Motto: The surest way to get a reputation for being a trouble maker these days is to go about repeating the very phrases that the Founders used in the struggle for independence.
-- C.A. Beard
Disclaimer: The editor speaks only for himself, and sometimes
he is wrong.
Standard disclaimers apply. In addition, the author makes no
concerning the grammatical accuracy of his writing. Submitted text
must be in raw or compressed (.Z, .gz or PK Zip) ASCII. Image files
be in jpg.
On last month's Fix;
the answer to last month's Fix,
"Does a blood or breath test given to a driver violate the Constitution's Fifth Ammendment protections against self-incrimination? If yes, how can this be corrected?"
A corollary is, "Does DNA or fingerprints violate the Fifth".
Well from a common sense view, if comman sense can be applied to law,
is this point - evidence left at a site is forensic and can be
collected with or without the conscience cooperation of the subject.
However, breath or blood requires either the cooperative or forced
"cooperation" of the subject. And since force leads to torture, this is
the exact nature of evidenciary collection that the Fifth was designed
to protect against. That is - remove the threat of torture to extract
confessions from citizens.
With the current attitudes of the courts, citizens have dropped back yet one more notch from the freedoms and liberties that our Founders had tried to protect.
By Jim Brown
February 28, 2005
Rhode Island College is under fire for allegedly forcing a student to lobby the state legislature for college-approved policies.
Master's student Bill Felkner says the School of Social Work at Rhode Island College (RIC) threatened to reduce his grades if he did not lobby for the school's position on welfare issues. David French with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) says the trouble began when Felkner objected to the showing of Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11 in Professor James Ryczek's social work class last Fall.
French explains that when Felkner wrote the professor about his liberal ideological bias, Ryczek responded in an e-mail that stated "I revel in my biases." And according to the FIRE spokesman, the educator also suggested that if indeed Felkner was a conservative, he should find a different profession because, as suggested by Ryczek, "social work is a profession for liberals," says French.
That apparently did not sit well with Felkner. "Bill objected to this e-mail, put it on the web and talked about it on local radio," French says, "and ever since that time he's been subjected to what looks like a campaign of retaliation: failing him from the course [and] forcing him to lobby for points of view that he doesn't agree with." The FIRE official calls the whole episode "an astonishing campaign of repression and intimidation."
According to French, there appears to be little tolerance for ideological diversity on the campus.
"One of the problems here is they've told Bill that he has to work in a group when he lobbies -- yet there's no group that wants to form to lobby a conservative point of view on some of these issues," he says. "So to form a group, he's had to have conformed to liberal ideas, which is just astonishing.
"Even if you have a group project, you cannot require an individual person to lobby the legislature on behalf of policies and ideas with which that person disagrees."
RIC spokesperson Jane Fusco says "no student has ever been punished, academically or otherwise, for failing to hold or take a particular social or political belief." RIC president John Nazarian says he is not at liberty to comment on the matter.
> > Steve-O, how's it going?
Let me comment your posted Debate changes.
1. Even without spin, different people interpret events differently. This isn't physics, it's politics. [although they both rely heavily on spin...] So the context is important.
2. Debates hurt the incumbent because he is running on record as president and the public gives credit to the challenger because he hasn't yet failed as president.
3. The debates are the president's to lose. Which means that you risk losing votes if you explain some positions and you can potentially add others. Especially on polarizing issues (abortion, gay rights, etc.) It benefits candidates, especially the incumbent, to stick to trite sound bites so they don't screw up and stray from the message. (Even if the message is high on spin and low on substance.)
4. It is widely acknowledged that the candidates do what they want anyway, like interrupt and take too much time. The rules are kept "loose". The one place where candidates have some bargaining power is in the order of the debates, if they choose to debate at all (which isn't a law). Bush putting the domestic issues in debate #3 only made things harder for himself.
I've been concerned about this election myself, especially with the polls close. I'm pretty sure Bush will pull through, but it's a toss-up. God help us if he looses!
John Forbes Kerry often must think of himself as another JFK (he has the initials, but Clinton had the charisma). He is no JFK. In fact, because of revisionist history in the liberal media, JFK was not the JFK they portray him as these days. I think if Bush finishes out successfully in the Middle East he has more of a chance of being remembered on par with Reagan than the Left has of finding their Camelot.
Of course, I've been blogging in my spare time I don't know if you ever make it out to my site. http://www.cybermaze.com/jdj/blog/.
Take care, let me know how you and the wife are doing in your new home! I probably didn't tell you I bought a new house too. Nice! (some pics at http://www.cybermaze.com/photos/)
1. Well, in the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
e.g. We are not having the worst unemployment in 70 years, either in absolutes or as a percentage.
2-3. Unless you are Ronald Reagen, then when you ask, "Are you better then you were 4 years ago", being the incumbant gets credit
On JFK, you may recall that the first thing he did in his first year was - gasp - cut taxes. Heresy!
1. March 1: The SUpreme Court strikes down capital punishment of minors. This will prevent M Malvo (the DC sniper) from being executed.