From the author of The Book of Virtues.
 

Wasn't this about the same time that the GOP was working to eliminate the DOE (which I supported, by the way)? If so, it does make some sense.

Liberal skepticism.......
 

Single malt?

From the author of The Book of Virtues.
 

You supported the DoE or eliminating the DoE?

From the author of The Book of Virtues.
 

Eliminating.

From the author of The Book of Virtues.
 

Right on!

Give Peace a Chance
 

You're being oversimplistic. I agree that most peacenicks are naive and have their heads up their asses, BUT they do serve a purpose. They are part of the natl conscience. They keep us from becoming too violent in our pursuit of law and order. They are necessary (even the guy quoting Noam Chomsky and the really baked kid in the Cat in the Hat costume screaming about how Bush is a fascist).

I also don't think peaceniks are against all forms of violence. Today, most of them are aginst the Iraq War - something many law and order types even agree is unnecessary violence for no good reason.

Give Peace a Chance
 

They are useful idiots. Useful for bulldozer practice....

http://www.root-1.co.il/Media%20file...ie-flag-02.gif

http://www.historylink.org/db_images/RachCorrie.jpg

http://erhard-arendt.de/deutsch/pale...er/corrie6.jpg

The Corporation
 

I watched this documentary called The Corporation last night. Its packed full of really cool information, and could have been a great evenhanded historical piece, outlining the history of corporations in the world.

Unfortunately, the producer decided to make it into a left wing, absolutely absurd criticism of corporations. The facts and stories are interesting enough to hold you for two hours, but every section is punctuated with some "point" about how corps are ruining our world. The movie never once gives a stitch of credit to the good corps do. It seems to suggest socialism is preferable and never deals with the fact that, but for corporations, many of the advancements in health, science, technology, communications, etc... would never exist. Instead, it just one-sidedly focuses on environmental problems caused by corps and selective examples of corps being prosecuted for crimes.

I don't mind a movie with an agenda, but these fucking extreme liberals go too far with this shit. They don't understand that they lose people when they put out one sided propaganda like this flick. And the preachiness was insulting. The narrative - delivered in NPRish tone (often by whiny freakish looking creatures, including Chomsky himself [possibly the most clueless fuck ever to publish an academic paper]) - reminds you of that idiot who taught you Econ 101 in freshman year. It was that condescending tone - the voice of one who'd studied but never actually plied her purported area of expertise.

I recommend this movie for two reasons:

1. There is a really interesting discussion of how the fact that corps are not allowed by law to have consciences affects society; and

2. You get a better understanding of why people hate the extreme left, and just how smug and self-righteous it can be.

White flag?
 

To all of my liberal pals here,

You may have been right about W after all. This morning for me could be a breaking moment. Harriet Miers is certainly, on her face (npi), the worst Supreme Court nominee since Souter, whose, coincidentally, highest qualification was being a personal friend of a friend of the Bush family (i.e. Sununu), although this one apparently is a personal friend of W. While I always cringed at Bush I's comment that "Thomas was the most qualified person for the seat", this lady makes Thomas look qualified.

Either she is a strategic appointment, offered as a sacrificial lamb (for her lack of record), with the ultimate thought being the liberals can't block two in a row, and the next one will be the real deal (JRB, PO, ML or EJ) or Bush may have just fvcked us for the next 20 years.

FYI, sources say this lady donated to Gore's campaign. And Bensten's.

Like fucking father, like son.

Spanky, what the fuck?



http://www.thehollywoodliberal.com/bush_abbas.jpg

Give Peace a Chance
 

Dude, if that is a series of shots of that dipshit 18 year old who was run over by a tank in Gaza a few years bac, Ty's going to give that post the hook... I think Faces of Death rotten.com style photos are banned. But then again, I never read the rules. I just agreed to them.

White flag?
 

Ahhhh, good to see W's Connecticut side is retaking his brain.

Silly Penske, you don't even understand, do you? If Bush wwent hard right and gave the white trash their constitutional literalist, he'd be dooming the GOP for decades. We'd be taxed senseless by some serious left wing Dem president next time around. We'd be fucked, my dear boy. Fucked. High taxes and a socially right wing SCOTUS? Who wins there?

This is a brilliant pick - it preserves the GOP's future and mutes Dem criticism (Harry Reid suggested Bush appoint Miers).

