Crickets vindicate erroneous charges (addended & updated 3dec13)

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2013/11/superb-video-reagan-vs-obama-social-economics-101/#6G7psfo6DLpBkIvb.99

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2013/11/superb-video-reagan-vs-obama-social-economics-101/#6G7psfo6DLpBkIvb.99

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2013/11/superb-video-reagan-vs-obama-social-economics-101/#6G7psfo6DLpBkIvb.99

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill

George Rebane

Here is an exchange that did not take place in the pages of The Union.  On 7 November 2013 the newspaper published Ms Nancy Eubanks’ gratuitous attack on the Tea Party and former Sheriff Richard Mack who recently spoke in Nevada County.  The local media outlets covered the well-attended event sponsored by the Nevada County Republican Women Federated.  Ms Terry McLaughlin of the NCRWF immediately submitted a response to Ms Eubanks' article three separate times – McLaughlin’s 7nov13 letter was followed by a shorter letter and then one Other Voices piece on 18 November.  The Union has seen fit not to publish any of these nor any other communications that would serve to correct the record of the apparently untouchable Eubanks’ charges.  The Union’s policy vindicates Eubanks through silencing all answers.  As a public service, RR has now stepped into this breech.

Ms Eubanks' article was published under the title ‘Sounds like Somalia to me’ –

We just had the Republicans Women’s club sponsor ex-Sheriff Mack from Arizona to come to our community to talk about his theories on law enforcement.

He asserts that the ultimate law of the land should rest with local sheriffs — local control being the most democratic form of government. And he gets standing ovations from our local Tea Party people — and this from the group that touts “read the Constitution.”

The Constitution says the ultimate law of the land is the Supreme Court. Numerous court decisions over many years have upheld that precedent. We even fought a civil war that decided federal law supersedes state law. All you have to do is watch the movie “The Butler” to see what can happen when sheriffs take the law into their own hands. Ugly!

We now have a Republican party controlled by a minority Tea Party contingency that wants “smaller government,” low — or better yet — no taxes (“do away with the IRS”) and local sheriffs deciding what laws will be implemented or not (tribalism). Plus every able-bodied person should have guns — the more AK-47s the better.  Freedom.  Sounds like Somalia to me.

Now that’s a country we should emulate.

Nancy Eubanks
Rough and Ready

Ms McLaughlin’s unpublished Other Voices response submittal -

In a letter published on Nov. 7, and titled "Sounds Like Somalia To Me", Nancy Eubanks disparages former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack's "theories" on local law enforcement and states that "The Constitution says the ultimate law of the land is the Supreme Court".   What Ms. Eubanks may not realize is that Sheriff Mack argued a case before that very same Supreme Court in 1996 and on June 27, 1997 the majority ruling on that case stated  "[E]ven where Congress has the authority under the Constitution to pass laws requiring or prohibiting certain acts, it lacks the power directly to compel the States to require or prohibit those acts.......Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. . . . Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State's officers directly. . . . Such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty."
 
In addition, the majority opinion of the Supreme Court stated   "This separation of the two spheres (of government) is one of the Constitution's structural protections of liberty.  . . . . Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front. . . . . . The Constitution protects us from our own best intentions:    It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day."  

Ms Eubanks went on to say that "we even fought a civil war that decided federal law supersedes state law".    This topic was specifically addressed in that same landmark 1997 Supreme Court decision which indicated that the Federalist Papers expressed  "Preservation of the States as independent political entities (was) the price of the union" and "The Framers explicitly chose a Constitution that confers upon Congress the power to regulate individuals, not States."

Nancy Eubanks also appears to take issue with the Tea Party groups, which she seems to believe would like to "abolish taxes, along with the IRS".   From what I know of the Tea Party, I believe they advocate fiscal responsibility, a balanced budget, and debt reduction, not "no taxes" and "tribalism", as Ms. Eubanks described.   And I very much doubt the Tea Party in any way promotes the idea of "the more AK-47s the better".    However, I would like to point out that in the US Justice Department's own "Operation Fast and Furious", Federal agents knowingly allowed over 2500 AK-47 type assault rifles to "walk" into Mexico and end up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Two of those AK-47 rifles were used in the murder of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in 2010.   Personally, I think that Mexican drug cartels murdering a US Border Patrol Agent with guns literally provided by the US government sounds "more like Somalia to me" than any of Sheriff Mack's "theories" on law enforcement.
 
Terry McLaughlin
Nevada City

[Addendum]  Brian Hamilton, editor of The Union, responds to this post here in the comment stream.

[29nov13 update]  This post has been getting a lot of attention lately, giving rise to a lively email exchange among more people than just regular RR readers.  It turns out that there was at least another counter to Ms Eubanks' letter sent to The Union.  A correspondent forwarded to me today this email from Mr Jim Driver.  Perhaps Mr Driver's effort suffered the same fate as Ms McLaughlin's for the same reason outlined by Mr Hamilton.  In any event, the following is from Mr Driver's email.

I thought that you would like to know that I also sent a response to Eubanks that has not yet been published. My response was sent in on nov. 15th. Here is what I wrote:
 
Sheriff Mack said WHAT?  You better check your FACTS!
 
