Tuesday, July 5, 2005

New look, same old drivel

If you've been here before, you'll notice that I switched the blog to a new template over the weekend.

In the last week or so, Champaign County Clerk Mark Shelden started his own office blog. It's a good idea, probaby help his reelection(s) and maybe even keep people informed.

Unfortunately, he used the same Blogger template that I used.

Couldn't have that.

Besides, I think the new look is a little sleeker anyway. (Nevertheless, it was a pain to switch templates; carrying over the blog links just about stretched my brain to its llimits. Unfortunately, I think i lost a couple.).

And so it goes

Monday, July 4, 2005

Why we're here

The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:

New Hampshire

Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts

John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island

Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut

Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York

William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey

Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania

Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware

Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland

Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia

George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina

William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina

Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia

Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Sunday, July 3, 2005

The Crisis

IN THE progress of politics, as in the common occurrences of life, we are not only apt to forget the ground we have travelled over, but frequently neglect to gather up experience as we go. We expend, if I may so say, the knowledge of every day on the circumstances that produce it, and journey on in search of new matter and new refinements: but as it is pleasant and sometimes useful to look back, even to the first periods of infancy, and trace the turns and windings through which we have passed, so we may likewise derive many advantages by halting a while in our political career, and taking a review of the wondrous complicated labyrinth of little more than yesterday.

Truly may we say, that never did men grow old in so short a time! We have crowded the business of an age into the compass of a few months, and have been driven through such a rapid succession of things, that for the want of leisure to think, we unavoidably wasted knowledge as we came, and have left nearly as much behind us as we brought with us: but the road is yet rich with the fragments, and, before we finally lose sight of them, will repay us for the trouble of stopping to pick them up.

Were a man to be totally deprived of memory, he would be incapable of forming any just opinion; every thing about him would seem a chaos: he would have even his own history to ask from every one; and by not knowing how the world went in his absence, he would be at a loss to know how it ought to go on when he recovered, or rather, returned to it again. In like manner, though in a less degree, a too great inattention to past occurrences retards and bewilders our judgment in everything; while, on the contrary, by comparing what is past with what is present, we frequently hit on the true character of both, and become wise with very little trouble. It is a kind of counter-march, by which we get into the rear of time, and mark the movements and meaning of things as we make our return. There are certain circumstances, which, at the time of their happening, are a kind of riddles, and as every riddle is to be followed by its answer, so those kind of circumstances will be followed by their events, and those events are always the true solution. A considerable space of time may lapse between, and unless we continue our observations from the one to the other, the harmony of them will pass away unnoticed: but the misfortune is, that partly from the pressing necessity of some instant things, and partly from the impatience of our own tempers, we are frequently in such a hurry to make out the meaning of everything as fast as it happens, that we thereby never truly understand it; and not only start new difficulties to ourselves by so doing, but, as it were, embarrass Providence in her good designs.

.........................................................

We may not, perhaps, be wise enough to make all the advantages we ought of our independence; but they are, nevertheless, marked and presented to us with every character of great and good, and worthy the hand of him who sent them. I look through the present trouble to a time of tranquillity, when we shall have it in our power to set an example of peace to all the world. Were the Quakers really impressed and influenced by the quiet principles they profess to hold, they would, however they might disapprove the means, be the first of all men to approve of independence, because, by separating ourselves from the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, it affords an opportunity never given to man before of carrying their favourite principle of peace into general practice, by establishing governments that shall hereafter exist without wars. O! ye fallen, cringing, priest-and-Pemberton-ridden people! What more can we say of ye than that a religious Quaker is a valuable character, and a political Quaker a real Jesuit.

.................................................................

The principal causes why independence has not been so universally supported as it ought, are fear and indolence, and the causes why it has been opposed, are, avarice, down-right villany, and lust of personal power. There is not such a being in America as a Tory from conscience; some secret defect or other is interwoven in the character of all those, be they men or women, who can look with patience on the brutality, luxury and debauchery of the British court, and the violations of their army here.

...................................................................

All we want to know in America is simply this, who is for independence, and who is not? Those who are for it, will support it, and the remainder will undoubtedly see the reasonableness of paying the charges; while those who oppose or seek to betray it, must expect the more rigid fate of the jail and the gibbet. There is a bastard kind of generosity, which being extended to all men, is as fatal to society, on one hand, as the want of true generosity is on the other. A lax manner of administering justice, falsely termed moderation, has a tendency both to dispirit public virtue, and promote the growth of public evils.



Excerpts from
The Crisis
By Thomas Paine
1777


Copyright ©1999-2005 by the Independence Hall Association, electronically publishing as ushistory.org.