Give Peace a Chance
 

It's not Rotten.com. They are pics that have been published in many commercial publications and are all over the web and not graphic (in comparison to the close-up shots of her run-over). This is an example, and a cautionary one for the liberal duncery here, of what happens when you attempt to assist terrorists in their campaign of genocide. You get bulldozed.

White flag?
 

1. I am more Connecticut than either Bush or you, and I fail to see the relation to the Nutmeg State;

2. Please review the backgrounds of Federal appellate judges Luttig, Jones, and [hi uknowwho!] McConnell (whose nomination, btw, I believe a well known liberal here would support) [/hi uknowwho!], and explain to me how these people are white trash nominees. You or I should have such a distinguished legal pedigree.

3. If this is Bush's strategy, to appease the Dems for future generations, then he is as much of a liar as his dad (who, as far as I am concerned, can burn in hell, assuming there is a hell). I am not convinced of this rationale, but if its true I will formally and publicly eat every word of support I ever gave this nomination and probably not vote R for a while (much as after Bush's dad, I didn't vote R for 8 years). I see this more as pure cronyism, which is only marginally less bad, but still results in a bad nomination. Bush was not elected by the Dems. He was elected by a consituency to which he made certain representations as to what he would do. He likely just breached one of those reps (and a big one)-the level of substantive egregiousness behind that breach is up for speculation.

White flag?
 

1. I mean Connecticut in the sense that Miers appears to be a socially moderate, fiscal conservative - a Connecticut moderate, possibly even "Rockefeller"* republican;

2. The nominees you mention are obviously not white trash, and you know I was not saying they were. I was saying that many of the people who support such "originalists" are of thw white trash persuasion. Not all, mind you... just many;

3. You will vote GOP because you will have no other acceptable economic option;

4. Bush is doing the GOP a favor. Nobody wins if the SCOTUS goes hard right. Bush is avoiding a whiplash pendulum shift to the left in the next elections. If he nominated a right wing imbecile stupid enough to start issuing radical rulings and overturning sacred cows of jurisprudence, you'd piss off the moderate GOP vote.

5. You can't give it all away to the rabid right. We live in a country of 280 million. 10 million of us should not be able to control what everyone else does by acting like children and threatening to pull their votes if they don't get a justiice who gets behind their pet issues. Bush is doing the right thing here, as his father did in this situation. He's doing the right thing for the country and his party.


* Thought extinct.

White flag?
 

Who the hell is Harriet Miers?

I know she's WH counsel, and that she's a Texas buddy and all. But still. Unless this woman assasinates abortion doctors in her spare time or something, I'm completely baffled by Bush's apparent punt on this one.

ETA: A friend who happens to know a bit about this woman has passed along the following trivia:

"*she's unmarried, a career professional women who's been very successful.

* she was the President of the Dallas law firm Locke Purnell Rain Harrell (a firm that I interviewed with out of law school, but decided not to pursue) when it merged with the Houston law firm Liddell Sapp, becoming the co-Managing Partner of Locke Liddell & Sapp after the merger.

* she was a well-known litigation attorney before she started working for Governor Bush

* she's worked in the Bush White House for the last several years.

* she's said to be very loyal to Bush

* she has no judicial experience. All her career has been either in private practice or in politics.

Should be interesting."

Indeed.

White flag?
 

1. Elitist paternalistic Country club republicans like the Rockefellers are extinct and thankfully. We need less fed gov't, of either the Rep or dem strain.

2. Who cares if white trash support originalists, the bottom line is the legal accomplishments as jurists of Luttig, JRB, Clement, Jones, Alita, McConnel, Owen et al, far outweigh those of this Miers person. She is a lightweight and frankly barely more qualified than you or I. Hell, I'd take Ty over her. No offence.

3. Dissent. Do you read the words in my posts or just look at the pics? I will recap for you [SPANKY, SCROLL PAST THIS] After Bush rescinded his "No new taxes promise", I voted against him and for Perot. In 96, I thought the GOP made a shitty nomination, despite the fact that years prior I had been a Dole supporter, and I voted for Perot. In 2000, in protest of another subpar nominee I would have voted for Gore, but for the fact that he supported perjury by the PotUS and in the process helped diminished the office of the President (I was unaware of the national security damage these people had done at that time that would directly result in 3000 dead Americans) [/SPANKY, SCROLL PAST THE ABOVE]

4. Bush just lost the hard right wing of the party which could ensure a Dimwit controlled fed govt for the next decade.

5. His father lied, and now, apparently, Bush has been exposed as a liar too. While not under oath, it is still a huge breach of trust. This may be his lame duck event. Either way, it cements the reality, he is no REagan.