Nancy Eubanks often writes about things that offend her.
 
Her latest Letter on November 7th titled “Sounds like Somalia to me” was about Sheriff Mack’s event sponsored by the Republican Woman’s club.

If she had attended the meeting, she would have learned that Sheriff Mack only spoke about Constitutional Law!
 
The first thing she derides is Sheriff Mack’s “theories on law enforcement”.

The Constitution of the United States is a theory?
She also wrote: “He asserts that the ultimate law of the land should rest with the local sheriffs …”.
 
Article VI, paragraph 3 of our U.S. Constitution, clearly states: “… all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution …”.

In America, the sheriff is a part of the Executive branch of our government; and he takes an oath to uphold the Constitution of The United States of America.

That means that when a law is Constitutional he must support it. That also means that when a law is unconstitutional, he must stand up for the people in his County. Sheriffs have exercised their right to defend their citizens against unconstitutional Federal laws and won their cases over and over again. This shows that Nancy’s implied argument, that he is not really in charge, falls apart.

Nancy wrote that he also said that: “… local control being the most democratic form of government.”
 
Sheriff Mack made it very clear that he believed in our Representative Democracy, where the majority cannot push their agenda on to the minority.

Then Nancy went on to write that he got: “a standing ovation from our local Tea Party people”.

Really?
 
In the meeting I attended there were about 600 people. Almost everybody was standing up and cheering. Does that mean everybody there was from the Tea Party?
 
I saw people with dreadlocks. Were they Tea Party folks? I saw people who were supporting the “99 %”. Were they Tea Party folks? I saw farm folks advocating “non GMO products. Were they Tea Party folks?
 
Nancy! Where did you get your “facts”?

You wrote: “The Constitution says the ultimate law of the land is the Supreme Court.”
 
In Article VI, paragraph 2, in my copy of the Constitution it very clearly states that: “This Constitution and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land.”

Also: “Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.”

The law of the land rests with the Senate and the House. Even if a President disapproves! The Supreme Court only decides on the Constitutionality of a law. In fact, when the people rise up to oppose a law, that law can be nullified!; either by amendments to the Constitution or by the Congress. Just as the 18th amendment was overturned!

Nancy wrote: “We even fought a civil war that decided federal law supersedes state law.”
 
Again, not true!
 
The Federal Government is the child of the State governments.

The Federal Government exists only because the States called it into existence! Remember? The States had to ratify the Constitution before it was the law of the land! I suggest that you re-read The Constitution and your history books.

I have not seen the movie “The Butler”; but your idea that our “Sheriffs (will) take the law into their own hands.” is absurd. That is guilt by association.

You state that “We now have a Republican party controlled by a minority Tea Party contingency that wants ‘smaller government,’ low – or better yet – no taxes (“do away with the IRS”) and local sheriffs deciding what laws will be implemented or not (tribalism).”

Since the three aims of the Tea Party are: Fiscal Responsibility, Free Markets and Limited Constitutional Government, your rant against them shows that that you know nothing about the Tea Party,
 
And finally; I must have been asleep, or in some other dimension, because I never heard anyone at the meeting ever say what she wrote: “… every able-bodied person should have guns – the more AK-47s the better.”

Nancy, you can write articles to the editor all you want, but until you verify your “facts”, who will believe you?
 
Jim Driver
Rough and Ready

[3dec13 update]  To put a bow on it, I received an email from Ms Terry McLaughlin summarizing some communications she had with Union editor Brian Hamilton subsequent to this post appearing on RR.  She has asked me to publish this "shortened version of our thread" as follows -

From Terry to Brian Hamilton:   "I just thought I should clear the air and reinforce the fact that I did indeed forward a personalized request for publication to you and to Cory  Fisher - and I explained that the DMV Kudos letter that was published in November had been submitted October 6 - and that I had never heard from you, so assumed it would not be published - and that the reply to Nancy Eubank's letter was time-sensitive. . . . Whether my letter is ever published in any form at this time is almost a moot point, as it was a time-sensitive response to many inaccuracies in Ms Eubanks letter - and if it's published more than a month later, no one would even remember her letter . . .
So - please tell me what your policy is?"
 
Reply from BrianHamilton:  "As I mentioned in the note to George, we do have a one letter per month policy. The policy is due to the large volume of letters we receive and our hope to be able to share as many "voices" as possible from the community.  When submitting an opinion piece, you should be contacted by us to confirm you are the author of the piece, which lets you know we received it.  Because we try to publish every letter — the least we can do for those who take the time to write them — sometimes quite a backlog can be created. In all honesty, there have been only a few pieces that we simply have not been able to publish (whether due to personal attacks, outright factual inaccuracies or potential libel issues).  Your point is valid, however, in terms of timely responses to other opinions shared. I'll discuss this with our editorial board on Wednesday to see if we need to shift the policy (especially in terms of timely discussions).  Again, I appreciate your contributions to the forum we provide on our opinion pages. I'll follow up with you on this."
 
Terry's response:  "You have answered some of my questions and I appreciate that you will take it up with your editorial board. Please let me know the result of that meeting - or even publish an article explaining the specifics of the policy. Thank you".
 
