Link below to hot off the press item.
Will write about it tomorrow.
-----link-----
http://netmail.verizon.net/webmail/servlet/HttpNimletDriver?nimlet=ManageEmailDetailNimlet&requestAction=showEmail&folderName=INBOX&messageID=4246
--------------
Regards, Live Dangerously.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
THE INTERNET AND FREEDOM
The Internet and Freedom go hand in hand.
A Free marketplace starts with room for free ideas The internet provides that room. It’s a market place for ideas. Some bad some good but what a selection!!! Our responsibility as consumers of these ideas is to pick the ideas that are good for us. Like any other tool, if used wrongly it can subvert the good. The link below is a shining example of some people who are using it in a useful and creative way. I applaud them. If others don’t like it don’t sign the petition, or start your own.
Wow. Is the tide turning out there in grass root land. Took the following off of The Drudge Report.
-----link-----
http://www.angryrenter.com/
--------------
These people are great. The pie chart showing that the numbers of home owners and renters are about equal was striking to me. The videos were great. I’m signing, not because I’m a renter, I’m not. Nor because I need to be bailed out. I already lost my house through foreclosure 2 years ago. I’m signing because it is the right thing to do.
------Like everyone else, I’ve been walking around complaining about how unfair it is to bail out the people who make bad choices, and the banks that got too greedy. I thought the bail out was just another form of enabling bad behavior. What could I do? That’s just the way it was I thought, especially during an election year. Or so I thought. The least I can do to make up for my lack of energy and bad logic is to sign. Lol
------I certainly hope that John McCain who claims he is a conservative gets behind this type of thing or at least acknowledges it.
------I’ve written before about the pent up frustration that the majority of people have in regards to the lack of real solutions that government has come up with, especially after making such wonderful promises.
------I’ve also written about the idea that the tide is turning overseas also, and they seem to be ahead of us this time. They however are better able to see the real life effects of socialistic systems. France Germany and now (see link below) are voicing their frustration with big governments lack of problem solving by electing conservative parties.
-----link-----
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1314825,00.html
---------------
------In the good ole US of A, I see that frustration bubbling up in candidates like Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee, and yes even from the other side Ralph Nader. This attitude if not addressed by either party after the election, will set the stage for a big move towards a Regan Revolution type of election in 4 years from now. Perhaps a 3rd party or a 4th.
The platform for that will be anything to cut the power of the government and it‘s size
------Not just big government either. Frustration comes from big anything. Big business is a mirror image of big government or better said the other way around.. What have "trimopolies", (my term) done for us other than cheaper prices. (cheaper products) How free is the market place in reality when I want to fix up my house my choice is to go to Home Depot, Lowes or Menards. The product selection is the same, I swear they have the same wholesale buyers. Lol.
------
Three cheers for those who are doing something about it.
Three cheers for the Internet
Three cheers for Freedom, with it we all have a chance.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
A Free marketplace starts with room for free ideas The internet provides that room. It’s a market place for ideas. Some bad some good but what a selection!!! Our responsibility as consumers of these ideas is to pick the ideas that are good for us. Like any other tool, if used wrongly it can subvert the good. The link below is a shining example of some people who are using it in a useful and creative way. I applaud them. If others don’t like it don’t sign the petition, or start your own.
Wow. Is the tide turning out there in grass root land. Took the following off of The Drudge Report.
-----link-----
http://www.angryrenter.com/
--------------
These people are great. The pie chart showing that the numbers of home owners and renters are about equal was striking to me. The videos were great. I’m signing, not because I’m a renter, I’m not. Nor because I need to be bailed out. I already lost my house through foreclosure 2 years ago. I’m signing because it is the right thing to do.
------Like everyone else, I’ve been walking around complaining about how unfair it is to bail out the people who make bad choices, and the banks that got too greedy. I thought the bail out was just another form of enabling bad behavior. What could I do? That’s just the way it was I thought, especially during an election year. Or so I thought. The least I can do to make up for my lack of energy and bad logic is to sign. Lol
------I certainly hope that John McCain who claims he is a conservative gets behind this type of thing or at least acknowledges it.
------I’ve written before about the pent up frustration that the majority of people have in regards to the lack of real solutions that government has come up with, especially after making such wonderful promises.
------I’ve also written about the idea that the tide is turning overseas also, and they seem to be ahead of us this time. They however are better able to see the real life effects of socialistic systems. France Germany and now (see link below) are voicing their frustration with big governments lack of problem solving by electing conservative parties.
