Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Commentary
Posted by: Jon Henke on Thursday, March 02, 2006

You know it's a Slow News Day when the New York Times does a story on Judge Alito's Thank You notes...
In his first weeks on the Supreme Court, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. sent a note to Dr. James C. Dobson, the influential Christian conservative, thanking him for his support and vowing that "as long as I serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep in mind the trust that has been placed in me," Dr. Dobson said Wednesday in a radio broadcast.
And since reporter David Kirkpatrick can't openly criticize the letter, he spends the bulk of the story citing other people making snide, loaded remarks about it, or defending the letter from those remarks. Other than the fact that Alito sent a thank you note to a prominent supporter, there's nothing to the story except innuendo-by-proxy. Top to bottom, this is a contrived story.

Frankly, I don't get it. Would critics be less worried if Judge Alito was not polite enough to send thank you letters? Or if he didn't pledge to be mindful of the trust placed in him?

Top to bottom, this is a contrived story. Not an example, I think, of "liberal media bias"; it's an example of a narrative-driven, scandal-driven media — a media in search of an angle, instead of simply reporting the news that's fit to print.

PS: Andrew Sullivan prints the letter and writes "So now we know, don't we?" What, that Judge Alito is polite to supporters?

Divider



What the hell?
The subject matter was extremely technical, and near the end of the argument Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dozed in her chair. Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge.
I'm not terribly familiar with judicial ethics, but I suspect that consciousness is a necessary pre-condition for ruling on a case. Will Ginsburg have to recuse herself?

Divider


John Hawkins at Right Wing News prints his list of The 25 Greatest Moments In American History. Make of them what you will.

Some time back, a family member asked me what I thought was the single most important moment in US history — the single event that most shaped what we are today. It was a good question, and I didn't have a good answer. Sure, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but that was more of a culmination — a symbolic moment — of many factors. He suggested something very interesting: George Washington declining the position of King...
At the end of the Revolution, a number of Army officers said America should have a King or Emperor, and wanted to give the job to Washington. He opposed the idea and prevented the officers from carrying out a planned military takeover of the country in 1783. Later that year, Washington and his officers voluntarily resigned their military positions.
That strikes me both as an important event in history and perfectly symbolic of the philosophy that created and sustained the United States.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I wonder if Justice Ginsburg’s health is deteriorating. She’s fighting cancer, no?
 
Written By: Dave Schuler
URL: http://www.theglitteringeye.com
> She’s fighting cancer, no?

"In 1999, Ginsburg had surgery for colon cancer and had chemotherapy and radiation treatment." Methinks this is old news and has no bearing on Snoozergate.
 
Written By: D
URL: http://
Glad to see someone else had the same reaction to the Alito letter. I’m a non-religious libertarian and very much dislike the Christian Right; but when I read the letter on Sullivan’s blog, my reaction was: "So?" I kept thinking I might have missed something, some little nuance that was actually code for: "Now we can start putting Gays in concentration camps." But I still don’t see it and don’t get why Sullivan was so disturbed by the letter. I am sure, however, that the Hive will use the letter as evidence that there is a conspiracy of people wanting to use the power of government to force compliance with their beliefs. Because, you know, liberals are never guilty of THAT.
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
There is nothing "wrong" - in the legal sense - about the Dobson letter. The problem is more of a political one, which doesn’t matter now, does it? Dobson is grade A extremist. Does that mean Alito can’t write him? No. But it does tell us more about Alito’s political outlook than he ever revealed at his confirmation hearing. I think part of Sullivan’s complaint is that Alito is now revealing a proclivity to associate with and draw support from extremists, and that he sought to project the opposite image at his hearings.

Did you know that stem cell research is equivalent to the experiments that Nazi "doctors" performed on Jewish people in concentration camps? I didn’t know that. Here I thought that who work on stem cell research want to help people afflicted with diseases. Turns out, they are no better than those who tortured people in concentration camps.

Now, most decent, moral people would not thank someone who held the view that stem cell researchers are equivalent to Nazis "doctors." But I guess Alito isn’t one of them.

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
"Dobson is a grade A extremist."

According to who, MK? You? Considering your track record on this site, I suspect anyone to the right of Patricia Ireland is an "extremist" to you.