And a positive reply from Brian Hamilton:  "You bet, Terry. I like the idea of a column to explain.
I appreciate your understanding and look forward to future submissions."

McLaughlin concludes her email with - "the above gives a recap of a pretty positive conversation between myself and Brian, and hopefully will result in a clearer policy being provided in the Union itself, so all writers will understand how it works and we might get a more timely dialogue on issues published - which is really the goal here!   So you could go ahead and use the above (or parts of it) and I don't think it will antagonize Brian or hurt the positive trend we are moving in - which is my concern.   In general, I think Brian Hamilton is a good guy and honestly will try to come up with a policy that will address our timeliness concerns."

 

Comments

[Bill Tozer]

Dr. Rebane. I am most grateful that you publish these opinion pieces so we all can see the workings of the libhole mind in their shining glory.

Tea Party compared to Somalia? Somalia is a lawless country where the chiefs make the rules. They don't need no stinkin' paper constitution.

Just mentioning the The Constitution of the United States of America by the Tea Party folks drives them libholes up the wall. Lawlessness? Now that is totally nuts.. Does Ms. Eubanks really believe what she wrote or did her doc give her the wrong meds by mistake?

History has proven that Sheriff Mack upheld the Constitution of the United States of America through an orderly and legal process to have his grievances addressed and heard by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. I am so sorry that some disagree with outcome of that decision. Not!

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1479336_10151775674310911_1508044791_n.jpg

[Ben Emery]

George George George,
Without going into a long comment The US Supreme Court rules on individual cases and is the highest court in our country by the powers given to them in the Constitution. Mack might have won his case but that decision is specific to the circumstances of that individual case and how the case was fought before the court. Supremacy clause has been well established. Legislatures create laws, Executive branch approves and enforces laws. The county sheriff is the head of one of the lowest official law enforcement branches thus closest to the people. If state office wanted to chime in on a case it would have the authority to do so if it applied to state law. The same goes for the feds. If not how do you explain the marijuana busts in states that have passed partial legalization? They are breaking federal law so the feds have authority over the states in that incident. I find it a bit disturbing but then it creates quite the dichotomy in my position because many things that I believe to have been good for the nation would violate that position. Such as Brown vs Board of Education.

[George Rebane]

BenE 1043am - was there a point viz this post in your condescending comment? Or perhaps you raised a well-camouflaged alternative (expanded?) topic of discussion.

[Ben Emery]

The point is your outrage was more about a group you support being targeted than anything of substance.

[fish]

The point is your outrage was more about a group you support being targeted than anything of substance.

Pot meet kettle!

[George Rebane]

BenE 1058am - So it was an admonition - well enough. But FYI and shocking as it may be, there are tens of millions of us who consider the one-sided vagaries of the lamestream to be very much of substance.

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
Fair enough. But I don't have a blog and have the top post of the day about it. Put it out there it is open game to criticize or support. Just as you are doing with my public comment about it.

[Ben Emery]

George,
Right back at you on another but even more important topic, Climate Change/ Global Warming.

[fish]

Fair enough.

I stopped reading after this.

[Walt]

Damn Ben,,, Where is your " outrage " for "O" and Co. with their picking and choosing just which laws to enforce? Or to " put off "..("O"care is a fine example... By decree )
"O" stumped the first time around on "leaving states with MMJ laws alone",, then after getting CA.'s "vote" ,,promptly sent in Holder and they boys.
Not much for the arrests of evil pot growers, but to seize their property and assets. "O" and Co. are still busy here in Ca. where weed is concerned.
Funny how Colorado didn't feel the same FED bite. Or states North of Ca.
( they must be special)
How many other laws has "O" and Co. chose to ignore? All for political gain?
Hell! Look into how many 4th Amendment violations that have happened with "O" at the helm. ( even at the local level.)

When gun laws come into play, I take issue with "cops" being able to buy weapons the average citizen is prohibited from owning...All because he/she has a badge.
"cops" can buy high capacity magazines, right over the counter. Why??? What makes them special? We read of dirty cops all the time. They buy the guns and "parts",, then turn right around and sell them. Where is the knee jerk law writing there?

Since our local bird cage liner isn't big on reporting what really goes on in this County, I suggest you get your hands on a scanner.
Just last night there was a tiff at someone's home, and just because there was a known gun in the house,( and not even part of the argument,and locked up in a safe... as reported) three of four cops went to the disturbance.
The same thing happens when they get dispatched to a place where gun registration spits it out on the computer. " There might be a gun in the house... Send six... Just maybe....)

There are plenty of unjust laws on the books. Mainly used as excuses to "investigate" and bust people.
Any top cop who refuses to "enforce" these intrusive excuses, and down right unconstitutional laws has my vote and/or support.

Watch a few episodes of COPS, or any "Boarder police" type program.
Down on the boarder, it's catch and release, and do pay attention to how militarized police have become.
It seems any excuse to make a felon out of someone is the name of the game.