-----link-----
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1314825,00.html
---------------
------In the good ole US of A, I see that frustration bubbling up in candidates like Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee, and yes even from the other side Ralph Nader. This attitude if not addressed by either party after the election, will set the stage for a big move towards a Regan Revolution type of election in 4 years from now. Perhaps a 3rd party or a 4th.
The platform for that will be anything to cut the power of the government and it‘s size
------Not just big government either. Frustration comes from big anything. Big business is a mirror image of big government or better said the other way around.. What have "trimopolies", (my term) done for us other than cheaper prices. (cheaper products) How free is the market place in reality when I want to fix up my house my choice is to go to Home Depot, Lowes or Menards. The product selection is the same, I swear they have the same wholesale buyers. Lol.
------
Three cheers for those who are doing something about it.
Three cheers for the Internet
Three cheers for Freedom, with it we all have a chance.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Friday, May 2, 2008
WHY DO WE NEED TO TAKE BACK EDUCATION?
WHY DO WE NEED TO TAKE BACK EDUCATION?
Below is a link to “Nick” from the Detroit News. Graphic example of what happens when you don’t follow the rules. The “rule of mouth” gets followed instead of the “Rule of law”. The point is that nothing gets accomplished. The efforts of all those people were thwarted by one ego-maniac.
-----link-----
http://www.rightmichigan.com/user/Nick/stories
--------------
Ms. Conyer’s unassailable ego jumps out during the next clip when she unsuccessfully tries to debate school kids. What a joke. Another example of “Unconstrained Vision” unleashed. What we need is an educational system that doesn’t pooh pooh out- bursts like that but rather shuns them. Holds them in contempt. Not elect them to office!!
-----I am proud of the advances civilization has made over the millennia. From savages to millions of people living together, and moving forward. This has been accomplished through continually teaching the youth what we have accomplished and demanding that they carry forward and build upon what our civilization has accomplished. We have done this through education based upon learning history and political science along with all the current skills in math and the sciences as the first step in progress. By basing our educational system on achievement. The USA has risen to world dominance through our leadership in that type of education. Our teachers were underpaid, and our schools were smaller, more functional. Those two things alone may have played a part in our attaining educational excellence. There was a lack of money. The school boards were forced to work harder to pick the very best teachers, and get rid of those who weren’t the best. They needed teachers that would make do with what they had, and not waste time complaining about what they didn’t have. Gradually that power was taken away from the school boards and put in the hands of others. Ever try to fire a teacher? I haven’t, but I fire plumbers, mechanics, and carpenters if they don’t perform.
-----I am not proposing that we go back to those “olden” days. We simply can’t and wishing won’t make it so. What I am saying is that we can go back to the main driving force behind that successful model.---- Give the power back to the local school boards. They have a better chance to pursue achievement based goals than the National Unionized Model which has failed miserably. I know if I was sitting on my school board, and had children in the system, I would be pretty eager to make sure they were being taught social survival skills necessary to get ahead in the real world. Not necessarily worried about hurting someone’s feelings.
-----Below is a link to one of a rare breed who is fighting an impossible task in the Detroit area. All the cards are stacked against him. But he fights on and fight he does. Stroll through his site, check out Genesis. This guy is trying.
-----link-----
http://whoisakindele.info/2008/05/detroit-needs-vouchers-right-here-right.html
--------------
-----A man not afraid to say what he thinks. Example below.
-----snippet-----
“We can do the same here in Detroit except we have ghetto standards for educating our children. We have a ghetto mayor, ghetto city council, ghetto school board, ghetto State Representatives and ghetto State Senators and a ghetto teacher union. We deserve better.”
------------------
I think I “Live Dangerously” in Muskegon because of my political views! I think it’s a walk in the park compared to being a Conservative in Detroit. I applaud Akindele F. Akinyemi for his courage and obvious abilities.
-----NOW WHAT CAN I DO????-----
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
<
ps. I just found this excellent article by George Will.Below is a Link to George Will'x article about education. That guy can get the point across. States pretty much my ideas but clearer in conception.
-----link-----
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/sen_moynihan_the_neoconservati.html
---------------
Below is a link to “Nick” from the Detroit News. Graphic example of what happens when you don’t follow the rules. The “rule of mouth” gets followed instead of the “Rule of law”. The point is that nothing gets accomplished. The efforts of all those people were thwarted by one ego-maniac.
-----link-----
http://www.rightmichigan.com/user/Nick/stories
--------------
Ms. Conyer’s unassailable ego jumps out during the next clip when she unsuccessfully tries to debate school kids. What a joke. Another example of “Unconstrained Vision” unleashed. What we need is an educational system that doesn’t pooh pooh out- bursts like that but rather shuns them. Holds them in contempt. Not elect them to office!!
