was also the full time US Attorney in Minnesota!! All this lack of supervision has given the merry men of the ATF way too much time on their hands. Hence they have come up with all kinds of ways to screw up on our dime. (Actually on our $1.23BILLION DOLLAR dime)
Lets lookie see what they have been spending money on...:
Well they have been picking on mentally challenged men and encouraging them to have tattoos of Giant Squids Smoking a Joint put onto their necks
They have encouraged robberies so that they can then buy the stolen merchandise back and lock up the guy who stole it, except most of the robbers never stole before the ATF decided to give away money by OVERPAYING for the stolen stuff
Oh yeah they like over paying for stuff, so they offered to buy guns for more money that they could be purchased for at a place like Dick's sporting goods... so even the mentally challenged figured out that it was worth it to BUY THE GUNS Legally and sell them for a profit to the MORONIC Special Agents...
Then they discovered that teenage boys like sex...SO They have been trying to get teenager boys to buy guns and drugs in the vain hope a particularly sexy "special agent" will have sex with them. (Too bad she didn't twerk, maybe the mainstream media woulda picked up the story.)
Finally they are slobs too.
I hope there is a Republican Congressman who sees this. WANNA FIND A BUDGET TO CUT?? Start with the ATF!!!!
Hat Tip: The Atlantic.com
We have spent most of the year looking at how the NSA is really an internal spying organization run by former military men whose level of paranoia while likely defensible is waaaayyy to high to actually run a spying agency in a democracy. Thanks to Edward Snowden, we now know that the US government has since 2001 been doing an really good job acting like the KGB of 1955. Now this comes as no surprise because for a nation that prides itself on talking about civil rights, we suck at providing them to anyone who isn't in our view when we look in the bathroom mirror.
Nevertheless, while the NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI and main Justice (Just us?) Dept. have all been seriously scrutinized these last few months by the libertarian (and only reluctantly by the main stream) press, our old friend of merry makers, the original set 'em up and blow them up gang over at the AFT (Bureau of Alcohol Firearms and Tobacco) (remember WACO? RUBY RIDGE?? FAST AND FURIOUS??????) have been on the down low... until now.
Seems that the agency hasn't had a real director since 2006. That is 7 years... for the last two years the "acting director" was also the full time US Attorney in Minnesota!! All this lack of supervision has given the merry men of the ATF way too much time on their hands. Hence they have come up with all kinds of ways to screw up on our dime. (Actually on our $1.23BILLION DOLLAR dime)
Lets lookie see what they have been spending money on...:
Well they have been picking on mentally challenged men and encouraging them to have tattoos of Giant Squids Smoking a Joint put onto their necks
They have encouraged robberies so that they can then buy the stolen merchandise back and lock up the guy who stole it, except most of the robbers never stole before the ATF decided to give away money by OVERPAYING for the stolen stuff
Oh yeah they like over paying for stuff, so they offered to buy guns for more money that they could be purchased for at a place like Dick's sporting goods... so even the mentally challenged figured out that it was worth it to BUY THE GUNS Legally and sell them for a profit to the MORONIC Special Agents...
Then they discovered that teenage boys like sex...SO They have been trying to get teenager boys to buy guns and drugs in the vain hope a particularly sexy "special agent" will have sex with them. (Too bad she didn't twerk, maybe the mainstream media woulda picked up the story.)
Finally they are slobs too.
I hope there is a Republican Congressman who sees this. WANNA FIND A BUDGET TO CUT?? Start with the ATF!!!!
Hat Tip: The Atlantic.com
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Mr. Romney, Your Silence is Deafening: Where is the Real Republican Immigration Plan
Yesterday I was pretty critical of President Obama about what I consider to be a basically valueless change in Administrations policy on Immigration. Today I want to make it clear I am just as unhappy with the Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney. You see, Obama hasn't really kept his campaign promises to pass comprehensive Immigration reform, however Mr. Romney has yet to even make a promise with any proposal. I am actually more inclined to be angry at Republicans for not trying to come to the table with a plan than at Obama who has at least put forth a plan that Republicans promise to filibuster. Look it is easy to say NO! It is hard to say, "this is what we need and we know what you are looking for and here is our proposal."
Five times yesterday, Bob Schieffer of CBS News asked Romney on "Face the Nation" if he would undo the Napalitano Order to not seek deportation of "Dream actors" for now. Five times he failed to say what he'd do. Thing is, I think Mitt doesn't really dislike the Presidents plan, he just can't say it without alienating every xenophobic wingnut who is supporting him on the right. Here is the thing, George W. Bush had a great plan, but the wingnuts took over and ruined any chance the Republicans had of passing the plan, fixing the problem and winning the day. That is the problem with "Pure" politics. You cannot get anything done with someone who is "my way or the highway."
The Majority of Americans favor a road to citizenship for people who are already here. The majority also seeks a plan that would make it counter productive for someone to come over here and be illegal. The people who vote in the cock-eyed primaries, aren't those people. Here is the thing, Bush was willing to fight his party, but he really couldn't fathom a way to do it. As a result he lost the Hispanic vote for McCain. McCain (who also shot himself in the foot by abandoning everything he ever stood for and with his Sarah Palin Fiasco)paid for it dearly. Romney has caved on EVERY THING for which he ever stood. Now no one, not the conservatives, not the libertarians, and not the American public will ever trust him. If I were an anti-immigration Republican, I wouldn't vote for this guy, I don't know what he will ultimately do. As a Pro-immigration Libertarian, I wouldn't vote for Romney because he is a living disaster for America and especially on this issue, even if I believe a President Romeny will flip (when the pollsters tell him to.)
I will probably cast a vote for Gary Johnson, who is better than either Romney or Obama. Then again, I may be so fed up by November I may not vote at all... (don't get excited, I will probably vote, I like doing it too much to give it up.)
Five times yesterday, Bob Schieffer of CBS News asked Romney on "Face the Nation" if he would undo the Napalitano Order to not seek deportation of "Dream actors" for now. Five times he failed to say what he'd do. Thing is, I think Mitt doesn't really dislike the Presidents plan, he just can't say it without alienating every xenophobic wingnut who is supporting him on the right. Here is the thing, George W. Bush had a great plan, but the wingnuts took over and ruined any chance the Republicans had of passing the plan, fixing the problem and winning the day. That is the problem with "Pure" politics. You cannot get anything done with someone who is "my way or the highway."
