No more so than we should dismiss the socialist agenda of the author of the Pledge.

Is child porn protected by the First Amendment, GM?  If not, it is NOT an outcome.  I provided you with a list of cases that the ACLU has supported at the USSC and won.  Those ARE outcomes.  Did you look at the list?  Did you see the protected speech?  The protected press?  Probably not.  I realize that no matter what the ACLU does, you will not change your mind.  Once your mind is made up, there is no changing it.  No matter what.  I am glad that you can justify your socialist leaning with the Pledge of Allegiance, though.  Well played!

Two words don't change the history of the Pledge or the meaning of the other words.  Tere is a guy who stands tall and wants to end the use of the socialist indoctrination of the Pledge (see below).  If you can't ignore history, you can't ignore history, GM.  But, if you are willing to look at the outcomes, say the protection of liberties involving speech, press, and religion (even the exercise thereof) like the ACLU has a, well, history of working toward, then I guess you can accept the change that two little words in the Pledge can make....

http://thatsrightnate.com/2009/07/30/the-socialist-threat-of-the-pledge-of-allegiance/

No way.  That is just a convenient marriage of the socialist and Congress.  Just because it has "under God" in there now does not mean you can ignore the socialist history of the Pledge.  We must stop this socialist movement from entering our schools.  They poison our children's minds at such a young age.  Once the pledge is socialist, it is always socialist. 

GM: Do you refuse to say the Pledge of Allegiance since it was written by a socialist?

You simply can't ignore the socialist roots of this pledge, and its goal to undermine the republic.  It is SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!

http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm

Very interesting.  While I still do not like the presence of cameras on every street corner, the unintended consequence here is a nice one.  Thanks for sharing this article also.

Lefties like Limbaugh and Nazis. 

Thanks for keeping us up to date with this story, GM.  It is indeed an important story to follow. 

GM: You claimed that "No one with an American Criminal Liberties Union membership has anything but contempt for the republic."  While you take the name in a misleading manner, you spoke in absolutes.  To make such an absolute statement demands that you poll everyone with an ACLU membership, or anyone who has ever held an ACLU membership, and make sure that nary a one has "anything but contempt for the republic." 

I then provided you with a list of cases that the ACLU has taken to the USSC and won.  On this list are cases that strengthened individual freedoms, including many cases related to free speech and the free exercise of religion.  Many of the cases stem from issues regarding the 4th and 6th Amendments. 

As you might know, the Constitution is the document that leads, and in some ways defines, the republic.  Yet, when I use it to debunk the argument that made in absolutists tones, you say I hide behind it???  The nerve I have to hide behind a few constitutional amendments! 

"Some conservatives don’t like that it
defends pornography, but occasionally
the ACLU pleasantly surprises
conservatives. Colorado state Sen. Greg
Brophy, a Republican, had jokingly
suggested he wanted an “ACLUSUX”
vanity license plate. He was taken aback
when the ACLU offered to defend his
right to express that sentiment on a
license plate."

Also, As I recall Stalin was anti religion of any sort.  So, wouldn't defending the rights of Muslims be anti-Stalinist?

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur59.htm

Let's see: Free speech, press, and religion; 4th and 6th Amendment; and protecting civil rights.... f'ing pinkos. 

I remember when the ACLU supported Rush Limbaugh's medical privacy.  Just because he ate reds doesn't make him a communist.



 

The US was allied with the Soviet Union during WWII.  Does that mean that the entire "Greatest Generation" was also unAmerican? 

There is a rich literature about justices' decisions to retire.  If you are interested in some particular articles, let me know.

She has been on the bench for a long time.  There is no shame in choosing to retire, whatever the reason and whenever the time.  I don't remember anyone saying that Jim Brown's legacy was tarnished because he retired "early". 

Separate issue: To say that an ACLU membership means that there is no love for the Republic is complete and utter nonsense.

With Bachmann and Pawlenty at the top, I wonder if this says more about proximity to Iowa than anything else.