-----I am proud of the advances civilization has made over the millennia. From savages to millions of people living together, and moving forward. This has been accomplished through continually teaching the youth what we have accomplished and demanding that they carry forward and build upon what our civilization has accomplished. We have done this through education based upon learning history and political science along with all the current skills in math and the sciences as the first step in progress. By basing our educational system on achievement. The USA has risen to world dominance through our leadership in that type of education. Our teachers were underpaid, and our schools were smaller, more functional. Those two things alone may have played a part in our attaining educational excellence. There was a lack of money. The school boards were forced to work harder to pick the very best teachers, and get rid of those who weren’t the best. They needed teachers that would make do with what they had, and not waste time complaining about what they didn’t have. Gradually that power was taken away from the school boards and put in the hands of others. Ever try to fire a teacher? I haven’t, but I fire plumbers, mechanics, and carpenters if they don’t perform.
-----I am not proposing that we go back to those “olden” days. We simply can’t and wishing won’t make it so. What I am saying is that we can go back to the main driving force behind that successful model.---- Give the power back to the local school boards. They have a better chance to pursue achievement based goals than the National Unionized Model which has failed miserably. I know if I was sitting on my school board, and had children in the system, I would be pretty eager to make sure they were being taught social survival skills necessary to get ahead in the real world. Not necessarily worried about hurting someone’s feelings.
-----Below is a link to one of a rare breed who is fighting an impossible task in the Detroit area. All the cards are stacked against him. But he fights on and fight he does. Stroll through his site, check out Genesis. This guy is trying.
-----link-----
http://whoisakindele.info/2008/05/detroit-needs-vouchers-right-here-right.html
--------------
-----A man not afraid to say what he thinks. Example below.
-----snippet-----
“We can do the same here in Detroit except we have ghetto standards for educating our children. We have a ghetto mayor, ghetto city council, ghetto school board, ghetto State Representatives and ghetto State Senators and a ghetto teacher union. We deserve better.”
------------------
I think I “Live Dangerously” in Muskegon because of my political views! I think it’s a walk in the park compared to being a Conservative in Detroit. I applaud Akindele F. Akinyemi for his courage and obvious abilities.
-----NOW WHAT CAN I DO????-----
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
<
ps. I just found this excellent article by George Will.Below is a Link to George Will'x article about education. That guy can get the point across. States pretty much my ideas but clearer in conception.
-----link-----
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/sen_moynihan_the_neoconservati.html
---------------
Thursday, May 1, 2008
WHY VOTE
My thoughts on the freedom to vote.
First though -- this from others, the pros. About freedom in general
Star Parker the excellent writer talking of MLK. Below a link to the Article.
-----link-----
http://www.urbancure.org/article.asp?idCategory=3&idsub=1&id=3093&t=Paying+tribute+to+King%27s+legacy
---------------
Next are two wonderful quotes from her about freedom in general.
This first one was set up by comparing the Jewish liberation from Egypt and their struggles and also the differences from the freedom blacks have gotten in America.
-----Quote-----
“Receiving the law was the crucial stop between escaping Egyptian servitude and entering the Promised Land. Freedom amounted to exchanging external oppression for personal responsibility”
-----------------
Ah. She’s claiming freedom isn’t free and the price is the personal responsibility of following the law. The law simply being the tool used to help people help others protect their freedoms thereby protecting their own. To protect my freedom I must help others protect theirs.
The next 2 lines of her article provide the next quote and applies to all people who have freedom in my opinion.
-----Quote-----
“Like Moses, the great prophet and leader of the Israelites, King did not make it into the land.
Perhaps the message is that even the greatest leader has his place. He can lead in adversity, but he cannot live your life for you.”
-----------------------
She seems to be saying that while great ideas like we have in our constitution for my example, may have been formed by great leaders, the responsibility to keep it in place is for the individual not the government. That responsibility is the one freedom we still possess. The freedom of the ballot. In that booth we can vote for whatever we feel will protect our individual freedoms, not what may be politically right.
-----These quotes point out to me what I’ve always known; I am not free unless I choose to be. Someone else choosing for me does not make it so. These quotes also remind me that there is a price to be paid for freedom. It’s called responsibility. It is a heavy price to pay. I must give up a lot of freedoms to maintain it. But can that be right? Is that not hypocritical? Shouldn’t I be able to have total freedom? I am an American in this great democracy in the land of the free.