What right thing did his father do, Thomas?

White flag?
 

1. Its cronyism at its worst, but look at the record, Souter, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Condi, Karen Hughes, the Saudis. The Saudis!!!

2. Lame. Duck.

I pray that I am proven wrong, but sadly, I suspect that all of my worst fears from 2000 are coming true. Even if he doesn't raise income taxes in the next 3 years, his failure to work diligently for the estate tax repeal is close enough to a tax increase. Can I rescind my vote in Florida from 2000?

My Theory
 

As I listened to the litany of issues before the court, it struck me that there is one set of issues this administration is more deeply invested in than any other. That issue is whether the administration's actions with respect to prisoners of war in Afghanistan and Iraq meet constitutional muster in particular.

Could it be that having a Bush loyalist with a voice on the court is more important at this juncture than the agenda? Of course, this doesn't address the issue of when she will be needed to recuse herself.

All else aside, I am not ready to question the woman's credentials as inadequate; she has had positions of great responsibility in both government and the private sector, and could turn out to be a fine jurist.

White flag?
 

Bush did not lose the hard right. They have no choice but to vote GOP. Like Judge Smails said to Spalding, "[They'll] get nothing... and like it!" What's their option? Vote for Hillary? Pissing on those people is the best thing for the country. The Jesus Nazis and the Shrill Left have to get slapped down and told to shut the fuck up. The Left and its Michael Moore wing got their asses handed to them in 2004. Now its the Right's turn. Both poles have to be taught that the Country will not tolerate tyranny by a vehement minority. Bush wisely chose to shut down the Right here and now, rather than allow their idiocy to lead to a huge pendulum shift next election.

Don't you understand the wisdom of being centrist? Its the radical shifts which hurt people. Bush is blunting a massive shift in 2008. He's saving everyone from the Dems electing a big govt liberal who will ruin our future.

Now, if he could only figure out how to undo his own huge govt, he'd really redeem himself. Otherwise, the next president - hopefully a centrist from either party - will spend his first term dismantling George Bush's Great Society.

The poles need to be shut down because they distract us from the true battle. The battle is everyone versus the political class. We need to carve govt down to nothing but essential services and wipe out the bloated inefficient complexes that feed off it and within it. The people who want smaller govt on both sides of the aisle need to get together and stop being split by idiots who think an inconsequential and minor issue like abortion should drive the national political debate.

Miers is a centrist pick - confirm her.

My Theory
 

Well, he may have one. From noted Bush critic David Frum:

• I believe I was the first to float the name of Harriet Miers, White House counsel, as a possible Supreme Court. Today her name is all over the news. I have to confess that at the time, I was mostly joking. Harriet Miers is a capable lawyer, a hard worker, and a kind and generous person. She would be an reasonable choice for a generalist attorney, which is indeed how George W. Bush first met her. She would make an excellent trial judge: She is a careful and fair-minded listener. But US Supreme Court?
  
  In the White House that hero worshipped the president, Miers was distinguished by the intensity of her zeal: She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met. She served Bush well, but she is not the person to lead the court in new directions - or to stand up under the criticism that a conservative justice must expect.

White flag?
 

The estate tax issue is silly. I agree it should be abolished. But if you've got enough cash that its an issue to you, you've already had a financial planner and lawyer structure an avoidance plan. Nobody just sits around with a stack of money in the bank and gets caught by the estate tax. I've never heard of it. Don't give me the family farmer/small business owner myth.

Give Peace a Chance
 

Quit being an asshole.

Give Peace a Chance
 

He can't help it. It's his nature.

Give Peace a Chance
 

So, Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King were against justice? The Quakers are servants of evil?

Interesting theory. I disagree.

I assume this is related to your previously stated position that anyone who is critical of the administration's decision to invade Iraq must logically be a supporter of continuing the reign of Saddam Hussein.

S_A_M

Give Peace a Chance
 

I was waiting for the photoshopping of Robert Byrd ddriving the bulldozer.

Give Peace a Chance
 

I know you know better than that. You've heard Daniel Carver- the jews are the devil. no way Byrd helps drive the dozer.

White flag?
 