[Ben Emery]

Walt,
Check out my facebook page where I go after Obama for being a corporate shill and war criminal. I have said as much here many times. I basically oppose 75% of what the Democrats and President have been doing for the last 5 years. In 2010 at a public forum with a room filled of potential constituents I called President Obama a war criminal. You need to get that Republican Party style patriotism out of your ears and goggles off your eyes maybe you could hear or see my constant opposition to this administration and the Democratic Party.

The only thing that equals my disappointment and opposition of the leadership in the Democratic Party is my absolute disgust in the leadership of the Republican Party.

[Ben Emery]

Walt,
Here is a sample of what you will find on my social media public opinions.

Our US Constitutional professor commander in chief bombed a religious school in Pakistan adding 6 more onto the children killed by ordered drone bombings. The number worldwide is well over 200. If Adam Lanza murdering of 20 children is wicked then what do we call over 200 and no plans on stopping in the near future?

The right wing will celebrate striking a religious school because it is a school of Islam. I am wondering where the love of the founders has gone where freedom to practice any religion or no religion at all is the right of every human being.

US Drone Attack on Religious School Spurs Outrage in Pakistan
'Now no place is safe': Missile strike outside of tribal region likely to cause renewed protest across Pakistan
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/21-2

[George Rebane]

re BenE's 1202pm - "The right wing will celebrate striking a religious school because it is a school of Islam. ..." This is a classic and uniformly practiced tactic by collectivists worldwide (perhaps confirming the different neurology required for that ideology to hold). Here the above quote is taken as an axiomatic truth, and then trashed in subsequent arguments that reflect badly on the ascribed holders of the truth, thereby allowing the collectivist to smugly sew another self-satisfying victory patch on his jacket.

More here -
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/08/the-liberals-intellectually-baseless-ideology.html
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/03/-the-liberal-mind-yes-virginia-we-really-are-different.html

[Walt]

Seems to me "O" isn't far enough Left for ya'.
As for "bombing a religious school",, No building in terroristville is off limits
in my opinion. That's the first place they run to, to go and hide. " How dare you shoot at a school or a masque!" Never mind the terrorist types have guns and heavy weapons poking out of every window, shooting at anyone that moves. If they shoot a child or "civilian",, they just blame it on us, and the anti war types eat it up. See,, only the U.S. military get's the blame for every death, while terrorists hide behind women's skirts.
Schools and Masques should have never been marked as "hands off".
Isn't it great when the powers that be, never think "forward" when writing
the rules of engagement.

[Walt]

Speaking of the Middle East, Hear how well the anti nuke "talk with our enemies"
went? Hell.... Why doesn't "O" just give them a few at this point?

"Iranian President Rouhani: 'Iran's nuclear rights recognised'

BBC News - Iran has reached an agreement with world powers over its nuclear activities after more than four days of negotiations in Geneva.

In a televised address, the Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani, welcomed the deal, saying the country had the right to continue its uranium enrichment programme."

Seems our Progressives in charge can't wait to see a mushroom grow over the landscape somewhere.
What is it going to take for the Progressives to understand these guys can't be trusted? They are masters at the BS game, and the likes of John Kerry give them just what they want. The thing is,,, Iran WILL use the damned thing.
Be sure to blame Bush Lefties,, he's always available when things go South.
And some call "preppers" crazy? A second underground "storage facility"
is more than justified at this point.

Wall St. got sucked into their own version of "welfare, free money" with that "QE" 1,2,3,4,,5?,,,6??,, to prop up the "free market" . The whisper
of that ending is in the air. The price of ink and paper go up?
Will "big and bad" business get the heat instead of "O" and Co.? ( Sure thing)
When this bubble breaks,, it's not going to be pretty.

[Account Deleted]

"The right wing will celebrate striking a religious school because it is a school of Islam."
Proof?
Have fun in the land of make believe, Ben. I'll take you seriously as an adult when you act like one.

[Ben Emery]

Scott,
You might want to reflect who you identify with as political friends if you don't believe that striking schools of Islam would not be supported by the military authoritarian fascists on the right side of the American political aisle. They might not come out with press releases about it but it is supported that is for sure.

I will go no further than this thread and blog host for two examples that could really get into the hundreds for sure that would support my observation.

"As for "bombing a religious school",, No building in terroristville is off limits"
Walt

Ragheads and Racism
"While they teach and preach the evils of the west to their children, we are apologetically spoon feeding our kids and pre-educated adults the pabulum of equal worth of all cultures. This does not bode well for the survival of our culture. Because of this unwillingness to recognize our self-avowed mortal enemy, that enemy is steadily shutting down more of our civilization as they continue to colonize the parts that we have already paralyzed, and, through political correctness, daily continue to extend that paralysis."

Racism; no. Ragheads? You bet!
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2010/02/of-ragheads-and-racism.html

[Ben Emery]

Walt,
Obama doesn't even find himself on the left side of the aisle on most major issues. That is how far right Rebane's Ruminations 4 or 5 regulars are on the political spectrum. You are so blindly with anti-Democratic Party rage that you can't see that Obama is a corporatist carrying on the tradition set forward by Nixon but primarily Reagan and every Executive Branch since has followed those failed policies of bloated military, corporate friendly tax code, and virtually no trade policies that weren't outlined by corporate entities.