----- A constant thread through my writing is coming to grips with this basic contradiction. It all boils down to a definition of freedom related to and as an integral part of society. In the above quotes a law was given Moses to help guide his people. The bottom line is that the law had to be followed by the majority of the people or else their freedom from bondage would collapse. All those laws simply can be summed up by saying that in order to protect your individual freedom you have to respect and protect the freedom of others. A society based upon freedom cannot exist without rules to that effect In my opinion.
From back in the day Janus sang “Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose”. I think she also was trying to come to grips with that contradiction. The hippies of the day were trying to claim all freedoms for themselves, perhaps Janus had gone down that road far enough to realize that to have total freedom one must lose everything society has to offer. I wish she would of given herself enough time to realize that that was a bad thing.
------That brings up that current dirty word "compromise", where do we draw the line. How much do we give up and for what? I like running water, indoor toilets, automobiles to drive around in, movies, supermarkets. In essence all the comforts of modern living. Why would I not? I used to think that if I wanted to get rid of the bloated bureaucracy and it’s constant drain on my freedoms I would have to do more and more without all the comforts it provides. Then I had an epiphany. Let’s keep all the luxuries I like and just transfer all the power we can from the bureaucracies back to free enterprise. They seem more directly responsible to me than the president of NEA or other super bureaucracy. I can't simply not buy education (by not paying taxes)
----Not totally abolish it -- even I along with Janus understand we still need to have government; just keep it as small a possible. No need for the layer upon layer of government to do what used to take one layer. The more localized the governmental control the more direct control we have over it. Examples abound as to the inefficiency of multi layered government. Below are some links stating the obvious.
First though -- this from others, the pros. About freedom in general
Star Parker the excellent writer talking of MLK. Below a link to the Article.
-----link-----
http://www.urbancure.org/article.asp?idCategory=3&idsub=1&id=3093&t=Paying+tribute+to+King%27s+legacy
---------------
Next are two wonderful quotes from her about freedom in general.
This first one was set up by comparing the Jewish liberation from Egypt and their struggles and also the differences from the freedom blacks have gotten in America.
-----Quote-----
“Receiving the law was the crucial stop between escaping Egyptian servitude and entering the Promised Land. Freedom amounted to exchanging external oppression for personal responsibility”
-----------------
Ah. She’s claiming freedom isn’t free and the price is the personal responsibility of following the law. The law simply being the tool used to help people help others protect their freedoms thereby protecting their own. To protect my freedom I must help others protect theirs.
The next 2 lines of her article provide the next quote and applies to all people who have freedom in my opinion.
-----Quote-----
“Like Moses, the great prophet and leader of the Israelites, King did not make it into the land.
Perhaps the message is that even the greatest leader has his place. He can lead in adversity, but he cannot live your life for you.”
-----------------------
She seems to be saying that while great ideas like we have in our constitution for my example, may have been formed by great leaders, the responsibility to keep it in place is for the individual not the government. That responsibility is the one freedom we still possess. The freedom of the ballot. In that booth we can vote for whatever we feel will protect our individual freedoms, not what may be politically right.
-----These quotes point out to me what I’ve always known; I am not free unless I choose to be. Someone else choosing for me does not make it so. These quotes also remind me that there is a price to be paid for freedom. It’s called responsibility. It is a heavy price to pay. I must give up a lot of freedoms to maintain it. But can that be right? Is that not hypocritical? Shouldn’t I be able to have total freedom? I am an American in this great democracy in the land of the free.
----- A constant thread through my writing is coming to grips with this basic contradiction. It all boils down to a definition of freedom related to and as an integral part of society. In the above quotes a law was given Moses to help guide his people. The bottom line is that the law had to be followed by the majority of the people or else their freedom from bondage would collapse. All those laws simply can be summed up by saying that in order to protect your individual freedom you have to respect and protect the freedom of others. A society based upon freedom cannot exist without rules to that effect In my opinion.
From back in the day Janus sang “Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose”. I think she also was trying to come to grips with that contradiction. The hippies of the day were trying to claim all freedoms for themselves, perhaps Janus had gone down that road far enough to realize that to have total freedom one must lose everything society has to offer. I wish she would of given herself enough time to realize that that was a bad thing.
------That brings up that current dirty word "compromise", where do we draw the line. How much do we give up and for what? I like running water, indoor toilets, automobiles to drive around in, movies, supermarkets. In essence all the comforts of modern living. Why would I not? I used to think that if I wanted to get rid of the bloated bureaucracy and it’s constant drain on my freedoms I would have to do more and more without all the comforts it provides. Then I had an epiphany. Let’s keep all the luxuries I like and just transfer all the power we can from the bureaucracies back to free enterprise. They seem more directly responsible to me than the president of NEA or other super bureaucracy. I can't simply not buy education (by not paying taxes)
----Not totally abolish it -- even I along with Janus understand we still need to have government; just keep it as small a possible. No need for the layer upon layer of government to do what used to take one layer. The more localized the governmental control the more direct control we have over it. Examples abound as to the inefficiency of multi layered government. Below are some links stating the obvious.
