We, the People, Are Losing Our Freedom

SH59 3 months, 2 weeks ago

'women's health' trumps religious conscience." ABSOLUTELY! Religion is a choice that we as Americans are fortunate to have. Even good Catholic women take birth control because they choose to so. Offering the opportunity to use this method of family planning should be offered to EVERYONE. It's about choice, not control.

SH59 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I guess it's ok to change the constitution to accommodate the religious right's beliefe that marriage is only between a man and woman but it's not ok to accept the anti discrimination amendment protecting all the people and living by that law.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

So long as a proposed bill passes a 2/3's majority in both houses of congress, and is then ratified by 3/4's of the states legislatures, then yes, an ammendment has been added to our Constitution. Two federal judges don't cut it.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Life in Republican World is so easy for us. Women don't have to decide whether to use birth control (as 99% of American women do today). Instead, her boss will decide that for her. If she works for a Jehovah's Witness, no blood products. Tough luck if she needs a blood transfusion. Even worse if she works for a Christian Scientist. Then she gets no medical coverage at all.

Sadly, in our theocracy government is being enlisted in the fight to force women to obey religious teachings. No free will for them! Maybe we could amend the Constitution to give women the right to make religious choices for themselves. Nahh, too radical.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

You know, Geoff, I'm really sorry I missed your column after Loving v. Virginia was decided. I'll bet you were all kinds of eloquent about how the Supreme Court was stepping on states rights by forcing 'unnatural' marriages. And that column would have enjoyed every bit of the legitimacy of this one. Discriminating against people for no better reason than you can is no less repugnant now as then.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Jim, my issue isn't with same sex marriage or birth control, it's with process, How laws are passed and whether the process fits with our Constitution. You don't know what my personal opinion is on birth control, abortion, or same-sex marriage.

Bentpan 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Great article Mr. Cutler, a pity your far left readers would rather interperate and substitute their own translation instead of reading it as written, but they got their practice with the United States Constitution.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

geoff, you haven't given us the specifics. Precisely what in the Constitution is being violated?

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Jim, I'm surprised by you. For starters, The Affordable Care Act, (that's a joke) is headed to the Supreme Court. Were you not aware of that?

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

The court has yet to rule. The lower courts mostly upheld the act. Exactly what is it in the Constitution that gives us the right to discriminate against gays? Could we apply the same rules to the left-handed? Blue-eyed? Be specific. What protects (or doesn't) these groups.

Why should the government favor conservative religions and not the more liberal ones (or none at all)? Why should the government accede to Church teachings on birth control but not the death penalty, which these same bishops oppose? Why is the government making these decisions at all?

The government has required access to birth control since the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The Supreme Court has supported the validity of the law. The only change is who pays for it. Since the taxpayers save $3 billion a year if the government does, it seems like a sound idea.

And you're talking about a policy that affects 99% of women at some point in their lives. Shouldn't thay have a say?

pgericson 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Who exactly, would the author empower to decide whether a law or activity was Constitutional: the Congress of the United States, the President, who exactly. We can't cherry pick Supreme Court decisions, decrying those we disagree with and sitting back smugly when the decision is consistent withour own beliefs. At the end of the day someone has to make the call. The process you are complaining about "fitting with the Constitution" is constitutional: its the job of the Supreme Court -to the best of their combined abilities- to see that it is.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

"Why should the government favor conservative religions and not the more liberal ones (or none at all)? Why should the government accede to Church teachings on birth control but not the death penalty, which these same bishops oppose? Why is the government making these decisions at all?"

Government shouldn't favor either left or right. It should yield to the Constitution as written until a Constitutional ammendment is passed by the method described above. If the First Amendment protects religiious freedom, then there's the answer to your second question.

Again, don't assume I have a opinion on these issues. You don't know that I'm not on your side. Again, Legal Constitutional process.

Bigguy 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff you do not have a vote on rights! if two thirds of North Carolinians voted 2/3 s that we should not allow Yankees here would that be fine with you. I'm married, I have a gay niece, is she threatening my marriage if she decides to marry her companion, NO. You should have more common sense than that, or is it because Bill O'Reilly got outraged about this you had to blindly follow him? If that is the case you are a TOOL!

