The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by taxwonk
The press in the US is biased.

The press everywhere is biased. What's curious about the US is that there is some mysterious need to pretend, at least by television broadcasters, that they aren't biased. Even Fox News does the dance.

I do think that it's funny that a party in control of the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the Presidency, most Appellate Circuits, (I think) the majority of governorships, and (I think) the majority of state legislatures seems to think it can still with a straight face argue it's completely helpless against the big bad biased media.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
So does ....the WSJ. The press in the US is biased.

While FOX is, as Sebby alluded, entertainment, pure and simple, like all visual "news" media, the Wall Street is not biased nor does it make stuff up. It's about reporting the facts (with a slant to business reporting over straight news) and editorialising with common sense, the UMC and empirical economic sense as their guides. The fact that you might think otherwise explains how you get suckered by the loonie leftists.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Other than seeing that it's a slam on Ted Kennedy, I am having a very hard time understanding this sentence. What are you trying to say here?

Ted Kennedy=murderer and liar and demo leading light

Ted Kennedy + Bobby Byrd=murderer and liar and racist and demo leading lights

Ted Kennedy + Bobby Byrd + Billybob Clintoon=murders and liars and racist and demo leading lights=the death and illegimitisation of the demo party.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Ted Kennedy=murderer and liar and demo leading light

Ted Kennedy + Bobby Byrd=murderer and liar and racist and demo leading lights

Ted Kennedy + Bobby Byrd + Billybob Clintoon=murders and liars and racist and demo leading lights=the death and illegimitisation of the demo party.

I admit Klan membership is vile, but I not sure Byrd deserves to be lumped in with the other two. Has he ever been proven to have murdered an innocent young woman?

[Spanky]

Some Abortion Foes Unsure About Alito
Single-issue groups are growing concerned that the Supreme Court nominee might not be an ally in their effort to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

By Maura Reynolds, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — Some antiabortion groups are starting to wonder whether Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. is as strong an ally of their cause as opponents have depicted him.

Although he has been wholeheartedly embraced by most major conservative groups, those whose sole mission is to restrict and prohibit abortion have reservations about the latest Supreme Court nominee as they learn more about his record on the divisive issue.

ADVERTISEMENT

"I don't know what his personal views are, but I know that he has ruled on pro-life cases four times and he has ruled against pro-life positions three times. And the fourth was a split decision," said Richard Collier, president of the Legal Center for the Defense of Life, based in Morristown, N.J.

"If you look at the paper trail, it is all negative."

Another group from New Jersey — Alito's home state and the jurisdiction where many of his rulings as an appeals court judge have had a direct effect — is also concerned.

"There's a big question mark about what he would do" on the Supreme Court, said Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life.

"We certainly hope that Judge Alito is all the things that our opponents claim he is, but we don't know that yet."

A leading antiabortion group, the National Right to Life Committee, has not taken a formal position on Alito's nomination, but the organization's website suggests that the group considers his record on abortion to be mixed at best.

"In examining his record, there are four principal abortion-related cases," the group's website states. "Judge Alito voted in favor of the pro-life side once and against it three times."

Americans United for Life, a national organization of antiabortion attorneys, believes his record is ambiguous.

Alito's rulings "give no clear indication one way or another," said Clarke D. Forsythe, director of the group's Project in Law and Bioethics.

"They reflect his status as a Circuit Court judge applying precedent, and to me they give no indication of how he would vote" on Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling on abortion.

In short, Forsythe said, abortion foes are of two minds on Alito: "Many have hope and many are withholding judgment."

Major social conservative groups such as the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America have endorsed Alito without reservation.

But the chief counsel of Concerned Women for America, Jan M. LaRue, said the group considered more than just abortion in backing him, particularly Alito's rulings in support of religious liberties.

LaRue said that in cases where Alito ruled against positions that some considered antiabortion, he was not expressing his own views but simply applying existing precedents, including Roe.

"The opinions I've read show a Circuit Court judge who recognizes what all the lower-court judges recognize, which is that they can't overrule the Supreme Court," LaRue said.

"Some folks want their outcome no matter how the judge gets there. If you do that, you are being inconsistent on judicial restraint."

The National Right to Life Committee declined to comment on or clarify its position on Alito. In an e-mail, spokeswoman Megan Dillon pointed to the statement on the group's website as "all we have."

The group's Pennsylvania affiliate, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, was circumspect as well.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by taxwonk
favor of cutting waste while keeping in place the safety net

Do you consider the safety net wasteful spending? Don't you think the safety net is important?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Demand better. Don't contribute to the party, either one. Respond to solicitations with a letter stating you'll be glad to contribute when they start fielding candidates you're proud to vote for. Spend your time and money on individual candidates who represent your ideals, even if you aren't a direct constituent.

Or you could start a blog.

How about getting involved in your party to try and change it? Run for a local party position. The biggest problem today is only the extremists get involved in the party power structure.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by baltassoc
The press everywhere is biased. What's curious about the US is that there is some mysterious need to pretend, at least by television broadcasters, that they aren't biased. Even Fox News does the dance.

I do think that it's funny that a party in control of the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the Presidency, most Appellate Circuits, (I think) the majority of governorships, and (I think) the majority of state legislatures seems to think it can still with a straight face argue it's completely helpless against the big bad biased media.

In this country everyone consideres themselves a victim. Being a victim gives you a license to complain. We have become a country of whiners.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I admit Klan membership is vile, but I not sure Byrd deserves to be lumped in with the other two. Has he ever been proven to have murdered an innocent young woman?

I imagine the Klan lynched innocent young women as well as men, no? Perhaps you should call Byrd's senate office and get clarification.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I imagine the Klan lynched innocent young women as well as men, no? Perhaps you should call Byrd's senate office and get clarification.

Sure, but killing someone passively as part of a mob is different than being the main actor. Like, while Teddy was guilty of the rape perpetrated by William Kennedy Smith, he was not the main actor. Can you show an instance where Byrd pulled the noose tight?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
While FOX is, as Sebby alluded, entertainment, pure and simple, like all visual "news" media, the Wall Street is not biased nor does it make stuff up. It's about reporting the facts (with a slant to business reporting over straight news) and editorialising with common sense, the UMC and empirical economic sense as their guides. The fact that you might think otherwise explains how you get suckered by the loonie leftists.

Nonsense. The Wall St Journal oped page is like Natl Review for dumb single-minded business people who wouldn't get NR's humor or follow its prose.

The WSJ is a good paper, but there's not really much use for it anymore, considering the chief reason people used to use it is so much more effectively provided online.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
In this country everyone consideres themselves a victim. Being a victim gives you a license to complain. We have become a country of whiners.

2. the legacy of the demos.

they inspire a culture of marginalisation and mediocrity, which lends itself to whining and claims of victimisation by those that reject their culture of loserdom and actually succeed and prosper in society.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Sure, but killing someone passively as part of a mob is different than being the main actor. Like, while Teddy was guilty of the rape perpetrated by William Kennedy Smith, he was not the main actor. Can you show an instance where Byrd pulled the noose tight?

I'm not a criminal attorney, what constitutes the badges of conspiracy?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
In this country everyone consideres themselves a victim. Being a victim gives you a license to complain. We have become a country of whiners.

I am not a victim, yet I complain. Same appplies to most of the people posting here. What's that make us?

[andViolins]

Originally posted by Spanky
How about getting involved in your party to try and change it? Run for a local party position. The biggest problem today is only the extremists get involved in the party power structure.

Originally posted by Spanky
In this country everyone consideres themselves a victim. Being a victim gives you a license to complain. We have become a country of whiners.

Didn't you just answer your own rhetorical question right there?

aV