- http://coreprinciples.blogspot.com/2008/04/regulation-of-trauma-scene-waste.html
- http://coreprinciples.blogspot.com/2008/04/porta-potty-proliferation-bill.html
- http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080428/COL04/804280375
During these hard times with business failings galore and personnal income slipping there is always the government to look to for inspiration. They are growing leaps and bounds.
- http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:hI5lgyph0_EJ:usgovinfo.about.com/od/governmentjobs/a/hiringbinge.htm+government+hiring+increase&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us
- http://jobs.aol.com/article/_a/hiring-leaps-in-public-sector/20080430132409990001?ncid=AOLCOMMjobsDYNLprim0001&icid=100214839x1201139264x1200046674
Some might call it a ponzi scheme.
One possible way to start digging back out.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
WOMEN !!!!!!!
WOMEN (thought that might get your attention lol)
DOMINIQUE took the wind out of my sails on this one.
---------------
Received an email today from my favorite charity. CAGW as I’ve posted before they are a nonpartisan government watchdog group of citizens a million members strong. I contribute 2-3 times a year only around $25 each time. So I’m not a rich guy, to me $25.00 is a lot. I’ll pick up a beer can in the street. Back to topic. I like this group because they actually take action. They are getting national air play. They publish the pig book which lists the worst cases of pork each year and run letter writing campaigns as this email to me is.
-----Anyway back to Dominique. I decided after reading the email and sending my Congressmen a heads up, that I would write my article today on it. I’m in favor of smaller more efficient government as you may know if you read any of my articles. Well I started digging out the meat and history of the “Tanker” deal. Below is a link to the email I received on the Tanker deal from Citizens Against Government Waste
-----link-----
http://netmail.verizon.net/webmail/servlet/HttpNimletDriver?nimlet=ManageEmailDetailNimlet&requestAction=showEmail&folderName=INBOX&messageID=4121
--------------
While the original Tanker deal was to go to Boeing the pork was out of control, John McCain has always been fighting pork and he has been fighting this juicy mouthful for a long time with Phil Gramm. The below link is from 2002.
-----link-----
http://www.d-n-i.net/war_profiteering/13boeing.htm
---------------
All well and good I was getting warmed up ---then I found the link below by Dominique.
She was in the Air Force. After reading her article I realized that I would just be saying the same things as she so I decided to give you all a break and let a woman give you the skinny on this one. Besides having beeen in the Air Force she is closer to the action. A tip of the hat to Dominique and her nice blog site.
-----LINK------
http://anunlikelyperspective2.squarespace.com/my-perspective/2008/4/30/dont-blow-the-tanker-deal-for-taxpayers-an-opportunity-for-u.html
------------------
Be prepared to start hearing news reports about how unpatriotic the Grummand tanker deal is and that Boeing is better. Unions were lined up behind Boeing. Looks like Dominique and myself are behind the taxpayer. Let’s see, costs less, and a better product.????? Hmmmmmmmmm. Well I guess I won’t listen to Mr. Murtha on this one.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
DOMINIQUE took the wind out of my sails on this one.
---------------
Received an email today from my favorite charity. CAGW as I’ve posted before they are a nonpartisan government watchdog group of citizens a million members strong. I contribute 2-3 times a year only around $25 each time. So I’m not a rich guy, to me $25.00 is a lot. I’ll pick up a beer can in the street. Back to topic. I like this group because they actually take action. They are getting national air play. They publish the pig book which lists the worst cases of pork each year and run letter writing campaigns as this email to me is.
-----Anyway back to Dominique. I decided after reading the email and sending my Congressmen a heads up, that I would write my article today on it. I’m in favor of smaller more efficient government as you may know if you read any of my articles. Well I started digging out the meat and history of the “Tanker” deal. Below is a link to the email I received on the Tanker deal from Citizens Against Government Waste
-----link-----
http://netmail.verizon.net/webmail/servlet/HttpNimletDriver?nimlet=ManageEmailDetailNimlet&requestAction=showEmail&folderName=INBOX&messageID=4121
--------------
While the original Tanker deal was to go to Boeing the pork was out of control, John McCain has always been fighting pork and he has been fighting this juicy mouthful for a long time with Phil Gramm. The below link is from 2002.
