I kneaded that. We can bare our soul at great risk? No.

Years ago, after my father died: I planted a morning glory called: Grandpa Otts.

He is blooming a bright purple, and is still there post-frost, and the morning glory shines up against thee old greenhouse.

My father was nicknamed, Otts. Otts- Arthur, Welsh blood.

Arthur V.L. James. V- Vinton.

L- Linwood. Linden Trees and,

Vintage honey wine, I wonder.

P.S. Gordon- a hearth. warmth.

The US Constitution mandates that international conventions the US ratifies become the supreme law of the land. Even on that, on top of countless violations of US laws, George Bush is totally impeachable, since he has violated supreme laws of the land by virtue of the US having ratified international laws and conventions. If we had anything resembling a free, sane and democratic legislative branch, both he and Cheney would have been impeached and removed unanimously years ago.

Memories are stored in every cell, are they stored in what we see? A memory is stored in Grampa Otts morning glories next time I plant them, of Arthur V.L. James, or more, of his son. Thanks for that.

mmmm
yes
thanks
for that

Dr. Martin Luther King use-ta-say.

Friends, heed Martin's counsel. No need ever to fool with shooter242.

If it makes you feel better, and there is nothing else (constructive) you can be doing, well ok go a-head. Butt

really no need.

Helpfully,

Laws cannot be "correct in fact" but not "in theory." That's not what laws are.

C'mon JO, this is getting back into silly semantics. Are we talking about legally "correct", or morally "correct"

You took us there at 1:42 PM:

[Jordan Orlando:] The John Yoo/David Addington position is not legally sound; it is not accepted or respected, it is merely stated. [...] But that does not make it correct.

[shooter242:] Yes it does. Certainly in fact, if not in theory.

----------------

Nor does throwing BS statistics into the conversation to evoke an emotional response thats inappropriate.

Pretend I said "a very large number of Iraqi civilians" if it means you can address what I said. I'm not trying to "evoke an emotional response:" I'm blandly citing post-Clinton United States behavior that I'm arguing has the effect of drastically harming our reputation and standing in other nations.

-------------

When the current United States intervenes in a world crisis and states a "human rights abuse" as its rationale, it's a little like an visibly drunk highway patrolman attempting to perform a DUI.

As opposed to invading a country and overthrowing a government because someone we want is there? Human rights is not the primary reason we went to Iraq for the second or third time (depending on interpretations of Clinton's bombing). But it's still a lovely sentiment to consider while we are there.

Apologies for not being clear. My example was not meant to refer to Iraq. I simply meant that the Nation that cites "Human Rights Abuses" as its rationale for doing anything is going to have a proportionally harder time garnering world sympathy/support/military assistance to whatever degree that they, themselves, violate an agregate concept of "Human RIghts."

Ditto. Your stream of thought in time is an important part of what you post. Fewer posts and more editing... and so much immediacy and spontaneity would be lost.

apparently Congress decided to abdicate its responsibilities ... something the Founding Fathers would never have believed would happen .. ambition being a check on ambition and all that

These euphemisms -- "waterboarding," "the water cure", "simulated drowning" -- they pass blandly over the oddly-smiling lips of the CNN hotties. They might as well be referring to "a time out."

So I suggest another question to the nominee: Is rape torture? I wonder if he'd answer that it depends on the context, that he'd need to study it. Probably he'd change the term to "enhanced lovemaking."

Walker Percy mentioned somewhere (The Moviegoer?) that his grandfather met a KKK grand dragon in a barber shop and challenged him then and there to a duel in the street. Had his father met the man, he'd have denounced him later over dinner. And had he himself met the grand dragon, he'd be wracked with indecision. Today our safe distance from the torture, and our fear, attenuates our reaction. It's disgusting.

I called my Senator about impeachment and was told by a phone-answerer, again, that he won't pursue it because it's a waste of time to try. I asked what the Senator would do if he passed an alley and witnessed a woman being raped. Would he decide against intervening if he was outnumbered?

So to Mr. Mukasey, then: would you grant that rape is always torture? And also: how do you define cowardice?

Feingold finally came out against Mukasey. Why it took him so long, I don't know. It doesn't make any difference since both Schumer and DiFi caved.

he's eyed home,

heard eternal hums;

hopes existential hope;

he's essentially heard!

His empty heaving --

halted, embryonic humanity --

howls echo habitually

hidden enmity; honed.

Harken! Evoke help!

Heart eviscerates hate.

heh

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/03/AR2007110300886.html

washingtonpost.com > Print Edition > Editorial Pages
Two for Mr. Mukasey
Sens. Schumer and Feinstein buck the crowd.
Sunday, November 4, 2007; Page B06

THE HALLS of Congress are too often filled with cowardice and groupthink. So it is reassuring when not one but two lawmakers show the moral fortitude to defy party politics to take a stand on principle.

Democratic Sens. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) showed such courage Friday when they announced their support for attorney-general nominee Michael B. Mukasey. [...]

War is Peace.

Freedom is Slavery.

Di-Fi-ism is Fortitude.

The swirling vines hide the plight

Of those below their towering height

Ambushes hiding with their venomous bite

Bebop weeps up on the night

Soaring over death a kite

Soldiers below holding tight

The sound of death lurking to bite

Garry weeps up on the night

Sent to Nam with valor and might

While politicians praise, but not quite

Their gross hypocrisy far from right

Bebop and Garry weep up on the night

The paths of glory streaming bright

Blue and Red dripping down the white

Buds tourniquets holding tight

Both weep up on the night

The jungles strewn in the light

With sickening screams from the fight

Their dying love for all in sight

Both weep together up on the night

Then typing in the darkness of the night

They suddenly meet on GG’s site

Bebop and Garry locking arms tight

Their dying love for all in sight