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

geoff, you have yet to tell me exactly what constitutional principles are being violated here. How does the constitution prevent congress from passing laws regarding health care? How does the constitution allow discrimination against one portion of the populace by another? When did 'equal under the law' get repealed? I don't see a word about marriage in the US Constitution.

You're talking about the reproductive practices of 99% of American women. Where does the constitution give employers the right to determine the reproductive practices of their employees? This is no trivial matter.

Remember, the president has removed the terrible burden of church-sponsored corporations having to accommodate their employees beliefs. Catholic women have totally rejected the Churches position on this matter. Who are we to overrule them?

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Bigguy, besides the rediculous hypothetical, do you have a particular "right" you're referring to? And can you show me where that right is specifically discussed in the Constitution? Were you calling me a tool? I don't like Bill O'Reilley.

Jim , the Supreme Court decision will turn on the question of whether the federal government can force the public to buy something. Where did I say anything about congress not being able to pass a law on health care? Stick to the article and quit assuming I've taken a position outside of what the article states.

AFCHIEF 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff, didn't take long for the name calling to begin, as USUAL

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Remember--a central belief of right wing "Christianity" is that they should be able to force everyone else to live by their religion. They are, in this respect, exactly like the Taliban. When a right winger complains about the "war on religion," what they're specifically talking about is a war in their "right" to make you behave as they see fit, whether or not you adhere to the same belief.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff, didn't take long for the name calling to begin, as USUAL

With your hypocritical whining about it close behind, since you're one of the worst offenders here.

skylinefirepest 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Amazing how in some blogs Jimmy Heim and Dusty gang up on Republicans as being the party that likes to tell people what to do, etc. But then, in this blog Mr. Jimmy wants the Democrats to tell us what we can and can't do. ( Affordable Abammercare Act ) You really shouldn't have it both ways, Mr. Jimmy, and my opinion is that less government telling us all what to do is a good thing. You like to point out that the government is filled with experts and can run our lives and finances better than we can. And then the government jumps up and does something really, really stupid and we float back to earth and reality.

jimt 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff, over the decades I've learned one simple fact: an single activist judge or multi-member court is defined as, "they handed down a decision with which I disagree." For example, "Citizens United." for me, "Roe vs. Wade." for you.

Not every decision that has some impact social policy and the law can reasonably be decided by a Constitutional Amendment, which in and of itself proves that the Constitution is a "living" document (as do countless statements by the Founders or the next generation of American political and judicial leaders) not withstanding what a professor from a purposefully far right wing college says. The Amendment process is reserved for far more basic changes; such as a determination that every citizen, regardless of race or gender is owed "due process" (14th Amendment) when facing criminal or civil trials. In most cases the language is broad, and implicitly is designed to allow future cases and future courts to "flesh out," what the language means.

For example, is it your belief that racial minorities that faced legal discrimination, such as the Jim Crow laws in the South, should have been limited to only use the Amendment process to have such laws be determined as unconstitutional? Do you think they could have gotten 3/4 of State Legislatures to ratify such an Amendment when more than 1/4 of the States had Jim Crow laws on the books? Remember, most of these laws were written and enforced AFTER the 14th Amendment had been ratified.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

"Remember--a central belief of right wing "Christianity" is that they should be able to force everyone else to live by their religion."

Dusty, are you suggesting I'm a right wing Christian now? That's news to me.

Bentpan 3 months, 2 weeks ago

dustyrhoades 24 minutes ago Geoff, didn't take long for the name calling to begin, as USUAL

With your hypocritical whining about it close behind, since you're one of the worst offenders here.

So says the NUMBER 1 offender

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Bentpan, the difference is, I don't whine about people doing the same thing I'm doing, like AFCHIEF and the other hypocrites. I'm a jerk to those who are a jerk to me, and I freely admit it.

PS I also don't cry like a little girl that I'm being bullied, like the fake tough guy AFCHIEF.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Jimt, that's true. But when you have 52% of a state's population voting to overrule that state's Supreme Court finding, as voters in California did with Prop 8, and then 2 Federal judges overrrule those voters, there's a problem. So, the issue will now head to the U.S. Supreme Court. If Americans don't like that decision, they can attempt, should they so choose, to seek an amendment to the Constitution. That's legitimate process whether you are for or against same sex marriage.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Dusty, are you suggesting I'm a right wing Christian now? That's news to me

If it quacks like a duck...

