Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ethics/Values in politics
C-Span sucks community > politics > Political Soapbox
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
Mizilus
QUOTE(SpaceCowboy @ Nov 15 2005, 12:32 PM)
Of the 280 million Americans, only about 20 participate regularly here.

Knowing this, your mission in life is to run new posters off?
[right][snapback]151414[/snapback][/right]



Yeah right. They'll leave because of me.

rolleyes.gif
Mizilus
well hey in this brave new 9/11 anthrax world every forum needs a few outright liars and at least one fire bomber.

cool.gif
SherryB
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Nov 15 2005, 05:04 PM)
well hey in this brave new 9/11 anthrax world every forum needs a few outright liars and at least one fire bomber.

cool.gif
[right][snapback]151443[/snapback][/right]


I still love you miz. smile.gif
judy
QUOTE(SherryB @ Nov 15 2005, 05:18 PM)
I still love you miz.  smile.gif
[right][snapback]151464[/snapback][/right]

user posted image
I always pictured them a pair!
Bee
Inane commentary from Barts more feminine "side."

laugh.gif
Mizilus
all real women love me.

cool.gif
Bart Katz
QUOTE(judy @ Nov 15 2005, 03:28 PM)
user posted image
I always pictured them a pair!
[right][snapback]151482[/snapback][/right]



laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
davisął
dry.gif

No respect for the law. Give them power and they go nuts.


Report: Public Broadcasting chairman violated law, ethics standards


By Jennifer C. Kerr
ASSOCIATED PRESS

1:16 p.m. November 15, 2005


Associated Press

Former Corporation for Public Broadcasting Chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson.

WASHINGTON – The former chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting broke federal law by interfering with PBS programming and appearing to use political tests in hiring the corporation's new president, internal investigators said Tuesday.

Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican, also sought to withhold funding from PBS unless the taxpayer-supported network brought in more conservative voices to balance its programming, said the report by CPB inspector general Kenneth A. Konz.

Tomlinson was chairman of the corporation until September and resigned as a board member earlier this month after Konz privately shared his findings with the board. The report was publicly released Tuesday.

The corporation – which funnels hundreds of millions of federal dollars to National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service and noncommercial radio and television stations – was created by Congress in the late 1960s to shield public broadcasting from political influence.

Specifically, the report said Tomlinson violated the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 and ethical standards by dealing directly with one of the creators of the conservative-leaning "Journal Editorial Report," hosted by the editor of The Wall Street Journal editorial page.


In internal e-mails, Tomlinson told CPB staff to threaten to withhold funds from PBS "if they didn't balance their programming," the report said.

There was evidence, the report said, to suggest that "political tests" or qualifications were used as a major factor in the hiring of new CPB President Patricia S. Harrison, in violation of federal rules. Harrison, who was backed by Tomlinson, is a former co-chair of the Republican National Committee.

The report also faulted Tomlinson for hiring a consultant to review program content on PBS shows such as "Now With Bill Moyers." The IG said Tomlinson didn't obtain the proper authorization from the board for the consultant's $20,000 contract. The consultant kept track of whether guests on the shows were "anti or pro-Bush," and "anti or pro-Tom DeLay."

There are no criminal penalties associated with the laws the report said Tomlinson broke, the IG's office said. The board could have taken disciplinary action if Tomlinson were still a board member.

A call seeking comment from Tomlinson was not returned Tuesday afternoon. He has defended his actions as an effort to bring political balance to public-affairs programming and maintained no wrongdoing.

Democrats see it differently, and have accused Tomlinson of trying to turn public radio and TV into a mouthpiece for the GOP.

"The report shows that Mr. Tomlinson was willing to ride roughshod over the law to impose his political mindset on PBS programming," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis. "The Corporation for Public Broadcasting needs significant reform and vigorous oversight."

Obey and Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., had called for the IG investigation.

With new leadership at the helm, the CPB's Harrison said the report offered an opportunity for much-needed changes. "It is going to give us a guideline to do things that probably should have been put in place a very long time ago," she told The Associated Press.

After the release of the report, the board approved steps aimed at improving operations, including setting up a committee to develop corporate governance guidelines and practices.

