Thanks to pmorlan

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1816911,00.html

One blogger called Pelosi "disturbingly disoriented" and said the deal she and her allies have cut will "eviscerate the Fourth Amendment, exempt their largest corporate contributors from the rule of law, and endorse the most radical aspects of the Bush lawbreaking regime."

Time's crack research staff has yet to figure out who this "blogger" is or what links are for, but they are working over the weekend to find out.

Has to Be Said:

I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced...

-- Little Brother

It was determined that Obi wan just had gas.

pow wow... D.C.'s favorite conventional wisdom is the claimed need to "balance" liberty and security...

And not just "conventional wisdom". Common sense and wise pragmatism would dictate it as well and the founders were nothing if they were not both, and much more. It wasn't coincidence Jefferson was sent to Paris when he was.

... liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as by the abuses of power...

James Madison, The Federalist, no. 63.

It is obvious to the person who can recognize the need for that balance that Franklin's warning was about the fantacism of both extremes. Having said that, all we needed to fight terrorism effectively we had before the Bush administration.

My point, though sarcastic, was absolutely valid.

Several points: blind worship or devotion to a candidate is really bad news and not the way to do politics.

The Constitution is NOT debatable. It is THE law of the land and cannot be sidestepped or ignored. Those that do cannot and must not be given a pass. Ever.

There was strength and timbre in our Founders, who placed their very lives on the line for the Constitution and Bill of Rights that does not exist today (Not even amongst most of our soldiers who, supposedly "defend freedom" by invading other countries that were no threat whatsoever to "our freedom", or helped overthrow democratically elected leaders in other nations, etc...I cannot think of a single military act since perhaps the Revolution itself, except perhaps World War II, that actually "defended our freedom"). To throw away all that away for expedience or as a result of hero worship is actually worse than simply being someone who wishes to eliminate those liberties outright as a result of megalomania.

lilyrose is a representative of those who actually see the Bill of Rights as fungible and up for debate if it will gain a political edge. That is Rove-think and it is wrong. It matters not whether it promulgates from the left or the right, it is wrong and unacceptable.

Some things are beyond compromise and it just so happens that every single item in the Bill of Rights, and every single line in the Constitution is among those things beyond compromise. There is no such thing as a danger so great that it requires the Law of the Land to be scrapped. It stands or the country itself falls.

@lilyrose

While MANY of us will now vote 3rd party or not vote at all, and will do what we can to convince others to do the same, there are those like you with no principals whatsoever. there are those like you who see every single Amendment in the Bill of Rights as expendable for political gain.

I haven't had principals since high school.

That's why I'm voting for Pat Paulsen!

http://www.paulsen.com/pat/

That's why I'm voting for Pat Paulsen!

I remember him and his repeated runs for Prez (at least twice, was it not?).

How does one "write in" a candidate's name with electronic vote machines? I've never actually looked into that - but may even be open to voting for Paulsen rather than der Fuhrer Obama.

You write:

I work in a school and many of the young people frequently ask me how such "a great and free democracy like America" could allow itself to be "ruled by a tyrant like George Bush." I have no simple answer...nothing that I can reasonably say to explain this.

It's simple, really. They've been through it. They understand the danger since they've lived it. My family in Spain still bear the scars from Franco and the Civil War. They too remember and understand the dangers.

We, on the other hand, have been so dumb, fat and happy for so long we have collective amnesia. We think a man (Bush, Obama, McCain, whatever) is going to keep us safe from The Terrorists, provided he has extraordinary powers, when the real danger invariably comes from such a powerful omnipotent government.

As the older generations in Spain and Romania (and other places that have recently survived tyranny) die away these people too will forget, dooming them to a repetition. Franco died in '75, meaning that Spaniards younger than about 45 to 50 don't have a first-hand memory of his repression. Many of these people will be entering (or already have entered) positions of responsibility in government, the media, etc. I worry about what will happen when they too decide that it is worth surrendering precious freedoms in return for the illusion of "security."

Glenn,

I haven't read the comments, I'm just responding in reference to my past emails and comments to you. I've always said that Obama has not been properly vetted, simply because there is no information on what he has accomplished. But you jumped into the pool with others who were eager to see him elected president in the hope (there's that word again) that he would bring some magical end to all our troubles. But in my humble opinion there has never been any indication Obama has any capability to accomplish that which has swayed you. Nor is there any hope he will gain what that is in the time between now and November.

We all make mistakes. You can provide powerful incentive to those who will be nominating the Democratic leader for the election to look long and deep, and make the proper decision for the country and the party. We all make mistakes.