This may show that the social conservatives and religious right are -- in the eyes of the mainstream GOP leadership and GWB -- the ugly little sisters at the fraternity house.

You'll sit around and drink beer with them, screw them a time or two when you're loaded, and you sure need them to build your float and help around the House -- but you're not going to put them up for homecoming queen.

OTOH -- who really knows with this woman?

I see the question here as being:

(a) did Bush just want to avoid a big fight and name a justice he was comfortable with; or

(b) Did Bush want to avoid a big fight with a stealth nominee who would transform the Court's jurisprudence.

S_A_M

My Theory
 

Oh my.

S_A_M

Give Peace a Chance
 

I wish you luck in this campaign. If you succeed, your next trick should be to get the sun to rise in the west a few times.

White flag?
 

In the first place, Rehnquist himself had no judicial experience when he was appointed. In fact, numerous Justices have been appointed without prior judicial experience. The only real harm in that is that there is no track record on which to politicize the appointee.

The woman was the first partner of a large Texas firm, the first woman to be elected the President of the Dallas bar, the first woman to be voted president of the Texas state bar. She's obviously a highly-accomplished lawyer.

I can guarantee that Bush knows her politics and her judicial leanings. It's just the rest of the country that doesn't and won't unless she's affirmed. Does anybody here really think that Bush would appoint someone who was not in his mold to be his personal counsel, let alone to the SC?

White flag?
 

Certainly true. I don't remember the Rehnquist nomination, but presume that he was a particularly esteemed member of the bar at the time. Here -- who knows? I don't pretend to be up to date on all of the prominent lawyers, but there are loads of people who've never heard of this woman.

Perhaps. These are all good accomplishments, to be sure, but I don't really know that this is SCOTUS material.

Harry Reid's earlier comments about wanting someone with actual litigating experience -- someone who's actually taken a deposition, tried a case, etc -- are well taken, but I didn't know he meant it to be to the exclusion of any judicial experience.

I agree with this. In some respects, I'm more concerned about a nominee whose primary attribute has been her loyalty to the president.

White flag?
 

Rehnquist received no small amount of criticism for being essentially a Republican "hack". One of the central points of opposition was that, while working for the Republican party, he had set up methods for systematically challenging black voters.

White flag?
 

I think that Harry Reid may very well have meant precisely that. As I noted earlier, one benefit of not having a judicial track record is that the nominee will be queried on her judgment, ethics, temperament, and intellect instead of what she meant in foot note five of her dissenting concurrence in California Ex. Rel. Beavis v. Butthead.

I am far more comfortable with a trial lawyer who has never put on a robe being a SC justice than I am with an academic who has never seen the inside of a courtroom (hello Scalia, Posner, et. al.).

And I agree with you that it is more disturbing to know that this is a woman who is so closely and intimately tied with the Bush administration and has such a high degree of loyalty to a man whose judgment I so completely distrust.

White flag?
 

2, but experience on one side of the bench and experience on the other are not mutually exclusive. And when a president goes to either extreme, I start to worry about his motivations. If it's "she is a brilliant, universally respected lawyer" or "he is a scholar whose views influence judges throughout the nation", that's one thing. If it's "she's a loyal devotee of the President," well, that's another.....

White flag?
 

Did either Brandeis or Warren have prior judicial experience? I believe both were heavily involved in politics and could be viewed as appointments driven by political payback or symbolism.

The Corporation
 

I saw it last year in a sneak preview and I really liked it a lot.

The guy who ran the carpet company from North Carolina and the Shell guy who invited the protestors to tea were my favorite subjects in the movie.

The section on how corporations market to kids scared the crap out of me.

I rather liked the film, even if it was absurdly long.

White flag?
 

Seems totally consistent with all his other nominations save Roberts. Someone close to him that he knows and trusts and he probably owes a favor to who may or may not be qualified at all and we won't know until the shit hits the fan.

You didn't like Bensten?

White flag?
 

Posner was assistant SG for a period, and also worked at the FTC. He may not have seen the inside of a trial court room, but he certainly was in court.

Scalia practiced at Jones Day for 6 years, and was an AAG. In those days, I suspect that he actually did see the inside of a courtroom by his 4th or 5th year as an associate.

White flag?
 

All of them?

Give Peace a Chance
 

Are the new avatar and sig line related to the SCt nomination? Or (my guess) the Lions-Bucs game? Or some unexplained deviance?

S_A_M