Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 22, 2017, 04:47:11 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
100380 Posts in 2360 Topics by 1085 Members
Latest Member: Why We Fight
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 134
3201  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Time to prevent elderly from living too long? on: December 01, 2013, 09:36:57 PM
 shocked

My experience in medical care has brought me to the conclusion that care near the end of life does not have to be akin to an all out war fought to keep a patient alive till their last dying breath.   Alternative options such as palliative care or hospice care are ethical, valid, and most importantly humane options for many.   The key word is these must remain as OPTIONS that can be chosen, sampled, refused or changed  with the knowledge that the decision is never binding.   I still am convinced that medical science has as much capacity to reduce costs as well as increase them.  Just think how much death and disease will be prevented when we are better at curing a disease like Hepatitis C.  How about dementia or obesity?   People will live longer and mostly though not always better. 

***************Human Exceptionalism

Life and dignity with Wesley J. Smith.

Time to Prevent Elderly From Living Too Long?

By Wesley J. Smith

December 1, 2013 5:03 PM

Bioethicist Founding Father Daniel Callahan has long supported death panel health care rationing based on age. He has now weighed in against spending a lot on research to delay the aging process.

The transhumanists aren’t going to like this! From, “On Dying After Your Time:”

Even if anti-aging research could give us radically longer lives someday, though, should we even be seeking them? Regardless of what science makes possible, or what individual people want, aging is a public issue with social consequences, and these must be thought through.
Regardless of what science makes possible, or what individual people want, aging is a public issue with social consequences, and these must be thought through. Consider how dire the cost projections for Medicare already are. In 2010 more than 40 million Americans were over 65. In 2030 there will be slightly more than 72 million, and in 2050 more than 83 million. The Congressional Budget Office has projected a rise of Medicare expenditures to 5.8 percent of gross domestic product in 2038 from 3.5 percent today, a burden often declared unsustainable.

Contrary to the transhumanist eschatology, Callahan doesn’t believe that extending the length of lives will also mean extending their vitality. I tend to agree. But he doesn’t exactly practice what he preaches:

Modern medicine is very good at keeping elderly people with chronic diseases expensively alive. At 83, I’m a good example. I’m on oxygen at night for emphysema, and three years ago I needed a seven-hour emergency heart operation to save my life. Just 10 percent of the population — mainly the elderly — consumes about 80 percent of health care expenditures, primarily on expensive chronic illnesses and end-of-life costs. Historically, the longer lives that medical advances have given us have run exactly parallel to the increase in chronic illness and the explosion in costs. Can we possibly afford to live even longer — much less radically longer?

Callahan could have refused that expensive treatment. I don’t say he should have, but no one forced him to spend all that (presumably) public money on care.

He does ask a valid question, I think, about the wisdom of pouring resources into radical life-extending research (at least public money). However he also seems to assert that the elderly be somehow prevented from living longer (my emphasis):

We may properly hope that scientific advances help ensure, with ever greater reliability, that young people manage to become old people. We are not, however, obliged to help the old become indefinitely older. Indeed, our duty may be just the reverse: to let death have its day.

What does that mean? Some kind of Logan’s Run scenario?

Callahan isn’t that type. But he should have specified what he meant. As I read him, he seems to be proclaiming some kind of a moral duty of the elderly to die.

Or it could mean refusing efficacious medical care to the elderly that the younger would be able to obtain. In less genteel hands than Callahan’s, it could mean something even more insidious.

My, don’t those clouds on the horizon look dark?**********
3202  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / One poll that surveys US opinion of a government controlled health system on: December 01, 2013, 08:09:22 PM


http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/poll-gallup-healthcare-insurance/2013/11/25/id/538519
3203  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Warning. The following is obscene. on: December 01, 2013, 07:57:42 PM
I am not sure this is suitable for people with brains:

http://www.alternet.org/visions/noam-chomsky-america-hates-its-poor rolleyes
3204  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The war on the rule of law on: December 01, 2013, 06:11:27 PM
Mr. McCarthy certainly connects all the dots.

Obama is clearly on record as stating "single payer" total government controlled national health system is in his mind the best.

So are probably most if not all of the academic politburo members who are behind the present AHA.  Berwick for example is well known for admiring the British system.

I am not totally convinced the flawed AHA was part of scheme to insure its own failure thus creating the vacuum for the government statists to move in a fill the void as though they were rescuing us with a mandatory single national health system.

It certainly could be.  I just don't know if they are that clever.

I am not sure it would matter if this was preplanned or just bumbling.   

We know they will never stop till they get to their goal of total control over our lives.

One question I have.  I wonder how many Americans would be just fine if we do have a government only health system. 

Socialism, communism, fascism, are not dirty words anymore. 
 
3205  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / one of many economist articles on China on: November 30, 2013, 03:51:15 AM
Crossing a line in the sky

What China’s new air-defence zone over disputed islands says about its foreign policy
 Nov 30th 2013  | From the print edition

ACUTELY conscious that the emergence of new powers on the world stage has more often than not led to war, China’s leaders make much of their plans for a “peaceful rise”. But they often have an odd way of showing it. Take China’s declaration on November 23rd of an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) above a stretch of the East China Sea that includes the Senkaku or Diaoyu islands, which it disputes with Japan. This was bound to create alarm in China’s own neighbourhood and tension in its relations with the incumbent superpower. So it calls into question the priority China really places on maintaining peace; or, perhaps, its skill in managing its rise without sparking conflict.

The declaration seemed contrary to at least three stated foreign-policy aims. First, China claims to aspire to a “new type of great-power relationship” with America. But the invocation of an ADIZ—elsewhere in the world a relic of the cold war—was almost bound to prompt some old-fashioned muscle-flexing in response. America quickly reaffirmed that, although it takes no position on who owns the islands, they are covered by its mutual-defence treaty with Japan. Nor did it take America long to test the threat contained in the ADIZ declaration of unspecified measures against aircraft entering the zone without following its procedures. On November 26th two American B-52 bombers based in Guam crossed the new zone without informing China. An American aircraft-carrier group was already in the area, ready for a joint exercise with Japan, simulating a defence of the country from attack.



All this came just ahead of a planned visit to China, Japan and South Korea in early December by America’s vice-president, Joe Biden, intended to reassure both China and America’s allies about America’s strategic “pivot” to Asia. Mr Biden is said to have a good rapport with Xi Jinping, China’s leader. Just as well.

Second, the ADIZ has done great damage to China’s fairly successful recent efforts to reassure its neighbours of the benevolence of its intentions. China and South Korea, for example, have been getting on well lately—helped in part by shared resentment of what they see as Japan’s refusal to confront the evils of its wartime past, and its intractability over territorial disputes. Yet the ADIZ, which also encroaches on areas claimed by South Korea, prompted the government in Seoul to express regret too. And it created a bone of contention with Taiwan, with which relations have steadily improved in recent years.





Both Mr Xi and Li Keqiang, the prime minister, made well-received tours in South-East Asia in October, drawing attention to their reliable presence at a time when Barack Obama had cancelled a trip. China’s importance as an economic partner overshadowed the disputes it has with four regional countries over the South China Sea. But the ADIZ to the north suggests it is only a matter of time before China feels able to enforce one there as well. That China’s new aircraft-carrier and other warships were this week headed for exercises in the South China Sea was a reminder that China claims almost the entire sea and is ready to bully rivals—notably, of late, the Philippines—that stand up to it.

Third, and most broadly, the assertiveness over the specks in the East China Sea makes a mockery of the 35-year-old policy adopted by Deng Xiaoping of “strategic patience” or “hiding one’s brilliance”—which implied concentrating on developing the economy before throwing China’s weight around. Yet more than ever, China needs a stable global environment. A Communist Party central-committee meeting earlier in November promised a series of ambitious but high-risk economic reforms.

So it is possible that the announcement of the ADIZ was a blunder, an ill-considered overreaction to Japan’s threat to shoot down unmanned aircraft entering its airspace. Chinese foreign policy has sometimes seemed unco-ordinated and oddly insensitive to the consequences of assertive nationalism. But in this case all the relevant arms of party and government were surely on board. And at the party meeting, Mr Xi seemed to have consolidated his own power over decision-making with the announcement of a new national-security council to take charge of the management of internal and external threats. Even so, China may have miscalculated in some ways: in including South Korean-claimed airspace, for example, or in including aircraft not just approaching China, but merely crossing its ADIZ; or perhaps in thinking that such a zone was enforceable at all.

