Reformed Hippie

Calling all cars… calling all cars. BOLO (i.e. “Be on the Lookout” for all you civilians) for Bush and Cheney! They are now wanted by the law. Where is Car 54 when you need them? To be sure, they have been indicted by the towns of Brattleboro and Marlboro in the state of Vermont.

The charges… not too sure but I think they just made up something that sounded good to them.  “Crimes against the Constitution” they were called but yet no specific allegations.

Voters in two Vermont towns approved measures Tuesday calling for the indictment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for what they consider violations of the Constitution.

More symbolic than anything, the items sought to have police arrest Bush and Cheney if they ever visit Brattleboro or nearby Marlboro or to extradite them for prosecution elsewhere—if they’re not impeached first.

In Brattleboro, the vote was 2,012-1,795. In Marlboro, which held a town meeting on the issue, it was 43-25 with three abstentions.

I feel sorry for those who voted against these measures.  It must be really embarrassing to admit they live in Brattleboro and Marlboro.  Shameful.

It is evident that there are 2,012 lunatics in Brattleboro and an additional 43 loons in Marlboro who need a keeper. Please keep them away from sharp objects and ballot boxes.

Bookmark It

OK… by now we all know that Michelle Obama is proud of the U.S. “for the first time in my adult life.” And of course her hubby tried to perform damage control on her statement… but would he. All it would take is a simple apology from Michelle.

Well I waited all day yesterday for an apology and did not hear one… yet I did hear her say once again that she is proud of America for wanting to “roll up their sleeves”. OK… we get it… you are proud. Well so am I. But not for the first time in my adult life. It was pride of country many, many years ago that as a teenager I volunteered to serve in the Air Force… and have not lost that pride yet.

So again Mrs. Obama… where is the apology?

Waiting.

Bookmark It

UPDATED: 02/21/2008 at 14:31 CST

It’s a sign of the times… when you enter a political race the media goons start digging. Back in the old days it was generally accepted that most people were good and honest. And if there were skeletons in their closet the bones were squeaky white. and nobody paid much attention to them. Everyone makes mistakes. Not any more. These days anyone running for public office is assumed to have some corruption mixed with good old-fashioned sexual trysts mixed in for good measure. And in some cases where the facts don’t fit, the MSM will fill in the details at their whim. The New York Times however is the master of inventing news… skewing the facts… misleading the American people. For instance, starting May 1st 2004 the NYT published 32 successive page one and/or section one articles on Abu Ghraib.

This latest story on McCain is reckless and irresponsible. It is another prime example of the hit-and-run media trying to generate sleaze during a campaign cycle.

Just like this story that popped up about Obama this week:

The electrifying presidential campaign of Barack Obama faces a new challenge – a Minnesota man who claims he took cocaine in 1999 with the then-Illinois legislator and participated in homosexual acts with him.

When his story was ignored by the news media, Larry Sinclair made his case last month in a YouTube video, which has now been viewed more than a quarter-million times. And when it was still ignored by the media, Sinclair filed a suit in Minnesota District Court, alleging threats and intimidation by Obama’s staff.

Sinclair, who says he is willing to submit to a polygraph test to validate his claims, will now get his chance – thanks to a website offering $10,000 for the right to record it and $100,000 to Sinclair if he passes.

Now it’s McCain’s turn:

John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, was last night romantically linked to a 40-year-old female political lobbyist and accused of granting her clients political favours.

Mr McCain, 71, fiercely denied a report in the New York Times which stated that eight years ago, during his first run for the White House, his aides were so concerned about his relationship with Vicki Iseman that they blocked her access to him to “protect the candidate from himself”.

Mr McCain and Ms Iseman both denied to the newspaper - which has been sitting on the story for several weeks - that they had ever had a romantic relationship. The story was first alluded to on the Drudge Report website just before the Iowa and New Hampshire nomination contests, but after frantic lobbying by Mr McCain and his aides at the time the New York Times did not publish it then.

Yet the New York Times story offers no proof… only guesswork on the part of McCain’s political team:

Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself…

By then, according to two former McCain associates, some of the senator’s advisers had grown so concerned that the relationship had become romantic that they took steps to intervene.

But again it is a sign of the times… rumor and innuendo rule the day for the MSM. They do not care about facts… just any kind of sleaze story they can reasonably dream up. America is loosing her way folks. Why isn’t the Obama story making the front page of the New York Times??? Because he is the liberal poster boy… and by and large the MSM is very, very liberal. They don’t want to turn on their own kind.

In fact John Weaver, McCain’s aid back in 1997, released a statement today debunking the NYT story:

The New York Times asked for a formal interview and I said no and asked for written questions. The Times knew of my meeting with Ms. Iseman, from sources they didn’t identify to me, and asked me about that meeting. I did not inform Senator McCain that I asked for a meeting with Ms. Iseman.

Her comments, which had gotten back to some of us, that she had strong ties to the Commerce Committee and his staff were wrong and harmful and I so informed her and asked her to stop with these comments and to not be involved in the campaign. Nothing more and nothing less.

I responded to the Times on the record about a meeting they already knew about. The campaign received a copy of my response to the Times the same day, which was in late December.

From the day I first approached John about running for President in 1997 and through today, I have always wanted John to be president. The country needs him at this perilous time. From the moment I left the campaign until today, not one day — not one –has gone by that I haven’t reactively or pro-actively talked with the campaign leadership, with state leadership about how the campaign and how to win. To suggest anything else is wrong, a lie and meant to do nothing but harm.

What does all of this have to do with the global war on terror… the financial tumult this country is going through… securing the borders… and all of the other problems this country has.

Everyone wants the “perfect” candidate for President. Assuming for a moment that both these stories are true… what are we left to choose from in November?

Ugh. Time for another cup of coffee.

Related articles:
"Drudge Report is becoming a sensationalist"

Bookmark It

UPDATE: 02/07/2008

For some reason this post disappeared from the blog… don’t know why. So I will try and re-create the spirit of the original from memory and perhaps improve upon it.

I briefly listened to Rush Limbaugh yesterday and to be honest I had to turn him off. Limbaugh, Hannity and others have continuously bashed the liberals for their “hate speak”. For example… referring to President Bush as Hitler and other such hateful people is despicable. Yet Limbaugh is saying that those who back McCain or Huckabee “are the enemy” and the conservatives goal is to “defeat them”. And it was not so much their words that infuriated me but how they said them… the tone… the inflection in their voice made you know that they cannot stand McCain or anyone who endorses him. They are not conservative enough.

F or a very long time I have personally felt that these conservative talk show hosts do damage to the country by dividing America into the good guys and bad guys… the conservatives and liberals. This serves no purpose except to fracture our country.

We are all Americans. Limbaugh is afraid that McCain and Huckabee are not conservative enough. And then when Bob Dole comes to McCain’s defense Limbaugh jumps on him. And Hannity keeps repeating similar language over and over and over again. I guess he figures that if he keeps repeating distorted facts long enough even he will eventually believe them.

Anybody can stand fast on principle. That’s easy. Just say that you cannot do anything because you are standing fast on your principles and then walk away. That is what people like Limbaugh, Hannity and other conservatives do (and liberals too but the conservatives are the ones making the most racket right now). And unfortunately that is what a lot of our politicians are doing. What is hard is holding on to your principles (convictions, beliefs, etc.) and then finding ways to work with others who have differing principles. That takes strength and leadership. If we continually allow our politicians to stand on their party platform and not find ways of working together then we will never get anything accomplished. Oh… that’s where we are at now.

What we need in this country is a President who has principles but yet has the ability to work with others. Democrat or Republican. Working with others and getting things accomplished is not weakness of character or moral mis-direction.  We are all Americans and we should be able to rise above the hate speak and rhetoric and get somebody who can get America’s work done. This is the “change” we want in the White House. Not someone who puts party platform above America’s needs simply to improve their political future at the expense of the country. We all need to find common ground on which to build.

For example… health care. Liberals want “universal health care”. And I know that all Americans, including conservatives, would say that everyone in this country should be allowed to have access to affordable health care. You can call it what you want but the bottom line is that affordable health care should be available to all citizens. See there, we can now all agree on something. That is a start.  So how do we get it done?  We can start by listening to the citizens… then doctors, insurance companies and others who can have a positive impact.  And in so doing you may find that standing on principle is not as important has helping people.

But of course the devil is in the details and it is how we go about it where we get into trouble. But instead of our candidates throwing out some bits and bites during campaign speeches and debates, they need to sit down and think their plans through. Just one thought while re-writing this post… instead of having “political debates” we should have “issue debates”. So for instance the candidates could have a health care debate. At least that’s what we did in communications class in school…. focused on one subject (or question) and then debate that thoroughly.  Let Americans know what each candidate proposes to do. Give Americans something they can sink their teeth into. Of course that will only work if the candidates really sat down and seriously thought through the situation.

