blogGarrett

President Scofflaw

When Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal," he knew this wasn't literally true. He knew we are tall and short, fat and thin, smart and stupid, industrious and lazy, rich and poor, male and female, black and white, brown, yellow and red.

What Mr. Jefferson meant is that we are entitled to equal justice under law. Equality before the law has been the cornerstone of our democracy. But maybe not for much longer.

The Department of Health and Human Services has so far granted hundreds of waivers to Obamacare. Most have gone to labor unions, companies and other organizations which support the administration.

The law Congress passed contains no language authorizing anyone in the executive branch to grant waivers. The Obama administration claims the authority is implied by the broad powers the legislation grants to the HHS secretary. The Founding Fathers beg to differ.

via www.post-gazette.com

How do you think the Founding Fathers would respond to the Health Care Law?

Amid flooding, CIA resumes Pakistan drone campaign - World news - South and Central Asia - Pakistan - msnbc.com

After a little-noticed, weeks long disruption caused by the monsoons that devastated Pakistan, the CIA in recent days has picked up the pace of its missile strikes against Islamic militants with back-to-back attacks against terror targets that have killed at least 11 people in the country’s northwest region.

But the air strikes have raised fresh concerns among some Pakistani officials that the agency is resuming its lethal campaign at the worst possible moment, in the midst of a humanitarian crisis that has submerged one sixth of the country and left at least six million people homeless.

The U.S. government was building substantial good will inside Pakistan by rushing food and helicopters and pledging $150 million — more than any other country — to assist with flood relief, one senior Pakistani official told NBC.

But “all that could go down the drain” if the agency continues with aggressive air strikes right now, said the official who asked not to be quoted criticizing the U.S. “It’s one thing if they were getting some high value targets. But there are many in Pakistan, particularly in the religious parties, who are going to look at this and say, ‘here we have the worst national calamity in the history of our country and the U.S. is responding by conducting’ ” lethal military attacks.

The sharp drop off in the CIA pilotless drone attacks this month was never publicly confirmed by U.S officials mainly because the program — considered by Obama administration officials as their most effective counter-terrorism weapon — remains officially classified.

via www.msnbc.msn.com

Isn't the drone bombing campaign an act of terrorism?

If it isn't terrorism, how does it differ from terrorism?

Prop 8 judge to religious believers: It's not about you - Faith & Reason

 

The ruling overturning Proposition 8 -- the ban on gay marriage in California -- is a fascinating document. If you have 20 minutes (you might skip some legalese) to read the ruling you will find Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's portrait of 21st century marriage will, depending on where you start, cheer or horrify you.

 

via content.usatoday.com

What do you think of this?

Should morality be legislated, propositioned, or decreed?

Does the Judge have a point?

Unease in Tibet Over Influx of China’s Money and Migrants - NYTimes.com

Adrian Bradshaw/European Pressphoto Agency

At the Potala Palace in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, images of the exiled Dalai Lama have been banned.

via www.nytimes.com

Read this article and tell me it you think this is any different than what the USA did in the Expansion West.  If it is different, How?  If it is the same, Why?

U.N. Security Council meets on Israeli raid - CNN.com

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: U.S. official says flotilla should have observed blockade
• U.N. Security Council holds emergency meeting on Israel's storming of Palestinian flotilla
• Turkish Foreign Minister accuses Israel of murder conducted by a state
• Israeli diplomat says flotilla was not a humanitarian mission, as portrayed in the media

New York (CNN) -- Israel faced condemnation and questions Monday at an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting called by Turkey on the Israeli military's storming of a six-ship flotilla of pro-Palestinian activists headed to Gaza with aid supplies.

At least nine activists died in clashes that injured seven Israeli soldiers. Israel contends the flotilla intended to break its blockade of Gaza, while Palestinian leaders and allies said Israel launched an unprovoked military assault on civilians.

via www.cnn.com

What should Israel have done? 

Were these peaceful humanitarians? 

Were they rogue propagandists threatening to violate Israeli political sovereignty and territorial integrity?

What would your country had done if a group of activist were going to enter your country without the permission of the government?

Was the attack proportionate? 

Shouldn't these activists have known that Israel does not show mercy?

Why were these "humanitarians" armed?

Chinese factory asks for 'no suicide' vow - World business- msnbc.com

SHENZHEN, China - Foxconn International Holdings Ltd., one of Apple's Chinese manufacturers, is asking its employees to sign a pledge that they will not kill themselves as the company tries to control the damage from a spate of suicides among its work force.

The normally secretive Taiwanese company opened its sprawling factory complex in the southern city of Shenzhen to reporters Wednesday after a 19-year-old worker jumped to his death from a building, the ninth apparent suicide this year at the factory that makes iPods and iPhones.

Foxconn Technology Group Chairman Terry Gou bowed deeply several times and apologized but also cautioned there was only so much his company could do.

via www.msnbc.msn.com

What in the World?!!! Welcome to the place I reside.

How do they plan on enforcing such a vow?

…My heart’s in Accra » The Partisan Internet and the Wider World

Is the internet making us more partisan?

