The Original Musings

Be aware! The definition of racism is changing!

Admit it … almost had you going there, didn’t it?

I didn’t even know he had been sentenced!

Three different people (among them my daughter Anna) sent this to me today so it must be making the ’rounds on the internet.

Remember the guy who got on a plane with a bomb built into his shoe and tried to light it? (Richard Reid) Did you know his trial is over? Did you know he was sentenced? Did you see/hear any of the judge’s comments on TV or Radio?  Everyone should hear what the judge had to say.

Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say.   After admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his ‘allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah,’ defiantly stating, ‘I think I will not apologize for my actions,’ and told the court ‘I am at war with your country.’  The Judge then delivered the sentence.

The version being sent around is close but not identical to what was actually said by the Judge.  Here is what the Judge said to Mr. Reid at his sentencing; this is taken from the transcript itself:

United States v. Reid — Final Statements by Judge Young

Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.

On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutive one with the other. That’s 80 years.

On Count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years consecutive to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you on each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 for the aggregate fine of $2 million.

The Court accepts the government’s recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.

The Court imposes upon you the $800 special assessment.

The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need not go any further.

This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and a just sentence. It is a righteous sentence. Let me explain this to you.

We are not afraid of any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is all too much war talk here. And I say that to everyone with the utmost respect.

Here in this court where we deal with individuals as individuals, and care for individuals as individuals, as human beings we reach out for justice.

You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist.

And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists.

We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court. You’re a big fellow. But you’re not that big. You’re no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders.

In a very real sense Trooper Santiago had it right when first you were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and where the TV crews were and he said you’re no big deal. You’re no big deal.

What your counsel, what your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today? I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing.

And I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you. But as I search this entire record it comes as close to understanding as I know.

It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose.

Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom. They carry it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom. So that everyone can see, truly see that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely.

It is for freedom’s seek that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf and have filed appeals, will go on in their, their representation of you before other judges. We care about it. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties.

Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms.

Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. Here, in this courtroom, and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.

The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged, and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.

See that flag, Mr. Reid? That’s the flag of the United States of America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag still stands for freedom. You know it always will. Custody, Mr. Officer. Stand him down.

Here’s the best part of this: he was sentenced on January 31, 2003. The man has been serving his sentence for more than seven years, and someone is only just now bothering to pass around the Judge’s commentary. I guess it didn’t make good press?

* – You Can’t Make This Shit Up

Here’s a trio of quickies for your reading pleasure.  I ask you:  with news like this, who needs fiction?

Here’s one from the “you gotta be kidding me” files: The victim was wearing skinny jeans, therefore, she could not possibly have been raped.  You want to ask how the hell skinny jeans = not raped, don’t you?  Well, let me explain that for you. Nicholas Gonzales (23) and a 24-year old woman met for drinks in April 2008 and then returned to his house to listen to music. Gonzales claims they then had consensual sex together; the victim says she was raped. She testified that “I struggled to try to get up for a while and then he undid my jeans and he pulled them off.” An Australian jury acquitted Gonzales of rape because they accepted his attorney’s argument that he personally believed it would be “difficult for skinny jeans to be taken off by someone else unless the wearer’s assisting, collaborating, consenting.” [The Frisky]

This being a Census year, we’ve all been faced with the form demanding answers to the list of Census questions (which go well beyond the data they’re supposed to be entitled to — name of the head of household and a headcount for how many persons live there). Failure to complete the form will result in a Census worker being sent to your home to demand the answers in person, and failure to answer the worker will earn you not only a fine, but can also result in the application of ever-increasing “inconveniences” like suspension of mail delivery to pressure you into providing the information.  Now here’s something you may not have known:  Census workers – all of them, even the brand new temporary worker hired just to gather data — are empowered under federal law to actually demand access to any apartment or any other type of home or room that is rented out, in order to count persons in the abode and for “the collection of statistics.”  If the owner of your leased premises refuses to grant the Census worker access to your living quarters — whether you are home or not — the landlord himself will face sanctions and can be fined $500 per occurrence.  In addition, some Census workers are demanding — and receiving – private cell phone numbers from landlords in order to call tenants to try to obtain Census information.  [AJC - Bob Barr]