Another one of my posts

Obama/ Democratic Party along with Republican Party leadership support this deal. So when Democrats say they are on the side of workers they are lying. Since NAFTA and becoming participants in World Trade Organization US manufacturing has lost over 50,000 factories and 7 million jobs. The time to wake up and dismantle the Republican and Democratic Parties has come.
Bill Moyers Takes on the TPP
http://billmoyers.com/segment/yves-smith-and-dean-baker-on-secrets-in-trade/

A US-led trade deal is currently being negotiated that could increase the price of prescription drugs, weaken financial regulations and even allow partner countries to challenge American laws. But few know its substance.

[Gregory]

Only someone who's fallen off the left side of the Democratic cliff sees Obama as somehow ruling from the right.

Ben, it is a shame you spent your school years in detention or suspension for starting fights instead of studying.

[Bill Tozer]

Thank you Mr. Brother Ben for proving my Libholism theory: Libholes do not ask, they demand. You demand that I feel the same outrage as you do about a drone attack that inadvertently caused civilian causalities. Happens all the time, year in and year out. Am I outraged? Is my justifiable anger aroused? Should everybody feel the same way as I do?

Reminds me of years ago I was taking to an acquaintance who was devastated when his cat died. He was enraged that his roommate did not show an inkling of sorrow and was going to toss the roommate out. Evict his sorry ass. I told the grieving former pet owner that he was going too far. That he was demanding that his roommate felt the same grief he felt and act like a grieving widow. That was unfair demand he was placing on his roommate coupled with unrealistic expectations.

Brother Paul gets all upset when we don't express the same outrage he still feels about the Iraq War...er...George W Bush in particular. Eats at him big time.

Mr. Keachie was quite upset when we did not show the same moral outrage when the Trevon Martin case broke. Really got under his skin when we said let's wait for the police reports and and Grand Jury reports come in before hanging the racist in the public square.

There is a huge difference between a demand and a request. You demand we express outrage over the corporate stuff and 500 billion years of slavery.

Expecting and demanding anyone to feel the way you do is 100% unrealistic. You can argue with the mind, but feelings are triggered by emotions and emotions have little place in fact based dialogue.. I "feel" you are becoming another friggin control freak.

[Walt]

" Democrat party"??? Really Ben? That's so 1970's. JFK was a "Dem",, but by today's standards would be considered a Republican. How many name changes has Lefties gone through? The good ol' "Dem" transformed into "Liberal",, then when that burned out, " Progressive" is the tag line of the day. The only constant
was the beliefs that defined the "new names". Hell. More than some, are climbing out of the " Commie" closet. Just like the self proclaimed Socialist elected
in Seattle. Decade by decade, the " Demi-lib-gressive" has done it's best to
shred the founding documents, one letter at a time. Slow and steady.. Just like Mau envisioned. ( you may need to look that one up..I don't.)

The feral LIB, in it's all mighty wisdom has trashed our manufacturing work horses. "Greedy" unions drove Co.'s into the ground, ( GM ring a bell?)
Gov. unions have done even more damage. How many generations of "government retired employees" are we paying today? ( PLENTY!)
The "Dems" have regulated business right out of the country. NAFTA? Yaa.... right.... LIBS have done a great job of killing business.
If it's private money,, every roadblock is put in place. Now,, if it's "government" money ( fleeced from what taxpayers are left) that's a whole new story.
If LIBS (as you claim) were really for the working stiff, IMM would be up and running. So.( he who is on the side of workers) How many laws and regs were sighted as grounds to keep IMM shuttered?
There is plenty locally to show LIBS are NOT on the side of the working guy.

[fish]

So when you aren't campaigning to join the institution you endlessly castigate it for its corrupt practices.

Why again do you want to be a member and just what do you think you can do to reform this cesspit....if reform is what you have in mind?

[Gregory]

" I "feel" you are becoming another friggin control freak."

Ben E. has given testimony how he learned his sense of justice from his dad, who got into a lot of fights with the bullies of their neighborhood and young Ben took that to heart, starting fights with his perceived bullies in school, leading the authorities to suspend him a lot for starting fights and beating people up in his own pursuit of truth, justice and the American way.

Given Ben's apparent age, I'm going to guess the men who shared the administrative tasks of dealing with kids who like to fight were a mix of Korean War and Viet Nam vets who didn't see his crusade in quite the same way.

[TheMikeyMcD]

Speaking of outrage. Will the left be willfully blind (ignorant) of the FED when his house of cards comes down (again)? Said another way, does the FED get a free pass cause it was deemed to be in the collective's best interest?

All bubbles pop.

[Bill Tozer]

Mr. Gregory, a point perhaps off topic, but have you noticed the current buzzword "bully" being tossed about in the political arena lately? Like we of the conservative bent are now the bullies.

The left side of the aisle controls the Executive Branch and the US Senate. When BarackObama was elected, the left side of the political spectrum controlled the Senate, The House of Representatives, the White House, and hands down the 4th estate (MSM) as well.

