Mike's a Leftist? Whoa. :shock:Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Yeah, let's affirm lynchings, child labor, laws against female-held property, theocracy, crucifixions, The Rack, serfdom . . .
Hey, that Past was something else! Good times. Good times.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.
Don't know about the rest, but serfdom... that most certainly is being reaffirmed today. What do you think the whole process of luring people deeper and deeper into consumer debt, as well as negatively-amortized interest-only loans on escalating home prices, is really all about?Mike's a Leftist? Whoa. :shock:
Yeah, let's affirm lynchings, child labor, laws against female-held property, theocracy, crucifixions, The Rack, serfdom . . .
It's about setting people up to be owned, lock stock and barrel, by corporations. They've already limited the ability of ordinary people to declare bankruptcy, so that once you're hooked there'll be no way out, nowhere for you to go except to them... on your knees. It's only a matter of time before the notion of debtor's prisons... if not out-and-out debt slavery... is floated around the halls of Congress.
"Better hurry. There's a storm coming. His storm!!!" :-O -Abigail Freemantle, "The Stand" by Stephen King
Trials -- legal procedures to establish proof beyond reasonable doubt -- and warrants to listen to phone conversation -- legal procedures to establish probable cause -- are both under attack these days. I'll add the Geneva conventions, a set of rules on how to fight wars.I'm not the least bit surprised to see the left mocking or pooh poohing the importance of the Saddam trial. The rule of law is, after all, a traditionalist institution and thereby an annoyance to those who, like liberals (at least those who can unabashedly admit it), would thrust a bitter dagger into the heart of The Past.
Traditionalists, however, seek to realize the hope of future progress by affirming The Past. Thus, Saddam's crimes against that hope must be exposed fairly and properly in a "court of law" if said hope is to be truly valid.
The Left rejects this affirmation with The Past. Thus, it is actually in their agenda to trivialize trials such as these just as the Chicago Seven (yes, Ramsey Clark was there too) turned their "court of law" into a circus in 1969.
Conflict is changing. Rules which held when two major powers were fighting an overt war don't work so cleanly when the enemy are insurgents and terrorists. I would not be surprised if the rules of war are rewritten at the 4T / 1T cusp. Until that happens, I will generally favor those trying to enforce the existing international treaties, while scorning those who claim that Rule of Law doesn't imply to them. Edit : It is worth noting that the insurgents and terrorists are among those who consider themselves Above the Law, and are included among those scorned. One might not entirely forget that by the old rules fighters not in uniform were illegal combatants or spies, and tended to be hanged with little to no formality. This tradition seems to be vanishing faster than the notion of warrants.
But characterizing the Left as being the ones who want to ignore Rule of Law while the Right is upholding tradition might not be entirely true, depending on whether one thinks of the current US Administration as being Left or Right. Last I knew, there were those on both sides trying vigorously to disown the Bush 43 administration, to put him in the opposite camp.Anyway, holding prisoners outside the US to avoid court jurisdiction, arbitrarily declaring and holding 'enemy combatants,' disregard of the Geneva Convention and warrantless searches might be ranked as questionable. I would prefer not to characterize the issue of Rule of Law against governments thinking themselves Above the Law as partisan. Both Nazi and Communist governments belonged to the Above the Law camp. Too many Americans (more than one) are ready to embrace similar ethics (or lack thereof). Said individuals come from both left and right, and are opposed by both right and left. Bush 43 and McCain, the most vigorous advocates in many respects, are of the same party.
Anyway, count me on the side of Law. On this issue, forget left and right.
If I'm the left, then their troubles are even worse than we thought.I'm not the least bit surprised to see the left mocking or pooh poohing the importance of the Saddam trial.
Did Iraq have a constitution against which Sadam acted? I don't know but that seems important. I assumed that in a cruel dictatorship, the cruel dictator makes the laws, and the cruel things he does are entirely legal.
Edit for typos
Rule of law
Federalize the "law" in the new Irak. When the new "state" is set up:
The Progressive Ba'ath Socialists could be tried by the Shia under Shariah law. If anything remained, that portion could be sent to the Kurds to be tried unsder their version of marxist-war lord law.
Any portion left over could be sent to the Sunni to be tried by Shariah law. Then the Turcomen, Xians, etc.
This would be Iraki justice (such as it might be) rather than Coalition justice (such as it is) for the internal affairs of Irak. Many a camel court might be preferred to the Anglo-spheric kangaroo justice (sic) that the Progressive Ba'ath Socialists may receive. The kangaroos might have an international case to bring to the Hague, etc. But, I would have let the several strainers of Iraki federalism and the several findings of Iraki law do their work first. :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:
I think we would find little need of cell space in the Netherlands for the remaining Progressive (alleged) criminals.
Legitimate rule of law begins with an important premise:Given the idealized nature of these words, one is tempted to reject their import on the basis of historical hypocrisy (ie., slaves, injuns, institutionalized injustice). Liberals, and paleo-cons (you?), are not tempted by this rejection because they wholeheartedly reject these words for differing reasons.
- 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.
