LowerCaseRepublican

First week of December. In the words of Lewis Black "I remember when Thanksgiving was its own holiday and not Christmas Part 1."

I have Hidden Fortress already. Kurosawa is absolutely mindblowing. And I should say that the Dawn of the Dead I want is the original Romero one and not the new one. I'm also thinking of adding Robocop to the list -- one of my favorite dystopic action flicks.

Avatar -- that'd be the pic under your name.

Yojimbo DVD Sanjuro DVD The 7 Samurai DVD Dawn of the Dead DVD Night of the Living Dead DVD A whole bunch of poltical books

http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/f...llnews&id=43623

This was by a Christian pal of mine: If we insist on placing ourselves under the old law, as Paul reminds us, we are obligated to keep every commandment of the law (Gal. 5:3). But if Christ is the end of the law (Rom. 10:4), if we have been discharged from the law to serve, not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6), then all of these biblical sexual mores come under the authority of the Spirit. We cannot then take even what Paul himself says as a new Law. The Bible sanctioned slavery as well, and nowhere attacked it as unjust. Are we prepared to argue today that slavery is biblically justified? One hundred and fifty years ago, when the debate over slavery was raging, the Bible seemed to be clearly on the slaveholders' side. Abolitionists were hard pressed to justify their opposition to slavery on biblical grounds. Yet today, if you were to ask Christians in the South whether the Bible sanctions slavery, virtually everyone would agree that it does not. How do we account for such a monumental shift? For Christians, Old Testament texts have to be weighed against the New. Consequently, Paul's unambiguous condemnation of homosexual behavior in Rom. 1:26-27 must be the centerpiece of any discussion. "For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error." No doubt Paul was unaware of the distinction between sexual orientation, over which one has apparently very little choice, and sexual behavior, over which one does. He seemed to assume that those whom he condemned were heterosexuals who were acting contrary to nature, "leaving", "giving up" or "exchanging" their regular sexual orientation for that which was foreign to them. Paul knew nothing of the modern psychosexual understanding of homosexuals as persons whose orientation is fixed early in life or perhaps even genetically in some cases. For such persons, having heterosexual relations would be contrary to nature, "leaving", "giving up" or "exchanging" their natural sexual orientation for one that was unnatural to them. In other words, Paul really thought that those whose behavior he condemned were "straight" and that they were behaving in ways that were unnatural to them. Paul believed that everyone was "straight". he had no concept of homosexual orientation. The idea was not available in his world. There are people that are genuinely homosexual by nature (whether genetically or as a result of upbringing nobody really knows and it is irrelevent). For such a person it would be acting contrary to nature to have sexual relations with a person of the opposite sex. Likewise, the relationships Paul describes are heavy with lust; they are not relationships between consenting adults who are committed to each other as faithfully and with as much integrity as any heterosexual couple. That was something Paul simply could not envision. Some people assume today that venereal disease and AIDS are divine punishment for homosexual behavior; we know it as a risk involved in promiscuity of every stripe, homosexual and heterosexual. In fact, the vast majority of people with AIDS the world around are heterosexuals. We can scarcely label AIDS a divine punishment, since non-promiscuous lesbians are at almost no risk. And Paul believes that homosexual behavior is contrary to nature, whereas we have learned that it is manifested by a wide variety of species, especially (but not solely) under the pressure of overpopulation. It would appear then to be quite a natural mechanism for preserving species. We cannot, of course, decide human ethical conduct solely on the basis of animal behavior or the human sciences but Paul here is arguing from nature, as he himself says, and new knowledge of what is "natural" is therefore relevent to the case.

The guy who filmed the video has released a statement about what happened. http://www.kevinsites.net/2004_11_21_archi...107420331292115 It's a long read but really good because it's a first hand account of what when down.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned when Ty Domi and the fan fought in the penalty box in, IIRC, Philly. Seeing that Pacer/Piston fight on TV after consuming multiple Jagerbombs -- I turned to my friend Dann and said "Artest is really serious about wanting that time off to promote his rap album, huh?"

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=4015

If they exempt abortion from the list of the following: prenatal care and delivery, mental health care, STD and HIV tests or treatment, alcoholism and drug abuse, and family planning -- then either make them all accountable to parents or make none. They are all medical procedures. And you never did justify that whole "ACLU is on the wrong side of everything" comment when faced with the other court cases that they helped win. As stated before Nuke, Most minors voluntarily tell at least one parent. This bill ignores the harsh realities of many adolescents' lives, it affects those who are afraid to tell both parents. Some teenagers do not have parents willing to talk with them about anything; and in some families sexual subjects, especially abortion are never addressed. To avoid confrontation, some minors will seek an abortion outside the health care system. The parents of the late Becky Bell lobby passionately against such laws, citing the Indiana law that drove their daughter to undergo a non-medical abortion. Becky died a long, painful death from the sort of septic abortion that killed and maimed many women prior to 1970. The coercive power of the federal government should not dictate that people cannot have medical procedures -- the decision if a patient needs a procedure or not is wholly at the doctor's discretion. For somebody who supposedly hates the creeping power of government, why support coercive legislation. And nice job cherry picking my last post.