Today, the Dems control everything but the House, where the TEA Party Patriots have a minority foothold. Yet,the Tea Party is bullying the entire country. Oppose BarackObamacare and you are now a bully. Guess being a bully is a step below being a racist. Oppose kicking the can down the road on getting spending under control and you are a bully. Request investigations into Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS being used for political intimidation...yes, you are a bully.

Well, who is bullying who?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/11/19/team-obama-scary-message-for-obamacare-critics/

Mr. Gregory, I think Dr. Rebane and Mother Goose are being called bullys...the Libholes new talking points. Glad they are all on the same page.

[Ben Emery]

Greg,
Obviously you read my comment closely and realize my dad means the world to me and he is at the end of his life. Only a complete douche bag would be insensitive enough to include him in negative comments. You truly lack any kind of class.
I matured past 15 years old and you still have the mentality of a 15 year old. I feel bad for you.

[Ben Emery]

Here is the funny thing, nobody came outright and condemned the bombing of children at the school. A slurry of personal attacks came out of it.

US Drone Attack on Religious School Spurs Outrage in Pakistan
'Now no place is safe': Missile strike outside of tribal region likely to cause renewed protest across Pakistan
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/21-2

Do you guys oppose the bombing of the Islamic School in Pakistan? Or is the targeting of children OK in your world view?

[Ben Emery]

I guess I have to word my question. Is targeting of students at religious schools (Not children) OK in your world view? The link I gave was a different link but adult student vs child student are still non combat targets.

More on the idea of US Drone Program
http://www.livingunderdrones.org/

[fish]

Do you guys oppose the bombing of the Islamic School in Pakistan? Or is the targeting of children OK in your world view?

I unequivocally oppose these strikes and their target selection criteria.

[Bill Tozer]

Brother Ben, I oppose targeting exclusively school children. I oppose targeting in and of itself day care centers. And I oppose suicide bombers strapping on vests and boarding school buses or senior centers.

I once got upset that we had a bunch of Taliban leaders gathered in one place in our sights. They were attending the funeral of a leader. We called off the strike cause funerals were off limits. Now, that was under President George W. Bush and I don't know what our current policy is.

Even Timothy McVay said he did not know that there was a child care center in the IRS building he busted up. The only ones that actually target school children are the Mexican Cartels and the Ragheads that kill school girls in Pakistan on purpose. Maybe Somalia as well.

Children are always off limits, whether in war or flaming on blogs. But, it is not all black and white. How to we help some child of a lazy or drug crazed parent in our country? The welfare check is for the child, not the parent. Hard to send a check to the child without Momma taking it for drugs. But, I digress.

Parents love of their children is a universal human characteristic. I understand your concern. We all wish it did not happen. We usually follow rules of engagement, but it is hard to pinpoint exact targets without boots on the ground. Intel ain't perfect either, even with boots on the ground.

Pakistan has got the human rights folks concerned lately as the peace loving muslims are going to reinstate stoning of wayward women. Its a mess and it ain't ever going to be perfect, be it on the battlefield or on the gridiron. But, yes, War is not pretty and one bomb falling on your head can ruin a perfectly good day no doubt. No how to win friends.

[fish]

I don't know what our current policy is

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that the drone program was ramped up by the current progressive administration so they continue waging their war while minimizing political blowback at home directed towards Americas Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

[Bill Tozer]

"The right wing will celebrate striking a religious school because it is a school of Islam."

Yep, Brother Ben, we are all partying like Flappers because of this. Roll out the barrels and all that stuff. Let the good times roll. See, here is the proof you have been seeking that us right wing extremist heartless cold as a stone and meaner than vipers are dancing in the streets singing Joy to the World because a school of Islam returned to the dust from whence it came. With children inside to boot!

Now that you got your proof what we are getting woodies hearing about children having their little arms and legs blown off, what are you going to do with this earth shaking news? You busted us, Brother Ben. Amazing how you pulled the truth right out of us. You be a shrewd fellow. Your suspensions have proven correct. You were only paranoid until proven right.

[George Rebane]

I'm not sure that everyone here is using 'targeting' correctly, most certainly not in the same sense. To my knowledge no post-WW2 administration has targeted children as matter of policy when waging war. Children have been killed because they were in the proximity of enemy combatants or a valuable military target, but not because we sought to reduce the number of children. The last time we targeted civilians, and most certainly children, was in the terror raids during the last year of the war in both theaters of operation - Dresden, Berlin, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, ... come to mind.

Nevertheless, I have quite a different view from the commonly received wisdom about the relative worth of human life at different stages of its life cycle, but that's a topic for a forthcoming post.

[Gregory]

Ben, Ben, Ben.

You proudly proclaimed how you would beat up the bullies at school only to be suspended or put in detention by the school authorities. What did those men of authority at the school say to you to try to get you to stop? Were you ever expelled? What did your father tell you about picking fights at school?

Doesn't it strike you that you're just doing the same thing now?

[Gregory]

"The right wing will celebrate striking a religious school because it is a school of Islam."

Now, Ben, just because you can imagine "the right wing" doing such a thing doesn't mean it ever has or it ever would, and I can't say I have ever been on a first name basis with anyone who would do such a thing. Is that the sort of thought process you went about as a youngster deciding who it was that you should beat up today?