He’s the President of the United States … why should he have to honor the fallen at Arlington National Cemetery and lay a wreath on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier for Memorial Day?  Obama decided to skip out of DC and has gone home to Chicago for the long holiday weekend.  On Monday, instead of the Commander In Chief being at Arlington, he is scheduled to participate in a Memorial Day ceremony at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood, Illinois and Joe Biden will lay the wreath at Arlington instead.  But don’t worry, Obama will be back in plenty of time to preside over a June 2 ceremony at the White House, where Paul McCartney will be given the Gershwin Prize, a lifetime achievement award for contributions to pop music.  Glad to see he’s got his priorities straight. [GJSentinel] & [Spinner]

Everything you need to know about some things …

American Idol season 9 — Paula Abdul left, her spot was taken by Ellen Degeneres whose qualifications for judging were debatable at best.  She’s quickly become known for stupid commentary (“you’re like a banana”) mixed in with some surprisingly accurate observations from time to time.  Simon Cowell announced this would be his final season.  No major scandals erupted with the Top 24 (a few mediocre ones, but really, it was a ho-hum group this year).  The final performance show was May 25 (Tuesday) and the final two are Lee DeWyze and Crystal Bowersox.   Crystal (a single mom from Ohio) has been a strong, and steady contender all season long.  Lee (a former paint salesman from Illinois) has been the one who exhibited the most growth over the course of the season and though he is not a “showman” his voice is quite good.  Throughout the season, Crystal has had many “moments” while Lee has only had a couple (his biggest and best was last week’s performance of Hallelujah, which was chosen for him by Simon).  My prediction for this season’s idol:  Crystal Bowersox.  Honestly, though, I’ll be happy no matter which one wins, because I’ve liked them both from the start. 

Cutest (recent) Quip – ”DEAR LORD, THIS YEAR YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTOR, PATRICK SWAYZE. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTRESS, FARRAH FAWCETT. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE SINGER, MICHAEL JACKSON. I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, MY FAVORITE PRESIDENT IS BARACK OBAMA. AMEN”

How dare you! — When they were voting on which things to include and strike from the latest edition of textbooks to be used by Texas students (which influences what will be printed in *all* textbooks across the US), state Board of Education officials had a heated debate about whether or not to include Barack Obama’s middle name in the information being added about him.

Lawrence Allen, a black former high school principal from Houston offered a motion to enter President Barack Obama’s name in a section of the curriculum that recognized significant dates in U.S. History.

David Bradley, a white businessman from Beaumont, motioned that the president’s legal name should be used, Barack Hussein Obama. “I think we should give him the full honor and privilege of his full name.”

“I am getting pretty fed up with this,” said Democrat Mary Helen Berlanger. “You don’t have to be derogatory. We don’t always put in Jefferson in William Jefferson Clinton.”

“This is our first black president,” said board member Mavis Knight, who is black. “You are making it sound humiliating.”

“I ask the member to withdraw the motion and move forward in a dignified manner,” said Democrat Rick Agusto.

Bradley did, but said under his breath, he did so, “to put an end to the whining.”

Knight shot back, “I don’t consider it whining.”

His middle name is humiliating?  Mentioning his middle name is derogatory?  Other things being excluded from the books include mention of Joseph Smith and Nathan Hale in elementary school history books — the latter because reading about his hanging “upsets” children.

Biden’s Latest Faux Pas — Brussels, Belgium is more deserving of the title “Capital of the Free World” than is Washington, DC.

[Biden] suggested that Washington, D.C., his home, is undeserving of that title — notwithstanding its wealth of global organizations and the countless international summits that take place there.

“As you probably know, some American politicians and American journalists refer to Washington, D.C. as the ‘capital of the free world,’” Biden said. “But it seems to me that in this great city, which boasts 1,000 years of history and which serves as the capital of Belgium, the home of the European Union, and the headquarters for NATO, this city has its own legitimate claim to that title.”

Biden’s Latest Faux Pas, Part Deux — At that same May 6th assembly referenced just above, our esteemed Veep also remarked that he was “particularly honored” to address the body, “as a lawmaker for more than 36 years in our parliament.”

