@ Shooter 242...When I was an Army officer...

Long time readers of UT will back me up on this because the comments at UT get dumped after 6 months but you are cutting this guy way too much slack. More than he deserves, unless you happen to agree with him that Max Cleland was a drunken sot who got his arms and legs blown off reaching for a beer.

The name, "Shooter" refers to his job/hobby as a photographer. I hear those wedding shoots can get very hairy. He also takes his life in his hands everytime he goes to the golf course. Every now and then, somebody forgets to shout, "Incoming!" Or is it "Fore!"?

Alas, I am a student of Socrates, and so am compelled to take each interlocuter at face value; and also a student of Kant, who taught us to respect the humanity that even the strangest and most wrong humans represent. It is a kind of discipline I refuse to give up.

@LWM

Alas, I am a student of Socrates, and so am compelled to take each interlocuter at face value; and also a student of Kant, who taught us to respect the humanity that even the strangest and most wrong humans represent. It is a kind of discipline I refuse to give up.

-- Jkalos

Fair enough. Bart (Shooter's not so better half) would have loved you. You might see him at work over here.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/

He was banned from UT. At least he was an army officer. And some still pay him legal fees for DUI defense.

the people on this board are just flat out interesting.

And Anonymous of the Solution: thank you for your thoughtful post. It was interesting to see the thinking of someone more on the "inside". Thank you for taking the time to write all that out.

My education continues.

I don't think shooter even wrote that tripe. Didn't have his usual, "heh" and "keep up the good work" snottiness about it. I think he got that mess sent to him via email. Then he butchered it up a bit after pasting it in here. Either way, the whole thing he posted is an embarrassing mess that looks as though it were written by someone with the skills of the lowly Johah Goldberg, or one of the college republicans who might have attended Goldberg's, All I Am Saying Is Let's Give War A Chance rally.

Do you think that Lord Acton's admonition regarding the corruption that follows power is incorrect? If so, can you supply examples that support that view? If not, do you really believe that 21st century Democrats are going to be the exception to the rule...again, if so, why?

You might not be aware of Lord Acton's full quote, and even then it was in another context. Religion, in fact. He was referring to Popes and the Lord was a Catholic.

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely... Great men are almost always bad men.

A new Constitutional Convention in which we can take the lessons we've learned in the past 220 years and form them into something that's far less easily misunderstood or ignored.

Yes, well Sandy Levinson, who blogs at Balkanization, agrees with you.

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Law/ConstitutionalLaw/?view=usa&ci=9780195307511

Others disagree. Good luck getting that "convention" convened.

Man, the people on this board are just flat out interesting.

Wait until Bebop-o gets back.

I've just been reading through your other letters. I liked so much what you had to say about free will and the necessity of acting as though we have it, and finding in that dictum the ability to move beyond the easy despair that rises to meet each day's reading. I feel exactly the way you do about reading Greenwald's column - that at least our primal scream is given coherent voice. He bears witness, explaining the shadows on the cave wall ...

But at least we now know where the real obstacle to change is. It's in the Democratic Party itself. They are putting on a kabuki theater, and they're all in on it. It's a scam. The Emperor has no clothes. But at least now we know.

But at least we now know where the real obstacle to change is. It's in the Democratic Party itself. They are putting on a kabuki theater, and they're all in on it. It's a scam. The Emperor has no clothes. But at least now we know.

-- Political Poet

What do you suggest?

A) Why bother? We're screwed.

B) Burn the mother down!

C)_________?

Go read every single one of those "more-radical-than-thou" sermonizers...

--GG

Well, I've called for a tax revolt a few times. Whether I'd also post here my own participation in such acts or not is perhaps less an indication that I'm not doing it myself than that I fear government retribution.

Never got a reply, either. I see no evidence that ANYONE has the guts to take the risk.

I do think it's amusing that we all judge the spineless Dems so harshly when they're really just a reflection of the times.

Glen - I thought for sure you'd address this claim in WaPo article, because it is the source of cover for Democrats:

"When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath -- one of secrecy," she said. "I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything."

Surely, this oath can not supercede the oath to uphold the Constitution?

Surely such an oath can not be used as a shield to conceal criminal activity?

Suppose Congress were briefed by CIA on Iran Contra? Suppose COngress were briefed by CIA on Watergate? Suppose (fill in the balnmsk on history of CIA crimes)

Thanks for the reminder about John Dean's book, and the link. I meant to include that on my Amazon list, got distracted, and forgot. And, thanks for your presence here. I admit - sometimes you make my eyes cross, but you frequently offer a nice synthesis. I meant to chime in with Anonymust the other day. Your voice is a little different, and it's not just that you dialed it back from an 11 to a 10. There are times when it really sounds like a different voice. Anyway, I appreciate your baritone in the chorus of UT.