The bottom line is let’s work together as Americans. Not as enemies trying to defeat each other if we do not see eye-to-eye on issues. It is only in this manner that America can truly show it is a world superpower and demonstrate to the world how freedom actually works.

I’ll now turn the soapbox over to someone else.

Bookmark It

I have watched countless hours on TV and listened to pundits bloviating on how Hillary is rehearsed and unemotional. And for the most part I agree with them. In no uncertain terms would I vote for Hillary for anything. Period. And if you search my blog you will probably find out why.

But to put forth the theory that her near tears breakdown yesterday was a show contrived by her for sympathy is the highest form of hypocrisy. Pundits and civilians alike bash her for not being compassionate and then when she does have an emotional moment they are Johnny-on-the-spot to criticize her for that. Well which is it people??? Let’s make a decision here.

*** FEMINIST WARNING *** FEMINIST WARNING ***

People need to wake up and realize that there are major differences (besides the obvious physical ones… which I might add are delightful) between men and women. Contrary to FeminNazis dogma women are more emotional than men. Face facts. Notice I said more emotional… everybody has a breaking point… that includes men. And sometimes one’s feelings overtake them and the plumbing springs a leak. LIVE WITH IT.

All of the candidates have been campaigning hard over the last couple of months… some getting just three or four hours sleep per night.  Add to that the up/down mood swings from adrenalin rush, preparing for debates, doing advertisements, giving speeches, covering their blunders given in the speeches and pressure from plain everyday folks that want answers to the countries problems.  Oh… did I mention any time for eating???  I think that most of us would cave under the pressure… and the dam would break and flood everything in its path.  But on the flip side, most of us are not running for President either.  So while we typically expect more from presidential hopefuls we also need to cut them some slack from time-to-time.  Remember the golden rule.

Despite what I may think of Hillary’s calculating and manipulative ways I cannot and will not loose compassion for someone when they are hurting… even if it is Hillary Clinton.

Bookmark It

My wish for this Christmas season is that you keep the spirit of Christmas in your heart all year long. Remember it is definitely more blessed to give than to receive… if you don’t believe me then try it some time… personally help someone in need or is less fortunate than you are.  Even the poorest of the poor can do something to help others.  When you do you’ll be amazed at how much better it feels.

And above all else remember that little baby who was born in Bethlehem in that modest stable who grew up to become the Saviour of the world (even for liberals who do not not believe)… Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Redeemer of all mankind.

And for the rest of the population who refuses to admit what Christmas is all about I will say this to you:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2008, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great.

Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere.

Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wish.

 Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Bookmark It

This past week the Drudge Report has posted two articles… one regarding a tabloid piece (supposedly from the National Enquirer of all places) alleging that McCain had an affair with one of his campaign staff and is the father of her unborn child. One would expect such dribble coming from the Enquirer… not from Matt Drudge.

And other article came out about allegations that Senator McCain did favors for lobbyists or special interest groups that helped him. Once again, so far, unfounded charges.

It seems as though Drudge is pushing the journalistic envelop even further with outlandish allegations. It seems like he is trying to make a name for himself and validate himself as a journalist. I have made it a practice for a very long time that if a headline appears on his site and it links to one of his own articles I will not click on it. It seems that the majority of these so-called news worthy items are nonsense and simply gets withdrawn… even the same day.

This should help remind us that we need to keep our perspective on things and, just because it is on a heavily hit site, we should not swallow it hook line and sinker.

Bookmark It

The Snyder family has won their lawsuit in Federal court against Phelps and his hate-group! The jury awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages, $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress. Of course the cult will hate that decision and come out firing against the courts.

This Westboro cult (does not really deserve to be called a church) hates the Gay-Community, African-Americans, Canada, Sweden, the Fire Department of NY, victims of 911, Christian Churches, The Pope, Judaism, America, Our American Troops, and the list goes on and on. They not only hate, but wish death on all that they abhor. Sorry guys… this is not the Biblical and Christian way. There is a difference between the sin that Christians should condemn and the person that Christians should love. Westboro’s approach is to condemn the person… WRONG!! Read your Bible. I mean really read it.