Oh, those crazy Democrats, Part I — Remember Rod Blagojevich?  Rod thought there was nothing wrong with selling off Barack Obama’s (then-newly-vacated) senate seat to the highest bidder.  He was impeached in January of 2009 and is scheduled to go to trial June 3.

Oh, those crazy Democrats, Part II — In February, Joe Sestak alleged that the White House last summer offered him a high-ranking position in the administration if he would sit out the Pennsylvania primary against Arlen Specter — Specter was formerly a Republican before became a Democrat last year in the belief that his re-election would be secure if he jumped ship.   Sestak refused to step aside, and handily won the primary against Specter.  Now Sestak is facing Republican Pat Toomey in the election this November and is being asked to explain in detail about this job offer and the conditions for accepting it.  An investigation is being sought and the White House is promising to comment “soon.”

Well, if the Democrats can do it, why can’t I? — Sarah Ferguson, the Dutchess of York, was caught on (hidden) camera offering to sell a “wealthy businessman” (played by a reporter) access to her ex-husband, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, for the paltry sum of £500,000 (about $725,000). Fergie is also on camera receiving $40,000 as a down payment from the businessman (reporter) and making arrangements for the balance to be wired to a bank account of her choosing later on but prior to the meeting.  Sarah has since issued an apology and stated emphatically that the Duke knew nothing at all of her activities; Buckingham Palace has also released a statement insisting the Duke was unaware and above reproach.

“I don’t know why you’d care, but just so you know …” — Victoria Beckham says her marriage is legitimate and not just a sham put on to preserve the family image for their children or a business arrangement to protect their business empire.

“I don’t know why you’d want to, but you can’t” — take your iPad into Yankee Stadium, that is.  Nor can you take a laptop computer.  You know, though, conversely, why can’t you take your iPad or your laptop if you’re paying the price of the ticket and not disturbing or disrupting anyone?  I’d rather see someone on their laptop (which I can ignore) than be forced to listen to some dumbass on their cell phone.

Her voice is toxic and so’s her jewelry — WalMart has pulled Miley Cyrus’ line of jewelry out of their stores because it was found to have dangerously high levels of cadmium.  Cadmium is toxic if ingested (imagine your little girl putting the edge of her bracelet in her mouth to fasten the clasp, or idly putting her pendant in her mouth, for instance) and the levels in the jewelry were high enough to be potentially lethal.

… a veritable cornucopia of things to piss you off …

Serving up the latest in Zero Tolerance and Obama fare … mmm, mmm, good!

Appetizer

Five California high school students were told they could either turn their t-shirts inside out or go home on May 5th for wearing t-shirts with US flags on them.  The Vice Principal said he was afraid for the boys’ safety since they were wearing these “incendiary” shirts on the “only day” that Mexican students can express their national pride.  When the boys refused to turn the shirts inside out – pointing out, among other things that the shirts are not a violation of the school dress code, that they each have several different US flag shirts which they wear all the time without challenge, that the Mexican students wear Mexican flag shirts any time they feel like wearing them, and that they felt that turning the shirts inside out was disrespectful to the flag, to them and a violation of their first amendment rights — they were sent home.  On Tuesday, May 11, following a school board meeting in which multiple parents expressed their displeasure at the situation, Superintendent Wesley Smith said, “They have a right to wear those shirts on school campus, on all of our campuses, they shouldn’t have been asked to take them off.” The superintendent also said an investigation into how administrators handled everything on Cinco de Mayo is still underway and should be complete by June, after which they’ll decide if any disciplinary action should be taken.  [FOX News, ABC News]

Wine

Remember when Joe the Plumber asked Obama exactly what he wanted to do if elected, and Obama, speaking off the cuff, said that “it’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success, too.  I think when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.” Remember when people said that sounded an awful lot like Socialism if not full blown Communism and his supporters accused them of over-reacting and blowing things out of proportion?  Well, on April 28, Obama went off the teleprompter and tried to paraphrase while speaking in Quincy, Illinois.  Here’s part of what he said:  “We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow the economy.” Silly me, and here I had no idea that Obama gets to decide when we’ve “made enough money” — or whether or not my success was “fairly earned” providing a good product or a good service.  Furthermore, I must admit that I didn’t have a clue that it was my responsibility to “grow our economy,” core or otherwise.  All these years, I thought I was supposed to be growing my own economy so as to support my family.  [Google It™ or you can *watch* him say it under the fold]