Ducks having a conversation by Bubbaist

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

That's mature.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Well, I admit it doesn't rise to the same high cultural standing as a video of hippos pooping, which MikeNC and the other snickering children seemed to find so hilarious. I don't recall you promoting "maturity" here then, Geoff.

Maturity went out the window here a long time ago, while you watched silently.

Bigguy 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff you still don't get it, if a certain section of Utah declaims it okay to have many wives, or mary and sex with minors is okay, then the law should be changed. And your outrage absolutely follows O'reilly's rage of the week. Just a coincidence!

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Bigguy, there's no outrage in this piece. Just warning. I'd respond to the rest of what you wrote, but it's unintelligible. Who's mary?

MikeNC 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Good column Geoff. Our granite of freedom is on it's way out, one chip at a time. IDiane

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

It doesn't surprise me if O'Reilley is talking about this. Thanks to the mandates of Obama and Sebelius, the foolishness of Ginsburg, and the typical circus that's the Ninth, the whole country is talking about this stuff. Which, thankfully, is a good thing. Thanks to liberals for helping to wake the country up.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

LIst them.

Bigguy 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Just because 99% of people from Kentucky or West VA says it's okay to marry your cousin does not mean it should be the rule of the people and make it law.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

As wacky as that sounds, if by proper procedure, plaintiffs from those states were able to have the Supreme court rule in their favor, it would become the law of the land...sort of like Roe v. Wade. If the rest of the states were upset about it, they could then petition Congress for a Constitutional amendment to try and overturn the ruling...etc.

moonchild7 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Must be Mary and Brigham Young. Prohibition didn't work. Why? Because most people wanted to drink alcohol. The Temperance Movement was a mostly women's group who wanted to try to "Cure" the rampant problem of DRUNKEDNESS. So, how did they try to do that? By making alcohol illegal. How did that work out? We got the Mafia, murder, robberies, and SpeakEasies. So it was repealed. The court system is supposed to be there to RIGHT the WRONGS. Slavery was at one time legal. The Supreme Court decided it was inhumane and illegal. Lynchings and denying Civil rights to minorites were real popular in the South at one time. Our Congress and Supreme Court decided it was inhumane and illegal. I wrote on the other post about the part of the Affordable Health Care Act that states it does NOT FORCE anyone to participate. The Amish and Mennonittes have FULL EXEMPTIONS, so maybe the whole bunch of you right wing nutz should convert. And soon.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

You know, there's simple solution for the birth control issue. American women can stand up for liberty and refuse to accept free contraceptives. Ladies, march right down to your doctor and pay for your own physical exam (what do you think - $100? $200?) and then head over to the pharmacy and fill that prescription at your own expense. Probably won't add up to much more than $1,000 a year. Isn't freedom worth that?

Once that tidal wave of refusals hits the press, you'll see just how dedicated America's women are to standing up for the bishops right to tell them how to plan their families.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Thanks for the list. I looked at your first link, and you do realize that what you provided is a response by Republicans to exactly what this article talks about? Response to runaway judiciaries. Your helping make my case.

jgc 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Goeff, the role of the justice department is to make decisions on the validity of a law when weighed against what is written in the Constitution. Just because the majority of the voters in a state feel a certain way, doesn't make it right. If that was the situation,minorities potentially still could be forced to the back of the bus, as significant the civil rights decisions of the 60's would never have happened.

As for the contraception issue, very touchy indeed. I am Catholic and agree with the arguements against. But this is not the first precedent. The State of Massachusettes voted in such a provision the year prior to Romney becoming governor there. He chose never to repeal it and included it in his state health care initiative. The same RomneyCare" that helped frame the current health care program.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Free contraceptives, Jim? What are you talking about? Nothing's free, and why should taxpayers, or other medically insured pay for another woman's contraceptives? Or, where in the Constitution is it said that government must ensure a woman's right to free contraceptives? Only in the minds of the left....Amazing!

jimt 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Geoff, "jimt, that's true. But when you have 52% of a state's population voting to overrule that state's Supreme Court finding, as voters in California did with Prop 8, and then 2 Federal judges overrrule those voters, there's a problem. So, the issue will now head to the U.S. Supreme Court. If Americans don't like that decision, they can attempt, should they so choose, to seek an amendment to the Constitution. That's legitimate process whether you are for or against same sex marriage."

