Friday, May 01, 2009

I was going to hit the outdoor range today, but:

It rained again last night, so that on top of all the rest the last few days will make the place a marsh.
Chance of more rain the next few days. 30% today, but I've seen that turn into "Toad-floater storms are moving into the area" with no warning, so. Especially with 70% chance tonight.
I need groceries.
So that means maybe the indoor range to try a couple of things out, then shopping.

At least this is not looking for clothes or shoes, both of which I loathe. Grocery shopping means finding what you need and putting it in the cart; clothes and shoes involves trying stuff on and looking(especially at shoes) and thinking "They what HOW MUCH? For THIS?!?" And I need some new black dress shoes, and yes I have been putting it off. And will continue to do so for a while longer. In the meantime,

Federal Felony To Use Blogs, the Web, Etc. To Cause Substantial Emotional Distress Through "Severe, Repeated, and Hostile" Speech? More wonderfulness from the morons in Congress.

Apparently the 9th Circuit's ruling on the 2nd Amendment wasn't really news. In the minds of our professional journalists, anyway.

Why is it that every time someone is for 'social justice' and connnected bullcrap, they're either a socialist or commie? Or, considering the proper definition, a fascist? And don't like Israel? And all too often are a professor or other 'professional educator'?

So the popular new statement is that Harry Truman was a War Criminal! I'm sure, soon as they figure a way to whack at the US, they'll get around- finally- to declaring Franklin Roosevelt, too. Which will just display fully what a bunch of freakin' loons they are. Like a lot of politicians, there are some solid reasons to be pissed at Truman, so garbage like this is just insane. If he hadn't decided to use the bomb, the casualties our troops would have taken(let's ignore the Japanese dead and wounded for now) in the invasion would have been horrendous; as one of his advisors said, 'When it comes out you had a way to end the war without this, and didn't use it, the people will call for your impeachment; and they'll be right to.' His hanging in the street, for that matter; you try explaining to a couple of million families that their father/husband/uncle/son is dead or crippled because the President thought using this bomb on the enemy 'just too nasty'. Especially since the enemy had been murdering prisoners of war, committing atrocities left and right and- we know for fact- was planning to murder EVERY POW the moment the invasion started.

But that doesn't matter to morons like Stewart, and I'm sure there are others who agree with him; much better to have a lot of American dead than some of the enemy. Especially if saving our guys would mean something so horrible as putting a bug in a box with the bad guy.

The kind of people Obama will push for the Supreme Court.
-Dean Kagan has taken positions that are disturbingly out of the mainstream. For example, driven by her view that the “don’t ask; don’t tell” policy adopted by a Democrat Congress and President Clinton is “a profound wrong–a moral injustice of the first order,” she argued that it violates the First Amendment for the United States to withhold funds from colleges that ban the military from recruiting on campus. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected this view.

-It is also unclear that a Justice Kagan would be an adequately independent check on executive excesses. She has argued in favor of greatly enhanced presidential control over the bureaucracy, which is concerning in light of President Obama’s unprecedented centralization of power in the White House.
-Judge Sotomayor’s personal views may cloud her jurisprudence. As Judge Sotomayor explained in a 2002 speech at Berkeley, she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their “experiences as women and people of color” in their decisionmaking, which she believes should “affect our decisions.”

-Only just recently, in Ricci v. DeStefano, Judge Sotomayor was chastised by fellow Clinton-appointee Jose Cabranes for going to extraordinary lengths to dispense with claims of unfair treatment raised by firefighters. Judge Sotomayor’s panel heard a case raising important questions under Title VII and equal protection law, but attempted to dispose of the firefighter’s arguments in a summary order, until called out by Judge Cabranes. The Supreme Court has agreed to review the case.
Judge Wood’s judicial views have on occasion been far outside mainstream legal thought and appear driven by her personal policy views. In NOW v. Scheidler, she wrote an opinion applying RICO – a statute designed for mob prosecutions – to prevent pro-life activists from engaging in protests. The Supreme Court reversed with Justices Ginsburg’s and Breyer’s concurrence. NOW v. Scheidler, 537 U.S. 393, 402 (2003).

-Judge Wood has betrayed a consistent hostility to religious litigants and religious interests. For example, Christian Legal Soc’y v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853, 867 (7th Cir. 2006), she would have voted to allow a public university to revoke the student organization charter of the Christian Legal Society because it declined to extend membership to homosexuals

And let's not forget Roxana Saberi, one of the results of the 'smart diplomacy' we've got going on.

And now, to the stores.


Donald Douglas said...

Hey man, thanks for linking!

Check back often!

Anonymous said...

Black dress boots -- Luccheses. They go with everything, even tuxedos.


Windy Wilson said...

If Truman was a war criminal, then Vincent Bugliosi's book about George Bush the younger being a war criminal (I'm too lazy to look it up now) should be given more attention, and if his arguments to that end are accepted, then of course FDR was a war criminal, specifically for the deaths of the crew of the Ruben James. Every argument Bug gives for GB being a war criminal applies to FDR.
Somehow the people who still consider the man sanctified won't agree, but facts are facts.