Entreé

Ten-year old Leighann came home from her Texas elementary school in tears, afraid to tell her parents that (for the first time in her life) she had gotten in trouble at school.  Leighann and her friend were under orders to serve a week’s detention during lunch and recess, and they had to write an essay about what they did and why it was wrong.  What had they done? Leighann’s friend gave her a single Jolly Rancher candy.  Leighann’s parents say the punishment was extreme, but school officials insist it was not.  Jack Ellis, superintendent for the school district,  says it’s a matter of following state guidelines to limit the amount of junk food in schools. “Whether or not I agree with the guidelines, we have to follow the rules.” The state Department of Agriculture does in fact mandate that school lunch foods need to be baked rather than fried, nutritious rather than loaded with empty calories and things like that.  But a department spokesman says that there is absolutely nothing in the rules that compels a school to punish a student for bringing his own junk food to school, that their policy does not prohibit friends from sharing a Jolly Rancher candy, and that if a parent wants to pack candy in the child’s lunch, they can.   The department even sent a letter to the school reminding staff that state policy doesn’t outline such punishments but the school is not backing down.  Leighann’s parents say the school routinely goes too far in punishing students:  Students at the school are required to wear a belt.  A few months ago Leighann’s younger brother was given an in-school suspension for failing to wear one even though his father called the school secretary to explain that their new puppy chewed up the boy’s only belt that morning.  The boy was made to “sit in a room all day and stare at a wall.” Leighann’s parents say that they’re pulling their kids out of the school at the end of the school year; if necessary, they say they’ll send them to private school.  [FOX News]

On the Side

Speaking at Hampton University in Virginia, President Obama suggested that “less is more” when it comes to absorbing news content and urged graduates to take a skeptical eye toward news from blogs, cable television and radio as well as modern gadgets like iPods and PlayStations.  Obama told graduates that the class of 2010 is “coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy. With so many voices clamoring for attention on blogs, and on cable, on talk radio, it can be difficult, at times, to sift through it all — to know what to believe, to figure out who’s telling the truth and who’s not. Let’s face it, even some of the craziest claims can quickly gain traction. I’ve had some experience in that regard.” You will no doubt recall that last September, the president used a string of major network and cable interviews to scold the media for playing up “outrageous” political comments.  Then Obama and his administration spent much of last fall criticizing Fox News in specific. It’s now starting to seem that targeting cable and blogs has become something of a hobby: In February, he urged Democratic senators to turn off their televisions. He singled out FOX, CNN, MSNBC and blogs, urging the lawmakers to get out of the “echo chamber.” In March an e-mail was sent to Senate staffers warning them not to visit The Drudge Report out of concern for a non-existent virus.  Pointing out that nobody has used the media more masterfully than Obama, Brent Bozell, president of Media Research Center, says that in order to prove his “sincerity” about media and technology gripes, Obama should delete his massive e-mail list and take his staff off TV.  “It’s just posturing on his part. He is trying to put himself in opposition to those forces to improve his status with the public.”  [FOX News]

Dessert

Two years ago, 5-year old Ryan lost part of his left leg in a lawnmower accident.  His leg was amputated below the knee, and he wears a prosthetic limb.  Ryan is a kindergarten student, and the bus ride from his home to the school is about an hour long.  He and his 7-year old sister used to ride the bus to and from school every day, but that stopped earlier this month because the school has informed Ryan’s parents that they must transport Ryan and his sister from now on.  Why?  Kids on the school bus — older kids, some as old as 13 — have been bullying Ryan, calling him names and taunting him.  They’ve stolen Ryan’s backpack.  They’ve tried to pull off his prosthetic leg.  Ryan’s dad spoke with the parents of  the kids involved and he thought the matter was resolved, until May 4th, when Ryan was given a black eye after being punched on the bus by a 13-year old who is one of the biggest kids on the bus.  After talking to the boy’s parents and getting nowhere, Ryan’s dad asked the bus driver and the school principal to do something about it, because “He’s young, he’s five, he’s disabled. I can’t ride the bus and stand up for him, you know. He can’t defend himself, so who easier to pick on than a kid who gets punched in the eye and sits quietly in the corner.  I asked for the child to be disciplined. I asked for him to be suspended from school to teach him a lesson because there’s a zero tolerance for bullying.  Instead we were told Ryan will no longer be on the bus, that it’s not safe for him or my daughter and that we have to drive them the round trip.” When Ryan’s dad complained, the school district offered to pay for the gas to make the trip each day.  [CBC News]

