Monday, November 3, 2008
Area professor supports Electoral College - leaves out some information...
...............
"On the other hand, it was equally clear that, in our republic, Farmer Brown needed to be represented even if he didn’t have the education, or time, to pick a president himself. The solution? The Founders assumed Farmer Brown was smart enough to elect Mr. Jefferson, that guy down the road with an education and time to go to Washington to pick a president for him. The Electoral College was born."
When the Electoral College was in place, the outcome was never any different than it was now, with the exception of 1888, where the electoral vote trumped the popular vote. The popular vote has won out every time since then, unless you take into consideration the case in Florida (2000), which the Supreme Court intervened on. Had we played the "Electoral College vote" game, Gore would have surely been in the White House. (ick)
...............
"Ironically, the lack of understanding those students displayed illustrates why the Founders went to such lengths to keep “the people” out of direct involvement in government. Think about it this way: Should anyone who isn’t acquainted with the U.S. Constitution, or even interested in it, be allowed to vote?"
...............
Whoa! Let's think about this. One could be fully acquainted with the issues regarding each candidate, have done their homework, and consider an "educated" decision regarding their presidential vote, but be disqualified because they don't know U.S. history? This piece of history (though interesting) does not affect one's ability to vote. This is a pretty ridiculous statement. I understand the passion here, as I am on board with historical background, education, and the like, but to remove the ability to vote because someone cannot cite past historical events is rather ludicrous.
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=V0JETi8yMDA4LzExLzAxI0FyMDA2MDQ=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom
From the Intellectual Conservative:
"The serenity with which Socrates contemplates his imminent death, placing his hope on virtue in life and immortality of the human soul, stands in sharp contrast to the professions of liberal-progressive materialism by Democratic Party presidential candidates.
They speak of religious faith, but what they really mean is that they place their faith in earthly salvation, the social justice of the collectivized political state, dedicated not to pursuit of moral virtue, but to the dispensation of the material pleasures that Plato rejected for the life of the lover of wisdom."
"On the other hand, it was equally clear that, in our republic, Farmer Brown needed to be represented even if he didn’t have the education, or time, to pick a president himself. The solution? The Founders assumed Farmer Brown was smart enough to elect Mr. Jefferson, that guy down the road with an education and time to go to Washington to pick a president for him. The Electoral College was born."
When the Electoral College was in place, the outcome was never any different than it was now, with the exception of 1888, where the electoral vote trumped the popular vote. The popular vote has won out every time since then, unless you take into consideration the case in Florida (2000), which the Supreme Court intervened on. Had we played the "Electoral College vote" game, Gore would have surely been in the White House. (ick)
...............
"Ironically, the lack of understanding those students displayed illustrates why the Founders went to such lengths to keep “the people” out of direct involvement in government. Think about it this way: Should anyone who isn’t acquainted with the U.S. Constitution, or even interested in it, be allowed to vote?"
...............
Whoa! Let's think about this. One could be fully acquainted with the issues regarding each candidate, have done their homework, and consider an "educated" decision regarding their presidential vote, but be disqualified because they don't know U.S. history? This piece of history (though interesting) does not affect one's ability to vote. This is a pretty ridiculous statement. I understand the passion here, as I am on board with historical background, education, and the like, but to remove the ability to vote because someone cannot cite past historical events is rather ludicrous.
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=V0JETi8yMDA4LzExLzAxI0FyMDA2MDQ=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom
From the Intellectual Conservative:
"The serenity with which Socrates contemplates his imminent death, placing his hope on virtue in life and immortality of the human soul, stands in sharp contrast to the professions of liberal-progressive materialism by Democratic Party presidential candidates.
They speak of religious faith, but what they really mean is that they place their faith in earthly salvation, the social justice of the collectivized political state, dedicated not to pursuit of moral virtue, but to the dispensation of the material pleasures that Plato rejected for the life of the lover of wisdom."
Area professor supports Electoral College - leaves out some information...
