home

Wednesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 09:39:05 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

My recap of yesterday's Alito hearing is up at Altercation, called "Alito Plays Dodge Ball."

Here's some space to vent, on Alito or anything else.

< 10th Circuit Affirms Angelos' 55 Year Sentence | MA Judge: Stop Saying 'Stop Snitching' >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Wednesday Open Thread | 101 comments (101 topical)
    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 09:53:26 AM EST
    The plot thickens...
    The National Security Agency's inspector general has opened an investigation into eavesdropping without warrants in the United States by the agency authorized by President Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to a letter released late yesterday. --Washington Post - January 11, 2006
    The NSA is now spying on itself? Hey... every day in every way it just keeps gets better and better...

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by desertswine on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:00:52 AM EST
    Pat Robertson; what a jamoke.. Isreal Punishes Evangelist

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:04:43 AM EST
    Anyone watching the Frontline series "Country Boys" on PBS? Closing episode tonight. It's a really insightful look at two teenagers from dysfunctional families in rural Kentucky trying to survive. Even though I grew up in city dysfunction, I'm amazed how much I share with the emotional life of these kids. It's heartbreaking, but hopefully it'll end well. We'll see. But the church signs around town are great: "God Answers Knee Mail" is my favorite so far. Though it's apparent the entire region, hell the entire COUNTRY, could benefit from Thomas Jefferson's take on Jesus (his teachings rather than the dubious "facts" of his life) rather than the guilt-laden, humans are bad naturally kind of Christianity that took hold in the United States, and especially in rural America.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:21:20 AM EST
    For those who might be interested in Yale University law professor Robert W. Gordon's credentials (in the process of contextualizing his views on the Alito confirmation hearings), some of them are described here (his Yale University webpage).

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:22:44 AM EST
    Alito isn't playing anything, but yes, he is quite effectively side stepping the balls that the unserious democrats on the commitee have been throwing at him. If I was Alito, when questioned about the abortion issue, I would simply answer........"If you pinheads in the legislature, (you know, thats the governmental body that is supposed to make law) would quit passing the buck, then you wouldn't have to worry about my stance on abortion."

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by ras on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:38:08 AM EST
    Given their own pronouncements on Alito, the Dems have now painted themselves into a corner: If they don't filibuster, they obviously don't believe their own statements. If they do, they'll get nuked. And now word is out that Stevens is planning to retire this summer. This is fun. Anyway, back to Alito, the Dems'll fold. Their courage of conviction is lacking, cuz, as I say, even they don't take themselves seriously anymore. And since they can count on their useful idiots to support 'em no matter what, why take a chance? p.s. Did everyone note that Anthony Kennedy joined in the 5-4 upholding of the death penalty? Maybe the statistical pattern of Kennedy agreeing with Roberts is causal after all. Looks that way so far.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:45:07 AM EST
    Should have said "a" Yale University webpage--actually a news release from 2002. There are also: Robert W. Gordon, a more-general Yale University faculty webpage) and Robert W. Gordon, another descriptive webpage hosted by Harvard University's Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, where he was a Faculty Fellow during academic year 1999-2000. Reading these descriptions will help those of us who are not lawyers or law professors to contextualize his perspective on Judge Alito.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:46:12 AM EST
    "Country Boys" on Frontline. Watching it again on tape. I never plug shows, but this thing is GREAT.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:48:02 AM EST
    And the Dems need to pound him on presidential powers, just grind him into the ground. That is the SINGLE most resonant issue with the American public right now. Yeah yeah, I know repubs on this site don't agree. But right now you're behind the curve.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Lora on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:53:13 AM EST
    From Bob Fitrakis, The Columbus Free Press: "What part of the headline in the Columbus Dispatch, 'Diebold vote machine can be hacked, test finds' don't people understand?"

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:57:59 AM EST
    Sen. Coburn mentioned this AM during his face time with Alito that of the 190 or so supremes in our history that about 1/2 of them were nominated by the opposing party of the party that had nominated the retired/deceased judge (although he said it far clearer than I just did). Anyway, point is, the sky didn't fall.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:58:07 AM EST
    Counting ballots should be national event, carried out in millions of neighborhoods, by hand. It should be a big event, a ritual, to ensure a fair and free democratic process. A political pot luck, bring your own, get comfortable, we're gonna do the work of the people no matter what our party differences, together and honestly. What a nice "holiday" that'd be.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:58:37 AM EST
    Israel, Iran Square Off On Nukes