Nuke -- I disagree that they are on the wrong side of everything. Take these cases for example. http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur59.htm 1932 Powell v. Alabama This first of the "Scottsboro" cases to reach the high Court resulted in the decision that eight African Americans accused of raping two white women lacked effective counsel at their trial -- a denial of due process. For the first time, in this case, constitutional standards were applied to state criminal proceedings. 1948 Shelley v. Kraemer An important civil rights decision that invalidated restrictive covenants -- contractual agreements between white homeowners in a residential area barring the sale of houses to black people. 1954 Brown v. Board of Education In perhaps the most far-reaching decision of this century, the Court declared racially segregated schools unconstitutional and overruled the "separate but equal" doctrine announced in its infamous 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson. 1965 U.S. v. Seeger In one of the first anti-Vietnam War decisions, the Court extended conscientious objector status to those who do not necessarily believe in a supreme being, but who oppose war based on sincere beliefs that are equivalent to religious faith. 1966 Miranda v. Arizona This famous decision established the "Miranda warnings," a requirement that the police, before interrogating suspects, must inform them of their rights. The Court embraced the ACLU's amicus argument that a suspect in custody has both a Sixth Amendment right to counsel and a Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines A landmark lift for symbolic speech and students' rights. The Court invalidated the suspension of public school students for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, writing that students did not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." 1970 Goldberg v. Kelly Setting in motion what has been called the "procedural due process revolution," the Court ruled that welfare recipients were entitled to notice and a hearing before the state could terminate their benefits. 1973 Roe v. Wade/ Doe v. Bolton One of the Court's most significant decisions, Roe erased all existing criminal abortion laws and recognized a woman's constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. In Doe, the companion case, the Court ruled that whether an abortion is "necessary" is the attending physician's call, to be made in light of all factors relevant to a woman's well-being. Let's not forget the ACLU stopping Operation TIPS, what would have essentially been a civilian Stasi as well as these: http://www.aclu.org/DeathPenalty/DeathPena...?ID=15716&c=192 http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=16650&c=286 http://www.aclu.org/DisabilityRights/Disab...m?ID=11734&c=70 http://www.aclu.org/HIVAIDS/HIVAIDS.cfm?ID=16267&c=21 http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFre...?ID=17005&c=206 But I guess they are just a bunch of anti-American commies. And let's not forget than abortion is legal still, Nuke. If they spent more time on sex education and not making it taboo then abortions would not be a problem. It is up to a doctor to decide if a woman, on a case by case basis, should engage in having an abortion -- not the power of the state. And as for the parental notification -- Most minors voluntarily tell at least one parent. This bill ignores the harsh realities of many adolescents' lives, it affects those who are afraid to tell both parents. Some teenagers do not have parents willing to talk with them about anything; and in some families sexual subjects, especially abortion are never addressed. To avoid confrontation, some minors will seek an abortion outside the health care system. The parents of the late Becky Bell lobby passionately against such laws, citing the Indiana law that drove their daughter to undergo a non-medical abortion. Becky died a long, painful death from the sort of septic abortion that killed and maimed many women prior to 1970. Proponents claim that teens need parental permission to get an aspirin in school—but this is a school rule, not a state law. In fact, New York specifically permits minors to consent to their own treatment for prenatal care and delivery, mental health c are, STD and HIV tests or treatment, alcoholism and drug abuse, and family planning. Only abortion is singled out for parental notification. Parental involvement laws open minors to the risk of beatings at home. In June, after learning that his teenage daughter had been raped, a Bridgeport father beat her with a belt so severely that he was arrested and charged with third degree assault. In some cases, beatings are guaranteed when parents receive a certified letter telling them that their daughter is pregnant and intends to have an abortion. Abusive parents handle sex, pregnancy, and abortion especially badly. Violation of this law by physicians would be a crime. Yet, ironically, the doctors are perfectly free to perform the abortion against the parents' will—as long as they've notified the parents (by certified mail 48 hours before) of their intention to do so. The ACLU may not be right on all issues -- but at least they are one of the most vigilant organizations to protect the civil liberties that people have died to give us.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41564 A Chicago man has launched a website to mobilize millions of Americans to consign the American Civil Liberties Union to the "ash heap of history."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer More and more -- its what Eisenhower warned us about.

When I was at the pub watching this fight go down live, I had one thought. Artest is acting in a purely rational way -- he must really, really, really want that time off to promote his rap CD that he has been talking about wanting to take off.

To be against Paige -- he had no background in education and the NCLB policy is one of the worst for schools (prepping to be a high school teacher, 2 semesters before student teaching) and I can say along with most people in the department, NCLB and the rest of the education legislation being passed/supported sucks balls.

So do I. Kiyoshi had a good article telling people they needed to stop getting their panties in a twist over a cartoon in a college newspaper.

This is like what happened on the U of I campus with our school paper. There is a cartoonist who makes fun of stereotypes of everybody (like he'll go after all racial groups and stuff) Anywho -- most recent cartoon cracked a Jewish stereotype joke. He's had his cartoon removed for a month for promoting hate speech.

www.antiwar.com/justin Yes, we are at war with radical Islam. However, that struggle does not require the democratic "transformation" of the Middle East, but rather a recognition of the reality that we are fighting an asymmetric war against a worldwide guerrilla insurgency, not a traditional-style battle to conquer and occupy nation-states – a battle that must be won politically, primarily, and conducted militarily only in a precise and strictly limited sense. Our strategy must be to isolate the Islamists, and that requires the renunciation, not the escalation, of the foreign policy that gave birth to the jihadists in the first place. --Justin Raimondo

Watched it for my Crises of Political Tolerance class when we were discussing Kazan's decision to name names to the House Un-American Activities Committee. Very good film -- but it was such a bad allegory for him (He tried to identify himself with Brando's character saying that his naming names was the same as ratting out the leaders of the union)

I loved his "Show me where we are lowering the standards" comment that Delay gave in a press conference about this. As the Daily Show said: "Right now! You're doing it right now!"

sdfjsdjf

http://www.madcowboy.com/ Howard Lyman -- the former cattle rancher that is famous for going on Oprah a few years ago and getting her sued by the National Cattlemans' Beef Association for saying she'd never eat another burger again after he told her the details of how the big factory farms work. This is his statement from Jan. 04 -- "In 1990, when I first started talking about mad cow disease, I never thought that the USDA would risk the entire cattle industry to protect the profits of a few corporations. It seemed common sense that we had to quit feeding slaughter house waste to grass-eating animals. It is crazy to continue a practice that is unnatural, dangerous and which consumers find abhorrent. Every country dealing with the mad cow issue has learned that there are two things essential to restore consumer confidence. You have to quit feeding animals to your food animals and you must institute a wide spread program of testing. When mad cow disease destroyed the cattle industry in England it also caused the fall of the Tory Government. It was plain that lying to the consumers was a bad choice. North America acted like we were not part of the world and we could continue to deal with the pending disaster with press releases and loud pronouncements. In 2003 the bottom fell out for Canada when they confirmed their first home-grown case of mad cow. They tried to assure a nervous importing community that there was only one mad cow in their herd, but no one believed them. Cattle prices dropped like a rock. The United States treated our northern neighbor like an ugly step sister and we banned their cattle and meat even though we were their biggest customer. Millions of animals both live and dead, had crossed the border in both directions, but we claimed that Canada had the problem and we were as pure as the driven snow. The US cattle industry jumped at the chance to take over the Canadian export markets and we saw record prices for our cattle. We filled our feedlots with the most expensive cattle in our history and continued to use the same practices that caused mad cow in Canada. It is not hard to see we were rushing down the same track as England and Canada and could expect to suffer from the same train wreck. On December 23rd the cow-that-spoiled-Christmas was reported to the world. A Holstein dairy cow in the State of Washington proved what we professed could never happen here - mad cow was in the US. The USDA, FDA, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, and a host of shocked meat flacks started to spew the preprogrammed party line that meat was safe and this was the only mad cow in the United States. Within a matter of hours our beef export market had disappeared. Country after country did to us what we had done to Canada and other mad cow nations, they banned our beef exports. Cattle markets in the US disappeared and the future markets went limit down without a single buyer. Containers of US meat on ships around the world could not be landed at the dock and sold. The entire cattle industry was changed over night because of the appearance of one mad cow. The USDA has instituted some limited response to the disaster such as banning the slaughter of downer animals from the human food system. This was a response that was long overdue. A downer bill was defeated just before Christmas in the House of Representatives by the Republican leadership as a present to the big corporations who felt it was infringing on their profit potential. When this action came to light after the mad cow was discovered it was just too hot an issue and USDA banned downers from the human food chain as a bone to satisfy unsettled consumers. The solution to the problem of mad cow disease is fairly straightforward. First quit feeding slaughter house waste to our food animals and second test the slaughtered animals for the disease. Currrently, we have over 100 million head of cattle in the US and in the last thirteen years we have only tested 57,000 animals for mad cow disease. France has 11 million cattle in their herd and they test 66,000 each week. I believe in the US we have had a "don't look, don't find" policy and up until the 23rd of December, it worked. If the cattle industry is to survive in the US we must start listening to our customers both foreign and domestic. They are saying loud and clear the product is not as safe as it should be and until it is, they do not want to be called customers. I'm a vegan and eat no animal products so for me there is no direct problem but I have family and friends that continue to eat beef. Their future is a great concern to me. I have many friends in the cattle business and I know they are willing to correct the problem and they want to return to raising animals as nature intended. I pray we solve this issue without filling the graveyard with our friends and destroying the family farms and ranches that helped build this nation. Treat this issue as if your life depended on it because it just may."

Stat Boy had the right idea today on Around the Horn -- if this was so indecent for primetime then why are all the TV news shows showing the clip all day today when covering the story?

Nuke, as Pat Buchanan said -- "Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich." Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, the panel's ranking minority member, said three-quarters of Iraq's illicit income came from trade protocols with Jordan and Turkey that the Clinton and Bush administrations had known about and "winked at" because support from those countries was vital.