...............
"On the other hand, it was equally clear that, in our republic, Farmer Brown needed to be represented even if he didn’t have the education, or time, to pick a president himself. The solution? The Founders assumed Farmer Brown was smart enough to elect Mr. Jefferson, that guy down the road with an education and time to go to Washington to pick a president for him. The Electoral College was born."
When the Electoral College was in place, the outcome was never any different than it was now, with the exception of 1888, where the electoral vote trumped the popular vote. The popular vote has won out every time since then, unless you take into consideration the case in Florida (2000), which the Supreme Court intervened on. Had we played the "Electoral College vote" game, Gore would have surely been in the White House. (ick)
...............
"Ironically, the lack of understanding those students displayed illustrates why the Founders went to such lengths to keep “the people” out of direct involvement in government. Think about it this way: Should anyone who isn’t acquainted with the U.S. Constitution, or even interested in it, be allowed to vote?"
...............
Whoa! Let's think about this. One could be fully acquainted with the issues regarding each candidate, have done their homework, and consider an "educated" decision regarding their presidential vote, but be disqualified because they don't know U.S. history? This piece of history (though interesting) does not affect one's ability to vote. This is a pretty ridiculous statement. I understand the passion here, as I am on board with historical background, education, and the like, but to remove the ability to vote because someone cannot cite past historical events is rather ludicrous.
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=V0JETi8yMDA4LzExLzAxI0FyMDA2MDQ=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom
From the Intellectual Conservative:
"The serenity with which Socrates contemplates his imminent death, placing his hope on virtue in life and immortality of the human soul, stands in sharp contrast to the professions of liberal-progressive materialism by Democratic Party presidential candidates.
They speak of religious faith, but what they really mean is that they place their faith in earthly salvation, the social justice of the collectivized political state, dedicated not to pursuit of moral virtue, but to the dispensation of the material pleasures that Plato rejected for the life of the lover of wisdom."
"On the other hand, it was equally clear that, in our republic, Farmer Brown needed to be represented even if he didn’t have the education, or time, to pick a president himself. The solution? The Founders assumed Farmer Brown was smart enough to elect Mr. Jefferson, that guy down the road with an education and time to go to Washington to pick a president for him. The Electoral College was born."
When the Electoral College was in place, the outcome was never any different than it was now, with the exception of 1888, where the electoral vote trumped the popular vote. The popular vote has won out every time since then, unless you take into consideration the case in Florida (2000), which the Supreme Court intervened on. Had we played the "Electoral College vote" game, Gore would have surely been in the White House. (ick)
...............
"Ironically, the lack of understanding those students displayed illustrates why the Founders went to such lengths to keep “the people” out of direct involvement in government. Think about it this way: Should anyone who isn’t acquainted with the U.S. Constitution, or even interested in it, be allowed to vote?"
...............
Whoa! Let's think about this. One could be fully acquainted with the issues regarding each candidate, have done their homework, and consider an "educated" decision regarding their presidential vote, but be disqualified because they don't know U.S. history? This piece of history (though interesting) does not affect one's ability to vote. This is a pretty ridiculous statement. I understand the passion here, as I am on board with historical background, education, and the like, but to remove the ability to vote because someone cannot cite past historical events is rather ludicrous.
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=V0JETi8yMDA4LzExLzAxI0FyMDA2MDQ=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom
From the Intellectual Conservative:
"The serenity with which Socrates contemplates his imminent death, placing his hope on virtue in life and immortality of the human soul, stands in sharp contrast to the professions of liberal-progressive materialism by Democratic Party presidential candidates.
They speak of religious faith, but what they really mean is that they place their faith in earthly salvation, the social justice of the collectivized political state, dedicated not to pursuit of moral virtue, but to the dispensation of the material pleasures that Plato rejected for the life of the lover of wisdom."
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Man draws criticism for effigy of Sarah Palin
A very bad idea.
