John Adams

Dead on comparison, that.

It IS happening. The waiting list for a Prius is 2+ months. The problem is that auto/oil are not a free market. They are both heavily influenced by government regulations.

This stuff is reminiscent of when King Roosevelt threatened to stack the Supreme Court with 6 additional judges so he could get the results he wanted. Delay believes that his majority rule means that he can override all the rules. Yet the Constitution in its wisdom, was written to resist pure majority rule. Below are Delay's comments from an AP story, with my comments in brackets. Will the Republipuke Party ever splinter because of guys like this, who don't believe in smaller government, but instead believe that the government is a tool to push social agendas? God I hope so. For AD, Ken, and other Libertarians, *that* could be the start of a strong Libertarian movement.

Bravo! I had to stick it to my then-adversary TJ, who wrongfully got too much credit as a founding father. Damn him.

Congress figured out how to give us more daylight?!?! Please, clue me in.

The Crap Throwing Monkey (CTM: you have room for that on your license plate, don't you) disputed some of your points. I'll address the others. I believe, as do most people, that a right of privacy does exist. It is implicit in the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments at least. Without a doubt, the Constitution was set up to protect people's privacy. Your question about whether that right extends to the mother vs. the unborn is difficult to answer. The Roe Court extended privacy. Other courts will push it back. All laws have gray areas, and the Supreme Court interprets the gray areas in the Constitution, of which there are plenty. When two rights conflict, assuming that people don't work things out civilly outside of court, a court decides which right is more important. No mystery. The Republican Socialist party is afflicted by the same theory that their activism can create a better world. They just focus their efforts on different things. At least this Republican Congress has been making sweeping cuts in government power and payroll. (See, I threw up in my mouth again.)

The countervailing answer to judicial review of a particular issue is to amend the Constitution. The "nation of laws, not men" idea is supposed to make it hard to change the Constitution. And it does. Regarding the "penumbra" you backhandedly disparage with reference to abortion, that "penumbra" is in reference to the implied right to privacy from the government. Are you of the camp of people who believe that such an implied right does not exist? Do you fear all judicial activism, or just liberal activism? The laws were enforced by the courts in the Schiavo case. Whether you like the result or not, that's our system. If the people of Florida want to change their laws, they can do it.

Do you support the bill? In Marbury, the Supreme Court asserted its place as the third party in the balance of the federal government. Before it did so, governmental powers were potentially divided between the other two branches. The Supreme Court asserted its role as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. This Supreme Court's Constitution interpretation role is a far cry from judicial hegemony. You want to change the Constitution? Amend it.

I can't even say Republican without throwing up in my mouth a little.

Maybe another way to look at it is that the Catholic doctrines (of which there are too many to count) veered SO FAR away from the teachings of Jesus that the non-Catholic Christians needed to get back to things that matter, i.e., the teachings of Jesus. In so doing, they defined themselves more as followers of Jesus, rather than followers of Rome. Thus, maybe these people, who rejected the beuracracy of man-made Catholic Church doctrine, lay better claim to being the one true Church than the Catholic Church. Just a thought.

I think you've pretty much wrapped this argument up, with one footnote. My Copernican reference was to you, who believe that Christainity revolves around Catholicism. I see now that you are either as ignorant as you seem, or are in the vein of Hogboy and others. Either way, you're wasting my time.

Dean would be a good third party candidate. From what I was gathering way back when, he was fiscally conservative and cut back govt in VT and turned it around during an economic downturn. He was socially liberal in that in many cases he wanted the gov't out of personal decisions. My biggest problem with Dean is that he decided to become a party man, when he had an opportunity to be his own man.

"Protestantism" is a word, and the religions that it generally encompasses have a myriad of belief systems, each of which is unique. Only a pre-Copernican thinker like you would think that those religions all define themselves as revolving around Catholicism. That may have been true in the time of Martin Luther, but has since ceased to be the case. Presbytarians, Baptists, Lutherans, Quakers, Methodists, etc. don't give a flying crap about the Catholic church.

Nothing, if you don't mind paying for the privilege of giving up your free speech.

There is no try.

I thought maybe this was posted on the First. I was once a Catholic, assuming you count being raised as one "being one," and will never be one again. Amen.

Absolutely not. No conspiracies. None of that. John Paul II believed in his suffering and wanted to live till his body wasn't able. I don't think for one second anyone pulled a tube or plug on him.

I think the Church is pretty clear on a lot of things. Abortion is murder and will get you sent to hell. Divorce is a sin that may get you sent to hell. Masturbation is a sin and if you go to hell for doing it, heaven's a lonely place.. "Pulling the plug" is a sin that will get you shipped to hell.

Funny. I agree with you. I don't agree with the Church, but your reasoning makes sense to me. I hear so many disenchanted Catholics complain about the Church. I always say the same thing: if it's that bad, get out. Ken- divorce rates in the U.S. have been declining for 20 years since their peak in the 70s. It's a statistic you don't hear reported that much, but it's true. (Divorce rates, as you may recall from an earlier discussion on this board, are very high in the red states as compared with the blue, which defies easy explanation.)

You're prolly right on the Conservative thing. The Americans and Europeans who are pining away for a more liberal pope are nuts. The Church doesn't change much, and when it does, it changes slowly. There's little reason to change now. The media hints at change are, IMO, wishful thinking by those authors.

Did you see that JPII appointed all but 2 cardinals. I'd expect a pope in his image. Plus, the conservative base in Central America, Asia, and Africa is the new strength of the Church. It would be surprising to see it cater to the more liberal Catholics in Europe and America, which are in stasis or decline, don't you think?

Yes, I disagree. There has been anger and disatisfaction, along with greedy media, and VERY extreme media (much worse than what we see now), since there was first media here in the America. The delivery method has changed; little else has, except that the media may be more civil now than when the founding fathers were running around.

DHS needs to be ready to fight off all the commie pinko types who are trying to make sure these terrorists get their milk, cookies, and cable TV every day.

This is not a commune or a news board. It's a politics board, fueled mostly by disagreement. Those who would disagree with the Pope are not posting out of respect (probably). Those who agree with the Pope have little to say at the moment. Therefore, no posts. Once the new names start floating, and the Pope is laid to rest, I'm sure you will see some Catholic bashing. Come back in a week for Lions vs. Christians.

I share that concern, but stopping kids from having sex is a pretty universally accepted thing to teach kids. The best solution, abstinance, is a good thing to emphasize.