The Majority of Americans favor a road to citizenship for people who are already here. The majority also seeks a plan that would make it counter productive for someone to come over here and be illegal. The people who vote in the cock-eyed primaries, aren't those people. Here is the thing, Bush was willing to fight his party, but he really couldn't fathom a way to do it. As a result he lost the Hispanic vote for McCain. McCain (who also shot himself in the foot by abandoning everything he ever stood for and with his Sarah Palin Fiasco)paid for it dearly. Romney has caved on EVERY THING for which he ever stood. Now no one, not the conservatives, not the libertarians, and not the American public will ever trust him. If I were an anti-immigration Republican, I wouldn't vote for this guy, I don't know what he will ultimately do. As a Pro-immigration Libertarian, I wouldn't vote for Romney because he is a living disaster for America and especially on this issue, even if I believe a President Romeny will flip (when the pollsters tell him to.)
I will probably cast a vote for Gary Johnson, who is better than either Romney or Obama. Then again, I may be so fed up by November I may not vote at all... (don't get excited, I will probably vote, I like doing it too much to give it up.)
Monday, November 28, 2011
Kid Tweets That She Muscled Governor Brownback. Should She Be Made To Apologize? I Say YES!
Here is the story from the Associate Press:
"A Kansas teenager who wrote a disparaging tweet about Gov. Sam Brownback is rejecting her high school principal's demand that she apologize.
Emma Sullivan (twitter@emmakat988) told The Associated Press on Sunday that she's not sorry and an apology letter wouldn't be sincere.
The Shawnee Mission East senior was in Topeka last week when she sent a tweet from the back of a crowd of students listening to Brownback. It read: "Just made mean comments at gov. brownback and told him he sucked, in person."
She actually made no such comment..."
Thereafter Brownback's Media hound found the tweet while searching the Governor's name. When she read the tweet, she contacted the school. The Principal got a call from the Governor's office, and had heart palpitations. He ordered the 18 year old woman to write an apology to help him with "damage control."
Our Question is: Should Ms. Sullivan apologize and for what should she apologize?
The kid claims to be liberal. Okay. She also claims not to like Governor Brownback. Okay again. She has decided not to write the apology...and every liberal and libertarian it seems supports her decision... NOT ME.
I am not being contrarian, I just think that there are some serious issues here that may not be affected by this young woman's right to free speech.
1. She was at a school function, representing her High School.
2. She lied, she said she told Brownback off, in person.
3. She tweeted, against the rules of the school at a time she was in class.
Now I want to make the following clear. If she had tweeted, on her personal twitter account at 3:30PM that she saw Brownback and wished she had told him he sucked, well then no problem.
That isn't what happened here. Here she was invited to meet with the Governor of her state.Not because she was someone who the governor would normally meet with, but because she was chosen by her school to go. While she was in the Governor's home or office, she took out her cellphone, and reported she told the man "He sucked" (Skip the fact that the statement is both juvenile and vulgar) in person. That was both against the rules about texting in class, AND, it was a lie.
Now imagine if she had said something dumber like she had assaulted or God forbid shot the man? Would that be okay?? What First Amendment line had been crossed? Isn't that still political speech? She is still saying she doesn't like the man. She is still lying. She would still be doing it on school time.
No, I don't agree that she is putting forth her opinion. I think she was going for a laugh, which is also okay as far as it goes, but the truth is, it was disrespectful not of Brownback (after all it goes with the territory of being a politician) but of the Office of the Governor. It was also a disrespect of her position as a campus leader of her school and all the people in it, including the few that may like the Governor, AND, she broke her school texting rule.
Now that doesn't mean she should have written a mea cupla, nor promise to help Brownback win his next campaign. It does mean that this college bound woman should show some understanding that: 1. The Governor of your state deserves your respect as the leader of the state and the choice of the people of your state; 2. You broke school rules and you are sorry for that, and; 3. That as a school leader, she has an obligation to represent her student body by asking smart questions, reporting accurately what was said and if she disagreed she had the right to state an opinion that criticized Brownback.
I am not asking her to agree with Brownback, but respect for our institutions is an important thing for schools to teach. The proper way to engage in debate is an important thing for leaders to learn. (Remember when some wingnut congressman yelled out at Obama during his State of the Union "you're a liar"? that kind of comment does not spur on the debate. It doesn't bring the other side into understanding your grievances. Saying Brownback "sucks" is just juvenile and frankly makes me think Ms. Sullivan is stupid. All I know is, she is entitled to an opinion, but you don't have the right to come into my house and crap on my carpet. Verbally, that is what she did. Her principal is right to demand an APPROPRIATE Apology. Not one that necessarily makes the Governor or his people happy, but one that indicates that the student understands where she went wrong.
"A Kansas teenager who wrote a disparaging tweet about Gov. Sam Brownback is rejecting her high school principal's demand that she apologize.
Emma Sullivan (twitter@emmakat988) told The Associated Press on Sunday that she's not sorry and an apology letter wouldn't be sincere.
The Shawnee Mission East senior was in Topeka last week when she sent a tweet from the back of a crowd of students listening to Brownback. It read: "Just made mean comments at gov. brownback and told him he sucked, in person."
She actually made no such comment..."
Thereafter Brownback's Media hound found the tweet while searching the Governor's name. When she read the tweet, she contacted the school. The Principal got a call from the Governor's office, and had heart palpitations. He ordered the 18 year old woman to write an apology to help him with "damage control."
Our Question is: Should Ms. Sullivan apologize and for what should she apologize?
The kid claims to be liberal. Okay. She also claims not to like Governor Brownback. Okay again. She has decided not to write the apology...and every liberal and libertarian it seems supports her decision... NOT ME.
I am not being contrarian, I just think that there are some serious issues here that may not be affected by this young woman's right to free speech.
1. She was at a school function, representing her High School.
2. She lied, she said she told Brownback off, in person.
3. She tweeted, against the rules of the school at a time she was in class.
Now I want to make the following clear. If she had tweeted, on her personal twitter account at 3:30PM that she saw Brownback and wished she had told him he sucked, well then no problem.
