SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (37234)7/31/2008 9:39:50 PM
From: Ann Corrigan  Respond to of 224755
 
Get this man a teleprompter: powerlineblog.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (37234)7/31/2008 11:07:17 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 224755
 
Judge to Rule on Limits at Denver Convention



By KIRK JOHNSON
Published: August 1, 2008
DENVER — A federal trial in a lawsuit seeking to ease strict security provisions at the Democratic National Convention ended Thursday with repeated questions from the judge about how the rules impinge on free speech, as the groups behind the lawsuit have charged.
The judge, Marcia S. Krieger, also questioned a lawyer for one of the groups, Steven D. Zansberg of the American Civil Liberties Union, about what precisely the court might do to correct the problem with the convention only a few weeks away.

The lawsuit, filed by the A.C.L.U. and a coalition of protest groups led by an organization formed here about 18 months ago, Recreate 68, says security concerns for the three-day convention beginning Aug. 25 are exaggerated. It says alternatives exist that would allow protesters and the public to get closer — within “sight and sound” — to the convention hall.

Judge Krieger repeatedly interrupted Mr. Zansberg during his closing argument in the two-day trial, seeking clarification about what the groups were seeking.

“What do you mean, ‘sight and sound?’ ” she asked him. “From whose perspective?”

Mr. Zansberg said previous court rulings had established that public protest required both the ability to exercise free speech and to be seen by the intended recipients, in this case the Democratic Party delegates and the news media. If those rights are somehow curtailed because of security concerns, he argued, other means of expression must be provided as well as proof that the security needs could be met in no other reasonable way.

Lawyers for the City of Denver and the Secret Service, in their closing arguments, said Judge Krieger needed to consider the government’s significant interests, including public safety and the functioning of the city.

“The First Amendment is important, but it’s not the totality of the public interest,” said James M. Lyons, a lawyer for the city.

Judge Krieger said she would issue a written ruling as soon as possible.

At the heart of the case is a battle of perceptions.

Members of Recreate 68 and other protest groups who testified before Judge Krieger on Tuesday said close proximity to the Pepsi Center, where 40,000 delegates, guests and journalists will gather in downtown Denver for the convention, was crucial.

The political statement and symbolic imagery they want to convey with their protests, they said, hinged partly on having the convention arena as a backdrop for the cameras.

Preventing proximity, lawyers suggested in their questioning, was tantamount to abridging free speech unless the government could prove that a huge fenced security zone was really necessary.

The planned parade route through the city for convention-related events, in particular, now ends about a third of mile from Pepsi Center, which one leader of Recreate 68 said made a parade almost pointless.

“There’s no visual connection,” said Mark Cohen, a freelance writer and co-founder of Recreate 68. The result, Mr. Cohen said, would make it, “appear as though we’re marching with no particular purpose in mind.”

Government witnesses, led by Denver’s deputy police chief, Michael Battista, said perceptions about security needs — and the need to keep protesters at a safe distance from the convention — had been heightened by a manual on potentially violent street tactics that could be found on Recreate 68’s Web site and by other groups that have announced plans on the Internet to disrupt the convention.

“Do you take those threats seriously?” Mr. Battista was asked by a lawyer for the city.

“Yes,” he answered.

Witnesses from both sides said they had learned from the past: The Secret Service and the police in watching how bombings and attacks have been carried out in recent years around the world, and the protesters in how the expression of dissent is increasingly hindered, they said, by deliberately overcautious security tactics.

But the imagery of the lead protest group’s name also seemed to cast its own shadow. Mr. Cohen took pains in his testimony to tell Judge Krieger that the name of his group was meant to evoke the broader youth spirit of protest and change of 1968, not the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, which was marked by street violence.

But under cross-examination, Mr. Cohen conceded that the group’s organizers did not know and could not know whether other people might be energized and drawn by Recreate 68’s message and come to Denver with other than peaceful ends in mind.

Government witnesses also declined to answer some questions about their security plans, thwarting lawyers for the protest groups who tried in their cross-examinations to pin down how security needs were being calculated.

“The more we put out, the more vulnerable we are,” said Steven Hughes, the Secret Service agent in charge of security at the convention, in declining to answer a question from a lawyer on the A.C.L.U. team about the height of the security fence.

More Articles in US »



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (37234)7/31/2008 11:11:19 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224755
 
husseinObama Wants You
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: Barack Obama calls it "Universal Voluntary Public Service." We call it a plan for national involuntary servitude. Kennedy asked us what we could do for our country. Obama has ways to make us volunteer.
Obama's call to public service is quite different from JFK's. JFK knew America was already a nation of givers and volunteers, perhaps the most charitable and altruistic nation on Earth. Entities such as the Peace Corps would give Americans an outlet for their kindness and generosity, an opportunity to share what the freest nation on Earth had given them. Obama will force you to share.