Yet the ADIZ dovetails with China’s long-term strategy for the islands. Since Japan’s government “nationalised” three of them (buying them from a private owner) in September 2012, China has stepped up incursions in the sea and air around them. Having contested Japanese sovereignty over the islands for decades, it has set out to undermine Japan’s claim to exercise administrative control. The ADIZ is a natural extension of this.

On the way up

The aim is to cow Japan, knowing that its government is under pressure from business to improve ties with the country’s biggest market, and believing that, as China rises inexorably, Japan is in long-term decline. China also hopes, some Chinese scholars suggest, to raise the diplomatic and military cost to America of its alliance with Japan, partly by provoking Japan into belligerence of its own. Then America might exert pressure on its ally to meet China’s demand, which is deceptively reasonable: for Japan to concede that the status of the islands is disputed.

An even more fundamental explanation of China’s apparently reckless behaviour is that nothing in its commitment to a peaceful rise is meant to trump the safeguarding of its national sovereignty. Mr Xi emerged from the party’s meeting appearing all-powerful. But no Chinese leader can afford to look weak on an issue, such as the disputed islands, that China has framed as one of its own sovereignty. He will find it hard to back down.
3206  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 27, 2013, 07:40:38 AM
Mark Levin actually discussed this same topic on his radio show yesterday 11/26/13.  He agrees with me completely.  It can be downloaded from his website.

There are many computer programmers here who cannot find jobs and whose wages have been stagnant.  So we need endless immigrants to compete endlessly keeping wages low while cost of living keeps going up. 

That said, the real point is FINALLY we have a prominent Republican speaking to the unfair power of the extreme wealthy.  We are all for people to become wealthy.  I am.  I wish I was one.  But when they then start getting benefits the rest of us don't that they use to tell the rest of us what to do and setting policy for their own ends, then we have a problem.  That is what the phrase "1% ers" is about.  Finally s few Repubs speaking about this.  I believe if more did then we would win by a landslide.
3207  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / "tweaking" - our lives on: November 27, 2013, 07:36:55 AM
More from the technocrat elites.  So we know that reducing the speed limit would save lives just by lowering the speed limit to a total crawl?  So now we make a city of several million slow down even more because statistically we might save some lives.  Why not get rid of all the cars?   Then the 98 % would be 100%?  Why do they decide when where how much?   Again the liberals making everyone suffer for some haze stats.  No one should ever die (except when they approve - death panels).  Every single thing must be studied and data has not become basis of all our laws, how we must live our lives.  It will NEVER end.  First the world has to give into delayed red lights.  Then we have the disability thing that inconveniences 98 % for the few.  Now millions must slow down for a relative tiny theoretical gain.   No end.   There really is no compromise. 

****Council Working to Reduce Speed Limit on City Streets

By Jill Colvin 11/26 4:03pm

The New York City Council hopes to pass legislation that would reduce the speed limit on most residential and side streets to 20 miles per hour, Council Speaker Christine Quinn announced today.

“We are actively working on that bill and our goal is to pass it before the end of the year,” Ms. Quinn said during an unrelated press conference this afternoon before the month’s final council meeting. “We’re actively working on it right now.”

The bill, introduced by Councilman David Greenfield, is aimed at reducing serous pedestrian injuries and traffic fatalities. Last year, 148 pedestrians were killed in traffic accidents and crashes.

“We are working to fine-tune this life-saving legislation that will slow down automobiles on narrow residential streets. I am hopeful that we can get consensus on this important legislation, which will literally save lives once it is enacted here in New York City,” he said in response to the speaker’s comments.

But there are complications. The city’s Department of Transportation has argued the proposal would conflict with state law, which only allows limits that low if other traffic-calming devices are used. Last Friday, Councilman Jimmy Vacca, chair of the council’s transportation committee, told WNYC the bill was being “tweaked a little bit” and that members were “aiming for 25 miles per hour on narrow, one-way streets.”

Currently, the speed limit on most city streets is 30 miles per hour, unless otherwise posted. The new regulations would be a boon to advocates–including those who installed their own 20-mile limit signs in Park Slope this week–but have drawn grumbles from some drivers who feel the city’s notoriously gridlocked streets are slow enough.

According to the group Transportation Alternatives, pedestrians have an 80 percent chance of surviving being hit by a car traveling 30 miles per hour and a 98 percent chance of survival if the car is traveling 20 miles per hour.

The measure is just the latest of several recent efforts aimed at making streets safer for pedestrians. Later today, the council is expected to pass another bill, introduced by Councilwoman Debi Rose, aimed at slowing speeds near public and private schools. The rules would require the city to install speed humps near at least 50 schools.

“Speeding is the number one cause of deadly crashes in New York City and we must do everything we can to prevent fatalities,” Mr. Quinn said in a statement touting Mr. Rose’s bill.

A spokeswoman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg did not immediately comment on whether the mayor supports the bill.


Follow Jill Colvin on Twitter or via RSS. jcolvin@observer.com****
3208  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / I cannot believe it on: November 25, 2013, 11:22:06 PM
For possibly the first time ever - I agree and appreciate Chuck Schumer's comments:

"The disproportionality of this agreement makes it more likely that Democrats and Republicans will join together and pass additional sanctions when we return in December," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.).

I hope it isn't the last time he stands up.  We will see.  Will Hillary jump in and pretend to be Israel' savior?

Iran leaders have concluded what we on this board concluded over a year ago, if not over two years ago. 

Obama has already decided to let Iran go nuclear with a "containment" strategy.   He played Netanyahu for a sucker.  He had to "contain" Israel first.
If we could see it certainly the mullahs were laughing all the way to uranium mine.


3209  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Yes!Yes!Yes!Yes!Yes! on: November 25, 2013, 11:05:03 PM
This is what I want to hear from Republicans.  This is what most of America wants.   We don't need the bums in DC or the bums in academia who are the technocrat communists telling us who to let into OUR country.  And the masses don't want to hear Freaking CEOS of big corporations running their political mouths off about how we need more immigrants to fill their coffers with low waged positions.   We, the people decide who comes here God Damn it!  Millions of Americans are unemployed and we have these big companies sending jobs overseas and demanding more immigrants come here to compete and drive down wages even more.  How about we get rid of 50% disability and unemployment and these  same big shots hire and train some of them.

We cannot keep bringing them on in.  We are displacing our own.

Now finally a Republican speaks up for Americans and tells the Google Microsoft Facebook GE oligarchs to shut up.  He is not their tool.  He was elected by us, not them, to serve us, not them.   That is the ticket for '16 folks.  The very first time I hear a Repub say what I have been saying for months if not years.  

If we don't want a country that is 50% on the dole - we cannot have a country controlled by 5%.  The 5% cannot get special privileges.  Those on the dole cannot get special benefits.  They ALL, top and bottom must play by the same rules.

We lower taxes but they don't get all the breaks most cannot get.  Fair and square from bottom to the very top.
The Republicans must shed the party of the rich image. They are the party for all Americans.

grin grin

Go Jeff, the MAN:

*****Sen. Sessions slams Obama, CEOs on immigration

3:51 PM 11/25/2013

Neil Munro
White House Correspondent

Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions wants wealthy CEOs to butt out of immigration policy.

“America is not an oligarchy… A Republic must answer to the people,” Sessions said today, in a direct response to President Barack Obama’s latest effort to get wealthy California CEOs to increase their support for his unpopular push for increased immigration.

“Congressional leaders must forcefully reject the notion, evidently accepted by the president, that a small cadre of CEOs can tailor the nation’s entire immigration policy to suit their narrow interests,” Sessions declared in a populist statement that contradicts the media’s image of Republican coziness with CEOs.

Sessions’ statement was released shortly before Obama used a San Francisco speech to ask friendly high-tech CEOs in California to revive his failing effort to pass an immigration-boosting bill.

The bill has been blocked by top GOP leaders in the House, who are trying to balance donors’ demands for more workers with voters’ demands for more jobs.

Obama has been working with top CEOs since summer to push the Senate’s immigration expansion that would welcome 30 million immigrants, plus millions of temporary guest workers, over the next decade.

That influx would import roughly one immigrant or guest-worker for every American aged 11 to 21, or one immigrant for every American teenager in 2012. Current law allows 1 million immigrants and 700,000 guest workers to enter the country each year.

The push is being supported by numerous billionaires, including New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, Fox News’ Rupert Murdoch and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg.