-----link-----
http://www.d-n-i.net/war_profiteering/13boeing.htm
---------------
All well and good I was getting warmed up ---then I found the link below by Dominique.
She was in the Air Force. After reading her article I realized that I would just be saying the same things as she so I decided to give you all a break and let a woman give you the skinny on this one. Besides having beeen in the Air Force she is closer to the action. A tip of the hat to Dominique and her nice blog site.
-----LINK------
http://anunlikelyperspective2.squarespace.com/my-perspective/2008/4/30/dont-blow-the-tanker-deal-for-taxpayers-an-opportunity-for-u.html
------------------
Be prepared to start hearing news reports about how unpatriotic the Grummand tanker deal is and that Boeing is better. Unions were lined up behind Boeing. Looks like Dominique and myself are behind the taxpayer. Let’s see, costs less, and a better product.????? Hmmmmmmmmm. Well I guess I won’t listen to Mr. Murtha on this one.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Monday, April 28, 2008
ORIGINALISM
ORIGINALISM
A REFRESHING ALTERNATIVE
-------------------
Link to Antonin (Nino) Scalia’s 60 Minutes interview. (originalism)
-----link------
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/24/60minutes/main4040290.shtml
----------------
----------Please keep in mind as you read and think through the article, that Originalism refers to the method of changing the Constitution democratically through elected officials not through unelected judges. It is not about the right or wrong of the social issues of our time, only the means by which those social issues attain the status of law. If change becomes necessary then change the constitution through democratic methods.
---------- Judge Antonin Scalia’s Originalism presents a refreshing look at Constitutional questions concerning the hot button social issues of today. From abortions to capital punishment to torture, Judge Antonin Scalia‘s concept “Originalism” seems to separate the wheat from the chaff. I think it clearly defines what the responsibilities of the Supreme Court should or should not be. I infer from the interview that Judge Scalia would look upon the “judicial fiat” method of changing or making law as taking the easy way out. Or perhaps the only way out after trying to change the law democratically has failed. Either way I believe he would call that change not constitutional. I totally agree with that.
--------- I revel in Scalia’s Originalism as refreshing because it acts as a counter-balance an alternative to the old accepted way of thinking of the Constitution as a “living document” that can be changed by “judicial fiat” to fit the changing values and ethos of the day. The nut of Originalism is that it doesn’t take umbrage with the notion of changing the Constitution: just in the method of that change. Originalism demands that change occur democratically, and not by any other means. In other words through legislation, not through “Judicial fiat”. If that method is slower and harder Originalism will say that is what the Framers had in mind.
--------- Below is a snippet from the interview about the hot button issue of abortion and the idea of changing the Constitution in relation to his concept of Originalism.
-----snippet-----
{Back at the Oxford Union, Scalia told the students, "You think there ought to be a right to abortion? No problem. The Constitution says nothing about it. Create it the way most rights are created in a democratic society. Pass a law. And that law, unlike a Constitutional right to abortion created by a court can compromise. It can…I was going to say it can split the baby! I should not use… A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change."}
------------------
Here is a man who believes and whose job it is to follow the dictates of the Constitution. Not to change it to fit his beliefs. While he seems opposed to abortion, he is also opposed to allowing the court to decide in favor of outlawing abortions. His Originalism holds sacrosanct what the Framers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution. In regards to abortion they didn’t have the concept in mind when they wrote the Constitution.
-----snippet-----
“…I think when the Constitution says that persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws, I think it clearly means walking-around persons. You don't count pregnant women twice."
------------------
The idea that fetus’s were “walking around people” would have been alien to them . I believe he is claiming that if you want to change or update the Constitution, then you have that right. But as the Constitution now stands, it does not cover abortion either way. All that is then needed is to pass a law. I assume that when and if that law was brought to the Court he would rule that the Court had no jurisdiction over the law, and the law would stand.
Here is a man who places his belief in following the rule of law as embodied in the Constitution above his personnel social views. Ironic isn’t it that the Framers who had diametrically opposed ideas felt the same way used the same construct to write the Constitution. It is refreshing to see a person in this day and age not so corrupted by his social beliefs as to be willing to follow the rule of law even though he has the obvious power to overlook it.
Again, please read the article with the idea of Democratic change vs. Judicial change in mind and you may just start to think that the Judge may be on to something. Then go ahead and call him names. Lol. Judge Scalia won’t mind. Neither will I.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
A REFRESHING ALTERNATIVE
-------------------
Link to Antonin (Nino) Scalia’s 60 Minutes interview. (originalism)
-----link------
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/24/60minutes/main4040290.shtml
----------------
----------Please keep in mind as you read and think through the article, that Originalism refers to the method of changing the Constitution democratically through elected officials not through unelected judges. It is not about the right or wrong of the social issues of our time, only the means by which those social issues attain the status of law. If change becomes necessary then change the constitution through democratic methods.
