Wednesday, June 28, 2006

When did the flag become "sacred?"

In order for something to be "desecrated," it must first be "sacred."

Republican senators, in arguing for the odious flag protection amendment, use "desecrated" ad nauseum.


When did the flag become elevated to the status of "sacred?" Which religion, of which, of course, there is none officially for the United States, has it in its dogma that the flag of the United States is worthy of adoration?

Republicans have long misused the language for their political ends.

This is, as yet, the most unpatriotic contortion of language of the year. One shudders to think what gross misapplications of words await during the forthcoming mid-term elections.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

"Burn, Baby, Burn!"? Maybe

Regardless of Republican senatorial leadership bloviating, burning a flag in protest of a government policy is an honorable, patriotic act. Very few other acts so give thanks to the men and women who have given life or limb to the protections of the U.S. Constitution.

If you think the government is violating the Bill of Rights, using the Bill of Rights to protest is the most logical action you can take.

Shame on Frist/Hatch for their pandering to ignorant Yahoos at the expense of our nation's most basic law.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Alice in Wonderland Repentance

The Episcopalian Church is debating whether or not it should apologize to the worldwide Anglican Church and repent for elevating Gene Robinson to bishop in 2003.

The wrong church sect is debating repentance. The worldwide Anglican Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Southern Baptists, Islamic congregations, and all other religious communions should be debating how soon they should be apologizing and repenting for their proscriptions on same-sex sexual orientation.

Jesus taught nothing about the issue. The proscriptions are based on the Old Testament and upon Paulist writings.

Meanwhile two allegedly gay teens were hanged a few weeks ago in Teheran.

Galileo was forced to recant his observations about our heliocentric planetary system, but he is reported to have muttered, "It moves" as he left the official proceedings. The American Episcopal Church might be forced to this shameful "apology" and "repentance," but "it moves."

American Episcopalians are on the side of God on this one.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Constitutional Balance of Power

Here's a "signing statement" which Mr. Bush issued upon the occasion of reauthorizing the "Patriot Act:"

President's Statement on H.R. 199, the "USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005"
Today, I have signed into law H.R. 3199, the "USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005," and then S. 2271, the "USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments Act of 2006." The bills will help us continue to fight terrorism effectively and to combat the use of the illegal drug methamphetamine that is ruining too many lives.

The executive branch shall construe the provisions of H.R. 3199 that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch, such as sections 106A and 119, in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information the disclosure of which could impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative processes of the Executive, or the performance of the Executive's constitutional duties.

The executive branch shall construe section 756(e)(2) of H.R. 3199, which calls for an executive branch official to submit to the Congress recommendations for legislative action, in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to recommend for the consideration of the Congress such measures as he judges necessary and expedient.

March 9, 2006.

Note the italicized words. What these words mean is that the Executive will decide whether or not to obey sections of this law, not Congress.

Where is the Congressional outrage?

What happened to a three-part governance?

What happened to checks and balances?

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Satisfaction Tempered

Zarqawi's death presents us with an unusual phenomenon: a certain sense of satisfaction, but tempered with certain knowledge that it will most probably be a very small success in the larger picture.

What does a confirmed death at 9:15 EDT on June 7, 2006, mean? Does it mean the suicide killings which were "in the pipeline" are going to be canceled? Or does it mean there will be a diminishing of suicide killings after the currently planned atrocities are completed? Or is there, at this moment (5:40 a.m., PDT, June 8, 2006), someone who has already assumed the mantle of terrorist-in-chief?

Finally, at what moment in time will the thinkers of the planet decide to study the early lives of perpetrators of horrors in order to try to determine when those lives changed from laughing toddlers to paths which would lead to bloodied monsters?

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Balance of Power

In his speech on June 5, Mr. Bush takes a shot or two at "activist judges." He makes a point of stressing that Federal judges are not elected.

What he doesn't mention is that the Founding Fathers intentionally wrote the Constitution in such a way that the federal judges would be unelected, as a third element of power which would be apart from electoral politics, and, ostensibly, neutral in their deliberations and decisions.

Federal judges who rule against legislation or administrative dicta which runs counter to the Constitution are doing their jobs.

Surely Mr. Bush knows that.

Sphere: Related Content