Also, it should be noted that the winner in Iowa rarely goes on to the White House.  However, a poor showing in Iowa can sound the death knell of a campaign. 

This is an interesting thread at the moment.  I find the dichotomy in the recent USSC ruling to be fascinating.  Recently, the USSC has ruled that children at schools do not have the as many First Amendment and privacy rights as they used to.  Compare and contrast the famous Tinker v. Des Moines case with recent decisions about drug testing and the "Bong Hits for Jesus" case (in which the offending action took place outside of school!). 

From JDN: "I agree; parents should control their children, choose for their children, but not the Government.  What I think is appropriate for my child may be different than your thoughts for your child. 
Let the parents decide, not the government.  Or the government will decide more and more for you...."

I agree with the spirit of this.  There is a potential slippery slope here though.  What of a parent who decides that MAKING pornography is OK for kids?  What about drug/alcohol use?  Etc., etc.   

A sample of "interesting" answers given by students on exams:

http://shitmystudentswrite.tumblr.com/

I don't have much time at the moment but let me say that I agree (mostly) with Charlie Savage, that I posted the Thomas piece because his name being in the news in this manner interests me a fair amount for a few reasons (including the loop that seems to exist with it in there), DMG is right about Thomas' voting record, and there are many checks on SC justices.

Have you read his book?  It IS rather onimous. 

A download of the entire Encyclopedia of the United States Constitution.  It is a BIG file.

http://www.suppressedreality.net/files/Docs/0816067635%20Constitution.pdf

This was an interesting article, Guro.  I find the dichotomy of the following two pieces somewhat odd, though.

"Known for piercing and sometimes inaccurate commentary..."

"She’s described as meticulous and worried about the finer details..."

I don't like that Rick Perry called for the succession of Texas.

I like Webb.  He has an interesting cross party affiliation.  He also comes out well in a favorite book of mine called "The Nightingale's Song."

I would love to see a good third party candidate, but Bloomberg isn't that guy.  I like the freedom to own firearms. 

Thank you!

Forgive my ignorance please: is there a link to pay for this online?  Or do we pay upon arrival?

Yes.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/06/02/pentagon-to-congress-dont-cut-funds-for-libya-operation/

Doug, let me begin by saying that at this point in the game I tend to enjoy the process far more than picking a favorite.  While I am a "lefty" at least by the standards of this forum, let me also say that I am not all that big on President Obama.  I've never voted for him and have had the opportunity thrice.  I don't like Romney much.  I can't explain that, I just a "spider sense" feeling about him.  I know essentially nothing about Huntsman.  I have never liked Newt.  Similar to Weiner, I think that a man needs to be a man (and I don't mean a "typical male").  If you can't be trustworthy toward your wives, you can't get me to trust you.  I am enjoying learning about Pawlenty, Bachmann, and Cain.  Palin has crossed into a weird cult status for me.  It is almost like a Paris Hilton where she is now famous for being famous.  And, if you walk out of your committment to your state's voters midway through a term (and I don't mean for higher office), how can I trust you for a four year term in a different executive seat? 

Am I missing anyone?

Some additional points and clarifications stemming from Guro's post:

1. I did not mean to suggest that you should not learn more techniques.  You may find others that work for you when you deepen your study.  To find those, it is necessary to study widely. 

2.  That said, there are limits that you can set.  I am not a high kicker.  This makes the study of TKD unnecessary for me.

3.  A musician friend of mine says (and he may take it from elsewhere): Practice doesn't make perfect.  Perfect practice makes perfect. 

Also, GM's point about mastering the fine of verbal deescalation is an excellent one.

You have it about right Guro.  There are discretionary funds built into a budget.  There are also funds available that do not officially count against the budget.  Congress is funding any military action.  And, in theory, that funding can be cut. 

Charisma will also be needed to differentiate himself from the crowded field.  Like it or not, even with a good (or great) economic plan or other, his fate is sealed unless he can appeal to the voters.