That isn't what happened here. Here she was invited to meet with the Governor of her state.Not because she was someone who the governor would normally meet with, but because she was chosen by her school to go. While she was in the Governor's home or office, she took out her cellphone, and reported she told the man "He sucked" (Skip the fact that the statement is both juvenile and vulgar) in person. That was both against the rules about texting in class, AND, it was a lie.
Now imagine if she had said something dumber like she had assaulted or God forbid shot the man? Would that be okay?? What First Amendment line had been crossed? Isn't that still political speech? She is still saying she doesn't like the man. She is still lying. She would still be doing it on school time.
No, I don't agree that she is putting forth her opinion. I think she was going for a laugh, which is also okay as far as it goes, but the truth is, it was disrespectful not of Brownback (after all it goes with the territory of being a politician) but of the Office of the Governor. It was also a disrespect of her position as a campus leader of her school and all the people in it, including the few that may like the Governor, AND, she broke her school texting rule.
Now that doesn't mean she should have written a mea cupla, nor promise to help Brownback win his next campaign. It does mean that this college bound woman should show some understanding that: 1. The Governor of your state deserves your respect as the leader of the state and the choice of the people of your state; 2. You broke school rules and you are sorry for that, and; 3. That as a school leader, she has an obligation to represent her student body by asking smart questions, reporting accurately what was said and if she disagreed she had the right to state an opinion that criticized Brownback.
I am not asking her to agree with Brownback, but respect for our institutions is an important thing for schools to teach. The proper way to engage in debate is an important thing for leaders to learn. (Remember when some wingnut congressman yelled out at Obama during his State of the Union "you're a liar"? that kind of comment does not spur on the debate. It doesn't bring the other side into understanding your grievances. Saying Brownback "sucks" is just juvenile and frankly makes me think Ms. Sullivan is stupid. All I know is, she is entitled to an opinion, but you don't have the right to come into my house and crap on my carpet. Verbally, that is what she did. Her principal is right to demand an APPROPRIATE Apology. Not one that necessarily makes the Governor or his people happy, but one that indicates that the student understands where she went wrong.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
It's Election Day. Here Are My Endorsements
Anyone who blogs for business reasons will tell you: "DON'T Get Political on your business blog." So much for my listening to common sense. I see a lawyer's job in part to help lead his community. That includes supporting candidates for office; not just anyone who runs on a particular party line, but candidates they know will make a positive difference in the lives of the people they try to help every day. I am more than aware (sometimes I think I am alone in this) that no one party has a lock on good ideas or good people. I endorse "bipartisanly" not because it is "good business politics" but because it is good government and I like to think exhibits leadership.
A proviso: I consider myself libertarian. Small "l". Which means I am not actively a member of the party, but I agree with much of what they stand for.
Libertarians are usually said to be fiscal conservatives and social liberals. To be libertarian, (small "l") I think you have to favor small federal government and very little government intrusion into private decisions.
With that said here are my picks and some analysis.
Governor:
Warren Redlich. He is the Libertarian. It is a minor party but Warren is anything but a minor brain. He seems to be the only candidate who understands you cannot cut taxes without cutting many MANY unnecessary and duplicative programs.
Look Cuomo is a great guy (really he is, I've known Andy politically since we were both kids. He is a tough/bully kind of politician but he also is very family oriented and has a good heart. He wants to make correct decisions, I just don't think he always knows what those might be.) Paladino is someone I'd like to like. He is a successful businessman, loves his family and is famously loyal to those he is surrounded by, but he is either a bigot or stupid at times. Until he learns to say what he means the first time he says it, there will always be a question in my mind as to which is which. Mutual friends of ours swear to me he is just a "regular guy". Maybe, but maybe you need to be more to be the highest elected state official in NY.
As for those who think that this is a wasted vote, so is voting for Paladino, however if Redlich gets enough votes (50K) the Libertarian Party gets a line in the next four elections. That will give it the power to get like minded people elected both to the statehouse and in local elections. Sure some people will be fringe candidates (so is Paladino if you think about some of the things he has said) but many will have new ideas that may work far better than the same old thing. VOTE REDLICH.
Attorney General:
Tough call. Politically, Eric Schniederman and I probably agree on a lot of social issues including death penalty, drugs and the proper emphasis of a state Atty' General's Office. Dan Donovan however is a good prosecutor and knows how to run an office. He worked under Guy Molinari, and is considered a Republican moderate. Schneiderman on the other hand knows Albany and has been an enemy of the corruption that runs the capital. He will be a watchdog over Wall Street, but I don't think he has the makeup of either of the previous two AGs (Spitzer or Cuomo.)
I will vote for Donovan and hope I was right.
Comptroller:
I have known Tom DiNapoli for 30 years. I like him personally. I am sure that Tom's heart is in the right place. He has been a good administrator but he isn't a comptroller. The Republican candidate Wilson is a tool of Wall Street.
I am voting for the Libertarian who understands Wall Street but also has the qualifications to be a Comptroller and who is just populist enough to understand he is a guardian of the Public fisc. I cast my vote for Carl E. Person. Take a look at his website. He has some interesting ideas. As with Redlich for Governor I know that not enough people will vote for Carl to elect him, but if he were to get 50K votes, it would send a strong message that the electorate wants a state government that gives greater power and less "pass down" legislation to local county and town governments.
I am not touching the US Senate or Congressional campaigns. Mostly because the Republicans decided not to show up. There are really no choices here. I don't support Schumer and I have no idea who Gillibrand is going to become. She is better than I thought she would be, but then again I didn't initially expect anything from her anyway. I will vote for Libertarian party candidates mostly as a show of dissatisfaction with the lack of a real choice.
Now locally (On Long Island) we have a bunch of Judicial elections. I am going to focus on Supreme Court and Family court.
I'd like to begin with the Supreme Court.
The most qualified candidates are without a doubt Daniel Palmeri and Andrew Crecca. I have appeared before both. They are outstanding trial judges. Palmeri is brilliant. PERIOD. Crecca has a great feel for the courtroom and for the issues. I think he has great ability to be the kind of judge who gets things done expeditiously both of these candidates are sitting judges and both are Republicans.