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by ras on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 10:59:05 AM EST
    Dadler, Um, when was the last time the SCOTUS effectively thwarted a president from listening in on an enemy's calls during wartime? But ... good news ... when Stevens or SOuter or RBG retire, JRB can be the nominee. All this talk of civil liberties being threatened improves her chances considerably. Thx. And, like I said above, if Dems believed their own comments, they'd fb. But they don't, so they won't.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:07:01 AM EST
    Ras, Why does the FISA court exist? When has it been shown that, in these warrantless cases, an actual ENEMY was spied on? And I'd think we would've learned our lesson by now about the damage done to the government's credibility with THE PEOPLE when spying is done on people who are in no way "the enemy". McCarthy, COINTELPRO, etc. But perhaps not. This president hasn't earned my trust. Simple matter. Lord only knows WHO the government was looking at with these illegal searches. Peace group bake sales, people with website names they don't get, I can only imagine with this group of half-wits and sycophants. Blind mice looking for cheese in the radiator. Sorry, but I'm more willing to be the victim of a highly unlikely random attack than I am of letting my nation slowly slip into the robes of a police state suspiscious of all. That's reactionary. I'd prefer actionary. Be better. Like my mama taught me.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:14:33 AM EST
    Dubya finds about the wildfires in Oklahoma, two weeks later. Still hasn't heard about the ones in Texas.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by ras on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:16:30 AM EST
    Dadler, I hear you (tho I disagree on details), but my q remains: when has SCOTUS derailed executive espionage in a time of war? It hasn't, which is why args re Alito on that basis are not cogent. In fact, given the quality of the two confrmations thus far (I'm already counting Alito; this one's over), Bush has quietly made a strong case to Stevens, Souter & RBG to retire sooner, rather than later. If you're hangin' on as one of those three, you may never get a better chance to leave knowing that a good replacement will be found. Leave it to the future, and who knows? You may be "trapped" there long after you wanna be, cuz who knows what sort of future presidents and political dynamics will be in place tomorrow. I'll be really surprised if Bush doesn't get at least one more appointment in his term, and even all three would not be shocker. Not in the least.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:21:35 AM EST
    Gotta love Teddy Kennedy... Is there a bigger fool in Washington? He now wants to supena the records of Alito's "college years" in the CAP group he belonged to. Is that all the Dems have? Pa..lease. Wait...now that I think of it, maybe i should wait till it's over. There are several more that are right there and might overtake the big blowhard from Mass.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:36:14 AM EST
    Unless Stevens is, quite literally, dying or on the verge of utter incapacitation, then I would consider his retirement, at this point, a greater crime than any the Bush Administration has committed, or ever could commit. Ball's in his court, no pun intended.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:40:55 AM EST
    Dadler, Given the near even split on how the public feels about the issue of surveillance without warrants, I wouldn't suggest that this is an issue which resonates with everyone. In fact, the numbers would suggest it resonates with the same percentage of the people who have been opposed to everything Bush has done all along. Not a loser, and certainly a good question for Alito (although there was a time when Democrats thought it inappropriate to ask a nominee about cases or issues likely to come before them - can you say Ginsburg?) but hardly a sure-fire winner. Still, Kennedy et al. would be better off sticking to that gun and refraining from anymore preening over the main stream, seeing as how everytime they touch that one they just show everyone how truly far outside of the mainstream they themselves are. Nevertheless, it does strike me as odd that a bunch of people notorious for not answering questions put to them by the public are so pissed that Alito won't voluntarily bend over for the flashlight rectal exam they want to give him. Oh well, that's politics in America. p.s. Did you enjoy the articles on Clinton and the IRS?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:53:15 AM EST
    Given the near even split on how the public feels about the issue of surveillance without warrants, I wouldn't suggest that this is an issue which resonates with everyone.
    Yes. Agreed. And this sad fact 2006, as Fred Dawes would perhaps delineate it, speaks pretty accurately to the current state of our nation. "I'm having appropriate conversations!" Stay alert, and stay with Fox.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Slado on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 11:54:15 AM EST
    The question of 2006 will be do you want to support the party that worries about terrorism first or the party that worries about rights first. We all know where we stand and don't need to holler about it but the country is showing mixed signals on this. This very poll has contradictions and CNN tries to slant it to "growing concern"...whatever. What I see is that even with the overwhelmingly bad press the NSA story has received 50% of the public still approves. This is a loser issue for dems in the llong run.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:07:35 PM EST
    justpaul, dude, what thread did you put those articles on? i musta never got back to that thread. still wanna look at them. i don't know, tho, i guess we're reading the pulse of the public on this just a tad, um, differently. and oppositely. hey, i'm a righty now. boinnggg!!! back to normal, there we go. the cnn poll was no home run, certainly, but the question struck me as being on the vague and tilted side. if you frame the question around the FISA court's LEGALLY MANDATED responsibility to insure the executive branch is not abusing this surveillance power, then i think the numbers would change pretty clearly. but i certainly could be wrong. ask my wife and son. and my agent. and seriously, congressmen DO have to answer more questions that judges do, EXCEPT in the confirmation process. that's kind of the whole purpose of it, to examine and query the judge to determine their fitness for the HIGH court.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:27:24 PM EST
    The question of 2006 will be do you want to support the party that worries about terrorism first or the party that worries about rights first.
    I always worry about my rights, first and foremost. Safety is an illusion.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:30:46 PM EST
    And I also wanna know what or whom is hiding under Abramoff's askew Michael Corleone chapeau. And the black trenchcoat. Nice look, Jack. Could you try harder to be sartorially bleak? No boys, he told his lawyers, the depressed mafia don look is my STYLE, I've done the market research.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:34:51 PM EST
    Um, when was the last time the SCOTUS effectively thwarted a president from listening in on an enemy's calls during wartime We are not at war.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:43:14 PM EST
    I just had to laugh out loud when one of these Democratic solons aked the accusatory question "did justice Alito say that abortion was morally repugnant?" What this statement tells me as it should anyone with half a brain is; the left in this country looks on abortion as some sort of social good, not an unfortunate part of life in our society. Who in their right mind can't see abortion for what it is? There's nothing good about it.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by swingvote on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:48:28 PM EST
    Dadler, I put them in a comment on the thread in which the issue was raised. Use the search feature to look for IRS and find the thread about this administrations alleged misuse of the IRS (two whole days ago). It's all there. But then, if you really wanted to known, a simple Google search for "Clinton IRS harassment" would find most of it. And by the way, in case you can't be bothered to go looking for it, the SP in question is not Ken Starr but rather David Barrett (with apologies to TL for going OT).

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by BigTex on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:49:23 PM EST
    Re the voting machines, why not stick with the tried and true optical scan machines? No worries about pregnant chads, who got that way because they were dimpled. *rimshot* While some of the old timers may not have used a scan-tron type of machanism before, by in large, most of the country has at least seen a scan tron type of test. With the help avaliable to the illeterate, aged, etc in selecting the person they want to vote for everyone can vote, and there is no question of who was the vote intended for. The bubble is clearly bubbled in, even if the machine doesn't read it, the human eye can tell what is a stray mark, and what is a filled in bubble. Re the midterms, it's always risky, but looks like the GOP is trying to play the economy card. If they keep with their message that the economy is humming along, and keep pointing out data indicating that, then the public will believe that the economy is good. Most of the public doesn't know how to read economic tea leaves, so make a good argument like 31 months of job growth, unemployment down from 2 and 4 years ago, stock market up from 2, 4, and 8 years ago, and the masses will swallow it hook, line, and sinker. At the very least that will make the economy a heavy gloss on the election. Because the economy is generally a democrat issue, but will be repub this time around, that will put a pinch on the democrats. Add to that troop levels will start to fall, and this isn't going to be a CW election. The dems need to stop sniping at the edges of the war on terror, and get back to what they do best, focus on the economy. If they lose the economy as an issue this time, they are in trouble. Those who suggest that the election will be about civil rights versus terrorism seem to be forgetting that all politics are local. While the public is divided on the warrantless spying, in the end that doesn't resonate as much as having a job. Wiretaps may get a few ideological and protest votes, but a good economy will give more votes to the GOP. Add to that the medicare prescription drug coverage kicking in, something the GOP gets credit for because they hold both chambers and the White House, and suddenly people say they are better off than 2 and 4 years ago. Dems should go back to talking about outsourcing, the environment, and other issues that have a local flavor to them. Right now they are waging an ideological arfument against what is becoming a pratical local argument. Practial local arguments beat ideological arguments 90% of the time.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:50:07 PM EST
    Actually, Abramhoff was donning the look of a Hasidic Jew. I thought he looked pretty cool in that get-up. What was the message? You just messed with the wrong Jew...