And speaking of that, I happen to think NARAL and Planned Parenthood are extremist organizations. You, I suspect, do not. "Extremism," like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. As for the rest of your screed - (sigh) yes, stem-cell research is the wonderful Promised Land that will cure all disease and grant us the Fountain of Youth, and anyone who raises an ethical question is a knuckle-dragging Bible thumping snake handler. Ethics? We don’t need no steenking ethics!
 
Written By: Christopher
URL: http://
Look, I disagree with Dobson on a lot of stuff — probably almost everything — but he’s a far, far cry from "Grade A extremist". Fred Phelps is a grade A extremist. Falwell and Robertson are solidly on the social conservative side. Dobson is not even as controversial as them.

Frankly, "extremist" is largely meaningless rhetoric. Just a word thrown about to re-frame the debate.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Not an example, I think, of "liberal media bias"; it’s an example of a narrative-driven, scandal-driven media — a media in search of an angle, instead of simply reporting the news that’s fit to print

Do you honestly think that if a liberal SCOTUS member had sent a thank you note to the head of the NOW or ACLU, it would be an "angle"?

Nope.

The "angle" is that a SCOTUS judge is thanking a CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE. Why is that an "angle" at all?

Sure, no bias there.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
According to who, MK? You? Considering your track record on this site, I suspect anyone to the right of Patricia Ireland is an "extremist" to you.
I believe anyone who compares stem cell researchers to Nazi concentration camp doctors is extreme. You apparently don’t. That’s your opinion and your entitled to it. I don’t know why you would think that. I think such a comparison is indecent and immoral, but again, you are entitled to your opinion.

I think Sullivan’s particular beef with Dobson is over his antihomosexual stance. Dobson has linked homosexuals with pedophiles. He has stated that homosexuals are out to destroy the family. He has made other outrageous statements about homosexuals that, if made about Christians, would certainly be labeled as extreme by most decent people.

Again, if you don’t think Dobson is extreme, that’s your opinion. Let it never be said that the left has a monopoly on moral relativism.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
As to the "Greatest moments in US history" I don’t know how "great" a moment it is, but Pearl Harbor is probably one of the most influential turning points in our national (and world) history, and it really did set the stage for what has happened since.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Did you know that stem cell research is equivalent to the experiments that Nazi "doctors" performed on Jewish people in concentration camps?
First, he didn’t equate the two, so your use of the word "equivalent" is inaccurate (big surprise). Here is what he said:
" . . . people talk about the potential for good that can come from destroying these little embryos and how we might be able to solve the problem of juvenile diabetes. . . . But I have to ask this question: In World War II, the Nazis experimented on human beings in horrible ways in the concentration camps, and I imagine, if you wanted to take the time to read about it, there would have been some discoveries there that benefited mankind. You know, if you take a utilitarian approach, that if something results in good, then it is good. But that’s obviously not true. We condemn what the Nazis did because there are some things that we always could do but we haven’t done, because science always has to be guided by ethics and by morality. And you remove ethics and morality, and you get what happened in Nazi Germany."
He has also said:
"In the case of killing embryos there is no suffering, no grieving victims, and so they’re not the same, obviously."


Secondly, MK should praise Dobson on his moral coherence after his previous claims about the right-to-life’s supposed inability to view an embryo as worthy of protection in all cases. Isn’t it morally coherent for them to want to protect an embryo from medical experimentation?


Thirdly, MK has yet to back-up or correct his claim that the NRLC supports an abortion exception for rape/incest.

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
First, he didn’t equate the two, so your use of the word "equivalent" is inaccurate (big surprise). Here is what he said:
I read what he said. If you don’t think he was equating the two, well, that’s your opinion. I think his message was pretty clear. Indeed, anytime a lefty uses the word "Bush" and "Nazi" in the same sentence they are immediately charged with equating Bush with Hitler. But when Dobson does the same, the analysis is more nuanced. Go figure.
Look, I disagree with Dobson on a lot of stuff — probably almost everything — but he’s a far, far cry from "Grade A extremist". Fred Phelps is a grade A extremist. Falwell and Robertson are solidly on the social conservative side. Dobson is not even as controversial as them.

Frankly, "extremist" is largely meaningless rhetoric. Just a word thrown about to re-frame the debate.
The issue is not whether you disagree with Dobson. I would hope you would. The issue is whether you dignify someone with a thank you in light of the things you disagree about. I disagree with my friend over whether Godfather I or II is a better movie. But I would still thank him for his support. On the other hand, I would never thank someone who compares stem cell researchers to Nazis, because that person has shown he is not worthy of a thank you. Indecent, immoral persons do not deserve my thanks.