[Joe Koyote]

"The last time we targeted civilians, and most certainly children, was in the terror raids during the last year of the war in both theaters of operation - Dresden, Berlin, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, ... come to mind."

Don't forget agent orange. It targeted every living thing in its path, and still continues to cause birth defects and cancer decades later.

[George Rebane]

JoeK 1002am - thanks again for illustrating liberal logic. Clearly, you are one of the multitude who doesn't understand 'targeting'. The existential impact of a weapon's deployment is semantically orthogonal to the intended objective of such deployment. E.g. that the lethal radius of an artillery shell is, say, 50 meters does not mean that everyone within such radius of an exploding shell was intentionally included - i.e. targeted - by whoever deployed the shell.

[Joe Koyote]

George --Yes.. I don't understand targeting, but thanks again for laying out a bushel of crap from some military manual in a logical attempt to somehow justify the collateral deaths of civilians. They don't really mean to kill innocent children. Those children, through no fault of their own, just happen to find themselves within some very neatly defined lethal radius.. depending on the weapon of choice, that makes their deaths justifiable homicide instead of murder.

[Gregory]

JK, what you are saying is that any militant force that hides among civilians is untouchable, yes?

[Bill Tozer]

If you exclude the Pentagon, I believe 911 was well planned successful attack on civilians. Excellent precision and tactics.

I think Hamas lobes any missile they can get their hands on on civilian targets within Israel. Never heard of them attack an Army base to this day. Just schools and people walking down the street.

Think them Palestinians strap on the Ka-Boom! jackets and walk into discos, school buses, and cafes. Might have some military targets up their sleeve, put they are playing that close to the vest have haven't carried out a military attack in 20 years. Opps, they kidnapped one Israel soldier. Pardon we.

I think the Sunnis and the Shiites get their jollies off by blowing up each others' mosques when they are jam packed with worshipers. No fun to blow up an empty mosque, now is it?

I could be wrong, but I heard that the poor band of Freedom Fighters fighting against the Imperialist Evil Empire of Russia cream their jeans each time they see a crowded movie theater in Moscow. Nice and dark and full of warm bodies. Just wish they would wait until the show was over before making women and children's body parts cling to the ceiling so the survivors would at least know how the movie turned out.

Bad America, bad. The world would go on its gentle relaxing harmonious historical way if ONLY big bad America would stop doing what we are doing.

Yes, two wrongs don't make a right. And two lefties don't make a half-wit.

[Joe Koyote]

Greg- are you saying that collateral civilian deaths are acceptable, yes?

[George Rebane]

Ah yes, when the ragheads fight from behind women and children, they shall go unanswered. Well, at least until they meet us one-on-one on main street at high noon with Do not forsake me oh my darlin' playing in the background.

[Joe Koyote]

Let's say your wife and children went to the bank. While there, robbers burst in. The SWAT team shows up and blows everybody away. Sorry about your wife and kids.. collateral damage.. the goods guys were just getting the bad guys. Maybe your family shouldn't have gone to the bank that day. Can someone explain how this scenario is any different from a drone attack that kills innocent bystanders?

[George Rebane]

JoeK 713pm - your logic continues to astound. First, who has argued any 'difference' in the scenarios you posit? But more importantly, what is your point? Such collateral damage does exist; recall the number of innocents killed when the Israelis rescued the hostages in Entebbe.

Are you saying that when bad guys choose to hide behind innocents, they get a free pass to do anything they want? Do you have some kind of a solution in mind, or is this part of an ongoing gush of ideological mush?

[Gregory]

"Haqqani sources told AFP that the network's spiritual leader, Maulana Ahmad Jan, was among those killed at the seminary, which they said was a rest base for militants fighting NATO forces in Afghanistan."

This wasn't apparently the local neighborhood Waldorf School, was it?
http://news.yahoo.com/first-us-drone-strike-pakistans-khyber-pakhtunkhwa-kills-041441452.html

[Gregory]

"Or is the targeting of children OK in your world view?"

Is the "targeting of militants fighting NATO forces in Afghanistan" on R&R not OK in your world view, Ben? JK?

[Todd Juvinall]

JoeK, let's say your wife and kids were in the mall. Say, the mall in Kenya. A group of Somali Al Queda arrives and starts shooting everyone. As the Kenyan police arrive the Somali's grab your family as sheilds and they keep shooting the military and other innocents, other kids and women. What do you think the police should do?

[Joe Koyote]

As for the bank/mall scenarios.. sharpshooters are preferable to just blasting away at the bad guys and anyone else who happens to get in the line of fire. The drone scenarios are different because they automatically take out everyone. It is not face to face.. there is no choice about who is a target and who is not. The former is a police action and the latter is terrorism. Yes, boys, drones are weapons of terrorism because they indiscriminately kill without warning, just like roadside devices or whack jobs wrapped in C-4. You must also keep in mind that, as weapons against terrorism, drones are total failures. By the Pentagon's own estimates, for every innocent civilian killed by a drone 5-10 new insurgents are created. Just do the math.

