adoptedmainer's Blog

Re: Too Big a Taboo

2009-07-24T01:33:08Z

Please spare us your adoration of the police. Police are responsible for crimes every day, none of which are punished or even recognized publicly as crimes. During the Vietnam war, I worked for the Washington Free Press. All of us lived and worked in a communal house. The glorious police used to break in every week or so, destroy our equipment, wreck the place. Years later, I was standing in front of Children's Hospital in Washington with my infant daughter in my arms, waiting for a bus home. A police car drove up to the intersection and stopped. The civilian car behind the police car stopped. A second police car drove up behind the civilian car and stopped. A policeman got out of the first car, went to the driver's window of the civilian car, and shot the driver in the head. Then the policeman got back in his car and both police cars drove away. They knew I had seen them and didn't care. I could go on and on, the litany of police sins is endless. And as for danger, miners and many other categories of workers have more dangerous jobs than the police, but don't get the pleasure of breaking the law with impunity to make up for it.

Wake Up Time

2009-03-23T00:21:13Z

Well, kiddies, are we awake yet? We worked long and hard to elect Obama and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, and what did we get for all that work and all that money? The Obama administration has re-affirmed the miserable and outrageous Bush positions in every single brief filed thus far in federal court, and there have been more than a few such briefs on major Constitutional questions. In the dismal world of finance and the economy, we have a continuation of government by and for Masters of the Universe. Time to rise and shine, folks, and recognize that we were scammed.

Coleman Timing Query

2009-02-14T03:26:10Z

Can anyone explain what stops Coleman, assuming he loses at trial, from dragging out the appeals process until Franken's term is over? It's not at all hard for a case to take six years from beginning to end, in federal court at least. Is there a point at which the Minnesota law barring certification while litigation is ongoing gives way to something else? If so, when and what? Thanks in advance for any insights.

John O. Brennan

2008-11-26T05:39:54Z

Since Mr. Brennan doesn't know the difference between "lie" and "lay", we're well rid of him.

Fu**ed

2008-11-24T02:51:16Z

Looking at all of the appointments, don't we know we are fu**ed? We are better off than we would be with McCain, because we won't have total disasters of federal court appointments and we may not have to suffer another four years of total degradation of the Constitution. But what can we reasonably expect in terms of progress? Not much. We've got an intelligent President who is not W and must be thankful for that, but real change? I don't think so. We'll have the same old same old running things.

Palin/Couric

2008-09-28T22:11:47Z

A male at TNR said he didn't understand why Palin did so much better with Gibson than with Couric. I would suggest that Palin has made her career out of seducing (figuratively at least) powerful males; that's what she knows how to do. Palin doesn't "do" other women; she's never had to. Faced with another woman in a position of power, Palin was simply clueless.

Down the Tubes

2008-08-14T03:08:46Z

Does anyone else see this election going down the tubes? Miss Manners, aka Senator Obama, doesn't seem to have learned anything from the last two elections: Nice guys finish last. Time to change the subject. How about one ad that questions McCain's family values. Dumps a disabled poor wife for a young, non-disabled rich wife. Signs the marriage license to wife no. 2 while still married to wife no. 1. Are those your family values? How about another that questions McCain's ability to understand your problems. Photos of his 8 or 9 or 10 houses, his $525 shoes. Do some research and find out how many servants the McCains have and add that (social security, anyone?). Add in that he spent his childhood as an Admiral's son - Admirals are provided with lots and lots of servants. Add that he has never, in his entire life, had to deal with private health insurance. Then on to foreign policy. Did you like Bush in Iraq? You'll love McCain in Georgia. Or Iran. Or wherever. And on to putting country first. McCain's accepted his salary as a Senator, but when it comes to voting, what we elect Senators to do, where is McCain? Not on the Senate floor (cataloge of voting record here). I'm not a media person, but surely Obama can find someone to do effective and truthful attack ads that have some chance of turning the tide here. If he put a request out, I bet lots of you could do better than he's doing now.

Colombia - What a Coincidence!

2008-07-02T21:05:36Z

For those of us who wondered why McCain went to Colombia, now we have a pretty good idea. The rightist Colombian government with American assistance rescues Ingrid Betancourt six years after her capture, along with three American contractors and some others. And the rescue just happens to happen while McCain is in Colombia. As Ionescu said, Quelle coincidence. Surely the touching photo op of McCain with the rescued Americans is next up.

Baby

2008-06-29T04:01:49Z

The Marshall baby photo moves me immensely. Those of us who don't have babies may have forgotten, or may have never known, the immense joy of a new family member. There is nothing like a baby. The wonder of a baby is a sheer joy that has no parallel. Yes, it deprives the parents of sleep and demands much of parents, yet it is a gift that has no parallels. To hold a baby in your arms is to experience absolute love, a love that we should, but generally do not, feel for all humanity, including repugs. Babies are our hostages to the future; they require more of us than we can possibly give. This baby, and all babies, should remind us to think beyond our lifespans and our prejudices and to love all unequivocally..

Supreme Court v. Bush

2008-06-16T00:58:49Z

After lauding Thursday's Supreme Court decision restoring habeas corpus for detainees, Mr. Taplin says that things get "dicier" because, inter alia, many of the detainees are "very dangerous." How do we know that any of the detainees is "very dangerous"? What evidence have we seen of this? Isn't it a bedrock principle of our Constitution that people may not be imprisoned for what they think, but only for what they do? Even a conspiracy charge requires, if I remember correctly, at least one overt act. If detention of "very dangerous" people by Mr. Taplin's standard is to become the norm, will we be locking up everyone who has more than one small drink, spends beyond his means, expresses hatred for his partner, boss, or government or for another political party or for another race or religion? Will we be locking up the four conservative members of the Supremes who clearly do not believe in our Constitution? If the guideline is great danger to our country, I would submit that those four Supremes are much more dangerous than anyone in Gitmo. The folks in Gitmo may kill some citizens of the United States if set free, as may many citizens of the United States not now subject to detention, but they cannot destroy our Constitution, perhaps the greatest political document of all time. The four Supremes can do that if they get another vote.