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Indecent, immoral persons do not deserve my thanks.
This is kind of funny coming from mkultra, once wondered if a blogger "sounded better in the original German."

So, when did you "get religion" on calling people Nazis?
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com
If you don’t think he was equating the two, well, that’s your opinion.
Yes, an opinion backed up with evidence of his actual words rather than your distortion. He was criticizing the idea that experimentation on human life becomes OK as long as some good comes from it; an argument you used in this very post. If you believe that a possibly beneficial end result of experimentation is a valid argument, then where does that lead us? That is what Dobson was arguing. Take your head out of your a** for once.


I’m still waiting for you to correct your error about NRLC.

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Back to "great moments" and Washington’s stepping down. Someone told King George that Washington was going to retire to his farm. King George scoffed and said [something like], "If he does that he will be the greatest man in the world.".


 
Written By: MIke Z
URL: www.rigoletto.com/blogger.html
This is kind of funny coming from mkultra, once wondered if a blogger "sounded better in the original German."

So, when did you "get religion" on calling people Nazis?
Stalin and the Nazis had much in common. So too did the Khmer Rouge and the Nazis. The issue is not comparing people or groups to Nazis. The issue is which people are you comparing to Nazis. Dobson believes stem cell researchers are comparable to Nazis. It’s funny, but not surprising, that no one else finds the comparison offensive.
Yes, an opinion backed up with evidence of his actual words rather than your distortion. He was criticizing the idea that experimentation on human life becomes OK as long as some good comes from it; an argument you used in this very post. If you believe that a possibly beneficial end result of experimentation is a valid argument, then where does that lead us? That is what Dobson was arguing. Take your head out of your a** for once.
Right. Thanks for making my point. Dobson could have said it exactly this way, if he wanted. Notice how you didn’t have to mention Nazis to make your point. Which only goes to show, of course, that Dobson WAS comparing stem cell researchers to Nazis.
I’m still waiting for you to correct your error about NRLC.
From a press release from the Republican National Committee for Life:
As further evidence of Governor Bush’s "pro-life" position, NRLC cites the facts that he recently filed a friend of the court brief stating his strong opposition to paying for elective abortions, and that he supports requiring parental notification before abortions are performed on minors. Does a politician really deserve praise for espousing those two positions? After all, even the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court has ruled that abortions do not have to be paid for with taxpayers’ money and that parental consent/notification is OK (as long as there is a judicial bypass).

National Right to Life Committee, in a release that is tantamount to an endorsement, has pinned the "pro-life" label on a man who has said he would support a human life amendment only if it excluded babies conceived as a result of rape or incest, or in the case of the life of the mother, and that he would allow the killing of those babies through the ninth month of pregnancy.

Perhaps Governor Bush misspoke. If so, he should take this opportunity to clarify his remarks. As it stands, there is no way his stance can be described as pro-life, especially in light of the fact that even many who support abortion draw the line at the first trimester, a view that is clearly unacceptable but certainly more restrictive than that of Gov. Bush.
From a column in RenewAmerica
There are a myriad of false perceptions on what constitutes being pro life among pro life groups. Some groups’ work is counter productive to authentic pro life work. They are part time or quasi pro lifers.

This fact, that some groups are not really pro life, is the reason why the U.S. is still counting over 45 millions babies surgically killed after almost 32 years of work? Some groups are so flawed they must be called fakes.

There is only one correct defense if we are to stop the killing of babies. We must be pro life with no exceptions.

A good example of a group actually being counter productive to life is what happened recently in the South Dakota Congress during March, 2004 legislation. It involves shocking action taken by the National Right to Life (NRL) and its South Dakota Right to Life (SDRL) chapter’s officer, State Sen. Jay Duenwald, an action that will affect thousands of children’s lives. Here’s what took place.

South Dakota’s House of Representatives had just passed the abortion ban bill 1191 by an overwhelming majority, 54 to 14 and was headed to the Senate. Instead of supporting this important piece of pro life legislation, NRL joined forces with pro abortion members of the legislature to defeat the initial bill, which had absolutely no exceptions in it. It was a perfect pro life bill.

NRL then attacked the forced compromised measure, which was still powerful legislation, banning virtually all abortions in South Dakota, making it a felony punishable to 15 years. Even pro abortion lobbyists called the revised bill "the most restrictive anti-abortion measure since Roe v Wade." Countless children would be saved. It would have been challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court, and once there, a viable possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade.