A public watchdog group, meanwhile, urged the entire board, as well as Harrison, to resign.

The board has "demonstrated an inability to effectively govern CPB," said Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy.

He called Harrison's hiring "a sweetheart inside deal by Tomlinson," and said her "platitudes today in responding to the IG report demonstrate she has no real comprehension of the seriousness of the problems at CPB."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/...oadcasting.html dry.gif
Friend Judy
I'm gonna watch the Amtrak hearing tonight, to see if the House found out how it came to pass that the Amtrak board, with two new recess appointees (that is, uncomfired) managed to fire the Amtrak director without discussing with the oversight committee what was wrong, much less their plans to fire him.
SpaceCowboy
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Nov 15 2005, 07:50 PM)
I'm gonna watch the Amtrak hearing tonight, to see if the House found out how it came to pass that the Amtrak board, with two new recess appointees (that is, uncomfired) managed to fire the Amtrak director without discussing with the oversight committee what was wrong, much less their plans to fire him.
[right][snapback]151598[/snapback][/right]

Somebody should watch the Amtrack hearings. I'm just glad it's you and not me.
Friend Judy
Well, OK, half-watch while I do crewelwork. (Mostly, I wanna watch a REPUBLICAN committee chairman read them the riot act.)
Friend Judy
But only if it doesn't conflict with NCIS.
davisął
National Criminal Intelligence Service

Naval Criminal Investigative Service

National Coalition of Independent Scholars

National Crop Insurance Services

National Chemical Information Symposium

National Construction Insurance Services

Nebraska Career Information System

tongue.gif
Friend Judy
LOL! Hey, Bill and I both think the Goth chick is hot! smile.gif
davisął
user posted image
davisął
user posted image
Tom Servo
QUOTE(davisął @ Nov 15 2005, 08:36 PM)
user posted image
[right][snapback]151633[/snapback][/right]

Nope, not a dime's worth of difference.
davisął
The artist did a good job.
Tom Servo
I'll drink to that.
davisął
Yet another Republican busted for morals and values. Is there an endless line of criminals going in and out of RNC headquarters? Could you imagine THIS guy heading Homeland security? Yet another great, wise choice by Bush. "You're doing a heck of a job Kerkie".


Kerik Is Accused of Abusing Post as City Official

By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM
Published: November 16, 2005

New Jersey officials said yesterday that Bernard B. Kerik abused his position as New York City correction commissioner in the late 1990's by accepting tens of thousands of dollars from a construction company that he was helping to pursue business with the city. They say the company has long had ties to organized crime.




The accusations against Mr. Kerik, who had to withdraw his nomination as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security last year, are in court papers filed by the state Division of Gaming Enforcement.

The agency is seeking to keep the construction company, Interstate Industrial Corporation, from doing work on Atlantic City casinos and became interested in Mr. Kerik's role with the company when the ties were disclosed after his nomination failed.

The agency officials said yesterday that Interstate paid another contractor for renovations worth more than $200,000 made to Mr. Kerik's apartment in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in 1999 and 2000.

Mr. Kerik, who is now a consultant to the government of Jordan, could not be reached yesterday.

A lawyer for him, Joseph Tacopina, said that Mr. Kerik was not aware that Interstate had paid for the work done on the Bronx apartment, and that he doubted that the work was as expensive as the officials said.

The officials also said that Interstate gave Mr. Kerik's brother, Donald, an $85,000-a-year job at the same time Mr. Kerik was using his influence within New York City government to help the company win a license to operate on Staten Island.


Some of the details of Mr. Kerik's dealings with Interstate and its owners, Frank and Peter DiTommaso, became public late in 2004 after President Bush nominated him as homeland security secretary. Mr. Kerik withdrew his name, citing possible tax problems involving his family's nanny.

After his service as correction commissioner in the 90's, Mr. Kerik served as police commissioner in 2000 and 2001 under his friend and longtime ally, Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Frank DiTommaso has long rejected investigators' claims that he and his brother and their companies have ties to organized crime. In a brief telephone interview, he said yesterday that they had not underwritten the renovations on Mr. Kerik's apartment and denied that he had sought to improperly influence the licensing process in New York. His lawyer, Thomas E. Durkin Jr., said a review of the agency's own evidence would show that his client had no mob ties.