A man who prompted protests by hanging an effigy of U.S. Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin by a noose from his home at Halloween has removed the display because it was causing too much trouble.
Chad Michael Morrisette had dressed a mannequin to resemble the Alaska governor, complete with beehive hairstyle and her trademark glasses, and hung it by the neck from the eaves of his home in famously liberal West Hollywood.
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSN3026388920081031
A man who prompted protests by hanging an effigy of U.S. Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin by a noose from his home at Halloween has removed the display because it was causing too much trouble.
Chad Michael Morrisette had dressed a mannequin to resemble the Alaska governor, complete with beehive hairstyle and her trademark glasses, and hung it by the neck from the eaves of his home in famously liberal West Hollywood.
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSN3026388920081031
Man draws criticism for effigy of Sarah Palin
A very bad idea.
A man who prompted protests by hanging an effigy of U.S. Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin by a noose from his home at Halloween has removed the display because it was causing too much trouble.
Chad Michael Morrisette had dressed a mannequin to resemble the Alaska governor, complete with beehive hairstyle and her trademark glasses, and hung it by the neck from the eaves of his home in famously liberal West Hollywood.
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSN3026388920081031
A man who prompted protests by hanging an effigy of U.S. Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin by a noose from his home at Halloween has removed the display because it was causing too much trouble.
Chad Michael Morrisette had dressed a mannequin to resemble the Alaska governor, complete with beehive hairstyle and her trademark glasses, and hung it by the neck from the eaves of his home in famously liberal West Hollywood.
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSN3026388920081031
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Grave dug up, remains of baby stolen - Cameron, WI
This is just plain disgusting...
Cameron - A grave has been dug up in a rural cemetery in northwestern Wisconsin and the remains of an infant apparently taken.
A marker on the grave has the date of 1925 and the words "Baby Locke."
Barron County Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said pieces of the casket were found, but not any human remains. He said investigators are "under the impression the remains were taken."
"We're not sure if it was targeted or some sort of a prank or bad joke," possibly having something to do with the Halloween season, he said.
The sheriff said the grave in Bandli Park Cemetery, also known as Pioneer Rest Cemetery, in the town of Canton likely was unearthed between Sunday night and Monday morning. The incident was reported Tuesday about 11 a.m.
The hole measured about 20 inches wide, 54 inches long and 48 inches deep.
No other damage was reported in the cemetery, described as well-kept and still in use.
Fitzgerald said the marker had only the one year on it, leading him to believe it might have been the grave of a newborn or stillborn baby.
He planned to consult with the state crime lab on what investigators should look for at the site. They already had dug deeper than the parts of the casket and found no human remains, he said.
The size and rectangular shape of the hole indicates the grave was the target of whoever dug it, he said.
"We believe they probably gained access to the casket area," he said. "If there was remains they did remove them."
Cameron - A grave has been dug up in a rural cemetery in northwestern Wisconsin and the remains of an infant apparently taken.
A marker on the grave has the date of 1925 and the words "Baby Locke."
Barron County Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said pieces of the casket were found, but not any human remains. He said investigators are "under the impression the remains were taken."
"We're not sure if it was targeted or some sort of a prank or bad joke," possibly having something to do with the Halloween season, he said.
The sheriff said the grave in Bandli Park Cemetery, also known as Pioneer Rest Cemetery, in the town of Canton likely was unearthed between Sunday night and Monday morning. The incident was reported Tuesday about 11 a.m.
The hole measured about 20 inches wide, 54 inches long and 48 inches deep.
No other damage was reported in the cemetery, described as well-kept and still in use.
Fitzgerald said the marker had only the one year on it, leading him to believe it might have been the grave of a newborn or stillborn baby.
He planned to consult with the state crime lab on what investigators should look for at the site. They already had dug deeper than the parts of the casket and found no human remains, he said.
The size and rectangular shape of the hole indicates the grave was the target of whoever dug it, he said.
"We believe they probably gained access to the casket area," he said. "If there was remains they did remove them."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