Next, the Senate narrowly approved the compromise measure, 18 to 17. When the bill arrived on the Governor’s desk, he sent it back with a "style and form" veto suggesting some technical changes which had to be approved by both houses of the legislature for the bill to become law. Although the House again overwhelmingly passed the bill, NRL’s officer, Sen. Duenwald, had a second chance to defeat it. This time, with the help of NRL’s powerful lobbying efforts, they succeeded. The bill was defeated by an 18 to 17 vote.

National Right to Life, a mainstream ecumenical face of the pro life movement, teamed up with child killers ’Planned Parenthood’ to defeat a bill by saying, "It’s not the right time for this bill," a bill that would have met no resistance what so ever...the Governor was pro life, the District Attorney was pro life, both the house and the senate were pro life. Indeed, it would have been fait accompli for the life of the unborn.

The Church is very clear on the sinfulness of NRL’s action. Referring to such rationalization, Pope Paul VI said "One cannot do evil so that good may follow therefrom" (Humane vitae n.14; Rom.3:8). According to the principle of double effect, even in a moral dilemma, the act in question must be good or at least neutral. One may not do evil in order to accomplish good. The end does not justify the means. Evil is evil.

It is no secret among many hard working pro lifers that NRL has caused much confusion during the past 30 years because they lack consistency and faithfulness in all life issues, including contracepting, IVF, cloning, abortion, euthanasia, etc. One cannot call themselves pro life if they only are pro life on one or two issues, alleging that a little bit of murder (called ’exceptions’) can be allowed.

Wielding enormous electoral clout, mostly within the Republican Party, NRL supports the murder of innocent unborn babies using the 30 year old "The Life of the Mother" ruse. Contrary to this barefaced lie, hundreds of doctors have given testimony there is never a reason to destroy the child to save the life of a mother. Another pro abortion myth that NRL has perpetuated.

NRL also states that a person can support abortion in cases of rape and incest and still call themselves pro life. Oh, really? This is a moral relativism at its worst.

Another dismal fact shows that NRL is not opposed to the evil "in-vitro fertilization" nor to "fertility clinics" that throw away thousands of living humans, or embryos, every year.
From CNS News:
NRLC Criticized for ’Unbiblical’ Position

NRLC’s support of Frist was almost immediately called into question by the group Columbia Christians for Life (CCFL) in an email to supporters and the media entitled "National Right to Life Violates the Word of God (again)."

"The simple, clear statement of the Sixth Commandment is: ’You shall not murder,’" wrote Steve Lefemine, director of CCFL. "There are no ’exceptions’ to God’s Commandment in Exodus 20:13."

Lefemine charged that NRLC had placed its own agenda for political power above a biblical mandate.

"It is NOT Pro-Life to be against child-murder ’except’ in cases where the innocent victim was conceived in an act of rape or incest," he wrote. "Nor is it necessary to intentionally destroy an unborn child’s life by procured abortion for the purpose of saving the life of the mother."
So - JWG - why don’t you tell me again what the position of the NRLC is? Hmmm. I won’t hold my breath.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Jon,

I agree with your friend though I think deflecting the coup attempt was the real accomplishment.
In March 1783, Washington learned about a conspiracy planned by some of his officers who were upset about back pay in the Continental Army’s winter camp at Newburgh, New York. They were plotting a coup against the Continental Congress. He was able to convince them (through use of theatrics) that he had suffered equally or more than they. He was thus able to instill loyalty, and thus end the plot.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington)

It was December of 1783 that Washington resigned his commission. In terms of revolutionary leaders, I can not think of another example of Washington’s behavior. From Cromwell to Castro, the general always ends up running the country.
 
Written By: Lighthouse
URL: http://
Do you honestly think that if a liberal SCOTUS member had sent a thank you note to the head of the NOW or ACLU, it would be an "angle"?
Well IF that had happened, I’m sure the O’Reilly’s and Limbaugh’s of the world would be all over it like white on rice.
You see shark, the key word there is “IF”. There is a degree of propriety.
When I first heard it this morning, I shrugged it off as what it appears to be, a thank you letter to a moron and a bigot. But what are the ramifications of such a letter? If Alito rules against roe v. wade, will not contemporaries as well as historians look back on this letter as an implicating that Alito’s ruling wasn’t based upon constitutional law but rather upon his own religious beliefs? And whether or not he “owed” the religious Right something for their support?
Many are disregarding this letter as a friendly thank you note, but the political consequences may be more damaging.
It wasn’t proper for Alito to thank James Dobson for the support of Focus on the Family. Like it or not, Dobson is a controversial religious leader. And publicly thanking him may inadvertently give the Religious Right another Cross to Bear.