As for the other two spots, I urge you to vote for two Democrats (no I am not trying to be equal. I know these folks and they are worthy of the job.) The first is a sitting District Court Judge Robert Spergel
Judge Spergel has a good way of cutting through the garbage that is litigation. He needs to be careful of his urge to "get it right" and rule according to law. (He used to be a policeman, "Street Justice" may work on the street but in a court of law, law works best.) Outside of that however, he has a good "gut" understanding of when a side is taking an unfair advantage of others. He is aware of how to move a calendar and he seems unafraid to make hard and unpopular decisions. He does that expeditiously. It is important to move Supreme Court calendars quickly. Justice delayed is justice denied. Supreme Court calendars move at the speed of a glacier. Having a judge who can decide tough calls and do it quickly is a good thing.
The last vote is for my colleague William "Bill" Devore. Bill has had a storied career both in and outside of the Suffolk District Attorney's office. He is a reasonable person who understands the issues that occur in people's lives. He is a good lawyer and will have the guts to make the tough call in a timely manner. He has compassion yet he is a strong lawyer who will be unafraid to decide to do the right thing as opposed to the popular thing.
Here are four good candidates who all will serve us well. This is not to take away anything from the other candidates who all bring different qualities to the bench. The biggest issue is that the four judges I selected all are gutsy lawyers who do not appear to be beholden to anyone and who can do the job (or are doing the job) well. They each know the importance of moving a calendar and do so while maintaining a high level of legal acumen. Crecca and Spergel work in high-stress busy "specialty courts" (Crecca works Domestic Violence Court in Suffolk which mixes civil family and criminal court in one courtroom and Spergel is the judge in the DWI Trial Court in Nassau County, the busiest Criminal Trial Court by volume on Long Island.)
There is only one great choice for Nassau County Family Court. Merik (Rick) Aaron. Rick is a former HS Teacher. Went to Law School. He is bright and he is compassionate. He has the perfect disposition to work with juvenile delinquents and dysfunctional people (After all he worked for me for his last year of Law School!) Now for those of you who will claim some type of nepotism, I say that is just not true. I know Rick, and I have seen his work. He is THE CHOICE for Nassau Family Court.
Finally for State Assembly, I am supporting Charles Lavine a Democrat in the NY State Assembly's Thirteenth (13) AD. He has done a great job. He sits on the codes committee and he has been very effective in Albany.
I am also supporting Michael Montasano in his race in NY's Fifteenth (15)AD. Mike understands the issues that effect everyday folk. He is one of us. He is a former police officer and lawyer. He is gutsy. He challenged the Nassau County Forfeiture law and won!! Mike is a good assemblyman who will serve his constituency well.
I like Tom McDevitt in the Seventeenth (17)AD. A fine young man who is becoming more and more of a force in Albany for his district. Tom is active in his practice of law and he has been active in the Nassau County Bar Association. HE is up on the issues and provides a spirited loyal opposition to the Democrat controlled Assembly.
In the State Senate, I am supporting the Republican ticket right down the line. Why? Because a Democrat Senate has wreaked havoc on Long Island. Democrats have taken the STAR exemptions away which helped a lot of people stay in their homes in a bad economy. We pay a MTA Tax even if we never ride a rail or cross a bridge. In other words, losing in the Third Senatorial District broke up the Long Island Republican Senate block. The new guy Democrat Brian Foley wasted no time paying back his political benefactors at a great cost to Long Island. Sorry. I really don't like how Albany works. There is too much power in the leadership of each house and Governor, and the system rewards the corrupt and the stupid (can anyone say Brian McLauglin and Anthony Seminerio?)usually at the expense of Long Island and the North Country. A solid Republican Senatorial block, until Albany becomes a place where rank and file members have more power, gives Long Island the only chance it has for a fair shake.
Well let the commenting begin. I am sure I ticked off many of you and even a few friends who I'd like to support but can't in fairness to the principles I have politically and or because the other candidate is just in my humble opinion a better candidate. Agree or disagree you can help have the final say if you vote on Tuesday.
A proviso: I consider myself libertarian. Small "l". Which means I am not actively a member of the party, but I agree with much of what they stand for.
Libertarians are usually said to be fiscal conservatives and social liberals. To be libertarian, (small "l") I think you have to favor small federal government and very little government intrusion into private decisions.
With that said here are my picks and some analysis.
Governor:
Warren Redlich. He is the Libertarian. It is a minor party but Warren is anything but a minor brain. He seems to be the only candidate who understands you cannot cut taxes without cutting many MANY unnecessary and duplicative programs.
Look Cuomo is a great guy (really he is, I've known Andy politically since we were both kids. He is a tough/bully kind of politician but he also is very family oriented and has a good heart. He wants to make correct decisions, I just don't think he always knows what those might be.) Paladino is someone I'd like to like. He is a successful businessman, loves his family and is famously loyal to those he is surrounded by, but he is either a bigot or stupid at times. Until he learns to say what he means the first time he says it, there will always be a question in my mind as to which is which. Mutual friends of ours swear to me he is just a "regular guy". Maybe, but maybe you need to be more to be the highest elected state official in NY.
As for those who think that this is a wasted vote, so is voting for Paladino, however if Redlich gets enough votes (50K) the Libertarian Party gets a line in the next four elections. That will give it the power to get like minded people elected both to the statehouse and in local elections. Sure some people will be fringe candidates (so is Paladino if you think about some of the things he has said) but many will have new ideas that may work far better than the same old thing. VOTE REDLICH.
Attorney General:
Tough call. Politically, Eric Schniederman and I probably agree on a lot of social issues including death penalty, drugs and the proper emphasis of a state Atty' General's Office. Dan Donovan however is a good prosecutor and knows how to run an office. He worked under Guy Molinari, and is considered a Republican moderate. Schneiderman on the other hand knows Albany and has been an enemy of the corruption that runs the capital. He will be a watchdog over Wall Street, but I don't think he has the makeup of either of the previous two AGs (Spitzer or Cuomo.)
I will vote for Donovan and hope I was right.
Comptroller:
I have known Tom DiNapoli for 30 years. I like him personally. I am sure that Tom's heart is in the right place. He has been a good administrator but he isn't a comptroller. The Republican candidate Wilson is a tool of Wall Street.
I am voting for the Libertarian who understands Wall Street but also has the qualifications to be a Comptroller and who is just populist enough to understand he is a guardian of the Public fisc. I cast my vote for Carl E. Person. Take a look at his website. He has some interesting ideas. As with Redlich for Governor I know that not enough people will vote for Carl to elect him, but if he were to get 50K votes, it would send a strong message that the electorate wants a state government that gives greater power and less "pass down" legislation to local county and town governments.