I guess this goes here.

http://www.kmov.com/news/mobile/Secrets-of-woman-with-5-dead-husbands-die-with-her-123798659.html

It added context to this: This is odd when you consider the English language has so many ugly terms for wayward women (slut, tramp, bimbo and so forth) and so few to describe wayward men (lothario? womanizer? playboy? dude? None seem to quite do it.).

And that seems like powerful wording (or perhaps the lack there of) to me.

The following excerpt appeared in an article linked here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56550.html.  The article itself is about Anthony Weiner and his past, present and future.


And where are our female elected officials when it comes to sex scandals? There are 17 women in the Senate and 75 women in the House, and when it comes to carnal wrongdoing, you never hear a peep out of them.

This is odd when you consider the English language has so many ugly terms for wayward women (slut, tramp, bimbo and so forth) and so few to describe wayward men (lothario? womanizer? playboy? dude? None seem to quite do it.).

That was all for you, GM!!!   

Today is the 45th anniversary of the Miranda decision. 

I had trained elsewhere for three or four years before I saw a Guro Crafty seminar.  I was hooked on DBMA, not just the mindset, by the first break in the seminar.  I learned more about application of all the techniques I knew in two hours than I had in all the time I spent in martial arts.  I still train in the school where I started, but my training took on a whole new purpose when I trained with the Crafty one for the first time. 

Rachel, I enjoy your posts very much.  So, thank you for your most recent post.

I think the answer to this might depend on the individual's mission.  Martial artists might need to learn many new things, so they can then teach their students or to progress to the next belt.  Those interested primarily in self defense might want to "own" a dozen or so techniques.  This is the approach taken by Kelly McCann and others in self defense (or "self offense" as KM calls it).  And in DBMA, while there are numerous techniques, the importance of consistence across curriculum can not be discounted... which means that we can "own" many techniques due to their similar attributes.  

From DougMacG: "Just wanted to add an opinion to the safety of the cell phone on the airplane question."

At least the plane will remain cancer free. 

This is, for the most part, a good article.  Some small things I would add, however.  First, in my mind, teaching goes far beyond the classroom.  Professors spend a damn lot of time on emails, lunches, study sessions, office hours, and the like.  Professors also do a great deal of counseling, whether life questions or class/academic/career advice.  The author, I think, sorely underestimates the total number of hours that many professors tend to spend teaching.

Also, he used skewed evidence: "a mere 20% of the faculty garner 99.8% of the external research funding."  So what?  The sciences garner the vast majority of research funding.  It costs a damn lot more for a nuclear physicist to experiment than a sociologist.  And philosophers can research damn near for free.  That doesn't mean that the contributions aren't important, it means they are cost effective. 

I'm not sure why the author wouldn't want professors at large, research institutions to focus on research.  That is the mission of the university.  There many, many professors who teach, teach, and teach some more.  They are at liberal arts colleges, where the focus is on teaching.

All of that said, I think the position of the article that college needs to be more affordable, that colleges/universities need to help that with efficient staffing and use of buildings, etc. is important. 

The answer is that it depends.  The budget itself can be broken down into pieces, hence the theoretical ability for a line item veto.  However, there are many instances, most famously in places like the NSA and CIA funding, where the budget simply says something like "operations."  This is for funding, but a very select few know how the funding actually is used.

A pretty good place to begin is here: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy12/pdf/BUDGET-2012-BUD-7.pdf (defense specific) or http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy12/index.html (with links to many different portions of the budget). 

Is this the info you want Guro and/or GM?

I am not supporting him being fired.  Let me say, however, that you can reverse your earlier question.  How do you, as a Rice administrator, explain a campus shooter and being a man short at the time?

I have heard from people in the know that retired police officers make bad body guards because their attention can be drawn away from their protectorate by situations such as arguments, fights, and other real or simulated issues.  The desire to help is not a bad thing, but situations can dictate the type of help given.  In this case, I think he was morally correct to enter the fight.  However, JDN is right about the hole in the Rice security due to his departure.