You’ll find that video under the fold, as promised. Think of it as the after-dinner mint.

Read the rest of this entry »

You would think the President of these United States would be aware of what he is presiding over.

I suppose the reason three different people forwarded an AP article to me is because they’ve been subjected at one time or another to my ranting about misuse of the term “Democracy” to define our system of government.  It irritates me to no end to listen to some dumbass wax lyrical about our “Democratic” government and how other countries should adopt “Democracy” so that they too can enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Despite my ire, I usually do not bother to correct imbeciles, primarily because I generally go out of my way to avoid controversy or conflict. If it’s irritating enough, I typically come home and rant about it on my blog rather than engage in frustrating and often futile attempts to educate idiots.

Given sufficient provocation, however, there can come a point when (regardless of what the subject may be) the person(s) doing the speaking have managed to invoke my input. Sometimes it’s because they include me in the conversation despite my attempts to politely demure. Other times it’s because the person(s) they’re talking to may not be beyond salvation and for whatever reason I have decided I give a damn about their being misled. Occasionally it comes about because I decide to Stir Shit Up™, which (depending on my mood) can be either cathartic or entertaining.

I can embark upon a rant of epic proportion to explain that while our government relies on some aspects of “Representative Democracy” we are actually — by both definition and design — a “Constitutional Republic.”  I like to begin by mentioning the Pledge of Allegiance: “… and to the republic, for which it stands …” And I point out that in Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, it clearly states: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” And then, after I’m all warmed up, I really get going.

In this case, though, I can’t actually take it up with the person who said it, so I’ll have to do it here.

In a blunt caution to political friend and foe, President Barack Obama said Saturday that partisan rants and name-calling under the guise of legitimate discourse pose a serious danger to America’s democracy, and may incite “extreme elements” to violence.

The comments, in a graduation speech at the University of Michigan’s huge football stadium, were Obama’s most direct take about the angry politics that have engulfed his young presidency after long clashes over health care, taxes and the role of government.

… [In his 31-minute speech, Obama] … took direct aim at the anti-government language so prevalent today.

“What troubles me is when I hear people say that all of government is inherently bad,” Obama said after receiving an honorary doctor of laws degree. “When our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening foreign entity, it ignores the fact that in our democracy, government is us.”  ^{(emphasis mine)}

In our “democracy?”   Exactly what “democracy” is that, Barry?

In the most common contemporary usage of the word and what (in my experience, anyhow) 95% of people mean when they use the term, Democracy refers to a system of government (either direct or representative) chosen by the people. Inevitably when this comes up, someone will trot out “of the people, by the people and for the people” in an attempt to demonstrate that our form of government is a Democracy just exactly as the Founding Fathers intended. Democracy, they proclaim, is when the people call all the shots, and that’s what we do when we elect our leaders.

Accurately defined, a direct Democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly — through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums, etc. To reduce it to its barest essentials, in a direct Democracy the people are making the decisions and the government is enforcing them. A representative Democracy is one in which the people elect the leadership. These leaders are then entrusted to make the decisions (theoretically subject to the will of the people), and to enforce them. On all but a small scale neither form of this will actually work and the Founding Fathers knew as much.

The fact of the matter is that Democracy was very much opposed and criticized by the Founding Fathers.

Many states allow for policy questions to be decided directly by the people by voting on ballot initiatives (those which originate with the people) or referendums (those which originate with the state). You’ll notice that the Constitution does not provide for national ballot initiatives or referendums. The reason, bluntly, is they were not confident that the people had the wisdom to make complex decisions for the benefit of all rather than based on self-interest and/or to not allow themselves to be persuaded by artful argument.

In Federalist No. 63, James Madison wrote that “There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind.”

In Federalist No. 10, Madison observed that one of the most important differences between a Democracy and a Republic is “the delegation of the government [in a republic] to a small number of citizens elected by the rest.” The primary benefit of this, Madison wrote, was to “refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the same purpose.”

Not only were they worried about the wisdom of the people, they saw great dangers in majorities forcing their will on minorities. Madison worried about the “leveling impulse” of Democracy. In Federalist No. 10, he advocated a Constitutional Republic over Democracy precisely to protect the individual from the will of the majority. He said, in part, “A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

John Adams defined our Constitutional Republic as “a government of laws, and not of men.” He insisted that our government must be “bound by fixed laws, which the people have a voice in making, and a right to defend.” The power of government officials is thus checked by allowing no single individual to hold executive, legislative and judicial powers; these powers are instead separated into three distinct branches that serve as a check and balance against each other. Our Constitutional Republic is specifically designed so that no person or group can rise to absolute power; further, the power of the majority of the people is checked by limiting that power to electing representatives who are required to legislate within the limits of overarching constitutional law which a simple majority cannot modify.

In summary and simply put, classifying our government as a “Democracy” is wholly inaccurate.  Our Founding Fathers went to great lengths to protect us from a pure Democracy. It bothers me that our President isn’t aware of this fact.

I’ve quoted some more of the article under the fold, or you can go read the entire thing here.  Do at least read the bit under the fold — you’ll enjoy ol’ Barry’s advice on citizenship and listening to opposing viewpoints. 
Read the rest of this entry »

This would be funny if it weren’t true …

Derwood sent this one along.

IF YOU…

…CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR

…CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.

… CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET SHOT.

… CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

…CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.

…CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

…CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

BUT, IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET:

A JOB, A DRIVERS LICENSE, SOCIAL SECURITY CARD, WELFARE, FOOD STAMPS, CREDIT CARDS, SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE, FREE EDUCATION, FREE HEALTH CARE, A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE , THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

…AND, YOU DON’T HAVE TO PRESS 1 TO SPEAK IN ENGLISH!

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION.

I’m so glad we always put ourselves first when we try to do what’s best in our country.

With your Master Card …

Are you really ahead?

You know the dilemma … you’re looking at the Visa with the 19% interest rate and seeing that introductory 1% interest for six months on that new Master Card and thinking “I’ll pay this off with the Master Card and I’ll come out ahead!” It almost never works, of course, because you always wind up not paying the Master Card balance off in time before the interest rate joins (or goes even higher than) the old one. Or you have an emergency and wind up running the Visa right back up and now you have two cards you can’t pay off instead of one. Or you default on the department store card by mailing the payment a day late, the bank finds out when it hits your credit report and they promptly apply the default rate of 27% interest even though you’ve never been a day late to them.

Regular readers of course know that I don’t have any charge cards.  I have three debit cards — one to the bank account, one to the Paypal account and one to the FSA — and that’s all the plastic I need in my life.  A couple years ago I demonstrated I can’t be trusted with bloody charge cards when I went went bankrupt largely (but not entirely) because of the damn things. So if you’re wondering why I’m mentioning this …

If you own a GM vehicle and they have your email address, you’ve gotten a nice email in the past few days that they paid back their bailout loan from the federal government.

A lie. Well, technically true, but a lie.

Turns out they took money out of one pocket and put it into the other. More precisely, GM took TARP money to pay off the auto bailout money and now must pay off the TARP money.

Pfffft.

GM, since being taken over by Obama, is now acting like the Obama administration. [RedState]

Ain’t that special?

It’s nice to know that GM’s not so very different from the old me. Back when I did it, that’s what we used to call stupid. Nowadays we call it Obamanomics. The main difference is, when I went bankrupt it only affected me, I wasn’t using any tax payer dollars except my own and I learned my lesson. Certainly no one allowed me to avoid bankruptcy by handing me a check for what I needed to clean everything up while saying “here, pay this back when you can” — and no one handed me another check to pay the first one back and buy me some more time. Must be nice though.

In picture format

Found it here:  Draw For Truth