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:56:47 PM EST
    Who in their right mind can't see abortion for what it is? There's nothing good about it.
    I hear that LWW. It's not cool, it's not pleasant, it should not be encouraged or promoted. But it also should not be illegal. What's wrong with a "safe, legal, and rare" policy?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by BigTex on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:59:00 PM EST
    Kdog - if the policy was safe, legal, and rare, then you would find support for the policy. But the current policy is abortion on demand.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by swingvote on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:00:28 PM EST
    BigTex, How is the economy usually a Democratic issue? Both parties tend to play it up if the economy is strong and they think they can claim credit, or if the economy is down and they think they can blame the other party. In the end, I don't think it makes much of a difference to the average person unless there is a concrete link to something either party has done recently. Both parties have shown themselves incapable of balancing a checkbook, let alone the budget, and their impact on the economy is almost always negative.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:01:55 PM EST
    Kdog, I doubt the poor folks jumping from the top floors of the WTC thought safety was an illusion. As the 9-11 commission reported, "it's not if but when." Of course, when the inevitable happens they'll be plenty of people who will forget about the NSA spying case and quickly switch gears to the "Bush incompetence case." Like flowers in the spring it's so predictable.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:02:11 PM EST
    What's morally repugnant is wingers like lww presuming to tell a woman what she can do with her body. When abortion is made illegal, poor women will be butchered in backalley abortions, while the rich republican hypocrites will be sending their women to countries with proffessional abortion clinics. but, since lww has probably never been with a female, he wouldn't know that they have minds, and the right to decide what to do with their bodies.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:05:40 PM EST
    Hey Sailor! This beer's for you! A better source than the FEC!
    Mr. Dorgan returned $67,000 donated to him by Indian tribes tied to Abramoff. He has said he did nothing wrong but was returning the money to avoid the appearance of a conflict
    . and the finishing touch...
    Mr. Reid has acknowledged receiving contributions from Abramoff's clients, but has said he does not intend to return the money because it represented legal donations. The sources said Mr. Reid is thought to have collected as much as $61,000 in donations from Abramoff clients, including Indian tribes.
    Link The one on Reid is telling. Remember that the tribes are opening casinos all over the country, but especially in CA and AZ, two states that have traditionally been huge sources for gamblers for Las Vegas. Neutralizing Reid's support for any bill that would support Vegas' desire to get rid of the Indian casinos is an obvious motive of the "contributors." Sail on Sailor, sail on!