[Todd Juvinall]

JoeK. So, in the confines of the mall, you wife and kids are being used as shield by the terrorists who now have placed themselves under a blanket as they mow down other patrons in the mall. Use sharp shooters is your answer? Tell us really how you would solve this, not some ridiculous answer as before.

[Gregory]

JK and Master Ben, let's not lose sight of the particulars of the strike that Ben started ranting about... it wasn't a school with kids, it was a seminary set up for combatants for rest, placed outside of the tribal areas because such places inside the tribal areas were being droned.

Ben's initial news was from "commondreams", a hard left site, with the same picture as the yahoo news link I gave. Of the entire seminary, the only room that got hit was the one with the big kahunas of a major terrorist network, and no innocent civilians were hurt.

Not the story Ben repeated.

No, I don't support drone strikes in ostensibly friendly countries, but let's not make stuff up when criticizing them.

[Joe Koyote]

Placed themselves under a blanket. Good one Todd. If they were under a blanket I would use napalm.

[Gregory]

"Yes, boys, drones are weapons of terrorism because they indiscriminately kill without warning, just like roadside devices or whack jobs wrapped in C-4."

If one accepts that reasoning, every bullet fired at a combatant who isn't directly looking at the shooter was a "weapon of terrorism". Every bomb dropped on a target was a "weapon of terrorism".

In the case of the mythical school that was recently 'droned', all the people killed were valid military targets.

"Two local security officials identified two of the dead as Jan and Mufti Hameedullah and said they were both members of the Haqqani network.

Several senior Haqqani sources confirmed the death of Jan, aged in his 60s. An Afghan Taliban source said the five others killed in the strike were also militants.

"He was the spiritual leader and head teacher of the Haqqani network," one source told AFP, adding that Jan was a member of the group's ruling council.

"He was receiving people who were coming to condole the death of Nasiruddin Haqqani because followers of were not able to meet any other member of Haqqani family."

Another Haqqani source said the seminary was an important rest point for members fighting in Afghanistan's restive Khost province.

"The seminary served as a base for the network where militants fighting across the border came to stay and rest, as the Haqqani seminaries in the tribal areas were targeted by drones," the source told AFP on condition of anonymity."

[Bonnie M]

George...Thank you so much for your revelation that the Union doesn't print some opinions. I've been noticing something strange going on. It's too bad, because I've always held the paper in high regard. That's why we subscribe to the newspaper and online also. As a community and nation, we only know what the media tells us. Without freedom of speech truth dies...and that's how all dictator's derive their power. We might not like an opinion different than ours, but it enhances our ability to learn and choose accordingly.

[Todd Juvinall]

JoeK, under a blanket has been used numerous times by the bad guts. Please tell us how you would deal with terrorists who use women and children as shields and who keep killings those around them. Come on now, you have shown us all your level of intelligence here. Tell us.

[Brian Hamilton]

Hi George ... Just to be clear, Ms. McLaughlin's piece has not yet been published due to policy — not conspiracy. After checking the que of letters and op-eds, I see Ms. McLaughlin had a piece published earlier in November, which means — due to our policy of one per month, per author — her next letter can run next month. I would have been glad to let her or you know that was the reason for the delay, had anyone actually contacted me. Our policy is to ensure we have a variety of opinions from a variety of writers, as we do receive a large volume of letters and op-eds -- we typically publish more than a thousand letters each year. We are glad to publish opinions with which we don't agree, as it makes for a much more interesting Ideas & Opinions page than if we only printed letters you or I agree with. Ms. McLaughlin, as well as yourself, have had many opinions published in The Union; and we certainly look forward to opportunities of sharing more of them with our readers. Hope this helps clear up any misconception. Have a happy Thanksgiving!

[George Rebane]

BrianH 648am - No conspiracy was imputed, only an apparent policy was referenced that results from the de facto policy that you describe, a policy which does not support productive discussion/comment threads. Had someone else responded in a timely manner to counter Ms Eubanks letter, we'd like to think that you would have published it. Since only Ms McLaughlin responded (three times including an Other Voices submittal), and you still saw fit not to publish any of these responses, the egregious Eubanks letter stood unchallenged. I believe a more responsive and flexible editorial policy to support such comment threads in a timely manner would much better serve our community and therefore The Union.

Everyone recognizes that print 'real estate' is expensive and limited. What remains a puzzle is that your uniformly paywalled website includes the op-ed page and readers' letters. Storage is cheap. I believe you would do the newspaper a service if you removed the paywall from your op-ed pages and published ALL readers' letter that were relevant and met minimum civility standards. And thank you for the clarifying comment. Happy Thanksgiving.

[Todd Juvinall]

I think the Union should go back to the Point-Counterpoint of many years ago. When someone like Eubanks, a democrat party activist, lays her attacks on a major local entity, isn't it reasonable to have a contra? I think so. But, the paper has returned to a pre 2000 set of policies that put conservative output below the fold and on the back page (if at all). Too bad.

[Brian Hamilton]

Good point on opening the opinion pages outside the paywall. We actually did so several months ago. If you're having issues accessing opinion content, please let me know. It should be open to all. Thanks, and enjoy your holiday!