This is one of the most persistent debates in the study of cyberspace. Cass Sunstein, legal scholar, author and now Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, wrote Republic.com in 2002, which made the case that the Internet would lead us to cocoon ourselves in information that confirmed our suspicions, opinions and beliefs. He’s developed the argument further in a Republic.com 2.0, Infotopia (my review here) and Going to Extremes.

There are (at least) three pieces to Sunstein’s argument. First, he asserts that the internet makes it easier to surround yourself with comfortable information – and predicts that Americans are headed rapidly towards a cocooned future. Second, he posits that deliberation with like-minded individuals tends to drive us towards more extreme positions than we originally held. Third, he suggests that we could make small changes in our media environment to “nudge” ourselves towards more diverse, inclusive views of the world. (Some parts of his argument are better developed than others – I think his case that like-minded deliberation tends to polarize us is quite convincing, while I haven’t found his nudges all that compelling.)

Is Sunstein right that we’re becoming more isolated? There’s a whole cottage industry in academia dedicated to confirming or challenging his assertions. Adamic and Glance’s “Divided They Blog” saw little interlinking between bloggers on the left and right as they discussed the 2004 US presidential elections. Eszter Hargittai looked closely at the links between bloggers in “Cross-ideological discussions among conservative and liberal bloggers” and discovered that when bloggers link across ideological lines, it’s often to create “straw man” versions of their arguments. Henry Farrell, Eric Lawrence and John Sides present evidence that suggests that blog readers are as politically polarized as members of Congress, a group that’s far more partisan than an average group of Americans. In the other corner, John Horrigan, Paul Resnick and Kelly Garrett found evidence that internet users had broader exposure to political arguments than non-users. (I offer my critique of the Horrigan, Resnick and Garrett paper here, relying on the Farrell et al paper for counterarguments. Dr. Garrett was good enough to engage with me in the comment thread, and her points are helpful in understanding the issues at hand and the difficulty of answering these questions.)

via www.ethanzuckerman.com

What do you think? Are we living in ideological cocoons? If so, is this bad? If you are not, what do you do to ensure that you remain intellectually malleable and open to other points of view?

Ambition and the Quiet Life

How do I, an American male, reconcile Paul's admonition to the Thessalonians to "make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands."

What about being successful?  What about reaching one's potential?  What about personal dreams?  What about the "American Dream"?

I like to have conversations about controversial topics.  I am an educator.  I talk for a living.  Can I still live quietly and mind my own business while provoking people to think and challenging their conclusion?

Also I am a thinker.  I don't like building things or fixing things.  Does typing count as working with my hands?

Any thoughts on what a "quiet life" is?

A Victory for Common Sense?

Here is an example of our President's condescending attitude.  He said the the passage of health care was a "victory for common sense."  That is just ridiculous and offensive.  For those that are opposed to this bill, is the president really saying they lack common sense?  Only those who agree with the president are smart or "get it." 

President Obama, I don't always agree with you, but sometimes I do.  I am getting tired of you dismissing those that argue or come to different conclusions than you.  Do you really think that you and your party alone possess "common sense?"  Am I wrong in my understanding of your comments?  If I am, please explain to me how this bill is a "victory for common sense" and not at the same time a backhanded comment at your political opponents.  You are a skill orator and am sure that you did not misspeak.  You intentionally put that in your victory speech. 

Please refrain from diminishing your rivals or dismissing those that disagree with you.  I thought you were the candidate of change.  I thought you wanted a different kind of D.C.

Pope amid abuse furor: Refrain from judging sinners - Europe- msnbc.com

How should the Church respond to cases of child abuse?  Are child abusers less deserving of God's mercy and our mercy than liars and adulterers?  I know that there is much more emotion and actual righteous anger directed at these priests and others like them in our world, but are they worse they we are?  Here is the Pope's recent statement, very similar to Jesus' statement.

Pope Benedict XVI on Sunday urged Catholics to refrain from judging sinners a day after he rebuked Irish bishops for their handling of a half-century of sexual abuse of minors by clergy.

While the pope made no mention of the Vatican's widely criticized policy of cloaking abuse allegations in secrecy, a Swiss churchman called for the Holy See to start a registry of molester clergy to avoid more shuttling by bishops of pedophile priests from parish to parish.

The pontiff didn't mention his letter chastising Ireland's church hierarchy as he made his weekly appearance Sunday from his studio window overlooking St. Peter's Square. He cited the Gospel passage about Jesus' inviting those without sin to cast the first stone toward an adulterer.

via www.msnbc.msn.com

This issue of not casting the first stone raises some very practical issues.  Can we cast stones if we are the second person? or the third?

How do we then deal with child molesters?  How do we show mercy?  What does does forgiveness look like?  How do we protect our children and not cast stones?  Is protection of our children more important than tangible forgiveness?

Here's another stream of questions..should the priesthood be a job that one can easily get fired from?  Or should it continued to be viewed as a vocation and calling no matter how unworthy the priests are?  Of course priests that have been found guilty of molestation ought not run the children's program.  Is pedophilia beyond God's ability to forgive?  to heal?

As a parent of three children and as someone who believes that the extreme grace of God ought to flow through our lives, this is a very challenging issue for me.

I am very interested in your thoughts.  Please comment.