Right now I’m a Tea Party activist resisting daily the Republican attempts to hijack our movement, although I support all candidates who will identify themselves with our movement: Scott Brown, (R); Doug Hoffman, (Con); Chuck DeVore, (R); etc.

And … I consider myself a Truman/Kennedy/Moynahan Democrat. One of my idols, Peter Drucker, said he voted for Truman every time Harry’s name appeared on a ballot, because Truman, unlike the present breed infesting the party, had impeccable integrity. I actually campaigned for Truman as a 10 year-old; voted for JFK and admired Moynahan greatly.

But once in while, if the Democrat is a lunatic, a liar, a usurper, a totalitarian, an idiot, an ideologue – let’s see, did I leave anything out – then I’ll vote Republican, even though the Republican would have been clueless and a usurper also (McCain). But I don’t tell myself fairy tales about my candidate like the Disciples do about their Messiah.

After I lost my MIND, and gained my mind, one of the benefits I obtained was I could do 2 times 2 without the story.

Right now I’m a Tea Party activist resisting daily the Republican attempts to hijack our movement, although I support all candidates who will identify themselves with our movement: Scott Brown, (R); Doug Hoffman, (Con); Chuck DeVore, (R); etc.

And … I consider myself a Truman/Kennedy/Moynahan Democrat. One of my idols, Peter Drucker, said he voted for Truman every time Harry’s name appeared on a ballot, because Truman, unlike the present breed infesting the party, had impeccable integrity. I actually campaigned for Truman as a 10 year-old; voted for JFK and admired Moynahan greatly.

But once in while, if the Democrat is a lunatic, a liar, a usurper, a totalitarian, an idiot, an ideologue – let’s see, did I leave anything out – then I’ll vote Republican, even though the Republican would have been clueless and a usurper also (McCain). But I don’t tell myself fairy tales about my candidate like the Disciples do about their Messiah.

After I lost my MIND, and gained my mind, one of the benefits I obtained was I could do 2 times 2 without the story.

Right now I’m a Tea Party activist resisting daily the Republican attempts to hijack our movement, although I support all candidates who will identify themselves with our movement: Scott Brown, (R); Doug Hoffman, (Con); Chuck DeVore, (R); etc.

And … I consider myself a Truman/Kennedy/Moynahan Democrat. One of my idols, Peter Drucker, said he voted for Truman every time Harry’s name appeared on a ballot, because Truman, unlike the present breed infesting the party, had impeccable integrity. I actually campaigned for Truman as a 10 year-old; voted for JFK and admired Moynahan greatly.

But once in while, if the Democrat is a lunatic, a liar, a usurper, a totalitarian, an idiot, an ideologue – let’s see, did I leave anything out – then I’ll vote Republican, even though the Republican would have been clueless and a usurper also (McCain). But I don’t tell myself fairy tales about my candidate like the Disciples do about their Messiah.

After I lost my MIND, and gained my mind, one of the benefits I obtained was I could do 2 times 2 without the story.

I know of people who voted for Ralph Nader, but that’s kind of quixotic, don’t you think

No. I think you are overlooking the concept of the “safe state.”

Does the fact that that person votes GOP make him a Republican?

If he does it consistently, yes.

And maybe you notice that Christopher has ducked the question.

Paradise arrived November 1979. Lost my MIND; gained my mind.
“A MIND is a terrible thing; waste it.” (Bruce Blanchard)

jbg:

Obama said (twice): “… 57 states …” (in the U.S.; including Eau Claire … I think. Somebody help me here – did the Idiot-In-Chief include Eau Claire in the 57?).

The Organization of the Islamic Conference has 57 States (wikipedia).

Well, what can you expect from someone born in Kenya (or maybe Manchuria), raised in Indonesia,
and who listened to the rantings of the Reverend Wright for 22 years, or whatever, until Wright, like SO MANY OTHERS had to be thrown under the bus. If it quacks like a duck …

No one answered correctly, so no one wins my 57-star pin.

leo marvin:

McCarthy? How did he get in here? But while he’s here, how come we always hear about McCarthyism and never anything about Hall-ism, Service-ism, Hiss-ism, etc.

What … “Venona,” “Bombshell,” “The Black Book of Communism,” and a whole shelf of other books were never published?

Oh, that’s right, evidence doesn’t matter to Utopianists.

Jack Marshall is the only one who’s made any sense.

Arakiba: Sarah Palin: She’s got what plants crave.

Nitrogen? Southern exposure? A job at Fox News?

Maybe you should check the constitution to find which mandatory oaths are in it ? You will find none, 0 (zero).

You will find “swear (or affirm).” The founders definitely would never have required anyone to participate in an oath. If they had, the constitution might not have been ratified.

At the time, quakers refused to swear oaths. “Accepting” any oath would be establishing non Quakerdom as an official religion. In fact, I think there is a pretty much open and shut case that the pledge is unconstitutional *without* the words “under God” and must read “I pledge (or affirm) allegiance to the …” to pass constitutional muster.