---------- Judge Antonin Scalia’s Originalism presents a refreshing look at Constitutional questions concerning the hot button social issues of today. From abortions to capital punishment to torture, Judge Antonin Scalia‘s concept “Originalism” seems to separate the wheat from the chaff. I think it clearly defines what the responsibilities of the Supreme Court should or should not be. I infer from the interview that Judge Scalia would look upon the “judicial fiat” method of changing or making law as taking the easy way out. Or perhaps the only way out after trying to change the law democratically has failed. Either way I believe he would call that change not constitutional. I totally agree with that.
--------- I revel in Scalia’s Originalism as refreshing because it acts as a counter-balance an alternative to the old accepted way of thinking of the Constitution as a “living document” that can be changed by “judicial fiat” to fit the changing values and ethos of the day. The nut of Originalism is that it doesn’t take umbrage with the notion of changing the Constitution: just in the method of that change. Originalism demands that change occur democratically, and not by any other means. In other words through legislation, not through “Judicial fiat”. If that method is slower and harder Originalism will say that is what the Framers had in mind.
--------- Below is a snippet from the interview about the hot button issue of abortion and the idea of changing the Constitution in relation to his concept of Originalism.
-----snippet-----
{Back at the Oxford Union, Scalia told the students, "You think there ought to be a right to abortion? No problem. The Constitution says nothing about it. Create it the way most rights are created in a democratic society. Pass a law. And that law, unlike a Constitutional right to abortion created by a court can compromise. It can…I was going to say it can split the baby! I should not use… A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change."}
------------------
Here is a man who believes and whose job it is to follow the dictates of the Constitution. Not to change it to fit his beliefs. While he seems opposed to abortion, he is also opposed to allowing the court to decide in favor of outlawing abortions. His Originalism holds sacrosanct what the Framers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution. In regards to abortion they didn’t have the concept in mind when they wrote the Constitution.
-----snippet-----
“…I think when the Constitution says that persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws, I think it clearly means walking-around persons. You don't count pregnant women twice."
------------------
The idea that fetus’s were “walking around people” would have been alien to them . I believe he is claiming that if you want to change or update the Constitution, then you have that right. But as the Constitution now stands, it does not cover abortion either way. All that is then needed is to pass a law. I assume that when and if that law was brought to the Court he would rule that the Court had no jurisdiction over the law, and the law would stand.
Here is a man who places his belief in following the rule of law as embodied in the Constitution above his personnel social views. Ironic isn’t it that the Framers who had diametrically opposed ideas felt the same way used the same construct to write the Constitution. It is refreshing to see a person in this day and age not so corrupted by his social beliefs as to be willing to follow the rule of law even though he has the obvious power to overlook it.
Again, please read the article with the idea of Democratic change vs. Judicial change in mind and you may just start to think that the Judge may be on to something. Then go ahead and call him names. Lol. Judge Scalia won’t mind. Neither will I.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Sunday, April 27, 2008
NEVER ENDING MONEY
PONZI SCHEME ??
From Wikepedia
-----link-----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Ponzi
--------------
Basically bringing in money, by asking people to invest and promising good returns, then paying those returns out of that money. Works great if you keep taking in more than you have to pay out. Starting to sound familiar? People do it all the time by charging more on their credit cards than they make. Cities and States do it and the Federal Government especially has become expert at it. Well Ponzi’s scheme eventually failed and so do borrowers who can’t pay their bill. So to will the Government. They too owe money. They owe the people that dividend they promised. More and better services. Remember we pay these ever increasing taxes because we are promised BETTER services (dividends). Examples of getting less for more are across the board. Look at education, look at the response to disasters (Katrina, need I say more)? More and more police don't equate to less and less crime as Chicago is proving now. The problem is that the fed is running out of places to get the money from. They starte getting the money from taxing the people. When the common person's limit was reached , they went after the richer people, next came the business’s. When that limit was reached the fed has to borrow. We (the Fed) owe debt in larger and larger amounts to other countries. If you think we aren’t affected by that, think again about recent news. The value of our dollar has plummeted, our national credit rating has gone down. The value of the money we as citizens have has lessened. The same as a pay cut. The fed. keeps lowering the interest rates, but there isn’t much room left. Lowering the rates actually just make it easier to borrow keeping the broken system above water a little longer. Just like the fed finding more place to borrow from. When that effort is exhausted, inflation will come roaring back IMO. Food prices and gas already are jumping. This is simply our way of paying the piper what is due. What is due and payable is our free ride on our Ponzi scheme. It is coming due. At the state level I found an example of that bill coming due at Jack Hoogendyk’s web site below. He is a Republican State House Representative from the 61st district, around Kalamazoo.