Obama's Orwellian use of the words "universal" and "voluntary" together is an indicator of an antithesis to capitalist society deeply rooted in his socialist associations, education and training. Indeed, in 1996, when he ran for an Illinois state Senate seat, one of his first endorsements was from the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America.

On the surface, his plan looks just like typical bureaucratic program growth. He wants to expand Americorps to 250,000 slots and double the size of the Peace Corps. He'll create a Clean Energy Corps to plant trees and otherwise save the Earth. It's how Obama plans to fill those slots that's worrisome.

Announcing his plan July 2 at the University of Colorado, he said: "We will ask Americans to serve. We will create new opportunities to serve. And we will direct that service to our most pressing national challenges." He will make us an offer we can't refuse.

Obama says that as president he will "set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year." What he doesn't say is that he'll make such voluntarism compulsory by attaching strings to federal education dollars. The schools will make the kids volunteer. It's called plausible deniability.

In a commencement speech at Wesleyan University, Obama advised graduates not to pursue the American dream of success, but to serve others.

"You can take your diploma, walk off this stage and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should," he told the graduates. "But I hope you don't."

Don't be another Bill Gates and amass a fortune making people more productive and successful in their daily lives and giving your countrymen a standard of living the world will envy. Exchange your cap and gown for sackcloth and ashes. Leave your possessions behind and come and follow Obama.

"Fulfilling your immediate wants and needs betrays a poverty of ambition," he opined. Shame on us for being selfish and buying that SUV built by an autoworker trying to fulfill his family's immediate wants and needs.

"Our collective service can shape the destiny of this generation," Obama said. "Individual salvation depends on collective salvation."

We already have a Salvation Army that is truly a volunteer organization. Collective service and salvation is not a classic definition of voluntarism. What Obama has in mind is to turn America into a socialist version of the old Soviet collectives.

And if your idea of service is to join the military and keep others alive and free, forget about it. And never mind about ROTC on campus.

Obama has no place for those who are willing to abandon fame and fortune to lay down their lives for their friends and ours. "At a time of war," Obama says, "we need you to work for peace."

"We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do," Obama's wife, Michelle, told a group of women in Zanesville, Ohio, during the primaries. "Don't go into corporate America. . . . Become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers we need, and we're encouraging people to do just that."

Don't be the engineers who will figure out better ways to extract shale oil from the porous rock that holds it. Figure out how to extract more money from taxpayers' wallets.

But the Obamas are doing more than "encouraging" or "asking." In a speech in California, Michelle, who has made a small fortune in the "helping industry," said: "Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zone. . . . Barack Obama will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual — uninvolved, uninformed."

But America is not a nation of selfish, self-serving people. Social demographer Arthur Brooks once calculated that Americans volunteered 32% more than Obama's beloved Germans. We also donate seven times more money to charities and causes than the Germans who gathered in Berlin.

In talking about his national service, Obama, the man who seems to be running for "community organizer in chief," also made this startling statement:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

This is an idea worthy of Hugo Chavez.

Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren has estimated that this civilian national security force alone would cost somewhere between $100 billion and $500 billion, or between 10% and 50% of all federal tax receipts. And that doesn't include the cost of the brown shirts.

Adults are not exempt from all this, even adults who've already served in the U.S. military. "People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve," Obama says. Will they be asked, or drafted?

"The future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson," he concedes. "But it (also) depends on the teacher in East L.A., the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans . . ." So drop down and give Sgt. Obama 50 hours.

Require. Demand. Never allow. Obama's version of "voluntary" service is more appropriate for Havana than middle America. He wants to turn America's students, and even adults, into clones of Elian Gonzalez, compelled to serve the state in ways Obama "will direct."

Correction: In the first installment of this series on Tuesday, the Luo ethnic group in Kenya was identified as "communist." The father of the Luo leader cited, Oginga Odinga, did espouse the post-colonial African version of communism in the 1970s and '80s, and his son, Raila Odinga, calls himself a social democrat. But communism as an ideology did not characterize the entire tribe.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (37234)7/31/2008 11:13:22 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224755
 
When a candidate says things like "we are the ones we have been waiting for," stages a campaign rally before 200,000 Germans ineligible to vote but hoping to touch his garment, and proclaiming himself a "citizen of the world," his critics may be forgiven for suggesting, as some have said of Paris Hilton, that he is famous for being famous.

McCain's camp has blasphemed against The One by noting his celebrity status in a campaign commercial that includes Mademoiselles Spears and Hilton. McCain's ad asks the obvious question: Is the man who sends tingles up and down the legs of MSNBC's Chris Matthews ready to lead? We think not.

The Obama camp has gone bonkers at the suggestion that he's an elitist in an empty Armani suit who can take time to shoot three-pointers but is too busy to visit vets in a German hospital.

They object to the statement of McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, that "only celebrities like Obama go to the gym three times a day, demand 'Met-Rx chocolate roasted-peanut protein bars and bottles of a hard-to-find organic brew — Black Forest Berry Honest Tea' and worry about the price of arugula."