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:07:24 PM EST
    justpaul, googled and read a bit. apparently the Barrett report is gonna come out soon, no? So will see. Though I have to add this quote from the founder and editor or the American Spectator on this potential report: If Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, had his way, the unredacted report might get out. His committee has oversight of the IRS, and he thought a month or so back that he had the agreement of the three-judge panel overseeing Barrett to allow him to receive the unredacted report, and make it public for the citizenry to see. Unfortunately, Democrats on the Hill led by Sen. Byron Dorgan, Sen. Dick Durbin, and Rep. Henry Waxman have thwarted Grassley's wishes by late-night legislative subterfuge. They were assisted in this project by two easily confused Republicans, Sen. Kit Bond and Rep. Joe Knollenberg. I love that. Assissted by two EASILY CONFUSED Republicans. Are these two suffering from early onset alzheimer's, are they under guardianship? It just sounds hilarious and dubious, but we'll see. Should be interesting, I think we can agree on that.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:12:52 PM EST
    Hey bigunit, I was married for 27 yrs, I have four daughters, five sisters, two grand-daughters and a mother who had 10 children. There goes your snide accusation out the window. Why not let the individual states decide? That's all I ask.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:15:02 PM EST
    I can only speak for me LWW, and I would rather Bush and his lawbreaking cohorts do nothing than further erode the Bill of Rights. Tex...how do you define "abortion on demand" exactly? Of course, if it is legal, it is available on demand. Do you want the state to actively discourage women who want an abortion? When does discouragement become harassment and abuse?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:23:35 PM EST
    Kdog, I doubt the poor folks jumping from the top floors of the WTC thought safety was an illusion.
    No LWW, they proved that safety is an illusion. Mortal beings are never safe from death. But while I'm alive, I'll take all the freedom I can get.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by swingvote on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:27:38 PM EST
    Dadler, Clearly you haven't read enough. Hillary Clinton's lawyer, among others, has spent the last 18 months filing lawsuits trying to get that report didacted or quashed altogether. What do you suppose might be in it that would make them do so? The IRS is ordered to harass conservative organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and the Institute for Justice. .....after congressional offices were bombarded with correspondence decrying the suspicious targeting for IRS audits of non-profit organizations critical of the Clinton administration An official with the Internal Revenue Service has admitted that legal opponents of former President Bill Clinton were singled out for tax audits In 1994, my non-profit news organization at the time, the Western Journalism Center, began investigating Clinton administration scandals. In 1996, the Internal Revenue Service came knocking on the door, explaining that this was no ordinary audit, this was a "political case" and the decision about our fate would be made "at the national level." White House officials ask for IRS files on White House usher Christopher B. Emery, before carrying out Hillary Clinton’s instructions to fire him.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 01:57:12 PM EST
    Kdog, you're from NY so I respect what you say about this stuff, because you could possibly be annihilated. Having said that, the people killed on 9-11 had illusions of safety BEFORE 9-11. Nobody has them now. When will this end? That's the question. When Israel is driven into the sea? When every westerner is out of the Middle East? Until then, worry about OTHER people and not just yourself.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 02:05:16 PM EST
    justpaul, i read what i read. and refreshed some memories. the quote struck me as hilarious. but i still got the sense this "report" is supposed to come out relatively soon. redacted, didacted, sliced, diced, julienne'd or however some believe it's being doctored. i still am hazy on how the minority party and two easily confused republicans are holding up anything this indicative of the illegal activity suggested by some.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by swingvote on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 02:20:13 PM EST
    Dadler, You never cease to amaze. First you claimed to be very interested in this materal, but when it is handed to you, you ignored it. Then, when you were asked what you thought, you claimed to have not seen it (because you ignored it) and then went and read something else on the subject which you pronounced unimpressive. So when the information was provided to you again, you still refused to read it and asked how the minority party could be holding up the release of the report [it's called a lawsuit Dadler, and it wasn't filed by the Democratic party, it was filed by David Kendall (among others) on behalf of citizen Hillary Clinton (and others)]. Somehow I doubt very much that you would be so blase about this if it was a report on Bush's illegal use of the IRS and Justice Department and Bush's personal attorney was fighting to have it quashed. In fact, I'm pretty sure you would declare that to be proof positive that Bush was guilty and that the report must be published for the good of the nation. Forgive me for suspecting that your interest in this is purely partisan and that you couldn't care less what uses the Clinton's put the IRS to. And for anyone coming in late: No, the fact that Clinton did it does not make it okay for Bush to have done it. I don't want the IRS doing anything for political reasons, regardless of who is sitting in the Whitehouse. I would like to see the allegations about Bush investigated. I would like to see the Barrett report in full. And I would like to see anyone within the IRS, this administration, or the former adminstratin, who has been doing this stuff prosecuted under any applicable laws. Political mischief making with an agency as powerful and pervasive as the IRA is wrong. Period.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by desertswine on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 02:58:14 PM EST
    A very Happy Birthday to Dr. Albert Hoffman. He's 100 today and he invented LSD. Yes, he's still alive.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:01:53 PM EST
    justpaul, give me more than a day, blogging in between working. a lawsuit is holding it up, very well. still, i don't think i've said, oh no, this is all b.s. and it must be a vendetta. i'd say we never cease to amaze each other. i can sit here and take my lumps. ouch. ouch. ouch. I also started out by announcing loudly and clearly that Clinton was the single most disappointing president of my lifetime.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:05:43 PM EST
    desertswine: A very Happy Birthday to Dr. Albert Hoffman. Though it may raise a few eyebrows, some of us are more alive, and aware, in part because of Hoffman.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:22:48 PM EST
    justpaul, look, i'll be honest, the sources you linked me to are not ones i would look to for unbiased assessment. a site with "victims of reverse discrimination" in its name, i must confess, for me, throws up a huge red flag. NewsMax, Wash Times, A Christian Broadcasters Association (and yes, I think big religious broadcasters are ANYTHING but entitled to non-profit status, it's a racket)...I just can't really say much beyond I tend to trust the judiciary on this one, who are really holding it up. Otherwise the suits would've have been tossed for lack of merit, like Paula Jones' case was. Also, I confess, I was indeed outta the loop on this one to the degree you were in it, I suppose. Guilty as charged. I don't profess perfection. Oh, and your original link to info, in your original post on the IRS thread, didn't work.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:23:07 PM EST
    Beasts of Burden If the Democrats' goal in the hearings is to paint a picture of Alito as unsupportable, they've already positioned themselves to lose. A Democratic victory in the hearings would result in a "no vote" or a "filibuster", but to accomplish this politically, the Dems have to build a case to justify it. Barring any surprises, the Dems won't make the case. The Democrats needed to put the burden on Alito and the Republicans: make them prove he's not a right-wing lunatic. Use "Do you still beat your wife variety?" strategy. Shift the debate from "Are you qualified?" to "Why are you the best candidate for this position?" "Why are you often out of the judicial mainstream? Are the people who disagree with you wrong?" From there, connect Alito to Bush's nomination of Meyers. Make him the Brownie of the Supreme Court. We already know what makes Sammy run. We need to reframe the debate to show why he should run the other way. BTW: Isn't asking a judge if he believes in stare decisis is like asking a mathematician if he believes in using zero as a number. Mb P.S. Anyone else want to strangle Lindsey Graham any time he speaks?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by BigTex on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:36:46 PM EST
    Kdog - leaving aside my belief that a fetus is alive from fertilization for the sake of discussion, two areas still concern me with abortion. The first is the very relaxed meaning of the health of the mother. A person can have an abortion at 9 months if her health is in danger. Health doesn't just include physical health and mental health. It also included, among others, finincial and social health. Who isn't going to take a finincial hit because of having a baby? Who's social life won't be stifled by having a baby? Answer is no one. Everyone will have a lessening of finincial situaion and have less of a social life. But those are health of the mother reasons, so abortion is upon demand, even at 9 months, all a mother has to do is site a finincial or social health issue. The other issue is the lack of father's rights. It takes two to tango, and outside of a case of rape the sex leading to her getting preggers was consentual. Unless her health or safety is in danger she should have to get the father's permission to have an abortion. Now, if the father isn't around, then that would be a different situation, a good faith effort would suffice. If the dems would be willing to give father's rights, or reasonable limits on abortion then they would win the heart and mind of the typical voter. Polls show support for Roe, but also strong support for ending partial birth abortion. Both sides are fuled by the ideologues, but the difference is that there are enough voters on the anitabortion side that would support some sort of compromise, that's why the policy is called abortion on demand.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:49:35 PM EST
    Desertswine, I don't think we should be too joyous about the invention of acid. I did it scores of times as a child (14 to 17) and it was interesting... One time I was riding between the cars of a subway train crossing the Brooklyn bridge, it was nuts, something I'll never forget. When you put it all together and look at it from the perspective of a parent it's frightening. I would never want any child to do what I did.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by desertswine on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 03:55:39 PM EST
    I would never want any child to do what I did.
    Certainly not.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 04:07:02 PM EST
    BigTex,
    The other issue is the lack of father's rights. It takes two to tango, and outside of a case of rape the sex leading to her getting preggers was consentual. Unless her health or safety is in danger she should have to get the father's permission to have an abortion.
    Except the Father isn't the one who is pregnant for 9 months.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 04:18:11 PM EST
    When will this end? That's the question
    When will people stop comitting acts of terrorism? I wish I knew, but judging by history, I'd guess never. I don't think I'm being clear about safety being an illusion. What I'm trying to say is safety from a violent death is literally an illusion...that kind of safety does not exist. Never has, never will. It just takes one whackjob. The govt. conducting warantless searches will not improve the chances of me avoiding a violent death to any meaningful degree, so I'd rather they didn't. Like I always say, true freedom is inherently dangerous, but it beats the heck out of the alternative. Thanks Tex, you make very good points. There is so much grey area in the abortion debate. All I know for sure is that prohibition is not the way, and the pro-life crowds lobbying in those areas you mention is viewed as an attempt to return to prohibition by many pro-choicers.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 04:24:21 PM EST
    Open thread, here's a joke: When Osama bin Laden died, George Washington met him at the Pearly Gates. He slapped him across the face and yelled, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive!" Patrick Henry approached, punched him in the nose and shouted, "You wanted to end our liberties but you failed!" James Madison followed, kicked him in the groin and said, "This is why I allowed our government to provide for the common defense!" Thomas Jefferson was next, beat Osama with a long cane and snarled, "It was evil men like you who inspired me to write the Declaration of Independence." The beatings and thrashings continued as George Mason, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans unleashed their anger on the terrorist leader. As Osama lay bleeding and in pain, an Angel appeared. Bin Laden wept and said, "This is not what you promised me." The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in Heaven." Oh yeah, don't pick it apart too much, its a joke. And, yes, I think he's dead.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 04:47:21 PM EST
    How 'bout the stunt Alito's wife pulled today? Pretty good theater, no? Dangerous as these people are, at times I've got to love them anyway for the sheer spectacle of it all. Here they are, all these "civilized" Republicans, so smug, so polished, so mature as they quitely erode liberty after liberty after liberty. And when such conduct gets called to the carpet, count on the 'little wife' to burst into tears, drumming up a little more sympathy for this waste of skin she married. *****Illustration!!!***** LWW perpetrates this same fraud for us right here on TalkLeft. Look atn this 'very civilized' conclusion to a post:
    Why not let the individual states decide? That's all I ask.
    Sounds innocent enough right? Until you think about what it means. I was in the gorcery store the other day, looking at all the people, thinking about LWW's argument. It is nothing but ludicrous to suggest that a woman would need the permission of all these people to do what she will with her body. All those people that surrounded me at the store, sure, they're probably all right, but the last thing I want is any of them getting to vote on my civil liberties. I'd rather they kept their grubby little noses out of my business and they can rest assured I will reciprocate.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 04:55:18 PM EST
    the last thing I want is any of them getting to vote on my civil liberties... I'd rather they kept their grubby little noses out of my business and they can rest assured I will reciprocate. I second that, Glanton... (and they can't stick their noses into what they don't, and won't, know about my business, thanks)