Thus the left tosses both the affirmation baby and the institutional bath-water out upon the ash-heap of history (so to speak). "All men" need not apply to Iraqis because it has been proven a farce by Americans. There is no justice, no hope, no future because the The Past is utterly corrupt: Stare Decisis writ large.
The Pale of Progress
Do you mean that my cousins who live under Nordic law in Republics and Kingdoms do not live under the rule of legitimate law?
That those who live under the variants of the Code Napoleon in Old and New Europe and the lower Americas do not live under the rule of legitimate law?
That those in the Anglo-sphere who have a tradition of common law and Blackstone do not live under the rule of legitimate law?
Those who abide in the parishes of Louisiana and the ridings of Quebec do not live under the rule of legitimate law?
That those under Shariah are not under the rule of legitimate law?
Confucian codes? Mosaic law? Roman law? Canon law? All illegitimate?
Beyond the Pale :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:
Well then, Marc's "Traditionalists" affirm the Past and bring us outstanding "Progress". The future belongs to the Troglodytes! :shock:
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.
Re: The Pale of Progress
Illegitimacy is a sore topic for the Trog. Tread lightly.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.
De-lurking for a minute to post this link to an article about a man who found a newspaper from 1925 in the back of a broken mirror. The similarities are startling.
http://www.alternet.org/story/30751/
Hmm, I'm not sure that captures my thoughts, but now I have label at least. I will be a paleo-con! (So who are those guys?)Legitimate rule of law begins with an important premise:Given the idealized nature of these words, one is tempted to reject their import on the basis of historical hypocrisy (ie., slaves, injuns, institutionalized injustice). Liberals, and paleo-cons (you?), are not tempted by this rejection because they wholeheartedly reject these words for differing reasons.
- 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.
Thus the left tosses both the affirmation baby and the institutional bath-water out upon the ash-heap of history (so to speak). "All men" need not apply to Iraqis because it has been proven a farce by Americans. There is no justice, no hope, no future because the The Past is utterly corrupt: Stare Decisis writ large.
Seriously though, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are great, even for all men. But unless it is codified somewhere other than my constitution, it's going to be hard to try him on it. I sure hope the citizens of New Jersey aren't looking for me for some New Jersey law I broke, that they see as self evident.
And anyway, we are supposed to be at war with those guys. President of the other team should be executed. That's closer to justice. And sense.
Time for you to get chummy with Virgil. 8)Hmm, I'm not sure that captures my thoughts, but now I have label at least. I will be a paleo-con! (So who are those guys?)Legitimate rule of law begins with an important premise:Given the idealized nature of these words, one is tempted to reject their import on the basis of historical hypocrisy (ie., slaves, injuns, institutionalized injustice). Liberals, and paleo-cons (you?), are not tempted by this rejection because they wholeheartedly reject these words for differing reasons.
- 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.
Thus the left tosses both the affirmation baby and the institutional bath-water out upon the ash-heap of history (so to speak). "All men" need not apply to Iraqis because it has been proven a farce by Americans. There is no justice, no hope, no future because the The Past is utterly corrupt: Stare Decisis writ large.
Your local general nuisance
"I am not an alter ego. I am an unaltered id!"
Getting "chummy with Virgil," in this "sense" of "justice" will lead to a dead end. Virgil's barn was burned to the ground and Virgil seeks no "justice" but to merely moveon.org.
The "dead end" kids (ie., "Millennials"?) will seek the justice Saari has "morally" denied. The barn-burner, ignored by Saari, flames again and again, until called in the "court of law," like Saddam, to answer for his crimes. 8)
Talking with you is like talking to a drunk. You take one thing I say and go off iin a complete different direction. You are so quick to put labels on me and put words in my mouth, that you don't seem to be listening. What I say and what you infer and refer to are two different things.Getting "chummy with Virgi," in this "sense" of "justice" will lead to a dead end. Virgil's barn was burned to the ground and Virgil seeks no "justice" but to merely moveon.org.
The "dead end" kids (ie., "Millennials"?) will seek the justice Saari has "morally" denied. The barn-burner, ignored by Saari, flames again and again, until called in the "court of law," like Saddam, to answer for his crimes. 8)
I am simply not sure that there is a lot of credibility to trying an evil dictator in whatever court they are doing it. I am more inclined to think he should've been killed in the field. Either way he is destined to die. It's just that this way he gets the added benefit of weeks of on-air shenanegans, and a little bit of play acting.
Like talking to a drunk? Oh, I've long assumed that our Mr. Lamb has a serious drinking problem... haven't you? It's one of many reasons that I'm not generally upset by anything he says, nor do I often respond... other than for the occasional poke at fun :-).Talking with you is like talking to a drunk. You take one thing I say and go off iin a complete different direction. You are so quick to put labels on me and put words in my mouth, that you don't seem to be listening. What I say and what you infer and refer to are two different things.Getting "chummy with Virgi," in this "sense" of "justice" will lead to a dead end. Virgil's barn was burned to the ground and Virgil seeks no "justice" but to merely moveon.org.
The "dead end" kids (ie., "Millennials"?) will seek the justice Saari has "morally" denied. The barn-burner, ignored by Saari, flames again and again, until called in the "court of law," like Saddam, to answer for his crimes. 8)
I'd agree... to be honest, I am quite surprised that the Saddam circus trial is actually going on. When we invaded Iraq, I fully expected for Saddam to be killed in an ambush/standoff by the U.S. Marines... not dissimilar to the fate that befell his serial rapist/murderer sons.I am simply not sure that there is a lot of credibility to trying an evil dictator in whatever court they are doing it. I am more inclined to think he should've been killed in the field. Either way he is destined to die. It's just that this way he gets the added benefit of weeks of on-air shenanegans, and a little bit of play acting.
"Better hurry. There's a storm coming. His storm!!!" :-O -Abigail Freemantle, "The Stand" by Stephen King
Great article.
"Jan, cut the crap."
"It's just a donut."
Yep, me too. I say kill the bloody bastard quickly, and save some taxpayer loot to boot! 8)
Please allow me the opportunity to, hiccup!, redeem my rather obscure post.Talking with you is like talking to a drunk.
There is nothing, in life and death, more important than a "trial." Jesus was tried... and then put to death. If a trial was good enough for Jesus it ought to be good enough for Hitler, er, Saddam.
But, you may say, Jesus got a bum rap, not a trial. Correct. But without a bum rap trial, Jesus would have been forgotten to history. So, a trial, even bum rap trials are essential to life, liberty and the pursuit of the "truth."
So why do some folks reject this important feature of life? Saari does. He witnessed a barn burnin'. But the barn burner, for all he knows, escaped to burn more barns. He did not wish to pursue the burner, to bring the burner to justice. No, he let him go saying, "God will judge."
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Man is God's agent of judgment, just as Man is God's agent of mercy. And without judgment mercy is meaningless. And without a trial there can be no judgment or mercy, even a bum rap one.
Everyone deserves a trial. And everyone will get one, eventually. As Saul, er, Paul once said:It is therefore the important responsibility of everyone to deal with those "open beforehand," as we would have God deal with us "after." To do otherwise is to, as I pointed out, merely postpone the responsibility on to the next (Millennials?) generation of judges.
- Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.
What do you care about Jesus? You're just going to make up what you believe he meant anyway. After all, you're "Jesus" believes in killing people and ignoring the poor.
You and HC would have had a good time partying with Caiaphas and Annas.
See you in Hell, Marc.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.
Thank you. That does make more sense.
I agree with you to a point.
And that point was this is supposed to be a war. The soldiers donīt get trials, they just get killed. If it was something other than war, I would feel differently.
That, and I am leery of international courts. Who is trying him? Against what standard?
Weren't you the one who was asking how the hell Stalin's and Mao's crimes got ignored, but Hitler and the caught Nazis go to victor's courts?
Yes, and I also argue that this is largely the reason why liberals find themselves on the wrong side of history. They have always pooh poohed the significance of these despots, while reserving great indignance for a much greater threat posed, in their minds-eye, by tail-gunner Joe, Reagan, Thatcher and the Pope.
And so it continues today. Bush and Alito totally eclipse the danger posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamism.
Yes, and I also argue that this is largely the reason why liberals find themselves on the wrong side of history. They have always pooh poohed the significance of these despots, while reserving great indignance for a much greater threat posed, in their minds-eye, by tail-gunner Joe, Reagan, Thatcher and the Pope.
And so it continues today. Bush and Alito totally eclipse the danger posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamism.
Lamb, all you do is write about how bad liberals are. How would we know you really care about shutting down The Base (Al Qaeda)?Yes, and I also argue that this is largely the reason why liberals find themselves on the wrong side of history. They have always pooh poohed the significance of these despots, while reserving great indignance for a much greater threat posed, in their minds-eye, by tail-gunner Joe, Reagan, Thatcher and the Pope.
And so it continues today. Bush and Alito totally eclipse the danger posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamism.
"It's easy to grin, when your ship's come in, and you've got the stock market beat. But the man who's worth while is the man who can smile when his pants are too tight in the seat." Judge Smails, Caddyshack.
"Every man with a bellyful of the classics is an enemy of the human race." Henry Miller.
1979 - Generation Perdu
Lamb, all you do is write about how bad liberals are. How would we know you really care about shutting down The Base (Al Qaeda)?Yes, and I also argue that this is largely the reason why liberals find themselves on the wrong side of history. They have always pooh poohed the significance of these despots, while reserving great indignance for a much greater threat posed, in their minds-eye, by tail-gunner Joe, Reagan, Thatcher and the Pope.
And so it continues today. Bush and Alito totally eclipse the danger posed by al Qaeda and militant Islamism.
"It's easy to grin, when your ship's come in, and you've got the stock market beat. But the man who's worth while is the man who can smile when his pants are too tight in the seat." Judge Smails, Caddyshack.
"Every man with a bellyful of the classics is an enemy of the human race." Henry Miller.
1979 - Generation Perdu
