Thursday, December 29, 2005

Death Penalty More Merciful than Euthanasia? 

I was just listening to a little Springer on the Radio and heard a caller bring up the fact that Tookie Williams was put to death in 22 minutes, while it took almost a week for Terry Schaivo to die once her feeding tube was removed.

While the circumstances of their deaths have little in common, they way they died was decided by laws we have created. Why the inconsistency? I assume the reason we use lethal injection for death sentences is because it's one of the less greusome ways to kill someone. Why doesn't the same thing apply to medical death sentences?

We don't starve or dehydrate our death row inmates to death, but we so with braindead loved ones.

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Bush's Desperate Attempts to Save his Presidency 

It's not every day that I agree with something Bob Barr says, but today's one of them:

Bob Barr quoted on firedoglake: "A critical component of White House Scandal Defense 101 is rallying the partisan base. This keeps approval ratings in territory where the wheels don't start falling off. The way to achieve this goal is you go negative and you don't let up. If you're always attacking your accusers, the debate becomes one of Democrat vs. Republican, rather than right vs. wrong. Anyone who questions the legality of the decision to wiretap thousands of Americans unlawfully is attacked, as either an enabler of terrorists or a bitter partisan trying to distract a president at war."

Now that Bush has admitted to an impeachable offense, and showed no remorse, it's up to the congress to either go home and let the dictator rule, or kick the bum out of office.

Hey, Mr. President. It's about Leadership 

Doug Brinkley does a great job explaining the difference between our current president and some previous presidents who knew how to lead:

Doug Brinkley: Bush's speech in Jackson Square was a phony: "BRINKLEY: It's about leadership.

When you look at presidents, a Theodore Roosevelt or a Harry Truman or a Ronald Reagan, the great American presidents would not let a region die and suffer. They would have seen this as the bell ringing. This would be the moment that would define their presidency, and it is not too late for President Bush to do that. But he gave a very powerful speech in Jackson Square. The blue lights were behind him, and, if you read that speech, it was wonderful.

But the reality is, the speech is?was phony. And we are not getting the funding. We are not getting the federal attention, and I think that it's tragic. And if President Bush wants to ignore New Orleans, then just say so. Let us know. Let us know not to come back, there are never going to be levees built, that we are not going to be?there isn't going to be a massive public works project.

You know, there are people where I'm at, in Houston, that want to work. They are looking to go back to New Orleans. Why not create a WPA, look at the leadership of somebody like Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression? Let's see a little bit of that out of this president. "

Power Line: The Last Word on Spielberg's "Munich"... 

Another non-review movie review from Power Line Blog:

Power Line: The Last Word on Spielberg's "Munich"...: "The Last Word on Spielberg's 'Munich'..."

I guess you have to break up the time you spend defending wars you're not fighitng with something, eh?

Monday, December 26, 2005

Rush Limbaugh's Right to Privacy: for him, but not Americans? 

Via Jane at FireDogLake:

firedoglake: 12/01/2005 - 12/31/2005: "Rush Limbaugh, from his radio show on December 22, 2005:

"Liberals and Democrats," Limbaugh claimed, "are only opposed to this because they don't want anyone finding out what they've been up to. What have you folks been doing that you so desperately want to keep hidden"

Rush's attorney Roy Black with Wolf Blitzer on December 15, 2005:

BLITZER: If Rush Limbaugh has nothing to hide and has done nothing wrong, what?s the problem with letting the prosecutor speak to the doctors and go through all the records?

BLACK: Well, Wolf, that's an excellent question. A lot of people ask this all the time. You know what? We have a right of privacy in this country that I think is important for us to hold onto. I mean, we could let prosecutors and police into our bedrooms, search our computers, watch us having sex. We could let them do all these things, but then we would have a police state. We would no longer have a democracy. I think it's very important to fight these privacy battles—and Rush Limbaugh has taken on this battle of privacy with your doctor, and I think it has really been a public service for him. Not only for himself but everybody else who wants their medical records and medical treatment kept private and not to be disclosed in the press or with the police or prosecutors or anyone else who has no business being there.

Power Line Reviewing More Movies the Haven't Seen 

I've been trying to figure out what makes many conservative blogs so crappy compared to some of the top liberal blogs. I've previously pointed out how right-wing blogs are less likely to allow comments. My theory on that is you need to have your facts straight if you're going to allow comments. Otherwise, you'll get shredded by your commenters. If you're positioning youself as apologists for a pro-torture, pro-spying on Americans administration, you're going to get some push back if you write long winded and innacurate justifications for something that can be summarized in nine words: You can not spy on Americans without a warrant.

Then it occured to me that some right wing-content is just downright crappy. While I'm not going to defend some of the stranger tendencies of left-wing Orchid or Cat blogging, at least left-wing bloggers don't review movies they haven't seen:
Power Line: More on "Munich" by Scott Johnson: "More on 'Munich' I haven't gotten around to seeing the film 'Munich' yet, and I'm not sure I will. "

Power Line: Here's One I Won't Be Seeing by John Hinderaker:

I shuddered when I heard that a movie called North Country was being made out of the Jenson case, in which a group of female miners sued the owner of a taconite mine in northern Minnesota.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?