No. The Court's ruling in this case was very narrow and specific. Since California already had a "civil union" law that gave same-sex couples every legal right associated with marriage, the court found that Prop 8 had no legitimate purpose or legal affect other than to single out a group and deny them the same civil rights enjoyed by everyone else in the State by virtue of living in that Sate. In short, the Proposition had no legal basis other than to stigmatize a group, and the Court ruled that such an Amendment to the State Constitution violated the Federal Constitution. Now, you can agree or disagree with the Court's ruling, but we do not put basic civil rights to a vote of the people in this Country. You seem to be arguing that we should, which seems contrary to the Framer"s notion that certain rights are, in Jefferson's word, "inalienable." So I find it somewhat odd that a Conservative would argue, in essence , against the natural rights premise that Conservatives fall back on whenever they don't like "Government interference" in our lives.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

jimt - your posts are far too rational and gentlemanly. You need to be a bit more wired :)

Nah, we've got that covered.

TreadLightly 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Goeff--good article. You had that part right about the hard left. Wait until they see the reward for being a useful idiot. (Lenin's term, not mine...)

wdd101st 3 months, 2 weeks ago

JimHeim 4 hours, 47 minutes ago Since the taxpayers save $3 billion a year if the government does, it seems like a sound idea".

Are you saying that the taxpayers are saving this $3 billion or are you saying that the government is saving $3 billion? Remember, all the money the government has came from tax payers.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

geoff, I'm just sure that American women will agree with you and reject this health care benefit being forced on them by their employers. Might even reach the dozens.

Zippy 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Debating such complicated constitutional issues often gets clouded by our political ideologies and I'm no exception, the only thing I'd have to say about this is that my impression is that the right often acts like the constitution is written in stone, although it can be amended, better maybe would be to say that's its treated like the Bible without the proviso that even the Bible is just an interpretation and I'd venture to say that's also true of the constitution which is a living document although bogged down in issues of political ideology. Nothing is perfect, Geoff makes some good points but I'm a liberal, and not that I'm unconcerned about our freedoms, there's no perfect intersection between individual freedom, the hobby horse of the right and the issue of the greater good, the hobby horse of the left. One thing that Geoff says here that I take great exception to and that maybe smears his whole argument is the statement, "Americans are losing their voice to federal power and judicial political activism." Some of that loss of power is necessary for the greater good, we can't all have it our own way, and judicial activism, you can call it "political," it helps him to make his argument, but in the hands of the right or the left its going to happen anyway, that's the way things work. But the greatest thing Geoff overlooks when he's talking about the people losing their voice is corporations, in my mind the greatest destroyer of the people's voice, not only in their political power, but the ability to control us for their own benefit. Nothing in my mind is more corrosive of democracy in America than corporations, and I'd like Geoff to devote a column to that issue rather than the typical rant against the government. Bob Katrin

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

jgc, you're right. But the problem is that the courts are finding precedent in the Constitution that doesn't exist. And that's one of the reasons why the decision on prop 8 was as jimt said decided on only a narrow part of the issue and not whether same-sex marriage should be legal or not. There's nothing in any of the 14 amendment clauses that can be used to decide the larger case. Boies and Olsen were well aware of that and that's why they argued so narrowly that voters were being irrational in singling out gay society. Ultimately, the larger issue will be decided by the Supreme Court, and the issue of same-sex marrige will be settled...or not.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

And the greater good will be decided by who, Bob, you? Obama? The secular left? A lot of us take exception to the idea that some men seem to know better than others what that collective "good" is, and feel comfortable dictating it to the rest of us. Such is the problem with your liberalism, and why its ideologies are bankrupt.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

See, Geoff only likes the idea of Republican ideologues telling us what the collective good is, especially in the areas of marriage and sexuality. When it's Democrats making the same sort of decisions, it's tyranny.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

No, Dusty. But whatever this collective good is, I'd rather it decided in the end by the will of the people than I would see it snuck through the backdoor by a couple of liberal judges, Obama, ...or you. How many times have the rulings of the Ninth been overrruled? 36% of the time, something like that?