-----link-----
http://coreprinciples.blogspot.com/
--------------
The pertinent article in the above blog about HB5221 is below.
-----article from blog-----
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
More info on that big Capital Outlay bill (HB5221)
Here are some key points on the Capital Outlay Budget just given to me by a colleague in the House:
1. The bond cap (how much we can borrow) is being raised from $2.7 billion to $3.8 billion. It will cost the general fund budget about $100 million every year, money that would otherwise be used to pay for needed services.
2.This bill authorizes spending this year and every year through 2012.
3.Because the bond cap is a statutory measure, it can be increased every year.
4. This bill spends $400 million more than even the Governor recommended.
5. The actual cost of this bill is $1.8 billion in new spending.
One must ask...how many credit cards are we going to max out before the people are broke?
Posted by Jack Hoogendyk at 5:00 PM
----------
Link to look up HB5221
-----link-----
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vegy2q55yt5wbajjj115wkzf))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=2007-HB-5221
--------------
Looks like it passed and is on to the Senate if I understand it. If not please correct me someone.
==========
Well got to go unplug my drain, crawl under the house and get messy pull the you know what out of the system. Maybe when I’m done there I’ll have gained some experience in taking the you know what out of our clogged and broken Ponzi system.
<
Regards Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
From Wikepedia
-----link-----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Ponzi
--------------
Basically bringing in money, by asking people to invest and promising good returns, then paying those returns out of that money. Works great if you keep taking in more than you have to pay out. Starting to sound familiar? People do it all the time by charging more on their credit cards than they make. Cities and States do it and the Federal Government especially has become expert at it. Well Ponzi’s scheme eventually failed and so do borrowers who can’t pay their bill. So to will the Government. They too owe money. They owe the people that dividend they promised. More and better services. Remember we pay these ever increasing taxes because we are promised BETTER services (dividends). Examples of getting less for more are across the board. Look at education, look at the response to disasters (Katrina, need I say more)? More and more police don't equate to less and less crime as Chicago is proving now. The problem is that the fed is running out of places to get the money from. They starte getting the money from taxing the people. When the common person's limit was reached , they went after the richer people, next came the business’s. When that limit was reached the fed has to borrow. We (the Fed) owe debt in larger and larger amounts to other countries. If you think we aren’t affected by that, think again about recent news. The value of our dollar has plummeted, our national credit rating has gone down. The value of the money we as citizens have has lessened. The same as a pay cut. The fed. keeps lowering the interest rates, but there isn’t much room left. Lowering the rates actually just make it easier to borrow keeping the broken system above water a little longer. Just like the fed finding more place to borrow from. When that effort is exhausted, inflation will come roaring back IMO. Food prices and gas already are jumping. This is simply our way of paying the piper what is due. What is due and payable is our free ride on our Ponzi scheme. It is coming due. At the state level I found an example of that bill coming due at Jack Hoogendyk’s web site below. He is a Republican State House Representative from the 61st district, around Kalamazoo.
-----link-----
http://coreprinciples.blogspot.com/
--------------
The pertinent article in the above blog about HB5221 is below.
-----article from blog-----
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
More info on that big Capital Outlay bill (HB5221)
Here are some key points on the Capital Outlay Budget just given to me by a colleague in the House:
1. The bond cap (how much we can borrow) is being raised from $2.7 billion to $3.8 billion. It will cost the general fund budget about $100 million every year, money that would otherwise be used to pay for needed services.
2.This bill authorizes spending this year and every year through 2012.
3.Because the bond cap is a statutory measure, it can be increased every year.
4. This bill spends $400 million more than even the Governor recommended.
5. The actual cost of this bill is $1.8 billion in new spending.
One must ask...how many credit cards are we going to max out before the people are broke?
Posted by Jack Hoogendyk at 5:00 PM
----------
Link to look up HB5221
-----link-----
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vegy2q55yt5wbajjj115wkzf))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=2007-HB-5221
--------------
Looks like it passed and is on to the Senate if I understand it. If not please correct me someone.
==========
Well got to go unplug my drain, crawl under the house and get messy pull the you know what out of the system. Maybe when I’m done there I’ll have gained some experience in taking the you know what out of our clogged and broken Ponzi system.
<
Regards Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)