I am not touching the US Senate or Congressional campaigns. Mostly because the Republicans decided not to show up. There are really no choices here. I don't support Schumer and I have no idea who Gillibrand is going to become. She is better than I thought she would be, but then again I didn't initially expect anything from her anyway. I will vote for Libertarian party candidates mostly as a show of dissatisfaction with the lack of a real choice.
Now locally (On Long Island) we have a bunch of Judicial elections. I am going to focus on Supreme Court and Family court.
I'd like to begin with the Supreme Court.
The most qualified candidates are without a doubt Daniel Palmeri and Andrew Crecca. I have appeared before both. They are outstanding trial judges. Palmeri is brilliant. PERIOD. Crecca has a great feel for the courtroom and for the issues. I think he has great ability to be the kind of judge who gets things done expeditiously both of these candidates are sitting judges and both are Republicans.
As for the other two spots, I urge you to vote for two Democrats (no I am not trying to be equal. I know these folks and they are worthy of the job.) The first is a sitting District Court Judge Robert Spergel
Judge Spergel has a good way of cutting through the garbage that is litigation. He needs to be careful of his urge to "get it right" and rule according to law. (He used to be a policeman, "Street Justice" may work on the street but in a court of law, law works best.) Outside of that however, he has a good "gut" understanding of when a side is taking an unfair advantage of others. He is aware of how to move a calendar and he seems unafraid to make hard and unpopular decisions. He does that expeditiously. It is important to move Supreme Court calendars quickly. Justice delayed is justice denied. Supreme Court calendars move at the speed of a glacier. Having a judge who can decide tough calls and do it quickly is a good thing.
The last vote is for my colleague William "Bill" Devore. Bill has had a storied career both in and outside of the Suffolk District Attorney's office. He is a reasonable person who understands the issues that occur in people's lives. He is a good lawyer and will have the guts to make the tough call in a timely manner. He has compassion yet he is a strong lawyer who will be unafraid to decide to do the right thing as opposed to the popular thing.
Here are four good candidates who all will serve us well. This is not to take away anything from the other candidates who all bring different qualities to the bench. The biggest issue is that the four judges I selected all are gutsy lawyers who do not appear to be beholden to anyone and who can do the job (or are doing the job) well. They each know the importance of moving a calendar and do so while maintaining a high level of legal acumen. Crecca and Spergel work in high-stress busy "specialty courts" (Crecca works Domestic Violence Court in Suffolk which mixes civil family and criminal court in one courtroom and Spergel is the judge in the DWI Trial Court in Nassau County, the busiest Criminal Trial Court by volume on Long Island.)
There is only one great choice for Nassau County Family Court. Merik (Rick) Aaron. Rick is a former HS Teacher. Went to Law School. He is bright and he is compassionate. He has the perfect disposition to work with juvenile delinquents and dysfunctional people (After all he worked for me for his last year of Law School!) Now for those of you who will claim some type of nepotism, I say that is just not true. I know Rick, and I have seen his work. He is THE CHOICE for Nassau Family Court.
Finally for State Assembly, I am supporting Charles Lavine a Democrat in the NY State Assembly's Thirteenth (13) AD. He has done a great job. He sits on the codes committee and he has been very effective in Albany.
I am also supporting Michael Montasano in his race in NY's Fifteenth (15)AD. Mike understands the issues that effect everyday folk. He is one of us. He is a former police officer and lawyer. He is gutsy. He challenged the Nassau County Forfeiture law and won!! Mike is a good assemblyman who will serve his constituency well.
I like Tom McDevitt in the Seventeenth (17)AD. A fine young man who is becoming more and more of a force in Albany for his district. Tom is active in his practice of law and he has been active in the Nassau County Bar Association. HE is up on the issues and provides a spirited loyal opposition to the Democrat controlled Assembly.
In the State Senate, I am supporting the Republican ticket right down the line. Why? Because a Democrat Senate has wreaked havoc on Long Island. Democrats have taken the STAR exemptions away which helped a lot of people stay in their homes in a bad economy. We pay a MTA Tax even if we never ride a rail or cross a bridge. In other words, losing in the Third Senatorial District broke up the Long Island Republican Senate block. The new guy Democrat Brian Foley wasted no time paying back his political benefactors at a great cost to Long Island. Sorry. I really don't like how Albany works. There is too much power in the leadership of each house and Governor, and the system rewards the corrupt and the stupid (can anyone say Brian McLauglin and Anthony Seminerio?)usually at the expense of Long Island and the North Country. A solid Republican Senatorial block, until Albany becomes a place where rank and file members have more power, gives Long Island the only chance it has for a fair shake.
Well let the commenting begin. I am sure I ticked off many of you and even a few friends who I'd like to support but can't in fairness to the principles I have politically and or because the other candidate is just in my humble opinion a better candidate. Agree or disagree you can help have the final say if you vote on Tuesday.
Monday, July 05, 2010
Of Regan, Kennedy, and Rockwell: TIme To Reflect On Being An American Not a Republicat or Demorican
A very interesting exhibit opened at the Smithsonian Art Museum In Washington DC. this Fourth of July weekend. It is a retrospective of the works of Norman Rockwell, as seen through the eyes of two of America's greatest living movie directors Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. Each has lent parts of their extensive Rockwell collections to the exhibit.
Rockwell is remembered as a artist who captured America and Americans at their best in worst times. Central to his work were the pieces that became known as the "Four Freedoms."
Rockwell told our story, the American story of the 1930's through the 1960's. His paintings captured the fear and strength of an emerging superpower. He captured our sense of wonder and our sense of determination. He was oft criticized for only capturing our "good times", but anyone who has ever really looked at his body of work, especially at "Southern Justice", and "The Problem We All Live With" knows that Rockwell understood both the American ability to do absolutely the right thing and the most horrible things. He just chose to most often show us, and remind us, of our best moments. His work reinforces that we proceed the farthest the fastest by working together.
In a like way, John F. Kennedy asked us to do the same thing. No one since Lincoln had been more divisive than the Boston Brahmin-like , Harvard educated yet Roman Catholic JFK. Our first WWII vet President and War Hero he was from an old line political machine yet like Theodore Roosevelt spoke like a populist.