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

You realize Obama was elected by the "will of the people," right? And yet, you've been moaning about how it's OMG THE DOOM OF US ALL ever since.

And "how many times has the ninth been overruled" is question with no relevance whatsoever to this discussion There are 29 judges on the Ninth Circuit Bench. It's the largest district. It hears more cases than any other circuit. There's simply no comparison.

wdd101st 3 months, 2 weeks ago

And he will be removed by the will of the people.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Yes, good point! There are 29 judges on the Ninth. And the first appeal will likely be to at least 11 of them instead of just 3, with one of them dissenting on this ruling. That would be at least a little better than two deciding for the whole state. Thanks for making a point I wanted to make in the piece but couldn't because of space constraints.

And yes, I realize Obama was elected by the will of the people. Their will in this case was mistaken. I'll venture a guess they'll not make the same mistake again.

AFCHIEF 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Dusty, yea I'm the fake tough guy. I'd call you out to step in the ring, but whats the point of kicking the ass of a lousy ticket lawyer

DannySteen 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I cannot believe the way grown people act. I can understand this sort of thing from children or worse maybe teens. But grown, supposed to be respectable people, no wonder we are circling the drain. I understand it is an election year, hypocrisy is in the air, we all have to stand on our side of the line and point fingers and throw stink bombs. But, it gets us nowhere. im_a_harleyman came close to the problem but is still staying on his side of the line. Whether it be republican or democrat the parties want the same thing. Gain and maintain control. Whether you believe in the Glenn Beck theory of “Progressives” taking over both parties or the tenant that power corrupts, the government cannot be trusted with or best interest. Just look at the problems that you all argue over. Everyone has something to do with Government getting into our business. Abortion, marijuana, sex, drugs, taxes, healthcare or any other topic that is argue worth is either being pushed or forbidden by Government. Me personally I don’t care what you do as long as you don’t cause harm to someone else, force your belief, opinion or will on someone else or expect me to pay for your decisions. Sure, there are duties of government and there are things that only government can and should do. But there are plenty of things that Government should keep its nose out of. Take gay marriage for one. Government has no business telling you who you can and cannot marry, but, it tells straights just that. At present, straights have to get permission, a marriage license, from Government. Granted marriage licenses are almost too easy to get, but you still need permission. Why should the government care? If Bob and Bill want to get married more power to them. If a church does not want to marry them, so what, another will be glad to. All I am saying is that both sides try to force on the people what Government they think is best for us. That is why those who want less Government, not no government, is saying to all of you to pay attention. One other thing, the whole contraceptive dance was just a ruse to pile more cost on the insurance companies. The man is not an idiot. Their cost and price goes up, Government healthcare looks more appealing. The churches have sold out to either “The Progressives” or their power has corrupted them.

Yukonjohn 3 months, 2 weeks ago

DR, we actually find some agreement on this issue. Something I do not understand is why BOTH sides are not rushing to support Ron Paul as our President. He is the only candidate that supports the Constitution and going back to it, word for word!! Why, if both parties are saying this is what they want to do, yet do the opposite, why do the populace not support someone that HAS a proven track record of sticking with the exact wording of our most precious document?!?!

MikeNC 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Yukon, nice thought that both sides aren't rushing to Paul, but bear in mind, the Liberals don't put much stock in the constitution. IT's going on right now with Obama VS the Catholic Church. Separation of church and state!! PS to Heim- as of this morningThe Church isn't buying Obama's smoke and mirrror trick. At least some of us figured out his magic trick. Diane

jimt 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Me thinks AFCHIEF, being a "hot" Obama hater par excellence, is running close to the line about what is and what is not acceptable commentary. He has just threatened, and then, maybe, saved himself, by the following: " Dusty, yea I'm the fake tough guy. I'd call you out to step in the ring, but whats the point of kicking the ass of a lousy ticket lawyer."

