Bush commutes Libby sentence

[kandrathe]

Uh, no. The modern executive is much, much more powerful than its strictly prescribed constitutional limits. This has been true since WWII, and is only getting worse.

We agree on that. I feel that though all aspects of government have been rabidly legalistic in trying to massage the constitution or pass laws to garner themselves powers. The Presidents use/abuse of power is most visible, but how many unchallenged unconstitutional laws are on the books, and how many rulings by courts have been motivated by politics rather than justice.

This strikes me as profoundly lacking in perspective. Ted Kennedy has been a spent political force for 25 years. If you disagree with him (clearly you do) that's fine. But to assign him this kind of importance is simply bizarre.

He is the leader of the gang of Progressives who pander to those who want to feed at the governments trough. This group use laws to take money from people to redistribute to those they think need it. I think we agree that some social systems are useful for those who truly need them. Ted's group uses our money to garner their political power by giving it away to their voting blocks.

Not that I particularly supported him in this, but Clinton tried to put the screws on OBL.

Yes, after our embassies were bombed there was some clandestine attempts to find him, but nothing that would have tipped him off that the US was after him. My point was that the US helped the Afghans toss out the Soviets, and we helped(favored) the Muslims in the Balkans. The "beef" that the Islamic world has with the US is our support of Israel. It seems to me that Arafat had an opportunity to establish a Palestinian state, but instead abused his power and frittered away the best chance for peace there in our lifetime. But, I think the extremists have a twisted religious agenda, and their enemy is the entire non-Islamic and even Islamic states they deem to be corrupted. At least I think the way they attract followers is to twist the Islamic faith. My point here is that this "War" will not stop if we withdraw from Iraq, but will only move to a new battle field. Maybe not where you live, or maybe not where I live, but it will move to places where their insurgency techniques will be effective.

However, to me, the whole thing is beside the point. Step up international police and intelligence action. Revamp the intelligence community to better process the information they have. Be more vigilant in defending against terrorist attacks, especially creative, bold ones. You do not retreat. You advance in ways that actually help.

That would help. We could secure our borders in meaningful ways and stop frisking girl scouts in airports so that no one accuses you of profiling. But, we also have to fight the Islamic insurgencies that seek to create regions of chaos, Taliban like states, and try to instill civil wars.

Yes. The emphasis there being on "real". Meaning that anyone who believes in the things that he cut out of the bible (like, say, the miracles, and the divinity, and the virgin birth, etc...) is not one, or at least on shaky ground. He is saying that Christianity as it is was practiced then and is practiced now by George Bush and a hundred million Americans is, in the main, a fraud perpetrated by charlatans, although built on the sound principles of a moral philosopher. If we're down to saying that this makes Jefferson a Christian, then yes, I suppose I'm willing to settle. I would certainly still describe him as a Deist by religion, if a Christian in moral philosophy. But this is a very different Christianity indeed, and distinguished in the ways I have already outlined.

I think you misread Jefferson here. I think he wants people to approach the topic with an open mind, and apply the same free thinking and scholarship to the topic, rather than act as sheep doing and believing as they are told. This is something I too embrace. To dismiss or embrace such a fundamental belief system without scholarship is what he would deem a fraud. What he has said in his letters is that he is a *real* Christian because he lives his life according to the teachings of Jesus, as opposed to the frauds and charlatans of his day that were claiming to be *true Christians*, yet attacking his faith, and clearly not following the teachings of Jesus.

I'm having serious difficulty with how it is those sentences coexist side-by-side. One says that if the extremists want Jihad (no need for the conditional, they do) that America should bring it unto them in "great measure"? And more than they can stomach? You're going to make war until the *extremists*, the ones who believe in martyrdom, cry uncle? That's war forever, as far as I'm concerned. And if those wars are anything like the one you've been carrying out, it is not the extremists who suffer most from this "Jihad" you bring them in "great measure". It's the ordinary people of those countries.

Who is killing them? Do you have a breakdown of who has been killing whom in Iraq for the past 5 years?

And then, next sentence, you're saying we have to expose the warmongers on both sides. What? Didn't you just recommend a Jihad? How does that not make you a warmonger? Because you are willing to make peace, if only the crazies stop being crazy? That's never going to happen. Never. So, what you are suggesting, if I am reading you right, is perpetual war.

What I'm saying is that we should always endeavor to be peaceful and dedicate our lives to building, but when some group like these Islamic extremists brings the fight to us, then we should endeavor with great resolve to finish it. It is so much easier to destroy than create, as evidenced by the Twin Towers. To be passive in the face of a group bent on destruction is extremely foolish. While we run around trying to arrest, and put them on trial our societies will be crumbling down around us.

I implore the United States: do *not* play right into Osama Bin Laden's hands by alienating half the world. The extremists are looking for Jihad. It is precisely what they are trying to provoke. They believe (sound familiar?) that God wants this war. They want to be the heroes and martyrs of the great war against the infidel. Why on earth would you want to give it to them? Why not just let them languish in their dank caves, and work instead to cut off their resources, track them down, infiltrate their organizations?

Because they are not in their dank caves anymore. They are in London, Toronto, Detroit, Frankfurt, Milan, Bangkok, etc. etc. etc. -- all that is fed from the caves is the propaganda. For about $20 in materials I could make an IED. The secret of bomb making is to find a strong container, then pack it with the explosive power needed to destroy it. A high school level of chemistry is sufficient. How are you going to stop the money flow? A dedicated terrorist organization can blend with the populations (e.g. doctors in London) while earning the means to fund their bomb factory. I think the only way to stop it is to try to cut off the head of the snake, while also making it lethal to be a snake. I think then the snake will choose to change into a bunny. Or, we just sit by and watch them destroy each other like,

For those who are left in Iraq, life is now unbearable. Islamist militants who seek a theocratic state in Iraq see no place for the “non-believer” Mandaeans there, and thus have undertaken a process of ethnic cleansing. Militants demand that Mandaeans convert to Islam, or face violence and possible death. Mandaean women, accustomed to their religion’s traditional system of gender equality, are forced to wear veils and have been frequent targets of kidnapping and rape, after which they are often killed. Violence and threats are used to expel Mandaeans from communities.