Saturday, July 2, 2005

Lest we forget

Check THIS link out. Or THIS. Or THIS.
To date, 1,745 Americans have died in Iraq. Another 15,000 to 38,000 have been wounded (Officially 12,855). And that doesn't count the 25,814 civilian deaths. These aren't numbers. They're people. Every one is someone's son or daughter. (Yeah, I know, Saddam killed Iraqi civilians, too. But there's a difference.)
It has cost us $180.5 billion so far.
And NO weapons of mass destructions have ever been found.
And NO al Quada connection has ever been found.
And NO terrorist camps.
And NO plans to spread worldwide terrorism have ever been found.
And, given the price at the pump, the oil isn't even flowing.
Anyone read the Downing Street memo yet?
Why, again, are we there?

And so it goes.

Friday, July 1, 2005

Let the games begin...

Ah, and so it begins.

I see that Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has announced her retirement.

Now, George W-imbecile will finally get his chance to nominate a justice. And we'll see if he uses the nomination to spend some of that imaginary political capital that he deluded himself into believing he earned in the election. Spend it wisely.

This could be a fun and/or frustrating time for politics watchers. Especially given the poll numbers recently out about W-imbecile. He's at the lowest point since ... since his father was there. And he's steadily falling. Even better, polls show that a quarter of Republicans (along with about 60 percent of Democrats) think impeachment proceedings would be a good idea. Can you say lame duck? Quack.

So, will W nominate a conservative idealogue? A conservative intellectual? A right-wing evangelical extremist? A nutcase? There's even a chance that W will reach back to the politcal center (of the GOP) to attempt to regain some of his lost base. (Sure...)

Only time will tell.

All we know now is that he's promised to act quickly.

From the AP:
President Bush said Friday he will pick a successor to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in a timely manner so her vacancy can be filled by the time the Supreme Court resumes work in the fall.
The White House said he would not decide before returning from Europe July 8.

Heading up the process in the Senate will be Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the panel's senior Democrat. Radical right-wing conservatives are not exactly dancing in the aisles about that.
Again, from the AP:
Shortly after winning re-election last fall, Specter angered conservatives long suspicious of him by warning a newly re-elected President Bush that anti-abortion judges would have a difficult time winning Senate confirmation, given Democratic opposition.
The comment sparked an outcry from social conservatives, who waged a campaign to pressure Republican Senate leaders to deny Specter the judiciary committee chairmanship he'd long coveted.
Conservatives eager to see more like-minded judges elevated to the federal courts worry about Specter's moderate politics and maverick style, but Specter ultimately survived that challenge.

So who's it gonna be? No one outside of W's 'handlers' knows for sure. You KNOW there's already a list and you can bet it'll be someone pretty darn conservative. You can pretty well bet it will be an anti-abortion conservative. Neither prospect bodes well for an easy coast through the confirmation process. If the W-imbecile wants a justice in place for the start of the fall term, he'd better put his list of extremist conservative idealogue nutcases back in the drawer and look at his 'potentially confirmable' list.

The AP put together a list of possible candidates, including lengthy profiles, which I've edited way down to a few pertinent comments. Culled from The Chicago Sun-Times:
SAMUEL A. ALITO:
Alito, 55, has been a strong conservative voice in his 15 years on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considered to be among the most liberal. On one hot-button issue, Alito was a lone dissenter in a case striking down a Pennsylvania law requiring women seeking abortions to inform their husbands.

EMILIO GARZA:
Appointed a federal judge by President Reagan and elevated to the 5th Circuit in 1991, he has become best known for his views that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that abortion regulation should be decided by state legislatures.

EDITH HOLLAN JONES:
In McCorvey v. Hill in 2004. Norma McCorvey was Roe in the landmark 1972 case that legalized abortion. Jones asked the court to overturn the ruling, arguing that abortion has a detrimental effect on women's long-term emotional state.

J. MICHAEL LUTTIG:
The 51-year-old Luttig is considered a solid conservative choice. He wrote the 1999 4th Circuit decision that struck down a key provision of 1994 Violence Against Women Act.

MICHAEL McCONNELL:
A respected conservative legal scholar, he opposed President Clinton's impeachment and [opposed] the Supreme Court's 2000 ruling in Bush v. Gore that made George W. Bush the president. Liberal interest groups are wary of McConnell because he is personally opposed to abortion.

JOHN G. ROBERTS:
Roberts, 50, has generally avoided weighing in on disputed social issues. Abortion rights groups, however, have maintained that he tried during his days as a lawyer in the first Bush administration to overturn Roe v. Wade.

J. HARVIE WILKINSON III:
He was part of a panel that ruled in 2003 that the government could indefinitely detain without legal rights American citizens captured overseas in the war on terror. The Supreme Court reversed that decision. He has less clear-cut views on the issue of reproductive rights.

Not a very cheerful list , is it?

If you're someone who considers proceses like this fun (or at least good theater), the next few months in Washington D.C. should be great sport.

Let the games begin!

And so it goes.