I mean if it was good enough for the founding fathers, why isn’t it good enough for us ?

Now they certainly did allow states to force people to swear oaths. The bill of rights, as written, imposes restrictions on the Federal government. It was only with the ratification of the 14th amendment that it restricted state governments. Clearly the founders did not limit what oaths school districts could force childred to swear. No one claims they did. The reconstruction era Republicans added that restriction.

I am not a lawyer and find it odd to feel the need to type this comment here. I guess I have noticed by now that familiarity with the US constitution is not a of commenters here (I seem to be commenting and I haven’t been quizzed).

I wonder if in place of the type these letters to prove you are a human being Volokh conspirators might put a quiz question on the constitution (if they have done that already you probably won’t get a chance to read this comment as I won’t get it right).

John: Look I’d be happy to debate the merits, or lack thereof, of your links but there really is no reason to get into a lengthy discussion about what these fellows think about an Ordinance PASSED by the FIRST US CONGRESS.

Why would you quote it then. But the links I gave you explain the relevance of an “ordinance passed by the first US congress”:

Was the Northwest Ordinance ever a valid law? The answer might surprise a lot of people. On July 13, 1787, the document that has come to be known as the Northwest Ordinance was passed by the 18 members of the Continental Congress, meeting in NYC. (The other members of that Congress were in Philadelphia meeting at the Constitutional Convention.)

It would seem that the fact that your “authorities” are a pile of sh*te might be worth pointing out.

There’s more fun stuff there in the links for you. Educate yourself.

Cheers,

christopher:

I’m not a Republican.

Would you care to tell us how you voted in the last few presidential elections? Because a pattern I’ve noticed around these parts is that there are lots of people who are suddenly distancing themselves from the GOP even though they’ve been consistently voting GOP. If it quacks like a duck etc.

jbg, if a person wants his or her vote to count, then he or she has to vote for a person who has a chance at winning the election, right? I know of people who voted for Ralph Nader, but that’s kind of quixotic, don’t you think, especially if you can mostly tolerate the Republican viewpoint and think the Democrats winning would be a bad thing for the country? Suppose that the person finds the Republican view, on balance, more in line with his own than the Democrat view. Or if not that, then finds the Democrat view intolerable and doesn’t want that party to win. Does the fact that that person votes GOP make him a Republican?

“So, so tired of this. If Palin were an idiot, don’t you think it would have been mentioned in any one of her numerous campaigns for office? But it wasn’t. Not once.”

Yes, if Palin was an idiot, why didn’t Palin’s campaign mention she was an idiot? Therefore she is not an idiot.

BTW: she has a huge entourage of advisers as admitted by herself & Bill O’Reilly

Christopher LoRicci: Obama said “57′ in Oregon in May. Then “57” in the state of Eau Claire in August.Why does the number “57” seem to stick in his mind?Anyone care to answer?First one who answers correctly wins my American Flag lapel pin with 57 stars.

I certainly can’t claim to know, but I can submit a reasonable guess. Being the ultra-knowledgeable, wonkish type that he is, and being in the midst of a primary campaign rather than a general election at the time, his head was packed full of minutiae about the upcoming convention. At which, there would be delegates representing the 52 states and the 5 official territories. (Check the number of quarters issued by the U.S. mint in the currently running “states” = “states and territories” series.) 52 + 5 = 57.

Since one of my best friends, also an Obama fan, grew up as a military brat in the territory of Guam, she’d be an appropriate recipient for that lapel pin.

J. Aldridge: Maybe she is thinking…

You lost me with that opening.

“Elitist”, “elitist”, “elitist”, what an empty “accusation”. Do you mean “elitist” as in “wealthy”? Then say it. Or, as seems to be the case here, do you mean “elitist” as in “educated”? Then say it. Because as soon as you say you hate the educated, then you should see your “accusation” as horseshit.

Christopher LoRicci: You should grasp the non-ideological nature of freedom: Freedom, like Being, just is.

I understand there are still some undeveloped stretches of rain forest where you can go to experience this ultimate Zen-like reality. Have you considered moving to paradise in order to live your creed?

Orin, the only difference might perhaps be that Judge Reinhardt said it clearly as opposed to the more typical indirection.

Justices are always using their own political views — I mean that’s their whole point. No?

If the teleprompter fails, he shuts his mouth and stands there

Naturally. That’s why a Republican said “it was a mistake that we allowed the cameras to roll like that” when Obama addressed the GOP without a teleprompter.

The hockey rink was passed by referendum of the people of the town, not by Sarah Palin’s fiat. And in any case, taking on debt to finance a permanent asset is a far cry from borrowing to pay for general spending as we do at the Federal level.

What about taking on debt so your friends can make lots of money and help you build a nice new house?

a severance fee is most certainly not a windfall profits tax

Naturally. And that’s why WSJ and various other conservatives described it as “a windfall profits tax.”

doesn’t know what a P/E ratio is

Hmm, let’s see. During Clinton’s term, the Dow more than tripled. During GWB’s term, it dropped 25%. So far under Obama it’s up 34%. If the Dow is above 6,000 when Obama leaves office, he will have outperformed Bush, in this regard.