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 05:02:22 PM EST
    sarc: The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you in Heaven." Isn't that "one 72 year old virgin"? ^^ 0 0

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 05:06:53 PM EST
    edger, even better!

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 05:15:47 PM EST
    Glanton, If you're standing around in a grocery store, looking at all the people, and musing to yourself that they shouldn't be judging your reproductive rights; you got some serious problems. Should I go where your compatriots have gone;say something snide like you don't have to worry about it because you've never been near a man? Not me.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 05:45:26 PM EST
    LWW: Unlike you, I don't need to have my own personal privacy/liberty violated before I worry about such violations. But baby, you can attach whatever gender, whatever identity, whatever ethos onto me that you want, if it makes you feel even a shred better about your thoroughly vacuous arguments. But then, maybe you really do think that only women are concerned about women's rights, only homosexuals are concernd with gay rights, etc. Sadly, it has been my experience that most wingers think that way. Annnnnd if it makes you feel any better that women who want to keep control of their bodies are somehow man-haters or unattractive, then that's your weird little trip, buddy. And you thought crossing that Bridge was bizarre! And by the way, LWW, I have found that watching people in grocery stores, or anywhere in public for that matter, can be very instructive not to mention entertaining. At least it puts a little abstract thought, a little spice into an otherwise mundane activity. But if you think that makes me weird, i guess all I can do is thank my stars you aren't getting a vote yet on what I can think in public as well. :-0 But anyway, I love how you focus on that instead of the main point, which is, again,
    the last thing I want is any of them getting to vote on my civil liberties.
    Stay alert, LWW, and stay with Fox.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 05:51:52 PM EST
    One correction to the above shredding of LWW's attempt at wit/avoiding the issue: "Annnnnd if it makes you feel any better to imagine that women...."