What Alito should have done, was to give Dobson a wink and a nod the next time they saw each other at the local Blue Oyster Bar.
But now it’s on the record. And we’ll hear about it from now to eternity.
Yes, an opinion backed up with evidence of his actual words rather than your distortion.
Yeah, JWG. Gotta disagree witcha’ there. When I first read about this, I immediately thought Dobson was comparing stem cell research to Nazi experimentation. Then my interpretation was confirmed with this interview between Hannity and Dobson,
DOBSON: Sean, it was only one paragraph that people have overreacted to and distorted, by the way. But the point is that you just cannot kill people in order — let me put it this way: Science has always been guided by ethics and morality. There have always been things that we could have done and we didn’t do because it was wrong to do them.
HANNITY: Right.
DOBSON: That’s always been true, except in Nazi Germany. That was the exception, and that’s where there was no morality, and there were no ethics. And so to that degree, there is a relationship.
There is a relationship? Hmmm?
Plus, you know what happens when you dance around Nazis. What’s that “Godwin’s Law”?
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Jon,
The most important event in U.S. history was the opening of the transcontinental railroad.

Now think about it.
Yes, democracy…, Washington…, Declaration of Independence…, Bill of Rights…,
Yes, all of those kind of things are no doubt extremely important. But what really made this nation what it is today was the railroad.

What we had was,
Democracy. Mass immigration. Untapped resources. Industrial revolution. Free market capitalism. All at the same time,
You couple all of that with the opening of the West for settlement… And voila’
The U.S. of A. Motherscratcher.

And that stands for US, Assh*le.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
The issue is not comparing people or groups to Nazis. The issue is which people are you comparing to Nazis
Just as I figured: it’s okay for you to call people you don’t approve of Nazis, but it’s not okay for someone else to call a group you do approve of Nazis.

So, the blogger you compared to the Nazis was comparable to Stalin and Khmer Rogue, too? Or will you admit that comparing those who disagree with you to Nazis is out of line?

 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com
I’m not sure whether the successful test of an atomic bomb at Alamogordo is one of the 25 Greatest Moments or Worst Moments, but it seems to me it ought to be one of the lists. Nothing has been quite the same ever since.
 
Written By: Steven Donegal
URL: http://
Just as I figured: it’s okay for you to call people you don’t approve of Nazis, but it’s not okay for someone else to call a group you do approve of Nazis.

So, the blogger you compared to the Nazis was comparable to Stalin and Khmer Rogue, too? Or will you admit that comparing those who disagree with you to Nazis is out of line?
Don’t remember calling anyone a Nazi or even using the word. (But maybe you think all Germans are Nazis.) Don’t really recall what the blogger said either. OTOH, there are plenty on the right who say things that one could compare to Nazi rhetoric. Look at Ann Coulter. She got a standing ovation at a top flight conservative convention when she called Arabs "ragheads." Michelle Malkin thinks concentration camps are a good idea. Tony Blankley criticized/made fun of George Soros for escaping a Nazi death camp. Michael Savage has made a cottage industry out of bashing homosexuals.

By contrast, I wouldn’t apply the Nazi label to stem cell researchers - and I don’t believe most decent people would either.

What exactly are you saying Steverino - you agree with Dobson?



 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
What exactly are you saying Steverino - you agree with Dobson?
No, you have completely missed my point — the latest in a series of many points you’ve missed. The point is that you are a hypocrite: you call Dobson indecent and immoral for comparing someone to Nazis, and yet you have done the very same thing.
OTOH, there are plenty on the right who say things that one could compare to Nazi rhetoric.
As usual, you sidestep the issure: it isn’t the "plenty on the right" that you compared to Nazis (and I’m sure there are just as many on the left whom one could compare to Nazis), it’s the one blogger you smeared by your comparison.

