Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito who wrote (78986)	8/18/2006 10:03:19 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 81568

I don't really buy the end of the essay. Perhaps I should have only quoted part of it. I don't think that ANWR combined with other areas that are off limits for drilling or were drilling is restricted, add to the problem. But ANWR isn't a panacea or even close. I do agree with the author that the environmental harm is likely to be minimal, but he exaggerates the benefit. Also I suppose its in OPEC's interest to encourage environmental restrictions on drilling in the US, but I don't think they are a major factor in such restrictions. I have no reason to think that they actually have made efforts to discourage such drilling, and even if they have I have no reason to think that the efforts were decisive. OTOH the first part of the post is IMO very solid. Not completely up to date (gasoline is a bit more expensive now) but not obsolete anyway.

To: Cogito who wrote (78986)	8/19/2006 11:00:36 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 81568

My comment: Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaign stressed that he is a uniter and not a divider. But his eavesdropping appeal and shopping it for a favorable court points to the the fact that he has clearly painted this country as black and white. With his appeak, Bush has now subjected the judges of the 6th circuit to display their political activism. 6th Circuit more conservative, hard to predict DAN SEWELL Associated Press CINCINNATI - The Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program is heading toward a federal appellate court loaded with the president's own appointees. However, veterans of cases before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals caution that the court's mixed record in a broad range of rulings covering elections, death penalty cases, religious displays and other civil liberties issues makes it difficult to predict how its judges will view the surveillance the administration says is crucial to stopping terrorists. "It is not a foregone conclusion that a conservative-dominated court is going to say, 'President Bush did this and we're going to uphold what he wants,'" said Robert A. Sedler, a law professor at Wayne State University. "There are many issues in this case. Conservative judges often have a very strongly libertarian streak." The Justice Department filed notice of appeal with the Cincinnati-based court, which hears federal appeals from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, soon after U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor on Thursday ruled the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance was unconstitutional. Taylor, a Jimmy Carter appointee, will hear the government's request for a stay Sept. 7 in Detroit. President Bush has appointed six judges to the 6th Circuit, including two Michigan judges last summer that gave Republican appointees an 8-6 majority. The chief judge was appointed by Ronald Reagan. But the three-judge panels that hear appeals still often split their rulings. Depending on scheduling, the panels sometimes include a district court judge or a senior judge who's not a full-time member of the court. The wiretapping case also could wind up before the full court, in what's called an en banc hearing. "There's a whole range of judges in terms of experience, age and background," said John Pirich, a Lansing, Mich., attorney who's argued cases here over three decades. "I really can't quantify any of their rulings based upon who appointed them or what year they've been appointed." Pirich, whose name has been mentioned as a potential Bush appointee to a federal bench, noted that the judges have lifetime appointments and that judicial philosophies sometimes evolve over time. The appellate court hears cases covering a gamut of constitutional issues. Just this week, a 6th Circuit panel upheld a ruling that Michigan's prep sports schedule discriminates against girls in some sports. Earlier this year, a panel overturned a lower-court ruling and allowed Tennessee to offer anti-abortion license plates with the message "Choose Life." And a 2-1 ruling in April overturned a lower court and found that punch-card ballots had violated Ohio voters' rights because counties could not ensure that the ballots were counted. The full court has agreed to review the voting case. Cincinnati attorney Scott Greenwood, a former American Civil Liberties Union general counsel, has had some 40 cases before the 6th Circuit, including a successful argument against display of Ten Commandments in front of public schools in Adams County, Ohio. However, the 6th Circuit later ruled that a display at the Mercer County, Ky., courthouse was constitutional because it was part of a historical display that included replicas of the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. Greenwood said the court has been altered by Bush's appointments, but said judges likely will take a hard look at the separation of powers issues in the wiretapping case. "Civil liberties are not liberal and they're not conservative," he said. He said it's impossible to predict the court's action in the case, but said he doesn't expect this to be the last stop - the case seems likely to go before the Supreme Court, Greenwood said. ohio.com