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 06:06:35 PM EST
    Glanton, You think you're pretty cute when it comes to this issue. Choice is the operative word I suspect? My wife was 17, a Jr in HS when she became pregnant with our oldest child. My oldest will be 30 in a few months. We had nothing. Absolutely nothing. SHE made the choice. WE made the choice. The right choice. There's only one choice. Anything else, under our circumstances would've been WRONG. Other people have to live with themselves. Not us. Tell my daughter it would've been right to flush her down the toilet. Abortion for convenience sake is wrong, period. If you don't like it that's your problem.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#64)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 06:28:59 PM EST
    LWW: First of all you can keep your little familial anecddote to yourself, it doesn't prove anything, it doesn't accomplish anything except illustrating your own sense of self-righteousness, your own desire to make yourself bigger by judging. Boy the GOP saw you coming, brother. Fact is, neither of us can imagine what goes through a woman's mind when she goes through with an abortion. But I guarantee you that the term "convenience" doesn't apply. But this is beside the point. Which is to say it doesn't matter. Which is to say it's none of your business, or mine, or anyone else's. Women don't have to prove the worthiness of their reasons to you, at least not yet, thank the heavens. But whatever is going through a woman's mind at such a point, the last thing on this freakin' Earth that she needs is you, in the form of a 'values voter,' suddenly popping up with your face contorted in righteousness, wagging your finger, telling her "NO!" Stay alert, LWW, and stay with Fox.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#65)
    by Lww on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 07:06:53 PM EST
    Glanton, You ready to declare victory? You can have it. The 40 million fetuses,or babies or blobs of flesh or whatever you consider them? Take that too.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 07:30:27 PM EST
    glanton - Any chance the Demos had disappeared today when Kennedy did his dumb ass act. It slid comoletely down the tubes when we found out that all he had to do was ask and the papers would have been his. Absolutrely dumb. No, stupid. I can not understand how a party I once loved can allow the likes of these people to run the party. Shame. Shame.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#67)
    by jen on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 07:33:03 PM EST
    Making abortion rare is easy BANNING abortion wont do it, abortion will either bo to back alleys, to wire hangers, or become infanticide. Making abortion rare AND legal means educationg our kids in how to prevent pregnancy. Making protection easily available to young folks. It means making health care available to pregnant women, and it means making helthcare, assistance for housing, food and finding a job available for single mothers. Making abortion rare means a commitment to our children, especially poor children. These things will make abortion rare.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#68)
    by ras on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 07:52:07 PM EST
    Jen, If Roe is overturned, and each state goes its own way, undoubtedly the subsequent superior results from liberal states - as you describe - will win by example, thus ending the debate in the best possible way. Looking fw to it?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#69)
    by BigTex on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 08:08:02 PM EST
    Making abortion rare AND legal means educationg our kids in how to prevent pregnancy. Making protection easily available to young folks. It means making health care available to pregnant women, and it means making helthcare, assistance for housing, food and finding a job available for single mothers.
    Right on Jen. The right to life people are too ineffective in getting that message out. They do try, google bomb and plenty of resources come up, but they are not well known. Some of the reason is that many of the right to life side thinks contraception is as evil as abortion. In their sick, twisted world, they would rather have someone get preggers and then have an abortion than to pass out meansures to prevent her from getting preggers in the first place. As with all ideologues, the right to life viarty does more harm than good. The worst part is that they would rather sacrifice what they hold dear to make a secondary point. To many of them abortion is a undesiraded, but acceptable consiquence, in the crusade against abortion and contraception. People like that are as much a cause of the problem as the pro choice groups. Macro, the mother chose to run the risk of getting preggers. Yes she is the one that has to bear the babe, but she took that risk knowingly and voluntrally. Now, if it is a question of her health, then her bearing the harm of the pregnancy should win out over the father's rights, but otherwise it is a consentual relationship that led to her being preggers, so the father should have the right to block a voluntary abortion (not one for medicinal purposes.) He will be legally responsible for the baby's care if the mother has the baby. This is an area of responsibility, but no rights, which should be enough reason to support some father's rights. The proabortion crowd doesn't even want the father to have the right to know that the mother is having an abortion. That at a minimum is a right he should have. Once again, that is the idelogues driving the debate. An exception can be put in place to where if the mother's life is in danger she can have the abortion without informing the father, likewise an exception can be in place to where if telling the father will place her in danger she isn't required to do so. Note, that I am not suggesting that the rapist be granted these rights, only where sex was consentual should hte father have these rights. But where the sex is consentual, the father should have some veto power. Yes the mother bears the child, and should have some ability to have an abortion if her life is in danger, but outside of that area the father should be granted some ability to have the child brought into the world. In a case of consentual sex the mother can't make a dignaty argument. She voluntarally got preggers. It may not have been intentional, but it was voluntary. The only argument avaliable to her is bodily integrety. Yet, the bodily integrity argument should fail on waiver grounds because she is not being subjetcgated to pregnancy, rather she subgated herself to pregnancy. It's no different than voluntarally and intelligently giving up your Maranda rights. They made a choice that lead to the consiquences. As long as the choice to have sex was voluntarally and intelligently made, then she waives her ability to argue bodily integrety because she knew she was running the risk of getting preggers.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#70)
    by BigTex on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 08:15:59 PM EST
    Thanks Tex, you make very good points. There is so much grey area in the abortion debate.
    It's a pleasure to discuss/debate the issues with you Kdog. We may not agree, but treat other with respect and try to understand the each other's argument. At the end of the day, we both have a better understanding of the issues because of each other.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#71)
    by jen on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 08:20:47 PM EST
    ras, No I am not looking forward to that at all. The states will not be allowed to make their own decisions in this matter. States right is not exactly a priority with republicans.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#72)
    by aw on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 08:53:25 PM EST
    When are you going to understand that women with money will have abortions on demand at whatever stage of pregnancy they want. You MEN will have nothing to say about it. They will thumb their noses at you. So you will just have to get what satisfaction you can at forcing poor women to have children or bloody illegal abortions. I'm sure their injuries and blood will make you feel so righteous and so manly again. Enjoy.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#73)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 09:57:38 PM EST
    Jim: Yes. It was in antgicipation of you that I spent fifteen monutes today skirting the web, looking for all the usual Talking Points from all the usual places. I see you got the memo re Kennedy. Nicely regurgitated! Meanwhile you chuckle, hem, and haw as yet another blight of human skin assumes the mantle of power. And BTW: The Dems never had a chance in this game, to begin with. There's nothing they can do to stop Alito, or someone equally repugnant, from being confirmed. The nominations are issuing from Bush, the GOP Senators will rubber stamp; 'nuff said. aw: Beautifully put, but unfortunately, you might as well be talking to a wall as attempt reason with these people; can you say, 'red meat for the droolers'?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 06:27:49 AM EST
    glanton - Thanks. I needed a laugh, and you provided me one this AM. et al - I know you guys want to ignore the fact that Senator Reid has been caught with his hand in the cookie box, but really...do you think the Amrican public can read and see and hear???

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#75)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 06:31:52 AM EST
    Likewise Tex...always a pleasure.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#76)
    by glanton on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 07:45:54 AM EST
    Jim: At times you almost have me convinced that you are committed to women's rights, gay rights, health care and education for all Americans, etc. And that further, when you vote GOP, you do so against your own commitment to these issues, because you are so repulsed by the Democratic foreign policy. I say almost. What makes it impossible to fully believe is that, every time a thread on Bush's judges comes up, or on social issues in general, you remain as antagonistic to the Dems, and as sympathetic to the GOP and its nominees, as ever. If you were half what you say you are you would share the concerns Kennedy, Feinstein, and Schumer have been talking about this week; instead, you go with good ole Powerline and Townhall and Newsmax and Drudge and Rush and on and on and on. 'Poor Mrs. Alito!' What a bully that Kennedy is!' Stay alert, Jim, and stay with Fox.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#77)
    by roger on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:13:38 AM EST
    Tex, I agree with you and Kdog, there is a lot of gray area in the abortion debate. That is why I am so hesitant to have anyone decide other that the people directly involved. They are the ones who will have to live with their decision.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#78)
    by BigTex on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:47:25 AM EST
    Gee, too bad there's not so much gray matter. If you're gonna quote the guy, tox, quote the guy. Use the whole quote, not just the part that makes you look not so bad.
    Charlie - the quote was only used to enhance a concept called civility.
    That is why I am so hesitant to have anyone decide other that the people directly involved. They are the ones who will have to live with their decision.
    You're right, the parents are the only ones who will have to live with the decision. Doesn't that cry for father's rights though? Doesn't the father have some stake in the matter? This is an area where there could be enough agreement to get change if both sides were willing to apply pressure to the ideologues. In the end, some sort of compromise will be reached on abortion. As has been said by others upthread, the wealthy will always have access to abortion on demand, even if not in the US. The poor will always have access to coat hangers. When all is settled, the middle ground will win this one. There may be temporary victories on both sides, but ultimatly safe, legal, and rare will be the final outcome.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:50:46 AM EST
    That sums up my feeling Roger. With so much up for debate on the abortion issue and as to when life truly begins, I feel we must err on the side of individual choice and freedom.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:59:27 AM EST
    Even if it turns the stomach of people like Tex or myself. Father's right's is an important aspect...I'm with you there in regards to notification Tex. I'd sure want to know if one of my seeds had taken hold, and I'd like the opportunity to try and persuade her to keep it. But allowing the father to stop an abortion from taking place would be going to far, as I view that as an infringement on the women's rights. Bottom line...it's a doozy. I hope you are right that one day in the future we can find a compromise all reasonable people can live with.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#81)
    by Edger on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 09:08:21 AM EST
    glanton writes: Fact is, neither of us can imagine what goes through a woman's mind when she goes through with an abortion. ... it's none of your business, or mine, or anyone else's. roger writes: I am so hesitant to have anyone decide other that the people directly involved. They are the ones who will have to live with their decision. I agree with both glanton and roger. The abortion debate I think is only a shadow or symptom of a much larger "issue", or "problem" as I and many others see it, and an attempt by some (usually on the religious right, but not always) , whom I consider to be suffering from an extreme, though perhaps unconscious, insecurity. A personal insecurity that results in a herd mentality that is threatened by and seeks to control anyone without that insecurity by force of social stigmatization and trying to stick their noses where they don't belong. Relax people, it is none of your business how others live their lives, and neither are their personal decisions and choices. You only frustrate yourselves...

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#82)
    by glanton on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 09:47:41 AM EST
    kdog writes:
    But allowing the father to stop an abortion from taking place would be going to far, as I view that as an infringement on the women's rights.
    Exactly. But don't think for a moment, kdog, that BigTex and everyone else who screams about 'father's rights' on this issue isn't specifically calling for the very thing that worries you. These people mean business, no matter how civil or friendly they appear to be. Matthew Sheperd's murderers looked smooth and civil too, at trial.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#83)
    by BigTex on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 10:10:48 AM EST
    But don't think for a moment, kdog, that BigTex and everyone else who screams about 'father's rights' on this issue isn't specifically calling for the very thing that worries you.
    You are partially correct Glanton. I would like to see an end to all abortions. To that extent you are correct. However, I do not care about the means. Nor, do I suspect do a vast number of those who oppose abortion. If the situation could be taken care of in a support for the mother way, great. The end, not the means (so long as the means are legal and nonviolent), is what matters. The point you seem to miss is that the antiabortion movement will accept compromise. Each incrimental step is a step in the right direction, and is one segment of fewer babies killed. If a father can convince the mother not to have an abortion, then great. Give him the opportunity to do so. Realistically, a ban on abortion will not work, and there is a growing awareness in the antiabortion movement that a complete reversal of Roe is not a solution, all it does is lead to more dead mothers. So what is left? Make abortion safe, legal, and rare. Put the antiabortion members to a test. Ask them if they would support a father's right to veto an abortion outside of rape and the life of the mother. Answer will be yes. Ask them if they would support a ban on abortion in all cases except for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. A majority will accept the compromise solution because it ends almost all abortions. Another reason that such a compromise will be accepted is that it allows the focus to change from fighting against abortion politically to focusing on helping crisis pregnancies. Rather than sink the time, effort, and money into political fighting, the resources could be going to care for those in need.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#84)
    by glanton on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 10:24:10 AM EST
    However, I do not care about the means. Nor, do I suspect do a vast number of those who oppose abortion.
    You write this as though it were a surprise to someone. Of course you don't care about means: that is why none of your individual arguments carry weight. We know what you're after, prettied up, civilized up, however you like.
    The point you seem to miss is that the antiabortion movement will accept compromise. Each incrimental step is a step in the right direction, and is one segment of fewer babies killed.
    The word "inalienable" comes to mind. Of course you're willing to compromise, since it's someone else's rights that are on the line.
    there is a growing awareness in the antiabortion movement that a complete reversal of Roe is not a solution, all it does is lead to more dead mothers.
    I believe that you are either aware of this or good at pretending to be. As for the general participants in the "movement," YEAH RIGHT. All I hear from them is attempts to deny the existence of coathanger abortions, back alleys, etc. 'Let's go back to the 50s," they say with a smile, 'back then life was just like you see it on "Happy Days."' Above all, the most repugnant thing to me about your argument is the use of the word "compromise" again and again and again. Liberties cannot be compromised, but they sure can be snuffed out by smug--er, "civil," "friendly" conservatives.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#85)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 10:33:23 AM EST
    So did anyone catch the final episode of the three-part Frontline series "Country Boys"? It was a beautiful and illuminating piece of work. On the social AND psychological level. A real rural white companion to "Hoop Dreams" in the pantheon of American documentary films. About young men in harsh circumstances struggling to survive in America. First rate filmmaking for the viewer of every political and social stripe.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#86)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 11:03:45 AM EST
    Darkly - My, my. Rattling on, I see. And now you are whining and attacking with your usual slurs... Actually the UCLA study noted that the news coverage of the WSJ was very "liberal," but not the editorial page. But that is of no interest because my comment said:
    et al - I know you guys want to ignore the fact that Senator Reid has been caught with his hand in the cookie box, but really...do you think the American public can read and see and hear???
    Now most reasonable people would understand the comment was directed at the readers of this blog... "you guys" not CNN... or anyone. In that event I would have noted "MSM," but I am sure that is far to complex for you to grasp.... So keep on picking... Anyone can see you looking and looking.. Now, let's have your "off his meds" slur and some of the usual psychobabble you like to pass out. Because as Rhett said, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn." Ta Ta! Come back when you have longer to stay! charlienolinks - What don't you understand about "clients." You know, the big says to the Indians... Give money to him.... Glanton - Sometimes friends will be your critic. Only your enemies will laugh and enable destructive behavior. Worse than looking dumb, Kennedy also committed the very worst mistake a politician can. He demonstrated that he was weak. He made an overt threat and had his threat stuffed up his nose. Time for some young dude to take him on. As I noted in a recent comment, R v W is not going to be overturned. But it is not going to be let alone because it is an issue both sides can use to inflame their base.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 12:15:59 PM EST
    Darkly...My, my you do rattle on. And countering what? A statement I hadn't made? Wow, Darkly. pick pock pick