Oh, and you are still a coward for not admitting to your mistakes.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com
Not an example, I think, of "liberal media bias"; it’s an example of a narrative-driven, scandal-driven media — a media in search of an angle, instead of simply reporting the news that’s fit to print.
Why can’t it be both?
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
So - JWG - why don’t you tell me again what the position of the NRLC is? Hmmm. I won’t hold my breath.
MK, you have the worst ability to read for comprehension. I ALREADY posted a link DIRECTLY to the NRLC which demonstrated their opposition to exceptions for rape/incest. What do you provide? Quotes from other groups who criticize the NRLC for supporting politicians who support the exception. It’s possible to support a politician who will move your agenda forward even if it doesn’t go as far as you would like. Additionally, you provide a criticism of SD’s Jay Duenwald as evidence that NRLC supports a rape/incest exception because he fought to defeat an abortion bill in 2004 that contained no exceptions. Unfortunately for your argument, he did not oppose it because it was too restrictive. He opposed it because he didn’t think the timing was right to challenge Roe v Wade. That’s changed now, hasn’t it? Did he oppose the current SD abortion bill? Nope...because he doesn’t support the exception.

How about you provide a link to a NRLC document that states their support for the exception? Unfortunately for you, you can’t. Your "fact" is demonstrably wrong, as usual.

There is a relationship? Hmmm?
Pogue, he stated there is a relationship in terms of the morality of killing humans in the name of scientific research. No one would dispute the relationship if we were experimenting on children. Therefore, the sensitivity is due to different views regarding the unborn. He has also stated that there are other ways in which there is no relationship. (""In the case of killing embryos there is no suffering, no grieving victims, and so they’re not the same, obviously.") However, I will grant that using the "Nazi" word is a poor way to make an argument given its highly charged nature.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Perhaps if Alito had written only the one letter, to Dobson, there might be some substance to these innuendos. I suspect, however, that Alito wrote many thank you notes to his supporters, but Dobson was the only one with the bad manners to publicize it.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Jon,
The story behind Washington turning down a kingship is a wonderful story in itself (I did a post on my own blog about it back on President’s Day).

I cannot agree with you more on this. For anyone who doubts the importance of George Washington in American history, you MUST read this story. Our country was only saved by the good intentions of this great statesman. To remain humble in the face of a crowd which would turn you into a king is a testament to the integrity of Washington.
 
Written By: EdMcGon
URL: http://politicsandpigskins.blogspot.com/
I won’t hold my breath.
MK won’t hold his breath because he’ll just run away rather than face actual evidence. How about it? Found a NRLC comment supporting a rape/incest exception, or where you wrong as usual?
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Pogue, he stated there is a relationship in terms of the morality of killing humans in the name of scientific research. No one would dispute the relationship if we were experimenting on children. Therefore, the sensitivity is due to different views regarding the unborn.
Well then, Dobson must be a pretty…pretty…pretty good barber to split those hairs.
He has also stated that there are other ways in which there is no relationship. (""In the case of killing embryos there is no suffering, no grieving victims, and so they’re not the same, obviously.")
Ah. I see. Well,
My apologies to the Reverend. I didn’t take into account his, “It’s like Nazi experiments except that it’s not like Nazi experiments” explanation. All better now.
(That’s a useful tool. I wonder if my wife would buy a like minded explanation…
“Sweetie,… You’re a little overweight. But here are reason’s you’re not fat.”
Yeah, I doubt it. She didn’t buy the whole, “depending on what your definition of the word “is” is.” … A little advice from Dr. Mahone, when defending your actions to your spouse, do NOT quote politicians. It never works.)
However, I will grant that using the "Nazi" word is a poor way to make an argument given its highly charged nature.
On that, we both agree. Using the “Nazi” word is almost always a poor way to make an argument.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Perhaps if Alito had written only the one letter, to Dobson, there might be some substance to these innuendos. I suspect, however, that Alito wrote many thank you notes to his supporters, but Dobson was the only one with the bad manners to publicize it.
I suspect, Tim, that your use of the word “suspect” is just code for, “Hey, I got my Hallmark, didn’t you get yours?”. ;)
But you’re probably right, I suspect that Planned Parenthood had the decency to keep their Alito Hallmark under wraps.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
”" is just code for,"

I don’t use "code". My use of the word "suspect" was used because I have no way of being absolutely sure that he sent more than one note, but since many people send thank-you notes(that’s what keeps hallmark in business) I can reasonably infer that he sent notes to most, if not all, of his supporters, including those who are not conservative Christians. Some things, courtesy being one of them, are not political.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider