Sunday, May 31, 2009

Judge Sonia Sotomayor

If you are reading this and haven't reviewed the entire speech where Judge Sonia Sotomayor clearly suggested that a woman of Hispanic origin could often make decisions better than a white man, you're head has been in the sand for a lot longer than I have been away from previous position routine.   I won't belabor the points on that issue beyond saying the obvious: had a while male said a similar statement, well, we wouldn't be discussing that guy's nomination any further, now would we?

Be that as it may .... I applaud Judge Sotomayor's rise from a poor family to the threshold of the highest court in the land.  It reminds me of the story of Justice Clarence Thomas, whose own background would likely be comparable to Judge Sotomayor's own (not that either judge would ever want to compete in the can you top this contest regarding their family life - there are certain contests that ought not be run).  Her background, however, has little to do with her judicial experience.

As Deboarh O'Malley of The Heritage Foundation points out:

Judge Sotomayor has made several public statements denouncing -- and even lightly mocking -- the idea that courts should be impartial and shouldn't engage in policymaking. During a Duke University panel discussion in 2005, Sotomayor stated: "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with Court of Appeals experience. Because it is -- Court of Appeals is where policy is made."
She flippantly brushed off this statement, to laughter from the audience. "And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I should never say that. Because we don't 'make law,' I know. Okay, I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it. I'm, you know..." She did not go on to clarify what she apparently did mean, but the words speak for themselves.
So there is blatant reasons why the Republican minority in the Senate are obliged to question Judge Sotomayor on her judicial philosophy and her own words.  What did she mean when she said you know?

Where does she stand on the 2nd Amendment, for example.   What about the 1st Amendment?  These kinds of questions are not about filibustering, but about advice and consent.

Look, I would be a fool to suggest the Republicans could defeat her nomination.  That's not to say they should roll over and give her no review, but elections have consequences, and President Obama deserves to nominate his justices.  I defended President Bush's right to nominate justices and I will do the same for President Obama, despite the fact that I oppose his positions on nearly 100% of the issues.

How many left-wing critics had the intellectual honesty to say that during President Bush's administration?

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook

George Tiller's murder

It should come as no surprise to anyone who has read my blog that I abhor murder, and that what happened to is, indeed, murder, no matter what persuaded the attacker.    That this happened in a house of worship makes the crime all the more damning.

I have a lot of thoughts on this matter, but those two will suffice for this evening.

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Remembering those that guranteed our freedom

With all due respect to President Obama's Memorial Day message, I think something more solemn could have - nay, should have been said.   There is still time for to do so, and for all I know he may well have an appropriate proclamation queued up in the teleprompter already.   Regardless, I think I should provide something in addition to his words on Monday (or in case he doesn't have anything formal to say).

In honor of those who have guaranteed our freedom:



On Memorial Day, we honor the heroes who have laid down their lives in the cause of freedom, resolve that they will forever be remembered by a grateful Nation, and pray that our country may always prove worthy of the sacrifices they have made.

Throughout our Nation's history, our course has been secured by brave Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen. These courageous and selfless warriors have stepped forward to protect the Nation they love, fight for America's highest ideals, and show millions that a future of liberty is possible. Freedoms come at great costs, yet the world has been transformed in unimaginable ways because of the noble service and devotion to duty of these brave individuals. Our country honors the sacrifice made by those who have given their lives to spread the blessings of liberty and lay the foundations of peace, and we mourn their loss.

Today, our service men and women continue to inspire and strengthen our Nation, going above and beyond the call of duty as part of the greatest military the world has ever known. Americans are grateful to all those who have put on our Nation's uniform and to their families, and we will always remember their service and sacrifice for our freedoms.

On this solemn day our country unites to pay tribute to the fallen, who demonstrated the strength of their convictions and paid the cost of freedom. We pray for the members of our Armed Forces and their families, and we ask for God's continued guidance of our country.

In respect for their devotion to America, the Congress, by a joint resolution approved on May 11, 1950, as amended (64 Stat. 158), has requested the President to issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe each Memorial Day as a day of prayer for permanent peace and designating a period on that day when the people of the United States might unite in prayer. The Congress, by Public Law 106‑579, has also designated the minute beginning at 3:00 p.m. local time on that day as a time for all Americans to observe the National Moment of Remembrance.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Memorial Day, May 26, 2008, as a day of prayer for permanent peace, and I designate the hour beginning in each locality at 11:00 a.m. of that day as a time to unite in prayer. I also ask all Americans to observe the National Moment of Remembrance beginning at 3:00 p.m., local time, on Memorial Day. I encourage the media to participate in these observances. I also request the Governors of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the appropriate officials of all units of government, to direct that the flag be flown at half staff until noon on this Memorial Day on all buildings, grounds, and naval vessels throughout the United States, and in all areas under its jurisdiction and control. I also request the people of the United States to display the flag at half staff from their homes for the customary forenoon period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty‑second day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-second.

h/t Conservative Belle

My flag will be at half-mast for the designated time on Monday, and my family will say a prayer at 3:00 PM. Some traditions ought to be carried forward.