Keep it up Chief, you'll soon be gone from these pages.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Well...they don't. At least, not the one written by the founders. They believe, or at least wish for, a "living Constitution," one that's subject to the interpretation of a couple of California liberal judges, one that's malleable and can be easily changed and formed to fit whatever the latest cause celebre is of liberal special interests and other American minority opinion.

JimHeim 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Diane, who cares what the Bishop's think of it? How many of them are there? Not too many votes. How about the 98% of Catholic women who ignore them and use birth control? I'd rather have them in my corner. Check the polls. Obama played this brilliantly. Good luck, R-money.

Yukonjohn 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Liberty is not a Republican or Democrat idea!! It is an AMERICAN idea!! And if an American cannot beileve in following our Constitution, for which so many have fought and died for, then that person should find somewhere else to live. My personal opinion is that we should all be rushing to get back to the Constitution, and away from the course we are on.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Ah...the name-calling brilliance of the leftist intelligencia. Moron? Hypocritical clown? Nice!

Yukonjohn. I agree. And as I've said to you before, it's what I absolutely like about Ron Paul. But don't delude yourself that Democrats, particularly those on the far left, are adherents of the same Constitution Ron Paul refers to. They're not.

The_AnonymusProfit 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I must say geoff has hit it on the head again, Trully scary things. Geoff could you provide more background?

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

At this point... it's starting the usual dissolve, as you might have noticed. Almost more amusing to rile em up and listen to them spew the epithets.

Do I remember you saying you attended Hillsdale? Did you know of Stephen Markham, or take a course with him?

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I'd call you out to step in the ring,

Sure you would, cupcake.

teufelhunden 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Ok why can't there be a grown up conversation and rigorous debate on this site? The usual suspects start their childish bantor and it sends the whole thing straight into the toilet. You kids lose the whole point and start slinging poo at one another...it's very unbecoming and quite silly. Make your point without personal attacks. Actually read posts before replying. It reminds me of some one who doesn't listen in a conversation...they're just thinking about what clever thing they're going to say next. I'm embarrassed for you, really.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Do I remember you saying you attended Hillsdale? Did you know of Stephen Markham, or take a course with him?

I know who The AP is in real life, and I can pretty definitely say the answer is no. He also didn't attend George Washington University as he used to claim on his wall. He is, in fact a complete fraud.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I know who he is too. I chose not to out him like you did, believing as you should, a defense attorney, people deserve a second chance. If I have been fooled, it won't be the first time.

moonchild7 3 months, 2 weeks ago

The reason YukonJohn that BOTH sides aren't behind Ron Paul's candidacy is because while he really gets the Individual Liberty Ideas right when it comes to most social issues and to reducing our military "Footprint" he's just more than wrong about letting corporate/business America have all the freedom to supposedly "SOLVE" our problems thru Capitalism/Free Enterprise. We've been there before with the Robber Barons in the late 1800's and early 20th century. They had all the money in the world to create a SUPER FANTASTIC AMERICA where everyone had health care, where workers were NOT worked to death, where workers had pensions to retire on, where everyone was treated equally...but they FAILED YukonJohn, THEY FAILED!!!!!!! The Government had to come in and RESUE AMERICA and it's Citizens during the Depression because Capitalism constantlly looked INWARD and NOT outward. I'll be the first to sign up for Exxon's Retirement/Health insurance Program when they offer it, but they don't have one except for employees. You do realize I can't stand the OIL Co's and the Banks, and the Insurance Co's and the Car industry, etc., etc., etc. I DO NOT want the Govrnment nosing around in my personal business, I want my freedom too but after working as a Social Worker with the poor and underclass who live at the mercy of having a job that pays enough to get by but in many instances can't get them by, well then I know that's where Libertarianizm FAILS and FAILS miserably..