Since 2007, progressive and business groups have spent more than $1.5 billion on advocacy and lobbying to pass an immigration bill, despite massive unemployment, stalled salaries and negative polls. Other business groups have been pressured by the federal government and progressives to provide rhetorical support for the push.

Obama’s alliance with the wealthy CEOs is mutually beneficial. The CEOs would gain because high immigration will lower many Americans’ salaries and boost shareholders’ value. Progressives would gain a lock on political power once immigration boosts the number of government-dependent voters.

Sessions, however, is working alongside various U.S. groups to raise Americans’ wages by lowering immigration.

Polls shows Sessions’ populist low-immigration, high-wage pitch is popular, but his allies have far less less money or media coverage than Obama and his allies.

On Nov. 21, Sessions held a press conference in D.C. with Americans4Work, where he slammed CEOs who demand more immigrants.

“These business people do not get to set the [immigration] policy for the United States of America. They do not represent the United States of America, they represent their special interests… [and] I represent 4 million Alabamians and 300 million Americans,” Sessions said.

Sessions was backed up by Jan Ting, a law professor at Temple University, who told the conference that the current high-immigration, low-wage economy is “Blade Runner with food stamps.”

“Blade Runner” is a 1982 science-fiction movie in which most Americans are jobless and trapped in a violent, poverty-stricken nation.

After two decade of low-skill and high-skill immigration, California’s middle class is shrinking, and the gap between the wealthy and the poor is expanding.

The Americans4Work group has no “anger or animosity towards any immigrant,” said Thomas Broadwater, the group’s president. “Instead, we are fiercely and passionately pro-American.” The group gets no donations from business.

But Sessions acknowledged that many senators echo industry’s talking points when they’re asked by Americans about the issue.

“So many of my colleagues in the Senate, when they’re out campaigning, when they’re asked about immigration, without much thought, they say things like ‘I believe in immigrants, we’re a nation of immigrants, we’ve got to end this lawlessness, and I‘m for fixing the fence and the border, but really, we need more immigrants,’” Sessions said.

“They have not thought through the implications of the economic condition of America at this time,” Sessions told the press conference.

“The fundamental question we need to talk about is what would be the right [level] of immigrants.. [and] who it is we should give priority to,” he said.

“We’re a nation with an economy, not an economy with a nation… [and] we have a responsibility, a moral duty, to our citizens, to make their lives better, and we’re not doing a very good job,” Sessions said.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/25/sen-sessions-slams-obama-ceos-on-immigration/#ixzz2livunNrF*****
3210  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / bronx 1848 on: November 23, 2013, 10:18:13 PM
thought to be oldest photo of house in NYC.  1848.
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/11/16/behold_the_oldest_photo_ever_taken_of_new_york_city.php
3211  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Race, religion, ethnic origin, LGBT, "discrimination", & discrimination. on: November 23, 2013, 09:25:43 PM
Maybe the leaders of Iran and Israel and Saudi Arabia can form a band.  How about a middle east rap gang?   They can curse each other out with rap lyrics.  Someone I know can write them and maybe win a Noble Peace Prize.
3212  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Iran on: November 23, 2013, 09:19:17 PM
CD,

I can't get to article.

Can you post the article itself?
3213  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 22, 2013, 11:00:25 AM
In response, to Doug and Crafty on Cruz and Rubio and Cristie...

I actually like Jindal though we noted how poor his performance of the State of the Union rebuttal a couple of years ago was .

But he might get better.   If Cruz is as smart as reported he could improve.   As for Paul he lacks something.  He is just to clinical for me.  He seems like a one trick guy.  The debt the debt the debt.  True as to its paramount importance but He can't seem to appeal beyond that.   Yes he went to a Black College and was given a little credit for trying.  His presentation to them was less than what even I could have done.

Rubio is very good.  But he has to figure out how to deal with ruthless Democrats.  Like obnoxious Schumer who stated he was "fond" of Rubio in a subtle condescending put down.  (like he was speaking of his grandson).

3214  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / from the history thread with '16 comparison on: November 22, 2013, 10:51:51 AM
BTW,

Dick's radio show is excellent.   I am not sure if it is national.  He pissed me off with his dead wrong prediction for the '12 election.  Yet he is extraordinarily insightful and does have very interesting talking points which I do not see or hear anywhere else.   I think we should continue to listen to him.

Interesting history lesson on how Truman got elected.  The democrats today are going to try the EXACT same strategy.   Balkanize the country pull on female heart strings, play up the rights issue for Latinos Gays and all the rest.  Then pass as many bills in the Senate.  Maybe as Harkin calls change the rules to all legislation in the Senate, then sit back and call Congress the "do nothing Congress" as the economy flounders.   All the while The grafter Clinton crew will be all over the media map drumming into our heads like the mediocre pop songs today over and over again how she is for getting things done and working with the other side.   Bill will be out there reminding us how the economy was better (thanks to a boom in tech - all which crashed just months after he left) and how he crossed the aisle to fix Medicaid (he was kicking and screaming and did so only when the polls instructed him to).

Perhaps the Truman '48 election is the going to be redacted in '16.   I am also going to post this on the 2016 thread where I think the analogy is quite strong.
3215  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: American History on: November 22, 2013, 10:49:51 AM
BTW,

Dick's radio show is excellent.   I am not sure if it is national.  He pissed me off with his dead wrong prediction for the '12 election.  Yet he is extraordinarily insightful and does have very interesting talking points which I do not see or hear anywhere else.   I think we should continue to listen to him.

Interesting history lesson on how Truman got elected.  The democrats today are going to try the EXACT same strategy.   Balkanize the country pull on female heart strings, play up the rights issue for Latinos Gays and all the rest.  Then pass as many bills in the Senate.  Maybe as Harkin calls change the rules to all legislation in the Senate, then sit back and call Congress the "do nothing Congress" as the economy flounders.   All the while The grafter Clinton crew will be all over the media map drumming into our heads like the mediocre pop songs today over and over again how she is for getting things done and working with the other side.   Bill will be out there reminding us how the economy was better (thanks to a boom in tech - all which crashed just months after he left) and how he crossed the aisle to fix Medicaid (he was kicking and screaming and did so only when the polls instructed him to).

Perhaps the Truman '48 election is the going to be redacted in '16.   I am also going to post this on the 2016 thread where I think the analogy is quite strong.
3216  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / third post on: November 22, 2013, 01:20:43 AM
Two amazing photos.  One the first known action battle photo ; 1870  I presume during the Franco Prussian war.  To the right is one soldier apparently at the moment he is shot.

Another photo from 1847 showing American troops in Mexico.

http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/06/12/how-early-photographers-captured-historys-first-images-of-war/

Now we see war and death in our living rooms all the time.
3217  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / second post on this thread on: November 22, 2013, 01:12:18 AM
Some interesting photos circa Mexican-American War 1847.  The bottom one is reportedly the burial site of Henry Clay's son killed in the war 1847 age 36.  He served a term in Congress from Kentucky:

http://www.cartermuseum.org/interact/notes-from-underground/photo-of-the-week-mexican-american-war
3218  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / The original Alaskan gold rush on: November 21, 2013, 10:36:47 PM
http://klondike-history.discovery.com/?__utma=17607724.1495179485.1385094074.1385094074.1385094074.1&__utmb=17607724.11.9.1385094240646&__utmc=17607724&__utmx=-&__utmz=17607724.1385094074.1.1.utmcsr=yahoo|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=discover%20channel&__utmv=-&__utmk=49219558#chapter2
3219  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A different view of dirty Harry's move on: November 21, 2013, 07:49:35 PM
Just as I figured.  The charts on CNN are part of the Democratic propaganda machine trying to convince that the Republicans are unprecedented in their obstructionism.
I was looking for a Conservative take and this so far fits the bill.  MSM cannot be trusted.  Reid's move is all about the Dems prospects for '14 having gone down in the last few weeks:

*****Are Republicans really blocking Obama’s judicial nominees at ‘unprecedented’ levels?

By Eric Pfeiffer 1 hour ago
    
President Obama addresses the nuclear option during a news conference on Thursday (AP)

When  President Obama gave his blessing to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision to invoke the so-called “nuclear option,”  he said the effort by Republicans to block his nominees was “unprecedented.”

"Today's pattern of obstruction, it just isn't normal," Obama said. "I support the step a majority of senators today took to change the way that Washington is doing business."

However, that’s only partially true.

