Saturday, December 31, 2005

Happy New Year..

Alden's New Year's Resolution

1. Find an everlasting AA battery for my new Thomas train, "James".
2. Be nicer to my brother.
3. Find a way to get my poop in the toilet.

Isaac's New Year's resolution

1. Eat more, drink less.
2. Sleep less, but in longer stretches.

Daddy's New Year's Resolutions

1. Be a good dad.
2. Eat Less.
3. Graduate.

Well, Alden is off to a good start. Happy new year everyone!

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Three branches and a weed...

So, I read a quote and thought it might have been taken out of context, as a politician's statements usually are. So I went to the source and read the whole speech. The following is a quote from a speech given by GWB in April, 2004,

"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."----Remarks by the President in a Conversation on the USA Patriot Act, Kleinshans Music Hall, Buffalo, New York. April 20, 2004.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040420-2.html

Go to the Whitehouse website and read the speech.In the context of the speech it is a particularly odious lie. In the paragraph before, he talks about roving wiretaps, a perfectly reasonable and lawful solution, and before he mentions them he says, offhandedly,

"-- see, I'm not a lawyer, so it's kind of hard for me to kind of get bogged down in the law. (Applause)"

Replace the word "law" with "constitution", not an unreasonable switch especially given the previous statement about constitutional guarantees (laws), and the President's muddle-headedness (or is it intentional ignorance?) becomes clearly dangerous. Why did these people applaud?! Would they have applauded if they knew what they now know?

Does it make sense in a constitutional democracy, based upon a "check and balance" system for one branch to set up another, fourth, parallel branch of government (a secret judicial branch with an unchecked system of detection, apprehension and punishment)? Could this weed grow? I would argue yes. What if congress decided to set up it's own military? Could the Supreme Court introduce legislation? As long as we're weeding abroad in Afghanistan and Iraq, then let's pull some weeds in the arbor of democracy.