MikeNC 3 months, 2 weeks ago

And so you have it folks from Heim's, it's not about Women's rights to her female reproductive organs, it's about Obama getting a vote. Oh and PS Heim's, who cares what you think. Diane

AFCHIEF 3 months, 2 weeks ago

@Jimt, if you read above you'll notice I made an innocent comment above about the name calling has already started towards Geoff. Followed by the usual Dusty calling me fake tough guy and then later on a cupcake. SO before you get on your high horse, as USUAL in these blogs if a conservative Disagrees with a liberal or points out a incorrect statement. The barrage of name calling begins as it did today with BIGUY calling Geoff a Tool.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Nothing like the clarity and conviction of our resident Socialist. I always get the warm and fuzzies for America when the Moon's oracle speaks. Puts me in mind of Reagan's "shining city upon a hill." Thanks Moon, upbeat as always.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I chose not to out him like you did, believing as you should, a defense attorney, people deserve a second chance.

I just wonder how many of your conservative buddies would feel the same, considering some of the comments made here.

dustyrhoades 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Well...they don't. At least, not the one written by the founders.

It's not liberals calling for the repeal of the 14th amendment citizenship clause.

Bentpan 3 months, 2 weeks ago

dustyrhoades 28 minutes ago "Well...they don't. At least, not the one written by the founders."

"It's not liberals calling for the repeal of the 14th amendment citizenship clause" ,,,,.......... Mr. Rhoades you do understand the 14th amendment was not written by the founders, and is easily the most misread and misapplied with it being used to extend citizenship to those with no right to it.

geoffcutler 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Do you suppose that's because of the current state of illegal immigration? As opposed to say, assuring citizenship for the children of immigrants who entered the U.S. legally? Just a stab in the dark....

skylinefirepest 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Danny, you are new to these blogs apparently...the trike kid comes real close to getting over the line almost every time he writes a line. He has joked about bloggers wives and I'm surprised that he hasn't had his butt kicked yet. Jimt finds a threat in almost every post. Dusty calls more names than the average lawyer knows. It goes from entertaining to simply tiring very quickly.

Yukonjohn 3 months, 2 weeks ago

MC7, if you truely believe in "wealth redistribution" you should do one of two things. Get the Constitution ammended to fit your idea of how America should be, or move. Plain and simple. Ron Paul wants NOTHING that is not in the Constitution. Do you believe in the United States of America's Constitution? All of it? Word for word? Maybe you should consider the second option.

jimt 3 months, 1 week ago

Dusty,

You can't keep us in suspense like this. Who is Anonymous? What's the deal? How do you know who he is. Can I surmise from your knowing him, and Cutler knowing him coupled with Cutler's comment to you, "I chose not to out him like you did, believing as you should, a defense attorney, people deserve a second chance." that we're dealing with a convicted felon who is on parole and hence passes into your workplace now and again to meet with parole officials? If so, that would actually surprise me for I didn't know that insufferable arrogance was a crime.

AFCHIEF, I'm not on any high horse. But when you seem to be challenging someone to engage in a physical fight with you, you cross a line. One that The Pilot does not allow. But given your vile comments in recent weeks, I rather hope you do cross that line in the near future.

JER 3 months, 1 week ago

jimt: You have to take into account that AFCHIEF is having trouble transitioning back into private life. He's still in the shoot first, ask questions later mode and most likely has a photo of himself hanging above his computer that shows him posing with a high dollar government issued weapon of mass destruction, thus reinforcing his macho, tough guy persona. Or he could just be a fake, like good old TAP.

geoffcutler 3 months, 1 week ago

Court Decisions Have Done Great Harm to Our Constitution

This article, listed above in "More like this story" from June 13, 2010 is a good one. Was away when it was published, so missed it the first time around. Further confirmation of the subject matter above. Good article, Mr. Jacobs!

MikeNC 3 months, 1 week ago

DR: Obamacare rammed down the throats of all Americans. Votes secured behind closed doors with dirty little deals. No public access to debate on Cspan as promised by Obama. Republicans told to shut up and take a seat at the back of the bus. Muslims, Amish and Christian Scientists exempt from Obamacare. Freedom of Religious beliefs now at stake, and you support the constitution of the US? Hmmmm. Diane

AFCHIEF 3 months, 1 week ago

@jimt, so is the Pilots line to allow one of there featured writers to continually berate people on the blogs.

JER, not a fake. I have a DD214 to prove my 30yrs of AF service. So you along with your fellow libs continue to berate people here on the web. From this point forward I will take the high road.

We, the People, Are Losing Our Freedom

More like this story

Comments