Looking at all of Obama’s nominees across his administration, he has suffered unprecedented levels of obstruction, according to the Wall Street Journal. But when it comes to judicial nominees – the process that sparked Senate Democrats to approve the nuclear option on Thursday – he’s really just suffering from a historically negative trend going back more than two decades.

According to congressional data, former President George W. Bush actually had a lower percentage of circuit court nominees approved during his time in office than Obama.

And when it comes to the amount of time it takes for circuit court nominees to get approved, Bush and Obama are actually in surprisingly close company, with Bush fairing slightly worse. (See chart)

Obstruction of judicial nominees first became a regular practice during President Clinton’s time in office, and the amount of time it takes for a nominee to be approved skyrocketed during George W. Bush’s presidency.

According to a May report from the Congressional Research Service, President Obama had 71.4% of his circuit court nominees approved during his first term, which is slightly better than George W. Bush’s 67.3% level of success during his first term.

President Obama also didn't fare the worst when it comes to district court nominees. During his first term, 82.7% of Obama’s district court nominees were approved, George H.W. Bush had 76.9% of his nominees approved.

Interestingly, H.W. Bush is the only president during this period who had fewer court vacancies at the end of his first term than he did at the beginning. However, Obama is the only president who suffered an increased vacancy during his first term without more court positions being created.

But in recent years, it’s the amount of time it takes to get a nominee approved where the most radical change has taken place.

For example, during Reagan’s first term, it only took 45.5 days for one of his nominees to get approved. That number escalated only marginally over the next 20 years. But by the time George W. Bush was in office, the number skyrocketed to 277 days. Obama has fared slightly better than Bush, with his nominees taking 225.5 days to get approved. But historically speaking, it’s still a severe departure from most presidencies.

Obama’s district court nominees have also suffered from extended confirmation delays. Again, Reagan’s nominees breezed through, with just a 28-day waiting period during his first term, compared with 215 days for Obama.

So, at the end of the day, Obama’s experience may not be quite as unique as he wants the public to believe. But if the nuclear option does reverse the historical trend of obstruction, it’s a move that future presidents, both Republican and Democrat, will likely be thankful for.*****
3220  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Militarization of local police department. on: November 21, 2013, 07:14:33 PM
I guess this thread is as good as any.  I couldn't find a law enforcement thread and it doesn't quite fit under military issues:

http://www.belgrade-news.com/opinion/columnists/john_w_whitehead/article_f21c8780-515d-11e3-9f97-001a4bcf887a.html#user-comment-area
3221  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional races on: November 21, 2013, 06:14:45 PM
CNN today had there guests on.  Tobin and the WH correspondent.  The latter, I cannot think of his name was claiming Reid did this because too many Obama judicial nominees were being blocked and of course they proceed to show charts that it is far more than in previous Presidents.

It seems more than coincidence that Reid does this NOW just as the Dems political fortunes have dropped since the Obamacare debacle.

Got to ram through as many liberals into the Fed Court system as possible in case they lose.  It always seems like the Dems are the ones to elevate the dirty nature of the fighting.

How many filibusters have there been all together not just judicial nominees?
3222  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 20, 2013, 09:29:54 PM
I have a dream.

The mainstream Republicans - the half asses - actually get behind someone like, well, Cruz.  And instead of tearing him down they start pile driving timbers as groundwork under him behind the scenes.

Work with him; groom him; he could be our chosen spokesperson. 

But alas I turn on the tube and I see Rove.  I hear Jeb Bush.  I hear the ridiculous nonsense about Christie (who could be more selfish then Clinton).  (At least Clinton was more or less a dedicated Democrat - what has Christie done for Republicans?).  These guys are not the answer.   What great ideas has Bush ever come up with?   Christie is not a big idea guy.
3223  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ - beware on: November 20, 2013, 09:18:55 PM
"The country needs a new national strategy for a viable future—a coherent set of ambitious goals that will serve, as John F. Kennedy said in announcing the race to the moon, to "organize and measure the best of our energies and skills."

Well we have had a turn towards fascist style socialism.   What do our Wall Street friends from the WSJ now have in mind for us?

Now that many of them have been bailed out?

Tell us Mr. Galston.  What is the strategy?

"Unless immigration increases dramatically, the U.S. workforce will expand only one-quarter as fast as it did in recent decades."

More immigrants?  to fuel the work force?  and cheap labor for you guys?   and more competition to drive/keep wages down even more for the majority that are not employers?

Sounds like my politics of health care post noting Ezeikel Emanuel getting on his soap box calling for a gloried setting of goals for our health care future.

We kind of had that too.  Free health care, or cheaper, better quality and everyone is covered.  Sounds great huh?

Levin was discussing Paul Gigot interviewing Paul Ryan and basically asking him about another government shutdown.  Gigot did it in a very MSNBC way.  Something like, how are you going to prevent another shutdown......  As Levin pointed out, the WSJ is all about Wall Street.  The rest of us can go grovel.

I think he is right. 

3224  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc. on: November 20, 2013, 08:50:34 PM
"If we investigate, subpoena evidence and compel testimony on the rest of these irregularities, we will find the 'Nixon tapes and much worse."

How can "we" do this?
3225  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc. on: November 20, 2013, 07:22:33 AM
Rush reminded us he predicted the unemployment rate would magically dip below 8 well before the election.  In fact I remember him saying this.  I doubt that there was not one listener who did not agree with his prediction.  I also doubt there was not one listener who also did not agree with his insinuation that the "books would be cooked" to achieve this "magical" number.

The MSM is silent. 

"oh these are career government officials"

as though their integrity and honesty is above reproach.

Unfortunately there are no Nixon tapes of Obama and/or his henchman Axelrod  to be discovered.

I guess only then could we speak of impeachment.  Like the mafia.   It is hard to connect the evidence to the masterminds pulling the strings.
3226  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: November 19, 2013, 06:48:26 PM
Dick Morris called Clinton's comment a "brilliant political" move.   
I am not so sure.  Someone else pointed out that such a public criticism is walking a tight rope for the Clintons.
Hopefully Bill will do for Hillary in '16 what his big fat mouth did for her in '08. 
Remember this?  The MSM seems to ignore history but it precisely this that cost Hillary the primary against the ONE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNkYDHUsQOM
3227  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc. on: November 19, 2013, 06:33:19 PM
Your right of course.  But,

it is not the lies that will undue Brock full of crock.
It is only when more of us get hit in the wallet then get checks that will make the difference.

I guess we are seeing this now with the drop in poll numbers with the AHA thing.  Now and only now. 

Unfortunately, truth and honesty doesn't seem to mean as much these days.

IF it did we wouldn't even be listening to Bill Clinton.  Yet we have to hear his opinion on the MSM to this day.

3228  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politically (In)correct on: November 19, 2013, 09:28:07 AM
Just saw my South African niece yesterday.  She was married to my nephew for several yrs.  Had to fight to get her green card, hire an immigration attorney and only recently gained citizenship.  Interestingly she has dual citizenship (not recognized but the US).   I asked her if she considers herself "African American".  She said she is.  But she doesn't use that label.  She knew of another white African who used that on an application and literally got into big trouble for "falsifying" and trying to get a break for being a minority.

I think he should hire a lawyer and bring this up to the Supreme Court.   I wonder if he could find one who would do it for the publicity and the political statement it would make.

If only she were Latino.  Then she could claim "how dare anyone question my being here you bigot!". 
3229  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: November 19, 2013, 09:21:52 AM
I was trying to post an article from Journal Of American Medical Association but I cannot do it since I am not technically a member.  I get their journal sent to me for free because I am on some sort of list.

It is Donald Berwick the lead politburo guy who was the lead shover of this monstrosity down all out throats complaining about the politics involved (how dare the phrase "death panels").   There are other articles as well from politburo.  Not as bitter and obnoxious as well.  Emanuel with another one suggesting we need a leader who announces something akin to JFKs we will be on the moon in 10 yrs. or perhaps Nixon's war on cancer etc.  but suggesting we apply the same unified goal of fixing health care.  I am not adverse to this in theory but I don't want it being a gigantic politburo led government take over of 1/6 of our economy.

I wish their articles in the med journals were posted to public forums. 

They are mostly (not all) Columbia types.  All the professor elites who are smarter wiser nicer more humane then the rest of humanity. 
3230  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: November 17, 2013, 05:45:07 PM
As long as Dems can keep offering 51% of voters more Christmas or Hannukah gifts the issue of honesty is only a secondary issue.

I guess the Republicans will have to convince 51% that they are the one's paying for the gifts.  Not receiving them.   It is sad this is what it has come down to.