He won a contested election. The nation was 50/50 for and against him, and yet Kennedy is revered by most Americans not only because he was killed by an assassin's bullet, but because he called on us to serve each other, to do not what was best or expedient for oneself but to do what was best for our nation. He ushered us in with a feeling that we could do ANYTHING. Land on the moon. Sure! Make the world safe for democracy. Absolutely! Equalize race relations. Without a doubt! We believed because he did. We believed because, our leaders, split as they were against each other, made it their job to do a job.
Ronald Regan. An Actor. A liberal labor leader turned Goldwater Republican. Was gonna lead us into war with the Soviets. Was going to destroy the poor and trample on the rights of everyone he didn't agree with.
Nope. He too saw the shining light on the hilltop as our nation. He engineered the fall of the Soviet Empire, and the rebirth of our nation as a superpower of import without firing a single shot. He stabilized our economy and made us proud of ourselves. Not by focusing on the things that kept us apart, but rather focusing on what brought us together. He fought with leaders of the left, and they with him, but the name calling we were now? The garbage that passes for political debate today? Non existent under his watch.
Regan Kennedy and Rockwell all understood the limits of America, but they called on us to remember not who we weren't but who we were and more importantly whom we could be.
To my Tea Party and Liberal friends, CUT IT OUT! Please don't send me another piece of E-mail that attacks President Obama or Senator McConnell. I don't care at this point where the hell Obama was born. I don't care that Michael Steele took some conservative yuppies to a burlesque show. Please never say "Rush Limbaugh" or "Rachel Maddow"to me, even in a joke.
I care that I want health care. I want my employees covered and I want to be covered. I know you want that too.
I want to be able to afford a vacation and still be able to retire some day. I know you want that too.
I want to give less money to the government and I want to make more money than I do. Who doesn't want this??
I want then poor to have shelter, and education. I want there to be no poverty in our nation. Republicans and Democrats want this too.
I want to live free. I don't want to have to be screened to get into my local library. Don't we all want this?
I want to save the environment and to know that our earth will feed my great great grandchildren someday. It isn't just my dream is it??
I would like you, as my elected officials to only tell me how you will do this. I do not want to hear your critique of the other guy's idea. (I am smart enough to do that critique myself, thank you.)
If I like your ideas better than the others that I hear, I will vote for you, donate to your campaigns and respect you.
If you shout down your opponent, call him or his ideas names mis-characterize his programs and act like a spoiled child if he wins the election, I will not vote for you, I will not support you and I WILL NOT RESPECT YOU!!
I ask, no I beg, the Sergeants at Arms of the United States House and Senate to post a print of Rockwell's "Freedom of Speech" at the door of each chamber. Maybe that will remind you those guys
Hattip: NY Times
Rockwell is remembered as a artist who captured America and Americans at their best in worst times. Central to his work were the pieces that became known as the "Four Freedoms."
Rockwell told our story, the American story of the 1930's through the 1960's. His paintings captured the fear and strength of an emerging superpower. He captured our sense of wonder and our sense of determination. He was oft criticized for only capturing our "good times", but anyone who has ever really looked at his body of work, especially at "Southern Justice", and "The Problem We All Live With" knows that Rockwell understood both the American ability to do absolutely the right thing and the most horrible things. He just chose to most often show us, and remind us, of our best moments. His work reinforces that we proceed the farthest the fastest by working together.
In a like way, John F. Kennedy asked us to do the same thing. No one since Lincoln had been more divisive than the Boston Brahmin-like , Harvard educated yet Roman Catholic JFK. Our first WWII vet President and War Hero he was from an old line political machine yet like Theodore Roosevelt spoke like a populist.
He won a contested election. The nation was 50/50 for and against him, and yet Kennedy is revered by most Americans not only because he was killed by an assassin's bullet, but because he called on us to serve each other, to do not what was best or expedient for oneself but to do what was best for our nation. He ushered us in with a feeling that we could do ANYTHING. Land on the moon. Sure! Make the world safe for democracy. Absolutely! Equalize race relations. Without a doubt! We believed because he did. We believed because, our leaders, split as they were against each other, made it their job to do a job.
Ronald Regan. An Actor. A liberal labor leader turned Goldwater Republican. Was gonna lead us into war with the Soviets. Was going to destroy the poor and trample on the rights of everyone he didn't agree with.
Nope. He too saw the shining light on the hilltop as our nation. He engineered the fall of the Soviet Empire, and the rebirth of our nation as a superpower of import without firing a single shot. He stabilized our economy and made us proud of ourselves. Not by focusing on the things that kept us apart, but rather focusing on what brought us together. He fought with leaders of the left, and they with him, but the name calling we were now? The garbage that passes for political debate today? Non existent under his watch.
Regan Kennedy and Rockwell all understood the limits of America, but they called on us to remember not who we weren't but who we were and more importantly whom we could be.
To my Tea Party and Liberal friends, CUT IT OUT! Please don't send me another piece of E-mail that attacks President Obama or Senator McConnell. I don't care at this point where the hell Obama was born. I don't care that Michael Steele took some conservative yuppies to a burlesque show. Please never say "Rush Limbaugh" or "Rachel Maddow"to me, even in a joke.
I care that I want health care. I want my employees covered and I want to be covered. I know you want that too.
I want to be able to afford a vacation and still be able to retire some day. I know you want that too.
I want to give less money to the government and I want to make more money than I do. Who doesn't want this??
I want then poor to have shelter, and education. I want there to be no poverty in our nation. Republicans and Democrats want this too.
I want to live free. I don't want to have to be screened to get into my local library. Don't we all want this?
I want to save the environment and to know that our earth will feed my great great grandchildren someday. It isn't just my dream is it??
I would like you, as my elected officials to only tell me how you will do this. I do not want to hear your critique of the other guy's idea. (I am smart enough to do that critique myself, thank you.)
If I like your ideas better than the others that I hear, I will vote for you, donate to your campaigns and respect you.
If you shout down your opponent, call him or his ideas names mis-characterize his programs and act like a spoiled child if he wins the election, I will not vote for you, I will not support you and I WILL NOT RESPECT YOU!!