So feel free to make a fuss about the words. I’ll be paying attention to the numbers.

John Skookum: Barack Obama has never done anything that comes close to that in his whole life. If the teleprompter fails, he shuts his mouth and stands there looking like an unusually frightened and stupid cigar-store Indian in a $3000 suit.

Barack Obama is so stupid, I’m amazed he can even say “57 states” without a teleprompter. Aren’t you?

Christopher LoRicci: Why does the number “57” seem to stick in his mind?Anyone care to answer?First one who answers correctly wins my American Flag lapel pin with 57 stars.

The answer is in the seventh paragraph. You can leave my flag pin with the FEMA driver who takes you to the re-education camp. He’ll know who I am. Just ask him to give it to me.

John Skookum:
Do you really believe Sarah Palin thought Africa was a country?

No. Did I say I do? No.

Did Christopher LoRicci say he believes Barack Obama thinks there are 57 states? Yes.

See the difference?

tde: t’s baffling to me why people seem to believe that Palin (who has to write crib notes on the palm of her hand to remember to be in favor of low taxes) has some nuanced understanding of the history of the Pledge that escaped the Judge.

Oh, the writing on the palm thing again. Those three lines on her hand weren’t to remind herself that she is in favor of low taxes. They were to remind herself to make sure to mention lower taxes in the hour-long extemporaneous speech she gave without the aid of any other notes or teleprompters.

Barack Obama has never done anything that comes close to that in his whole life. If the teleprompter fails, he shuts his mouth and stands there looking like an unusually frightened and stupid cigar-store Indian in a $3000 suit.

leo marvin: Seriously, do you really believe he didn’t know there are 50 states?

Do you really believe Sarah Palin thought Africa was a country?

jukeboxgrad: You mean like her decision to build a $15 million hockey rink in a town with a $20 million annual budget? Or maybe you’re thinking of some other aspect of her “Uninspiring Tax Policy Record.” Which included passing what various conservatives have described as a “windfall-profits tax.”

The hockey rink was passed by referendum of the people of the town, not by Sarah Palin’s fiat. And in any case, taking on debt to finance a permanent asset is a far cry from borrowing to pay for general spending as we do at the Federal level.

Also, a severance fee is most certainly not a windfall profits tax. When you say that, you are only demonstrating that you don’t know the difference between net and gross.

Reminds me of a certain ‘genius’ Harvard Lawyer who fancies himself competent to take over one-sixth of the American economy but doesn’t know what a P/E ratio is.

Mike: Remember when Charlie Gibson interviewed Palin? Gibson accused her of saying that Iraq was a holy war, based on a deliberate misquote. Palin questioned whether the quote was accurate, but the ABC editor cut that part out. Then Palin explained what she had said, the context, and that she had drawn it from Lincoln. 

Sarah Palin correctly used the subjunctive mood in that statement, and correctly echoed the sense of Lincoln’s version. I’d like to think that ‘genius’ Charles Gibson was too dishonest to acknowledge it, but the reality is he’s probably just too stupid to recognize it.

I wish all of these half-educated enemedia filth would go on Celebrity Jeopardy like Wolf Blitzer so we could dispose once and for all of the notion that they are any smarter than your average unemployed Alaskan housewife.

egd: But really, if this case becomes a well cited precedent, who (outside of history majors) is going to know who Sarah Palin was in 50+ years?

Sarah Palin is fairly young and robustly healthy. I expect Republican office seekers will still be kissing her ring and seeking her endorsement in 50 years.

Bob from Ohio: This reminds me when Sarah Palin talked about President FDR addressing the nation on television in October, 1929. That was her right?I mean no one else in politics could actually think FDR was president in 1929 and there was mass market television then.And when she said that Austrians spoke the “Austrian” language.That was pretty dumb of her too.

The funniest thing was when she tried to show off her intimate knowledge of Middle Eastern affairs by reminiscing about the time the US and the French drove Hezbollah out of Lebanon. What a hoot. Good thing such an ignorant moron didn’t become Vice President.

zuch: Because they explain why the references to the Northwest Ordinance are inapropos.

Look I’d be happy to debate the merits, or lack thereof, of your links but there really is no reason to get into a lengthy discussion about what these fellows think about an Ordinance PASSED by the FIRST US CONGRESS. They are as deluded as any person can be in judging what that Congress did as “unconstitutional”. Their historical presentism is kind of funny actually.

The point, which I though I made clear above is that the vast majority of founding fathers were religious men who practiced their religion vigorously. This is Palin’s claim and it is absolutely true whether the congnitive dissonants like it or not.

Cheers!

Why does the number “57″ seem to stick in his mind? Anyone care to answer?

First one who answers correctly wins my American Flag lapel pin with 57 stars.

“Nobody tell Obama what comes after a trillion.” (Mark Steyn)