by Eternal Hope, Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 08:53:59 PM EDT
wades into the fray between the retired generals criticizing the Bush administration and those who say that generals should keep their mouths shut. In a bizzare form of reasoning, he praises those who would praise Donald Rumsfeld's so-called military genius and then turns around and says that those who criticize them are setting a dangerous precedent akin to Saddam and other such dictators.
This, of course, is a case of selective outrage. Typical of the New Morality practiced by the Republicans, they make up all sorts of moral rules that we have to follow very strictly. But in their books, if you're a Republican, it's all good. If Krauthammer wants to be credible when criticizing generals who speak out, he needs to go after General Myers as well as the generals criticizing Bush. It works both ways.
by Washington Hotlist, Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:03:08 PM EDT
Dear Ms. Malkin,
I can appreciate your views in support of the War in Iraq. While I have personally opposed this reckless and incompetently mismanaged military operation, reasonable people can certainly disagree on an issue as emotional and controversial as war. Our republic was founded by individuals that were concerned about the dangers of an all too powerful government. Lucky for us, the First Amendment was ratified to give political dissenters the ability to peacefully protest without fear of incarceration or extradition.
by populistamerica, Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 09:50:33 AM EDT
...Every little thing that can be done to chip away at the Constitution and Bill of Rights is being done by the Executive, the Judiciary and the Legislature. If the children are now to be taught only the approved curriculum, to be accepted without comment, we may wind up with the equivalent of a Hitler Jugend or a Soviet Young Pioneers here in the United States....
by skeptic06, Sat Mar 04, 2006 at 04:52:27 PM EST
This is by way of a heads up: surges of legislative enthusiasm for regulating broadcast indecency come and go, according as the mass hysteria of the Bozellite fanatics waxes and wanes.
It must be waxing again, because there are stirrings on the Hill.
by Worcester Justice Calling, Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 06:29:34 PM EST
The Worcester (Mass.) Telegram & Gazette reported today on the extension until April 7 of the temporary restraining order Mary Jean won against the State Police regarding the posting of an arrest video to her web site
. Read the article here
In the article Richard Nangle reports that:
Houston lawyer Daniel J. Shea, who represents Ms. Jean, wants a federal court to rule that the state law in question is unconstitutional as it would apply to Ms. Jean. Mr. Shea said publication of the video served the public interest, because it revealed that state police did not show a warrant before searching Mr. Pechonis' home, and that the case could establish a precedent.
The law in question (MGL Chapter 272: Section 99
) applies to the "Interception of wire and oral communications." The preamble states that it was crafted to fight organized crime.
The commentary on the Blue Mass. Group blog on this issue when the story broke was prescient.