I ask, no I beg, the Sergeants at Arms of the United States House and Senate to post a print of Rockwell's "Freedom of Speech" at the door of each chamber. Maybe that will remind you those guys
Hattip: NY Times
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Public Hypocrite #1: Sen.Arlen Spector Wants a Attorney General Who Can Say No To The President.
This is rich. Arlen Spector, Republican Senator from Pa. and former Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee has announced that although Attorney General Nominee Eric Holder has excellent academic and professional credentials he is "concerned" that Holder may not be able to say no to the President.
IS HE KIDDING???? This is the man who as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Alberto Gonzalez as AG. Now I understand that Holder told President Clinton he had "no problem" with Clinton pardoning Marc Rich, but Gonzalez not only had no problem with Rendition, and torture, he actually approved of them with written memos. He approved the firing of US Attorneys because they wouldn't do Karl Rove's bidding.
Hey Arlen, can you say "I am a Hypocrite??" Probably not, politicians are just not that honest.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
BREAKING NEWS SDNY US ATTORNEY MICHAEL GARCIA RESIGNS
REUTERS NEWS AGENCY REPORTS BREAKING NEWS: SDNY US ATTORNEY MICHAEL GARCIA RESIGNS EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 1ST 2008.
Garcia's anticipated resignation came today at 5:30. He is leaving after just 3 years as the lead prosecutor and US Attorney in Manhattan to join a law firm (rumored to be Kirkland and Ellis )
Garcia has presided over the investigation into the Prostitution ring that brought down NY Governor Elliot Spitzer and the corruption case of Former NYS Assemblyman and AFL/CIO leader Brian McLaughlin. Thereafter, McLaughlin rolled on Assemblyman Anthony Seminerio who was also indicted.
Two weeks ago, Garcia announced that he would not indict Elliot Spitzer. It was rumored that such an agreement was secretly reached with Spitzer in order to assure he resigned as Governor.
If Hillary Clinton were to be appointed Secretary of State, Garcia would be considered a leading Republican candidate for NYS jr. Senator.
Garcia's anticipated resignation came today at 5:30. He is leaving after just 3 years as the lead prosecutor and US Attorney in Manhattan to join a law firm (rumored to be Kirkland and Ellis )
Garcia has presided over the investigation into the Prostitution ring that brought down NY Governor Elliot Spitzer and the corruption case of Former NYS Assemblyman and AFL/CIO leader Brian McLaughlin. Thereafter, McLaughlin rolled on Assemblyman Anthony Seminerio who was also indicted.
Two weeks ago, Garcia announced that he would not indict Elliot Spitzer. It was rumored that such an agreement was secretly reached with Spitzer in order to assure he resigned as Governor.
If Hillary Clinton were to be appointed Secretary of State, Garcia would be considered a leading Republican candidate for NYS jr. Senator.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Bush and Paulson Impose More Rules on Internet Gaming: They Just Can't Help Themselves Deep Down Inside, They Just Aren't Really Conservatives
Gambling has gotten the Republican Party in trouble before. After all the Jack Abramoff Scandal was all about the Republican lobbyist paying off Republican Congressmen to protect his client's (Indian Casinos) interest. That included curbing Internet gambling.
In the waining moments of the Republican congressional majority the Party bosses and the President passed a law ordering the Treasury to develop rules to ban credit card companies from permitting Americans to place bets on Internet gaming sites. This of course angered Poker players. It is also just not what the majority of Americans want. OTOH it is very popular among Christian Right leaders and the so called Republican base.
Well now that Bush is about to finally go off to that great Presidential Library in the west... Paulson (Treasury Secretary) has promulgated Rules that effectively ban any Internet gambling (except the free kind which is fine for me but not very satisfying for most poker players)from the US.
I haven't the time to rail against the Bush Administration right now, but read about the matter here.
I never thought I would say these words. Rep. Barney Frank is right. (Was that thunder I just heard?) Lord help us when we have to look to the Democrats to enforce our liberties...
In the waining moments of the Republican congressional majority the Party bosses and the President passed a law ordering the Treasury to develop rules to ban credit card companies from permitting Americans to place bets on Internet gaming sites. This of course angered Poker players. It is also just not what the majority of Americans want. OTOH it is very popular among Christian Right leaders and the so called Republican base.
Well now that Bush is about to finally go off to that great Presidential Library in the west... Paulson (Treasury Secretary) has promulgated Rules that effectively ban any Internet gambling (except the free kind which is fine for me but not very satisfying for most poker players)from the US.
I haven't the time to rail against the Bush Administration right now, but read about the matter here.
I never thought I would say these words. Rep. Barney Frank is right. (Was that thunder I just heard?) Lord help us when we have to look to the Democrats to enforce our liberties...
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Stuff I Missed Blogging About: Obama, Neo-cons, Smart and Stupid Conservatives.
While I was without a Laptop, and couldn't really post the way I wanted to, a lot occurred. The last week of October and the first week of November of an election year has got to be the worst time of the year to have your laptop stolen. Here is what I would have linked to had I been able to (and a few I can link to in a more timely fashion).
To Filibuster or Not to Filibuster That is the Question
I thought these two posts were interesting. Sen. Kyl has announced his plan to filibuster any Obama judicial nominee that he feels will be too liberal. (I should note that Tomás de Torquemada was too liberal for Kyl.)
With the federal judiciary almost 25% under its need, I might suggest that Kyl be careful about what he filibusters. I wonder how Kyl feels about the fact that the gang of 14 ruined his good time by nixing the "nuclear option" now? Anyway, I think if he intends to tie up the judiciary as it has been tied up over the last 16 years, he think again. I think he has a good chance of destroying the careers of many of the Republican Senators he works with now. He has the ability to filibuster the Republicans into irrelevance.
Here is Johnathan Adler over at Volokh Conspiracy, kind of seeing it the way I do and here is Jerry Merrit at TalkLeft discussing the issue too. Who said I can't be fair and balanced?
No Son, You Can't Watch 'Sesame Street' in Prison."
While reading TalkLeft I also noticed this tidbit about an 8 year old who may have killed his abusive dad...The Police in Arizona think the kid should be charged as an adult. That would expose this 3rd grader to a sentence of life in prison.
