Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom (hat tip to blogger friend Terri) snags the 125th award for BSIHORL (Best Sentence I’ve Heard Or Read Lately):
The constant and steady perversion of language and meaning has finally brought us to the surreal endpoint where a president stands before the public and pretends that a Supreme Court ruling is illegitimate if it looks to the Constitution for guidance on checks to federal power.
He is referring to a comment made recently, by America’s First Holy President, He Who Argues With The Dictionaries, that it would be an act of “judicial activism” to strike down the Obamacare law.
“I am confident the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically-elected congress,” President Obama said at a White House event in the Rose Garden today.
“I just remind conservative commentators that for years we have heard the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. That an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example and I am pretty confident that this Court will recognize that and not take that step,” Obama said to the White House press.
No distinction made between Supreme Court decisions that invalidate laws because of irreconcilable contradictions against the restrictions in the Constitution…and decisions that invalidate laws because of concerns over “if this, then such-and-such-a-thing might happen.” They’re all just sort of lumped in together and called “judicial activism,” if they go against the grain of what His Holiness wants.
This is supposed to be a Professor of Constitutional Law speaking. We’re told so, anyway.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
California brothers and sisters…can I get peals of derisive laughter at Barry right about now?
- Rich Fader | 04/03/2012 @ 12:56You know, one thing I’ve noticed is that people don’t like to be told what their business is. It’s bullying, and folks really hate being bullied. A lot of the current unpopularity that President Three Putt enjoys is that he can’t stop telling people what their business is – cops acting stupidly and such forth – when he clearly doesn’t know jack doodle about it himself.
A friend will simply tell you to knock it off. My guess is that the President hasn’t got enough of those (possibly by alienating all possible candidates). All he has are allies – either of convenience, or of ideology, or whatever. And allies will break with you a lot easier than friends. Depart from the group ethos (or lack thereof) and you’ll be branded traitor. Pursue a different goal, develop a different hobby, and you will do it not only alone, but sometimes against the active meddling of those you thought were your comrades.
If he thinks this is a way to subtly influence people like Kennedy or Souter to toe the party line on this, he is sore mistaken. These are people who tend to bristle at not being thought of as original thinkers (whether they are or not) and His Telepromptness is giving them every reason to go out of their way to prove to him that they are not merely kept justices.
- nightfly | 04/03/2012 @ 13:58Today, Mister Wonderful was saying that he didn’t think it was right that an “unelected panel” would have the power to overturn his…how did he put it? Oh yeah…his bipartisan “duly written and passed law” that was passed with “huge majorities.” Several points:
– It wasn’t bipartisan. Not one Republican voted for the damn thing.
- cylarz | 04/07/2012 @ 01:28– It wasn’t a “huge majority.” It wouldn’t have passed if Bart Stupak hadn’t swallowed the bull about abortion funding, and voted NO as his own constituents were telling him to do.
– The incumbent president put two members onto that “unelected panel” himself not too long ago.
– Duly written and passed? Don’t even get me started.