Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: southeast
Home country: USA
Current location: southeast
Member since: Thu Jul 3, 2014, 03:13 PM
Number of posts: 1,650

Journal Archives

When I salute the flag, I am saluting the people who served, but more than that, I am saluting the

founding principles of our country, as manifested in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The development of a society is an evolutionary process, not an instantaneous event. The fact that our society has not yet achieved the full realization of those principles is not a justification for rejecting them, but rather a motivation for identifying where our society has fallen short and how it might get back on the path toward perfection, which, being a human construct, will never achieve, but can continue to pursue. As Browning so eloquently put it, "a man's (or society's) reach should exceed his (or it's) grasp, or what's a Heaven for?"

The fact is that they rejected the Constitution and the rule of law years ago.

More than that, they have rejected the philosophy behind the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. They have embraced the rule of the whim of the mob, or that of whoever has been recognized as the leader of the mob. This, however, is unlikely to be the final destination. A mob, like a gas, will not, of it's own nature, stay together. It must eventually dissipate it's power due to the lack of a unifying goal unless a strong leader rises among them. They will follow the leader much as a herd of sheep follow a shepherd, who will probably become a dictator. The ultimate destination is probably a 'dystopian' society like the one that is the background of the Hunger Games novels, where the dictator and the ruling elite surrounding him/her live the good life on the backs of the impoverished and powerless masses. I imagine those who have embraced the ongoing revolution against our founding philosophy expect to be part of that ruling elite.

Wow! Trump has POWER!

He can get the GRU to do his bidding by publicly giving the order. Obviously it never before occurred to them to hack one of our major party's servers before the opposition candidate ordered them to do it. If the GRU folks are that stupid, we have no worries.

The formatting commands such as boldface, italics, underline, don't seem to work anymore. n/t

A modest suggestion

I just served on another jury this morning. I submitted my vote with explanation as usual, and read the results in my inbox. I was somewhat dismayed to see an explanation that was much more insulting than the post we were voting on. Come on, folks. This is an open forum, so we should expect to see some opinions we consider outrageous. If we are called upon to decide if they are too outrageous to merit rational discussion, can't we do so in a rational manner? My suggestion: mutter a few appropriate words, take a deep breath, then calmly type why the post should be hidden, leaving the insults and foul language out. It will improve the credibility of the jury system.

Medical Kidnapping

I have been following the case of Justina Pelletier, a young girl suffering from mitochondrial disease who was taken from her family by the state of Massachusetts because of a dispute over diagnoses between doctors at competing hospitals. I have become aware that this is quite common, and has occurred in several states. The Pelletier case is the most thoroughly documented of them, but there are others that may be similar. Several of these are the cases of Isaiah Rider, Jaxon Adams, and the Diegel sisters. If these cases are as they are represented on the internet, we have a serious problem in this country. A bill entitled Justina's Law has been introduced in Congress in an attempt to prevent this. Any opinions?

Appreciation for DU poster pnwmom

I have been following the Justina Pelletier case for several weeks. I came across a thread in the Democratic Underground, which I understand is the parent of this site. I read pnwmom's posts and found them to be among the most logical posts on any of the discussion sites I visited. I did not join DU because I do not fit that site's political demographic, but since these sites are related, I hope someone here will pass on to her my appreciation for her preference for logical argument, facts, and intellectual integrity over ideological purity. She obviously recognizes that this is primarily a human rights issue. I would also like to extend my appreciation to those DU posters who supported her position.
Go to Page: 1