You know, I don't remember conservatives being so wasteful or so stupid. No guys, even if an Eight year old knows right from wrong, it should not open him up to prison. In fact, I am not even sure it should be handled in court at all. If he is uncontrollable, he may need to be taken out of the home and placed in a foster care situation that would provide a great amount of supervision, but I don't think it serves the child or the state to warehouse someone for the next 70 years. Who raised the adults calling for adult treatment?? How can their be such a disconnect between the northeast and the southwest and our sensibilities? Arizona has one of the worst records for rehabilitation in the country. What hope would that leave for this child?
Conservatives With Brains.
Patterico Pontifications talks about the Decency of Barack Obama. Patterico, who is a very conservative assistant district attorney in S. California takes the time to really look at the man who ran for and is now the President Elect of the United States of America. It is clear that Obama is a decent if somewhat politically misguided. Patterico recalls all of the things that Obama did throughout the long campaign to try to tone down the rhetoric of the campaign and focus on policies. Patterico suggest that conservatives spend their time focusing on policy issues and bury issues of personality. At least Patterico gets it. America is tired and can ill afford four more years of personality assassination.
On the issue of how the Republicans go from rulers to the minority in two of the three branches of government, a wonderful piece in this week's "Weekly Standard" by P.J. O'Rourke. O'Rourke is a conservative raconteur but he is dead on in his description of the way the conservatives sold out the Regan Mandate by allowing the Neo-conservatives to set and dominate the agenda. My only disappointment is that while playing the story for a laugh, he sometimes falls into the same type of talk that cost the Republicans the Presidency. (Knocking Bill Ayers, John Edwards fidelity, etc.) His description of the Abortion albatross is right on. We need to tone down that rhetoric too and work to overturn Roe to return the issue to the states where it belongs. While we are at it, maybe we should start to find a way to limit the Commerce clause and keep the feds out of state and local issues. In the end thought O'Rourke is absoulutely right "We Blew It".
Not Too Bright Conservatives
Then there is the decision of Elizabeth Dole and her campaign to lie about her opponent's religious practices. Just because one understands the First Amendment and has a extreme view of the separation of Church and State does not mean the person is Godless. The good People of North Carolina took note of the dirty tactic and through Lizzy right out of office... Sorry but it was a deserved defeat. Kay Hagen (Dole's opponent, a Sunday School teacher)was irate, now she is elected.
Hattip: The Agitator
One other cool thing. Friday's blog post was picked up by the Wall Street Journal. That is pretty cool I think.
HatTip: twitter.com/VBalasubramani
More later this week till then follow me on Twitter:http://twitter.com/ThatLawyerDude
To Filibuster or Not to Filibuster That is the Question
I thought these two posts were interesting. Sen. Kyl has announced his plan to filibuster any Obama judicial nominee that he feels will be too liberal. (I should note that Tomás de Torquemada was too liberal for Kyl.)
Kyl said if Obama goes with empathetic judges who do not base their decisions on the rule of law and legal precedents but instead the factors in each case, he would try to block those picks via filibuster.
With the federal judiciary almost 25% under its need, I might suggest that Kyl be careful about what he filibusters. I wonder how Kyl feels about the fact that the gang of 14 ruined his good time by nixing the "nuclear option" now? Anyway, I think if he intends to tie up the judiciary as it has been tied up over the last 16 years, he think again. I think he has a good chance of destroying the careers of many of the Republican Senators he works with now. He has the ability to filibuster the Republicans into irrelevance.
Here is Johnathan Adler over at Volokh Conspiracy, kind of seeing it the way I do and here is Jerry Merrit at TalkLeft discussing the issue too. Who said I can't be fair and balanced?
No Son, You Can't Watch 'Sesame Street' in Prison."
While reading TalkLeft I also noticed this tidbit about an 8 year old who may have killed his abusive dad...The Police in Arizona think the kid should be charged as an adult. That would expose this 3rd grader to a sentence of life in prison.
You know, I don't remember conservatives being so wasteful or so stupid. No guys, even if an Eight year old knows right from wrong, it should not open him up to prison. In fact, I am not even sure it should be handled in court at all. If he is uncontrollable, he may need to be taken out of the home and placed in a foster care situation that would provide a great amount of supervision, but I don't think it serves the child or the state to warehouse someone for the next 70 years. Who raised the adults calling for adult treatment?? How can their be such a disconnect between the northeast and the southwest and our sensibilities? Arizona has one of the worst records for rehabilitation in the country. What hope would that leave for this child?
Conservatives With Brains.
Patterico Pontifications talks about the Decency of Barack Obama. Patterico, who is a very conservative assistant district attorney in S. California takes the time to really look at the man who ran for and is now the President Elect of the United States of America. It is clear that Obama is a decent if somewhat politically misguided. Patterico recalls all of the things that Obama did throughout the long campaign to try to tone down the rhetoric of the campaign and focus on policies. Patterico suggest that conservatives spend their time focusing on policy issues and bury issues of personality. At least Patterico gets it. America is tired and can ill afford four more years of personality assassination.
On the issue of how the Republicans go from rulers to the minority in two of the three branches of government, a wonderful piece in this week's "Weekly Standard" by P.J. O'Rourke. O'Rourke is a conservative raconteur but he is dead on in his description of the way the conservatives sold out the Regan Mandate by allowing the Neo-conservatives to set and dominate the agenda. My only disappointment is that while playing the story for a laugh, he sometimes falls into the same type of talk that cost the Republicans the Presidency. (Knocking Bill Ayers, John Edwards fidelity, etc.) His description of the Abortion albatross is right on. We need to tone down that rhetoric too and work to overturn Roe to return the issue to the states where it belongs. While we are at it, maybe we should start to find a way to limit the Commerce clause and keep the feds out of state and local issues. In the end thought O'Rourke is absoulutely right "We Blew It".
Not Too Bright Conservatives
Then there is the decision of Elizabeth Dole and her campaign to lie about her opponent's religious practices. Just because one understands the First Amendment and has a extreme view of the separation of Church and State does not mean the person is Godless. The good People of North Carolina took note of the dirty tactic and through Lizzy right out of office... Sorry but it was a deserved defeat. Kay Hagen (Dole's opponent, a Sunday School teacher)was irate, now she is elected.
Hattip: The Agitator
One other cool thing. Friday's blog post was picked up by the Wall Street Journal. That is pretty cool I think.
HatTip: twitter.com/VBalasubramani
More later this week till then follow me on Twitter:http://twitter.com/ThatLawyerDude
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)