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#89)
    by Edger on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 12:59:06 PM EST
    Charlie, I think old Vito, had he been real instead of fictional, would have been much more honest a man than Alito. At least there were no questions about what to expect dealing with him. You'd always know where you stood.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#90)
    by roger on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 03:10:38 PM EST
    Tex, If I veto a woman's decision for abortion, doesn't that make her my slave? Or factory? Though I (greatly) sympathise, I dont think that it would work out.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#91)
    by BigTex on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 03:44:06 PM EST
    If I veto a woman's decision for abortion, doesn't that make her my slave? Or factory?
    Roger - I'd categorize it as being a coequal parent. If the veto power extended to the point where it would do harm to the mother, then I'd agree with you. But since that is an exception laid out in the veto power, it merely makes the two parents coequals. In general, I think a veto would cause some problems if not crafted well, but throw in a clause to protect the mother's health, a clause if the father can't be reached, a clause to except iof the father will be violent and this seems to at least diserve consideration. Glanton, I would suggest that liberites have already been compromised. A father's ability to have his child born has been compromised. Also, a father's ability to have notice that his child will be aborted has been compromised. I know I am equivocating on the word compromise here, using a different meaning, but this is a zero sum gain area, where one parent's libert's loss is the other's gain. Since zero sum is the outcome, compromise seems to be the best way to try to save some liberty for both parents.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#92)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:00:25 PM EST
    Darkly, how are you doing? Still snarfing around, eh? Pock, puck and pickeeee my man. You do nothing but try and pick fights. Sad, really sad. Your world must be so small that you have to sniff around behind me all the time. Wow. We are impressed. Why don't you show us some of your cowardly nonsense posts that you hid behind when I decided I'd had enough of your BS re spelling.... and started spelling checking your work... Like, do you see anything wrong with this statment..
    Then again, sometimes people do it just 'cause their semi-literate ignorant morons
    Hmmm, now that is funny.... But wait! That's not you, it is charliedonturf10... Oh well, I can't tell you apart, anyway. and from you..
    the fact that, to paraphrase what an inhuman spokesbeing for the government once said
    And your close was a classic.
    Keep the prattle up, PPJ, I'm heading into a busy year and I need the laughs you consistently provide here on a irregular basis.
    Puck, puck, pick.. Ta, Ta, Charlotte..er, Darkly.. er, charlienolinks BTW - I'm saving this one for my hall of laughter..

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#93)
    by roger on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 08:11:43 PM EST
    Tex, So, if a woman wants an abortion, and the man disagrees, she can allege abuse? Where I live, a bear allegation is enough for an arrest, even absent ANY physical evidence. Is it enough for an abortion? I think that your idea is impractical

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#94)
    by aw on Thu Jan 12, 2006 at 09:07:17 PM EST
    After listening to this virtual all-man debate: Yeah, you're a REAL MAN honey (wiping myself off). Feel better now?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#95)
    by BigTex on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 12:22:39 AM EST
    So, if a woman wants an abortion, and the man disagrees, she can allege abuse? Where I live, a bear allegation is enough for an arrest, even absent ANY physical evidence. Is it enough for an abortion?
    Looking at it from that prospective, your viewpoint seems more solid than mine.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 04:52:19 AM EST
    Darkly - You wrote:
    That people find someone's work less credible when there are spelling mistakes isn't something that PPJ is willing to acknowledge, and he seems unable to accept the fact that, to paraphrase what an inhuman spokesbeing for the government once said Keep the prattle up, PPJ, I'm heading into a busy year and I need the laughs you consistently provide here on a irregular basis.
    And in your response (?) you write:
    One made-up work, and one grammatical error.
    Could you explain the "work" word. What were you trying to say? Oh, I know you were trying to say:
    One made-up word, and one grammatical error.
    You brought the subject up, Darkly. Now you'll have to live with the results. charlienolinks - Gee, how does it feel to make such a stupid mistake while calling someone else:
    Then again, sometimes people do it just 'cause their semi-literate ignorant morons
    As F. Gump said:
    Stupid is as stupid does.
    Thanks for the laugh, dudes.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#97)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 04:53:12 AM EST
    aw - When did you start?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#98)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 07:23:41 AM EST
    Was anyone here active on the old CNN "community" comments pages back before they canned them?

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#99)
    by glanton on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 08:36:30 AM EST
    aw: I'm trying to understand the line you're taking here. Would you rather that only women spoke up for women's rights, only homosexuals for gay rights, etc.? If so, that's pretty sad; you're playing right into the hands of the Right.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#100)
    by pigwiggle on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 09:59:53 AM EST
    John Stossel, former crush of Ralph Nader and ilk, is doing a piece on US public schools on 20/20 tonight. If his look at gun control last week didn’t get you sufficiently twisted, this should. You can get that liberal indignation burning now with this synopsis over at Reason. Some of the highlights; they picked some kids from above average schools in New Jersey and put them up against some average Belgian students, they didn’t test so hot. How could this be when the US spent significantly more per student? Stossel thinks it’s the choice Belgians have; the government pays for the schools, but any school, so they are forced to compete. But where is all our money going? After all, we are spending double what we did 30 years ago (inflation adjusted). Well, New York will pay $20 million this year to warehouse teachers they can’t fire but are liabilities in the classroom. Like one they recently manage to fire after six years of working through the union negotiated process. He sent sexually explicit email to a 16-year-old student and was rewarded with a six year, $300,000 vacation. Looks too be interesting; hope you all watch.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#101)
    by Dadler on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 11:25:59 AM EST
    Pig, I saw a story about that schoolkid test, or a story about it. Not surprising at all, as American student achievement has lagged behind for decades -- across all social classes. However, educating kids in a much smaller society is always easier. No school in Belgium would have students who speak thirty different languages, like many urban districts do here. In the same way it's always easier for private schools than public because private schools can CHOOSE their students, while public schools must commit a large amount of resources to educate EVERYONE -- they don't have a choice. So, I'll be curious to see if Stossel plays devil's advocate to a genuine degree with all the factors that play into this. Not that our public schools can't do MUCH better. They will, however, when we as a society decide education is as important as raising new consumers. We're a madly consumer society, buy buy buy, consume consume consume...that's our mantra. Did the president say LEARN after 9/11? No, he said SHOP!! We're not a nation who's mantra is Smart People are Cool. Cool is bling and power here, we celebrate them. We're the Lottery Nation at heart. And on a national political level, we tend to mock and dismiss intellecuals, which doesn't send a good message. But the truth remains in this nation: go to a nice neighborhood and you'll find a well-funded school with high "acheivement" as WE measure it here -- that it doesn't beat other countries is another problem. Go to a poor neighborhood and you'll find a poor school -- lacking for resources, experienced teachers, parent support. If the affluent in this nation aren't doing well against the affluent in other nations, that's on them entirely. That we don't care about educating those who need it MOST in America is on us. Oh, and one of my favorite movies of all time is a little Belgian picture called La Promesse (The Promise), came out about a kid growing up in a hardscrabble Belgian industrial area. Check it out if you wanna see a Belgium I don't think Stossel will cover. But he might, we'll see.

    Re: Wednesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#102)
    by Dadler on Fri Jan 13, 2006 at 11:31:19 AM EST
    Add Pig, Although I think we'll both agree on the massive amount of money sucked into the gigantic education BEAURACRACY in this nation. Administrators, to be sure, are necessary, but not NEARLY as necessary as teachers. You wouldn't know that from our system, however.

    Wednesday Open Thread | 101 comments (101 topical)