Hopefully this will stand up on appeal by Westboro… that the IIED (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress) claim on which Snyder’s won will be solid. But like I said earlier the appeals courts are really screwball when it comes to rational thinking. This brings to mind the Fallwell vs. Hustler that Falwell ultimately lost because Falwell the Supreme Court determined that Falwell was a “public figure”. The courts have reasoned that people have to be free to criticize public figures in order to engage in public debate. This is where I part company with the courts. The key word is “criticize”. We need to have the freedom to be critical of a public figure but we need to be civil in our criticism. That means not cast personal disparaging remarks… like calling them a Hitler or a Castro… calling them fagots or even worse. That is overstepping the bounds of freedom of speech.

In the Falwell/Hustler case, the magazine ad described a drunk Falwell having an incestuous encounter with his mother in an outhouse. Yet the courts ruled that “At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. The freedom to speak one’s mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty — and thus a good unto itself — but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole. We have therefore been particularly vigilant to ensure that individual expressions of ideas remain free from governmentally imposed sanctions.” But in my mind this does not include telling lies about someone else in such a public manner. Falwell argued that the advertisement was so outrageous it caused IIED. But the court found that it was so outrageous that nobody could think it was actually true and was in fact a parody.

For the purposes of Snyder however I doubt that Westboro could argue that the Snyder family is a public figure. So is Westboro’s conduct outrageous??? Certainly it is. But the Supreme Court has a precedence established just for such an occasion:

“Outrageousness” in the area of political and social discourse has an inherent subjectiveness about it which would allow a jury to impose liability on the basis of the jurors’ tastes or views, or perhaps on the basis of their dislike of a particular expression. An “outrageousness” standard thus runs afoul of our longstanding refusal to allow damages to be awarded because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience.

The Synder website has legal documents from the case here. Send him a note of congratulations and thanks here.

Related posts:
"Happy New Year 2008"

Bookmark It

I am very happy to know that someone has taken WBC to task regarding their loony dogma at hate-speak towards the military and America as a whole. While you may not agree with why we went to war in Iraq or why we are still there, the hateful rhetoric from this group is despicable. Yet our Constitution (which I might add is defended by our military) allows them to speak the way they do.

The family of Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, US Marine Corps, has begun this civil lawsuit* against Mr. Phelps and certain members of the so-called Westboro Baptist Church to bring an end to the reign of terror and abuse that they inflicted upon the grieving families of US service members killed in defense of our nation. Using innocent children to deliver their twisted message of hatred and fear, the defendants in this suit have sought to attack the memory of our departed heroes, to strip their loved ones of their dignity, and to use abuse and intimidation as a tool for preventing surviving family members from reaching closure over their loss.

It is my sincere hope that they prevail. I firmly believe that our founding fathers wanted freedom of speech in a civil and dignified manner. The First Amendment protection of free speech has limits, including vulgar, offensive and shocking statements. The judge in the case said the jurors must decide “whether the defendant’s actions would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, whether they were extreme and outrageous and whether these actions were so offensive and shocking as to not be entitled to First Amendment protection.”

A reasonable thinking individual would easily determine that the hate-speak of WBC far exceeds the protections of the First Ammendment. Yet with the liberal court system, especially at the appellate level, the Snyder family may fail in their efforts. But I do wish them all the best. All the thoughts and prayers of our family are with the Snyder family.

If you wish to get involved our donate to the legal fund please visit http://www.matthewsnyder.org.

Bookmark It

From Fox News…

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong tearfully announced his resignation Friday after testifying about missteps he made in the Duke lacrosse rape case.

During emotional last words he made while on the stand in Raleigh, N.C., Friday, the embattled prosecutor said he made mistakes in the prosecution of three Duke lacrosse players — Reade Seligmann, Dave Evans and Collin Finnerty — after an exotic dancer claimed they raped her at an off-campus lacrosse party the night of March 13, 2006. However, he maintained he never lied to the state bar association over any facts of the case.

“To the extent my actions have caused pain the Finnertys and the Seligmanns and the Evanses, I apologize. To the extent that my actions have brought disrespect or disrepute to the bar, to my community, I apologize,” Nifong said. “But I cannot admit to telling a lie I didn’t tell and I’ll continue to defend myself against those allegations.”

Nifong earlier admitted it might have been helpful for him to personally interview the Duke rape accuser before he charged the lacrosse players with rape.

He sure wrecked havoc with the lives of everyone involved in the Duke case… no excuses.  But he was not the only ones that jumped on the bandwagon.  Within days of the media latching on to this case they, as well as Duke University professors and staff, publicly denounced those charged as guilty.

Will we ever learn?

Bookmark It