Hillary is going to use the "women's" angle like a battering ram.
3231  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: November 17, 2013, 05:41:10 PM
The part annoying to me is AHA was not a problem with any of these people who thought it would others who would have to pick up the tab.  You know.  Soak the "rich".   No problem taking money from some to give to them.  Now that they are going to have to pay more, and only now, it is a problem.  It is not the lying.  It is now they are adversely affected:

****Breitbart Logo

17 Nov 2013, 10:07 AM PDT  39  post a comment 

Campus Reform: Students at Bowie State University assailed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on Thursday after administrators cancelled a low cost school-wide health care plan due to new regulations in the law. Many students told Campus Reform that the now cancelled plans, which provided coverage for just $50 per semester, were the only insurance they could afford.

 "I can't afford anything right now," one said. "I can't even afford my loans."

 "We don't have that money," said another. "We can barely afford books."

 Several students said that they felt they had been let down.

 "It's stupid and it's Obama's fault," one said. "You haven't done anything, Obama, and I'm disappointed in you."

 "What it was hyped up to be, was that it was supposed to solve a lot of problems and help a lot of people, and its not really doing that," said another.

 Many students had no idea the plans had been canceled, which was announced only in an email to their school addresses.

 In a statement to Campus Reform, Bowie State said it was confident that Obamacare would fill the void left by the canceled plans.

 "Most students are now able to be covered under their parent’s health plans up to age 26 at no additional cost and new affordable coverage is becoming available through the Maryland State Insurance Exchange System," it read.

 Campus Reform conducted the interviews with student Eugene Craig III, who first wrote about canceled plans in an article in the school's alternative newspaper, The Bulldog Collegian. ****
3232  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 17, 2013, 02:17:44 PM
Why do I have to supplement their education?  I know a lot of New Jerseyens feel the same way.  No one ever asks us.   Just shoved down our throats by politicians bribing for votes and a Democrat party looking for power.  Always at my expense.  And how dare anyone use the phrase "anchor baby".  How dare we? huh

N.J. bill to offer in-state tuition, financial aid to immigrants in the country illegally gains momentum

DREAM_act_photo.JPG

Giancarlo Tello, an undocumented immigrant who came to New Jersey from Peru with his parents at age 6, pays out-of-state tuition at Rutgers-Newark. Tello, the campaign chair for New Jersey United Students' Tuition Equity for DREAMers, today joined advocates to push for a bill to offer in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants who went to high school in New Jersey. (Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger) (Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger)

Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger By  Matt Friedman/The Star-Ledger   
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on November 14, 2013 at 4:40 PM, updated November 17, 2013 at 7:50 AM

TRENTON — After a decade-long effort by advocates, a bill that would charge in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants who grew up in New Jersey appears well on its way to landing on the governor’s desk.

The state Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee today voted eight to three with one abstention to approve the measure (S2479), which advocates say will affect tens of thousands of New Jersey residents.

“This community has waited long enough. Let’s not look for excuses to say no. Let’s look for reasons to say yes,” said Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), who has lent his name to the bill as a prime sponsor.

The bill now heads for a vote in the full Senate on Monday, where it’s expected to pass. Assembly leaders say they expect to pass it soon as well.

Under the bill, undocumented immigrants who attended high school in New Jersey for three or more years, graduated, and filed an affidavit saying they plan to legalize their immigration status as soon as legally possible would be able to get lower in-state tuition rates at New Jersey’s public colleges and universities.

The undocumented immigrant students would also be eligible for state financial aid under the Senate version of the bill. Incoming Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto (D-Hudson), a Cuban immigrant, said today that he expects the Assembly version will incorporate that aspect — which had been part of a separate bill —as well.

Advocates said it doesn’t make sense for the state to provide K-12 education to undocumented students — which federal law requires — and then refuse to treat them the same as citizens once they graduate.

“After having educated these students from kindergarten through twelfth grade, what purpose does it serve to penalize them by not allowing them to better themselves?” said Frank Argote-Freyre, president of the Latino Action Network.

In-state tuition is available to undocumented immigrants in 16 other states.

Giancarlo Tello, 23, immigrated to New Jersey from Peru when he was six years old. He didn’t find out he was undocumented until his sophomore year in high school, when his mother told him he could not apply for a driver’s license. Now, he attends Rutgers-Newark part-time and pays out-of-state tuition.

“If you consider me a fellow resident of New Jersey, if you believe I deserve an education, a chance at the future, then I urge you all to vote yes on this bill,” Tello told the committee.

Three elected officials from cities with large Hispanic populations — Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, Perth Amboy Mayor Wilda Diaz and Plainfield Mayor Adrian Mapp — were also in Trenton to push for the bill.

“We all agree that in order to break that cycle of poverty that exists in this country and exists in places like Jersey City, it really starts with investing in education,” Fulop said at a press conference before the committee meeting. “To invest in a child’s education K through 12 and then turn your back on them is really foolish.”

All eight Democrats on the committee voted in favor of the legislation. And Gov. Chris Christie — while refusing to answer detailed questions about the bill — has indicated he supports the idea. Nevertheless, three out of the committee’s four Republicans voted no, while one abstained.

State Sen. Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth) said she abstained because a loophole in the bill could allow out-of-state residents – regardless of their immigration status – to qualify for in-state tuition if they attend private high school in New Jersey. She also said New Jersey residents could move to other states for years, then return and qualify for in-state tuition because they went to high school here.

“I don’t want to vote against the bill. I’m just going to abstain today and hopefully by the time we get to the floor Monday we can find a resolution for those two issues,” Beck said.

But state Sen. Joseph Pennacchio (R-Morris), who voted no, said he didn’t think it would be fair that “a struggling family of American citizens in a neighboring state would pay more than an undocumented student.”

Only one member of the public testified against the bill. Pat DeFilippis, a New Jersey representative for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, read a letter from the organization’s state and local director, Dale Wilcox.

“Many New Jersey schools, colleges and universities are experiencing severe budget shortages as a result of the weakened economy and the state debt crisis,” read the letter, which was addressed to Christie. “Granting in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens would only serve to further damage and strain delicate budgets and impose additional burdens on New Jersey taxpayers.”

Christie's action on the bill is uncertain. He worked hard to appeal to Hispanic voters and won 51 percent of their votes in his re-election last week, according to exit polls.

State Sen. Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex), a prime sponsor of the bill, said the governor had not disclosed to her any decision on the measure.

This story has been edited to reflect the correct bill number. It's S2479, not S2468
3233  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Benghazi and related matters on: November 14, 2013, 11:01:29 AM
Doug,
"Honesty" in government is low on the list of many Americans political imports.

Lying has become a no big deal - unless it affects an individual's bottom line.

It is more than ever all about the money.

To me honesty is even just as importance as competence.

That is the one thing I respected about Jimmy Carter.   At least I believed he was honest.

The left certainly doesn't care about honesty.  Look at the Clintons.  Look at Brocks deceptions.  40% will defend them no matter what.  Another 10 - 15 % jump on board as soon as they get the money train offered to them.

I certainly don't know how we can have a government that is not honest.  No matter what they say, no matter when, one never knows if it is the truth or not.  I agree.  How can anyone not think that is a problem?

It suggests to me many people in general are dishonest.  It also proves what I learned.  When it comes to money forget about all else.  Family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and the rest.

That is the reason Dems have lost some support.  Not the lying.  Just the fact that more people than expected are having to pay more.  That's it.  All about the freaking money.
3234  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: November 14, 2013, 10:50:37 AM
My impression is that  most people are coming to the conclusion there is a global warming affect though what to do about it is in question.

I don't know what to think.

On this board we tend to only post the deniers point of view.   In some places I read just the opposite.  They conclude it is fact and anyone who disagrees is corrupt, stupid, or a crazed denier.

Again I don't know what to think.
3235  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Race, religion, ethnic origin, LGBT, "discrimination", & discrimination. on: November 13, 2013, 09:18:32 PM
unbelievable. eom

right out of Columbia University.
3236  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Is Devotion to the Constution destroying Democracy? on: November 12, 2013, 07:49:24 AM
Constitution Check: Is devotion to the Constitution destroying democracy?

National Constitution Center
By Lyle Denniston 2 hours ago      
Lyle Denniston looks at a claim that interpreting an old document, like the U.S. Constitution, is a doomed attempt to apply outdated legal principles.


theconstitutionTHE STATEMENT AT ISSUE:
“Professor Neuborne describes this dysfunctional democracy very well, but he does not give the real reason for that dysfunction – the reverence for the United States Constitution.   Each of the Supreme Court’s iniquities he lists is based on the interpretation by five of nine high priests of increasingly irrelevant documents written by wealthy white men in an unimaginably different and distant world.”

 – Michael Gorman of Chicago, a native of Great Britain, as quoted in The New York Times on November 10.  He was one of several writers engaging in a dialogue with New York University law professor Burt Neuborne over the professor’s complaint about harm done to American democracy by a series of modern Supreme Court rulings. The full exchange can be read here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/06/opinion/invitation-to-a-dialogue-democracy-gone-awry.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1384171630-7yEFDKkFT5rO5TOK1yVMsA

WE CHECKED THE CONSTITUTION, AND…

One of the fundamental issues that deeply divides the nine Justices now serving on the Supreme Court is the proper way to interpret the Constitution’s meaning for today’s world.  Some of the Justices believe that the key is the “original meaning” of the document – that is, as it was understood in 1787.  Others believe that the document is a “living Constitution” that is adaptable to changing times and thus acquires new meaning from time to time.

No one expects that disagreement ever to be finally resolved. At the same time, all of the Justices agree that the Constitution embodies enduring principles, and that it is the duty of judges in this country to apply them.  Even a sincere devotion to those principles, though, is bound to produce disagreements about their contemporary meaning.

What is often misunderstood about the process of constitutional reasoning is that the Constitution itself does not provide all of the necessary answers to any legal problem that turns on enduring principles.  No document, and certainly no legal document, can always be understood by its literal meaning.  Words are means of expressing ideas, and the same words can mean different things to different judges.

Take, for example, the words of the First Amendment, declaring that “Congress shall make no law….”, etc.  Does that mean that the Amendment only restricts Congress in the use of its powers?  The Supreme Court interpreted it that way – until 1925.   In the decision that year in Gitlow v. New York, the Court began applying the idea that at least some parts of the Bill of Rights restricted the powers of state governments, too.  (Some scholars say that this process actually got its start in 1897.)

That process has continued, off and on, since then.  Most recently, in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment “right to keep and bear arms,” when understood as a personal right to have a gun, applied to state and local gun control laws, too.

What’s the explanation for that process?  The Court interpreted the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “due process” – two words that are inherently indefinite – to embrace certain fundamental rights, so that the states and local governments, as well as Congress, had to respect and enforce them.

At a more basic level, this process also reflects the very nature of law.  Law is the means by which a society keeps order, and a society would be in constant anarchy if the people could not count on the law being relatively stable. If law is developed in a sound way, that stability reflects how a well-ordered society should be run, by more or less common agreement.

But stability does not mean that legal principles are frozen in time.  There was a time, for example, when petty theft could bring a death sentence.  As more civilized ways of resolving property disputes developed, and as community policing brought more civic order, such punishment was seen as too harsh.  In American constitutional history, this kind of changing perception is reflected in the way that the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment” has evolved over time.  As one example, it is now unconstitutional to execute a minor even for murder.

As the British native Michael Gorman suggests, in his comment quoted above, some critics of American constitutionalism seem to believe that interpreting the old document means a doomed attempt to apply outdated legal principles.

But even in his own native land, there is such a thing as the “British constitution,” embodying fundamental legal norms, even though it is not written down in the same way as the U.S. Constitution is.   Law in Britain is the accumulation of the “common law,” as it has been developed by judges over time, supplemented by parliamentary legislation.  British courts still respect some parts of the Magna Carta, even though it dates from 1215.

And, for the past four years, Britain has been imitating – to a degree – the U.S. model of a Supreme Court.  The United Kingdom Supreme Court was created by an act of “constitutional reform” in 2005, and began work four years later.  Its power to overturn laws is not as extensive as that of the American court, but it does have significant power to determine law for Britain.

The very idea of a supreme court, of course, is that, somewhere in government, the power to interpret basic legal commitments and promises must be lodged.  The American experiment, now more than two centuries old, shows that this power of interpretation should not be left to the elected political branches.

Perhaps one can attempt to dismiss devotion to the constitutional idea of judicial review as sentimental “reverence,” but it is more properly understood as a good faith belief in abiding principles of justice and equality.   Perhaps more importantly, it has shown that judicial power can be exercised along with democratic government.

Lyle Denniston is the National Constitution Center’s adviser on constitutional literacy. He has reported on the Supreme Court for 55 years, currently covering it for SCOTUSblog, an online clearinghouse of information about the Supreme Court’s work.
3237  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: November 11, 2013, 07:46:46 PM
"‘We’re talking about 5 percent of the population.’"

If Clinton said this he would respond that he was talking about the total *World* "population".  Hence no lie.   No big deal.

Next.   

3238  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: November 10, 2013, 10:14:27 PM
Judge Andrew Napolitano, Canceled Fox Host, Tells His Fans To Stop Angry Emails


 Posted: 02/14/12 11:54 AM ET  |  Updated: 02/14/12 12:13 PM ET  

 
   
Judge Andrew Napolitano is trying to calm his outraged followers after the cancellation of his Fox Business show.

The low-rated network axed "Freedom Watch," along with the rest of its prime-time lineup, last week.

Ever since then, Napolitano has had to send repeated messages to his fans to stop bombarding Fox News with angry emails.

In his latest note, posted to his Facebook page on Monday, Napolitano sounded a note of optimism, even as he sternly told his team to cut it out:

In television, shows are cancelled all the time. Two of my former shows have been cancelled, and after each cancellation, Fox has rewarded me with more and better work. This cancellation--along with others that accompanied it--was the result of a business judgment here, and is completely unrelated to the FreedomWatch message. It would make a world of a difference for all of us, if you would KINDLY STOP SENDING EMAILS TO FOX. I am well. Your values are strong. I will continue to articulate those values here at Fox. But the emails many of you are sending are unfairly interfering with my work and that of my colleagues here. The emails even violate our values because they interfere with the use of private property. I have accepted the cancellation decision with good cheer and a sense of gearing up for the future. You should as well.
As a favor to me, and as I have asked this past weekend, PLEASE STOP SENDING EMAILS TO MY COLLEAGUES AT FOX ABOUT THE CANCELLATION OF FreedomWatch; and please stop NOW.
3239  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left on: November 09, 2013, 09:16:55 AM
As Doug points out "after the obligatory belittling of Republicans, and now Bamster is safely elected, and AHA is law, and Hillary now has opportunity to distance herself and is being set up for her coronation, and we get opening phrases such as, "to be fair", and "on balance" the left now sort of makes some sort of back ended "Obama has to take his lumps".

Importantly the Repubs will have to devise strategy to deal with Hillary in the future.  Not simply keep up the same barrage against Obama the same way.
Hillary's mob is already figuring ways to spin this to her favor.  The total difference between her and Obama is she will pretend to compromise, she will pretend to give on certain issues (era of big gov is over) and not be steadfast in your face double downing ideologue - even though she is.   The Republicans always thought they had the goods on Clinton and he most of the time could successfully spin it around take credit and walk away laughing. 

In any case back to Bamster's comrades in arms:

IT'S TIME FOR OBAMA TO TAKE HIS LUMPS
Cynthia Tucker
By Cynthia Tucker 9 hours ago
     
President Obama deserves forbearance on the bungled rollout of his health care initiative. After all, Republicans have dedicated themselves to sabotaging the law -- withholding funds required for a smooth inauguration, harassing the experts hired to explain the law to consumers, and even threatening the National Football League when Obama asked teams to advertise it to their audiences.

Millions losing health plans under Obamacare. Did president mislead? Christian Science Monitor
Obama Tells Americans Losing Coverage: 'I'm Sorry' ABC News
Republicans Allege Obama Deception on Health Plan Cancellation ABC News
Obama promises to "smooth out" health care Associated Press
Why some individuals are losing their health plans under ObamaCare The Week (RSS)

Still, Obama deserves all the blame for the deception that may be the biggest threat to his signature legislative achievement -- and his legacy. He must have known better when he told Americans repeatedly over the past five years that they could keep their insurance policies if they were happy with them. As countless policyholders have learned over the past few weeks, that's simply not true.

Early on, the president was careful in his descriptions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Speaking to a joint session of Congress in 2009, he said, "If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have." The veracity squad at Politifact rated that statement "true."

But as Obamacare, as it is now widely known, picked up a dedicated and vociferous group of critics, the president grew careless. In countless speeches in the last three to four years, he dropped the nuances: "If you like the (health insurance) plan you have, you can keep it."

Just as more Americans were beginning to pay attention to a mandate that will go into effect in 2014, that flawed description became Obama's mantra. Now, as insurers send out cancellation notices, many consumers feel betrayed. And that includes some of Obama's most loyal supporters.

Writer Peter Richmond, who has purchased his health insurance through a small group affiliated with a local Chamber of Commerce in upstate New York, was stunned to learn recently that his insurer was dropping the group.

"(Obama) spoke so vehemently about our being able to keep our coverage. ... I feel betrayed for the first time by (this) president. ... I resent it a great deal," he said.

At a recent congressional hearing, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, a liberal Democrat from Maryland, weighed in, contending that the cancellation notices were creating a "crisis of confidence" about Obamacare. She's right.

On balance, the cancellation notices are affecting a relatively small group of Americans -- those who don't get insurance from their employers but who purchase it in the individual market. They represent about 5 percent of the population. There are no exact figures on the number receiving cancellation notices, but experts have given estimates ranging from seven to 12 million people.

To be fair, many of them will be better off. Obamacare has virtually abolished their old "bare bones" policies, some of which didn't even pay for hospital stays. With subsidies, many consumers will be able to buy far superior health insurance policies for less money. Kaiser Family Foundation health care expert Larry Levitt told CBS News that "the winners will outnumber the losers."

Still, there are many customers who are experiencing genuine rate shock. They will be stuck paying a higher premium for health insurance policies they may not have wanted. That's bad enough, but it's made worse by the fact that Obama misled them.

At the moment, Obamacare is a morass of confusion: dysfunctional websites, lies spread by its critics and even deceptive practices by some insurance companies. That's all the more reason that Americans need to be able to trust their president to tell them the truth about his health care overhaul -- even if some of that truth is unpleasant.

Obama needs to stand up and admit that he misled consumers about keeping their health care plans. He needs to take his lumps and promise to give the public straightforward and truthful answers.

If he keeps prevaricating, he will be doing as much damage to Obamacare as its harshest critics.

(Cynthia Tucker, winner of the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, is a visiting professor at the University of Georgia. She can be reached at cynthia@cynthiatucker.com.)
3240  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Obama effectively lifted Iran sanctions enforcement months ago on: November 08, 2013, 08:27:05 AM
Lead article on Drudge.

Treasury simply stopped enforcing companies that do business with Iran.  I assume the House and Senate Committees that deal with this were in the dark.

The government departments are simply ordered to do his bidding behind the scenes.

This makes Iran Contra look like peanuts.

Of course the shysters will be out en masse denying this is the case. 

And Hillary will be doing polls and devising her distancing strategy behind the scenes.

She will campaign for stronger ties with Israel and the Hollywood hypocrites will be flooding her with money.   Now the liar in chief is safely in for the second term they will shift their support to the next one.

All the while we are going to have a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. 
3241  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Libertarian Issues on: November 07, 2013, 11:31:07 AM
Time to legalize pot, prostitution in NJ.  Legalize them and tax them and keep the business and government tax base here.  Screw NY.  We have been getting screwed by NY ever since I can remember:

( I say this with tongue in cheek.  I guess the prostitution money could go to health school lunch programs, and pot could go to pay for the half of the population that gets it "free".  Maybe free mammograms or something and that would also double to secure the chick vote.)

*****Why New York casinos could crush Atlantic City

Richard Cummins | Lonely Planet Images | Getty Images
 New Yorkers have approved an amendment that will allow seven casinos to open in the state, including one to three in the New York City area in seven years. And that could sound the death knell for Atlantic City, already struggling under the weight of regional competition.

Atlantic City should be "very concerned," said Chad Mollman, an analyst who covers casino and hotel stocks for Morningstar. "New York City is the biggest feeder market in Atlantic City. There is a question in terms of the viability of Atlantic City in the long term."

Resorts was the first legal casino on the East Coast when it opened in Atlantic City in 1978. A lot has changed since then.

"Atlantic City's time has come and gone," said Harold Vogel, the CEO of Vogel Capital Management and the author of the bedrock textbook "Entertainment Industry Economics: A Guide for Financial Analysis." "It was second after Nevada, and it was a special place in a small location. It had 10 good years when it was pretty unique, but then we got Indian casinos, and then gambling in Pennsylvania."

(Read more: Stronger than the storm? Maybe not Atlantic City)

Part of the rationale for opening casinos in New York has been that it will capture gambling money that has been going to Atlantic City and other places.

The New York Daily News reported that Gov. Andrew Cuomo made the case for the casino amendment by telling the press, "New Jersey has casinos. Connecticut has casinos. Pennsylvania has casinos. We literally hemorrhage people from the borders who go to casinos. I think it will keep the money in this state and I think it is a major economic development vehicle for the Hudson Valley especially and for upstate New York."

If New York money stops crossing the southern border, Atlantic City is in big trouble.

Richard "Skip" Bronson, the chairman of U.S. Digital Gaming and the author of "The War at the Shore," which chronicled his effort to build a luxury Mirage Resorts casino in Atlantic City, said New York casinos will make a bad situation even worse.

"There are only so many gambling dollars in the pot," Bronson said. "And there has been a massive proliferation of casinos throughout America. It's a form of real estate, and like any form of real estate, it goes through a cycle: Demand, saturation, and then glut. A place like Atlantic City has too many casino hotels and too many rooms. This is a fact of life."
Play VideoRoll the dice on a casino?
Is now the time to be on casino stocks? With CNBC's Melissa Lee and the "Options Action" traders.If Atlantic City does slip into further decline, Caesars Entertainment could be deeply affected. The company owns four casinos there (Bally's Atlantic City, Caesars Atlantic City, Harrah's Atlantic City and Showboat Atlantic City), which have been a serious drag on earnings. The company lost $761 million in the third quarter, largely because of a massive write-down of Atlantic City assets.

"We continue to have a negative outlook for casino companies in the U.S. due to what we're seeing in regional casino markets, and Caesars is the most exposed to regional casino markets," Mollman said. He rates Caesars shares sell, and estimates their fair value (similar to a price target) at $9.

Yet, despite the fact that New York casinos are likely to hasten the demise of Atlantic City, Caesars donated $100,00 to the New York Jobs Now Committee, which supported the pro-casino amendment.

Caesars did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

(Read more: Science says casinos could make Wall Street riskier)

Of course, ignoring potential New York City casinos might be impossible.

"There isn't a gaming company in America that isn't paying attention to New York, and there's not a gaming company in America that's not interested in having an opportunity in New York," Bronson said.

New York casinos could still face an uncertain future because of the extent of regional competition.

"In an oversaturated market, now there's a much higher risk for people who will have to build up these casino palaces, and it's not clear that they'll be at all successful," Vogel told CNBC.com. "This is how markets fall apart, and this is how you have bankruptcies."
—By CNBC's Alex Rosenberg. Follow him on Twitter @CNBCAlex.****
3242  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / How in tarnasion is this possible? on: November 07, 2013, 11:04:58 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/ligament-found-human-knee-142502691.html

I don't know how a "new" ligament could be rightfully "just" discovered.  With hundreds of thousands, millions of knee surgeries and replacements and MRI etc.

I wonder if the new ligament is simply being re categorized as being separate from the lateral collateral ligament and not perhaps a sporadic separate head of the same ligament.

If I run into any orthopedic guys I'll get their opinion.
3243  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Libertarian Issues on: November 07, 2013, 10:53:50 AM
"The money is earmarked for education, so now parents can tell their kids they're getting high for their future, or something"

 rolleyes

3244  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics at the State & Municipal level on: November 07, 2013, 10:36:45 AM
"I'll ask you the same question I pose to ccp: Why do you want limited campaign funding now?"

The topic I am speaking to is fraud and deception.  Running under a banner that did not represent his positions.

I am speaking about lying on the campaign trail about who one is, who one represents.  You are turning this into a free speech issue.

I am speaking of honesty in politics.  

"Because he was freely speaking his mind? Why do you want limited campaign funding now? Maybe if McCain-Feingold had not been overturned...."

This was a divide and conquer strategy from the Democrat side.  It is a dirty trick that is all.

The Libertarians who allowed him to hold up their banner must have been fooled.  And the two most prominent libertarians absolutely were disavowing this guy later on when they realized his true colors.