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Creeping Socialism takes one on the chin

For those who fear creeping Socialism (and rightfully so), there is some bright news:

  • ITEM: NEW CALIFORNIA TAX REVOLT - An angry electorate soundly defeated a slate of budget measures that would raise state taxes. Voters instead their representatives do some spending cuts. How is their vote any different from lsat month's ? Who says you can't win running on a tax cut agenda?
  • ITEM: SENATE VOTES TO BLOCK FUNDS FOR GITMO CLOSURE: Despite the illustrious leadership of Majority Leader Harry Reid (heh-heh.... I'm sorry, I can't keep from laughing at that line... I crack myself up sometimes), plan to let the terrorists come to the US mainland have been denied. These thugs are not entitled to our Bill of Rights, nor are they covered by the Geneva Convention (read why here). Who says a minority in Congress (the GOP) can't have an impact? Clearly, this was a bipartisan decision... will it be framed that way in the press I wonder?
There is sane reasoning remaining in this country. If we can only derail the plans for socialized medicine and prevent the outright theft of Government General Motors from private ownership, we may survive this onslaught of madness.

In all seriousness, I kid when I said I laughed at 's competetence. Can you imagine how loudly our enemies must be laughing at 's agenda?

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook

Monday, May 18, 2009

What's on my mind?

While cranking out my afternoon Enterprise Status Report, a colleague past my cubicle and overheard me humming (whistling, actually) a tune.

What's that song you're humming?  I've never heard it before.

I stopped for a minute, having never realized I was actually whistling anything.  After a few seconds of replaying it in my head it finally occurred to me.

Of course! The theme from Lost in Space.

I have no clue what posessed me to think of that show/song.

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Quick Hits

From an apparent cloud of noise comes Quick Hits: the fast points on various topics, or double-your-money-back!

  • may lose crown: Speaking as a guy who happens to know which end of the handsome scale he sits on, I have no interest at all in beauty pageants (other than, perhaps, the objectification of women who voluntarily wear bikinis in high-heels).  That much said, there is a palpable hate being shown Ms. Prejean simply because she voiced her opinion. Whether you agree with her or not, it is certainly interesting to witness the masses gathering with their pitchforks, arguing whether or not the gal deserves her crown - as if her crown is worthy of such attention.

    But instead of expressing so much outrage at a 20-something who, in all due respect, has little influence outside of the or   audience (unless she happened to win, in which case you can possibly influence - gasp - the audience), why is it a few seem to pay any attention to a person who can have a distinct influence on society?  As Becky succinctly said:
    If we have reached a point in the development of our society, where a beauty pageant contestant is disqualified for believing that marriage should be restricted to a union between a man and a woman, then shouldn't the President of the United States get the same treatment?
    Certainly food for thought. Read more.
  • Wanda Sykes: By now you've all read/heard what was said Saturday night.  Ask Rush Limbaugh to describe himself, and you'll find he has no trouble being called an entertainer.   Should Mr. Limbaugh, in the guise of being an comedian - or an entertainer - suggest that Ms. Sykes should be afflicted with a life-threatening illness (as opposed to, say, George Carlin, praying "God, give Barry Manilow a boil on his ass!"), I think we'd all be surprised if Mr. Limbaugh wasn't hounded off the air and his career otherwise ruined.

    Ms. Sykes is certainly entitled to her opinion, and she ought to be able to speak her mind through her art wherever she wants.  However, this venue, in particular, should be considered where such acrid comments were made.
    What we've been seeing around this country is this constant ratcheting up of a coarsening of the culture that all of have to think about."

    [A]s a culture, we really have to do some soul-searching to think about what kind of toxic information are we feeding our kids."
    Should President Obama have openly laughed at Ms. Sykes jokes is a matter worthy of discussion, especially in light of the above words he spoke about another comedian's humor.

    By the way: I know people who have struggled to overcome addictions (and it is a daily struggle) who are very troubled by the use of such a topic in the guise of humor.   Yet, apparently, it was fine to be laughed at by one and all.   Tell me again: which political party is most often associated with being mean-spirited?
  •  Health care industry promised to cut $2 trillion in costs over 10 years  It's deja vu all over again - Yogi Bera (happy 84th birthday, incidentally) 
    Reacting to the Obama administration’s health care event, former-President Jimmy Carter aide and Brookings Institution health economist Henry Aaron told the New York Times: “I had a Rip van Winkle moment, as if I had fallen asleep in 1977 and woke up again this morning.” And just as with the Carter administration, don’t expect these health care savings to ever actually materialize. Former director of the Congressional Budget Office Robert Reischauer told the Washington Post: “It would be difficult to wring 1.5 percentage points out of this list of proposals.” Boston University health policy professor Alan Sager was even less kind, calling the Obama event, “An unrivaled set of abstractions and posturing.”
    Read more at The Foundry
  • Thanks for the kind inquiries.. I am still here.  I am pleased to report work is well, unlike many others I am aware, and while that is a good thing, it has severely impacted my blogging time.   I will be restructuring a lot of my personal time in the near future in the hopes of providing me some actual down-time where I might start blogging once again.  Do keep an eye on my shared items list for links to articles I find that are worthy of review.


Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook