Free Republic

point taken. but you know what I meant anyway.

Thanks. Scalia is a jewel in the crown of American legislation. A non-dogmatic man of principe, super-intelligent, non-partisan, and the ultimate in trustworthiness. And he has the guts to stand up to faulty reasoning in his own Republican ranks.
Wish there were more like him.
IM.

Very well observed. I try to keep a keen eye on my own language (Dutch) being abused, and admire Americans who do the same. So if you object to the terminating of the life of a 16 week old fetus, you are 'anti'something, yes, even 'anti-choice'. That is an Orwellian inversion of human reality. The only proper choice of words for someone willing to commit such an act is along the lines of: I am engaging in a terribly grave breach of morals, but I see no other way to act in my current position. Which sounds quite different from 'pro-choice', of course, and places the burden where it really belongs. It's a mad world where anti-abortionists have to defend their stance and come up with all kinds of reasonings.

Thanks so much! It's this kind of psychological observation the late Allan Bloom was a champion at.
How does one quote and italicize at the same time btw? I am a newie, thanks in advance!

I must confess that I am shocked that something can happen in the U.S.
How is it that not only the highly controversial act of terminating the life of a 16 week-old foetus is allowed (ever seen one?); but that also the benign and helpful activities of a peaceful clinic for women who choose otherwise are disturbed and attacked?
As a Dutchman I know how vicious the defenders of abortion can act towards those who vent the slightest doubt about it. It is just this viciousness which betrays oceans of self-doubt, guilt, and rage directed towards themselves.
Your comments please?

Peach...you...are...a...PEACH!!!

Blimey! -
indeed. The Left still doesn't grasp the:

Super Information Highway

hahahahahaaahaaaaaaaaaaa! What a term....
IM.

I surely will share all this with my acquaintances more inclined towards the liberals points of view, m'lady. It's energetic folk like you who, by diligent grass-roots work, keep the bad at bay.
(you are a lady, I hope? if not, tell me so...)
IM

Thanks for taking the trouble -
am still re-catching my breath! Very informative.

Ah well, I guess you're right -
we must take into account that the times have changed. The people's speech has changed too. And oftentimes not for the better.
See, I was musing a bit about dialogue in films last week. For the umpteenth time I had seen an American movie in which the dialogue had obviously regressed to caveman status. Not one single complete sentence. Myriads of insults. And the ubiquitous word 'fuck' to fill up all those severe thinking gaps.
How different that is from the general way in which film dialogue functioned and sounded in the fifties, to name but a decade. Expletives were used too, for sure, but personal insults and that horrible f-word were absent. A sentence was a sentence. Even top-notch actors of today hardly can do without, excuse me, verbally fucking themselves throughout the god-given day.
Perhaps that's why the law HAS to be more lenient with verbal assault - it cannot be otherwise. Is that your point?
Cheers, IM.

Yup, I see -
we must take the utmost precaution not to picture them as martyrs.
Call me old-fashioned, but I was musing about them older days, when there were laws against personal insult actively being used in Holland. This was distinct from the general right to free speech. One could not call a fellow citizen (for instance) 'bastard' without reason. The offended party could call up witnesses and start a case, after which usually a fine of appropriate size was administered.
But our law systems are hugely different, and perhaps the jury system of the U.S. makes it more difficult and cumbersome to make such action feasible - I do not know.

Nothing wrong with a good belly laugh. That business card takes the biscuit...handing that out and then using the bad sausage turnover as a reason for showing some cleavage...the inconsistencies make for a nice joke to go with a cool beer...

I thought, darn, I want all to read my above long statement, in honor of Conservatrixie!
That's why I took the liberty.
Your newie Inspector Morse.

Consie -
thanks for taking the words right out of my mouth, m'lady. I am a gigantic music fan, and my palette is broad, it included classical (first and foremost), and jazz, country, blues, the more elegant pop - but rap and hiphop are the genres I despised from day 1 on.
Under the pretext of 'rebelliousness' and 'social uprising' and 'black consciousness' and what have you (and I include Eminem!), these 'artists' offer nothing but, excuse the term, excrement. Most musicians with some kind of substance problem feel shame enough to hide it and not to advertise it; not so with these immorals. What they have to offer to the kids gullible enough to fall into the trap is:
-alcoholism
-drug abuse (cocaine, hashish, crack, heroine, ecstasy)
-the noble art of 'pimping' the girls in their vicinity
-ostentatious showing off of jewelry and big cars, thus inciting kiddies to steal and prostitute themselves
-ultra-bad language (they only know the word: 'fuck')
-gang rapes are considered normal and triumphant
-and they finish it all off with reciprocal killings

At the end of the day, when the ruins have become visible, they accuse 'whitey' of putting them in this godawful situation, which they caused themselves in the first place and which they glamorized till the bitter end. And then there's no shortage of white 'studied' apologists who support their whining and call for help for those poor souls. And there are the slimey white 'studied' rock journalists who see in the rappers' antics a noble artistic endeavour to identify themselves with the hierarchical structures that their white oppressors put upon them and which they purportedly live out as an art form.
Sorry if I rambled a bit OT here - but I felt like getting this off of my chest, and I was in no small amount inspired by Conservatrix' fine words. I just played the uplifting music of Hildegard Van Bingen (the abbess - see the marvelous performances by the Sequentia ensemble under the helm of the late Barbara Thornton, on the Harmonia Mundi label); and Conservatrix' words: good, beautiful, harmonious brought tears to the eyes of this Dutchman!
Cheers, Inspector Morse.

Sorry, I even am guilty of an unintentional laugh. To read that HRW discovered that guards from Saddam's regime make dirty hands now and presenting that as a news item IS funny, no? Here you have the not-so-nice guarding the godawful out of necessity, and you expect it to function like Kindergarten?
HRW perhaps must not be distrusted until proven guilty, but one MAY very well laugh them out loud in their collective faces for all their rosy naivity.
IM.

Nah, perhaps not, but even then it's understandable. I mean this: we don't have to scold HRW beforehand. Even if it is the truth it is no news. It's been this way ever since Man took over the planet. In every tyranny that's been overthrown, the old guard system had to be employed, for better or for good. And it is in their genes to go with the old routines, they can't help it themselves and will continue for sometime to act according to their nature. Rome wasn't built in a day. See Russia after Gorbachev, or the old GDR, or Rumania, or...the list is endless. It does not surprise me in the least and does not detract anything from the good intentions of the Iraq Invasion.

Thanks -
I was thinking along the lines of 'personal insult' and 'vicious slander' but perhaps that was taking things too far into First Amdmt territory. I stand corrected. But these 'artists' should be corrected in a Correctional Facility, I say!
IM

Thanks katie for posting -
isn't there a law in the U.S. making it possible to penalize such offenders? I mean, it goes far beyond any form of satire or comedy. I think a hefty fine is the very least you must do...if throwing a ciggie butt or a chewing gum paper on the street can be fined, then this surely ranks a bit higher in the order of offenses, no?
IM

Thanks so much for posting on a most controversial and sensitive issue. And it's true what's being stated.
I don't like sensationalism, only facts. The limit time lines being used in abortion are in themselves not possible. No on in their right mind seeing an aborted foetus of, say, 12 to 16 weeks could ever sleep without branding this murder.
It is typical of the Left to commit such an act and immediately look the other way and pretend nothing of note happened. It's in their genes.
Bah.
IM.

Some things you just can't get. What an odd form of criticism. As if the current way of handling things does not already amount to a strong-minded plan but were a aimless sort of meandering around.
The remark about being partial allies with countries that have Islamists bespeaks a gross misunderstanding of Realpolitik. By sheer logic the US would, according to Spencer, have to detach itself from itself, because there are Socialists and Loonies in the US too. This is a riot.
And the use of the term Modest Proposal is in bad taste. Spencer does, however much he'd like to, not become a satirist on a par with Jonathan Swift. He's not up to that level.
Good riddance, I'd say (the paper it's printed on can be good toilet paper, mind).