BTW BigDog, I was never against campaign finance reform.  It does bother me how wealthy people, corporations, wealthy lobbyists can outright control or influence elections.

I believe I am on record somewhere way back when on the board about this.  

Probably one of the few times I diverge in opinion from Doug who is one of my favorite posters over the years.

3245  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillary will also distance herself on: November 07, 2013, 10:22:55 AM
Both of them were huge supporters of Obama.  Now he is safely re-elected and the focus is now in the direction of the next liar to be in chief, Hillary, they are safe to come out and mock HIM.

Where were they when it counted - before the election?

http://www.gossipcop.com/cmas-obamacare-video-carrie-underwood-brad-paisley-affordable-care-act-cma-awards-song/
3246  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Big win for McAullife; Bigger win for Clinton on: November 07, 2013, 09:23:41 AM
The FOR PROFIT Clinton Blue Chip were not going to let this strategic position pass by without throwing everything they have into it.  It is remarkable how coordinated the Democrats are in their money, their focus, their unified messages, and their playing as take no prisoners, kill them all war.  It is remarkable that coverage for BCP is one of so many people's minds as THE big issue for them.  What a screwed up country.

*****And Now, The Airing of Grievances

By Jonah Goldberg

November 6, 2013 8:50 AM
In the recent government shutdown fight I found myself in polite (on my part at least!) disagreement with the elements of the right inclined to denounce the “Republican establishment.” No need to rehash all that again. But, I will say that in the wake of the Cuccinelli defeat, I think the critics of the establishment have the better side of the argument.

If the folks running the party want the tea partiers to support their preferred candidates — when they’re the nominee, at least — it should work the other way around as well. It now appears that Cuccinelli, a flawed candidate running against an even more flawed human being, could have pulled this thing out if he’d had more help at the end. In fairness, the Republican Governor’s Association did help Cuccinelli, but it came too early. The RNC treated him like a write-off. I can understand that temptation when Cuccinelli looked like a sure loser. But I don’t understand why, when ObamaCare became a big issue, the RNC couldn’t have done more. I’m sure it’s hard to ramp up at the last second. But so what? Things are going to be hard in lots of ways for as far as the eye can see. Hard can’t be an excuse anymore. As for the more moderate Republican donors who stayed away from Cuccinelli, I certainly don’t think they’re obliged to give money to anyone or anything they disagree with. So maybe they’re pro-choice. Maybe they call themselves “socially liberal but fiscally conservative” (don’t get me started). Fine. But on the issues that make them Republican, McAuliffe will still be far more of a disaster than Cuccinelli ever would have been. McAuliffe says his first priority for the legislative session is accepting the expanded Medicare option under ObamaCare. That’s bad enough, but does anyone doubt that another, equally important, priority of his will be to prepare the ground for a Clinton candidacy should she run? Even if she doesn’t, McAuliffe in the statehouse is terrible news for every kind of Republican. McAuliffe is not a policy person. He’s not a “statesman.” He’s a purely political hack moneyman. And he’s going to use his skills as best he can to put Virginia in the Democrats’ column in 2016.

For all the talk about how the base needs to cooperate with the establishment more, it’s worth remembering that the base almost always does its part on Election Day. Its the establishment that is less reliable in returning the favor.*****
3247  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics at the State & Municipal level on: November 07, 2013, 08:54:28 AM


http://thefederalist.com/2013/10/25/virginia-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-sarvis-libertarian-name/

"I still don't see why spending money in the manner above is seen as crooked"

Sarvis is not a libertarian.  Libertarians would never support his positions.  That is why both Pauls were travelling through Virginia pointing this out.   

Why would do you think someone would run say as a Libertarian when he clearly is not, rather than say an "independent"?   Why does someone clearly and purposefully use the wrong label to describe himself?

Why would someone who was a major supporter of Obama fund this guy to the tune of 70% of his campaign funds through bundled donations?

He knew this guy wasn't going to win.  It had to be for some other reason.
3248  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Rants & interesting thought pieces on: November 05, 2013, 07:44:18 PM
"Conservative Parents, Left-Wing Children"

Doesn't that describe Hillary' parents and her?
3249  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: November 04, 2013, 08:24:00 AM
CK is out hawking his book.
I have been more frequently disagreeing than agreeing with his arguments the last few years.
3250  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Israel an international energy market disrupter? on: November 03, 2013, 10:54:42 AM
Of course the Palestinians will lay claim to this source of wealth. 
Personally, and sadly I am hesitant to invest in anything Israeli.   Too much political uncertainty.

****The Motley Fool

This Natural Gas Find Could Completely Change the World As We Know It

By Tyler Crowe   
November 3, 2013   

One thing that makes the energy sector so intriguing is the constant overlap between markets and politics. In many ways, energy security is synonymous with national security, and the supply and demand needs of the oil market can make the most unlikely bedfellows. One country that has been at the center of energy and politics for decades has been Israel. For years the country has been dependent upon foreign energy sources, but a major discovery by Noble Energy (NYSE: NBL  ) and its partners has turned this situation on its head. Let's look how this massive natural gas find could affect both the political landscape and the pockets of major oil companies like ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM  ) .

With a name like Leviathan, it has to be big
In 2010, Noble Energy and its partners found something in Israel's offshore region that the country had been looking for since the oil embargoes of the 1970's; its own hydrocarbons. You might say that the company and the country found more than they could have hoped for. The Tamar and Leviathan fields are estimated to have as much as 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which is enough gas to supply Israel for decades even if it were to convert all of its energy consumption from coal and oil to natural gas -- with enough left over to export. Noble Energy estimates that this gas field and the planned export projects could net the country more than $130 billion in energy savings and government revenue from gas royalties.

Of course, Israel isn't the only one making out from this deal, either. The nation's proven reserves account for more than 30% of Noble's proved reserves, and will likely be one of the company's premier energy plays for decades to come. On top of that, the U.S. Geological Survey estimates there are more than 600 million barrels of recoverable oil in the Leviathan field, which could boost the company's reserves by another 17%.

Game of Therms
Thirty trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 600 million barrels of oil is not a monumental amount in terms of the global energy landscape. But the combination of the size of the find, its proximity to a major demand center (Europe), and the fact that it's found in Israel could lead to several issues that might leave some major oil and gas powers not too happy.

Israel could disrupt the energy markets via liquefied natural gas terminals or a combination of pipeline and electricity cables. Noble has brought on Australian partner Woodside Petroleum to develop an LNG terminal for the Leviathan gas field and potentially a second site for an adjacent gas field in Cyprus. The Leviathan LNG terminal is projected to export about 0.85 billion cubic feet per day. Again, not much, but enough to displace 15% of the LNG market in Western Europe.

More importantly, though, Noble estimates that Israeli and Cypriot LNG terminals could together undercut both American and Australian LNG export prices, which could drive down natural gas costs for Europe. This could reduce the profitability of major LNG players like Qatar, where ExxonMobil has a 25%-30% working interest in two of that nation's largest LNG terminals.

An even more significant impact would revolve around the idea of supplying natural gas to Europe via pipeline. It may limit the market for Noble's natural gas, but it would probably generate higher profits per thousand cubic feet of gas because of the cost savings from skirting the liquefaction process. Also, since 40% of Europe's natural gas comes from Statoil (NYSE: STO  ) and Gazprom through very lucrative long-term pipeline contracts, Noble could carve out a nice position by displacing either the more expensive pipeline gas from one of these two players or expensive LNG imports.

Not being an expert in geopolitics, I'm not going to try to venture a guess as to how the political landscape will change in the Middle East. It is pretty fascinating, though, that Israel will go from an extremely energy-import dependent nation to a big-time exporter almost overnight. The country has plans to build pipelines to Jordan, the West Bank, and Turkey, which could improve both economic and political ties to these energy-starved regions. Then again, it could also go in the exact opposite direction and could be a prime target for groups or nations who may scuffle with Israel. 

What a Fool believes
Noble Energy may have found a very large oil and gas field that could boost its bottom line for decades, but it found that asset in a place that has been the epicenter for religious and ethnic conflict for millennia. Even more, it may find that other companies are reluctant to join the project. Oil services giants Schlumberger (NYSE: SLB  ) and Halliburton (NYSE: HAL  ) have major contracts across the Middle East, and they are not likely willing to potentially lose those contracts in order to work with Noble in Israel.

Noble Energy investors and geopolitical watchers should be captivated by this story, because the next couple of years could be a wild ride. **** 
 
Pages: 1 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 134
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!