The gambling agency officials in New Jersey have no authority to bring criminal charges against Mr. Kerik, but the Bronx district attorney and the city's Department of Investigation are also investigating Mr. Kerik's ties to the builder.

Stephen Reed, a spokesman for the Bronx prosecutor's office, said of the New Jersey accusation: "There are allegations with respect to work on the apartment. It is not anything new. At the time, we said it was an open investigation, and it is still continuing."

The agency's accusations, though, were clearly laid out in papers they filed with the Casino Control Commission in Trenton as part of its continuing effort to persuade the commission to revoke Interstate's license in the state.

"By directly and indirectly conferring money or other things of value on Kerik during a period in which Kerik was a high-ranking public official of New York City and was in a position to - and did - provide assistance to Interstate, the DiTommasos and Interstate attempted to influence Kerik in the performance or violation of his official duties," the papers said.


During the agency's investigation, Mr. Kerik invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination eight times, refusing to respond to a number of questions and requests for documents, citing the New York City investigations and his lawyer's advice, according to the court papers.

Among the questions he would not answer was whether Frank DiTommaso ever gave him money or anything of value on behalf of Interstate or whether Mr. DiTommaso ever asked him to take any action on behalf of Interstate, the court papers said.

The agency's court filings, however, indicate that Mr. Kerik took several actions to aid the company and that the agency considered the company's reputed connections to organized crime - allegedly employing mob figures and doing business with trucking companies owned by mob figures - to be serious enough for the agency to try unsuccessfully for years to ban the builder from casino work.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/16/nyregion...artner=homepage
davisął
The agency's accusations about Mr. Kerik are, at minimum, the latest difficulty for a man praised by Mr. Giuliani as one of the most capable law enforcement experts in the country. laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Mr. Giuliani, who had accepted part of the blame for Mr. Kerik's embarrassing withdrawal as the Homeland Security nominee, has stuck by Mr. Kerik publicly in the months since, although they have ended their business partnership.

Yesterday, Mr. Giuliani, who is considering running for president in 2008, repeated his support. He said through a spokeswoman that the accusations in the court papers submitted by the gambling agency, a part of the New Jersey state attorney general's office, were "hypothetical."
Friend Judy
Hey, if you wanna see some corruption, you shoulda heard yesterday's Amtrak hearing. They made Abramoff seem like a petty crook, stealing lunch money by comparison!
Friend Judy
PS, by "they" I mean Bush's strangely appointed, probably illegally constituted board that's trying to pull a fast one on Congress and everyone else, and sell off Amtraks only valuable assets, essentially for free, under the guise of "reorganizing" them by transferring them to a for-profit private entity. The plan is to transfer the EQUIPMENT to this private subsidiary owning the ASSETS of the being-created Northeast corridor, and then sticking the taxpayers with the operating costs for that, and also for the rest of the system if it isn't liquidated entirely.

Did I mention, sticking the taxpayers with the debt and pension costs inherited when the railroads went out of the passenger rail buisness, too?

The robber barons are back, big time!
davisął
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Nov 16 2005, 07:13 AM)
PS, by "they" I mean Bush's strangely appointed, probably illegally constituted board that's trying to pull a fast one on Congress and everyone else, and sell off Amtraks only valuable assets, essentially for free, under the guise of "reorganizing" them by transferring them to a for-profit private entity.  The plan is to transfer the EQUIPMENT to this private subsidiary owning the ASSETS of the being-created Northeast corridor, and then sticking the taxpayers with the operating costs for that, and also for the rest of the system if it isn't liquidated entirely.

Did I mention, sticking the taxpayers with the debt and pension costs inherited when the railroads went out of the passenger rail buisness, too?

The robber barons are back, big time!
[right][snapback]151745[/snapback][/right]



Was there any doubt?

But them thar homos won't be gittin' murrahed.
davisął
You can't swing a dead cat in DC without clocking at least twenty crooked, faith-based Republican corporate whores.
judy
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but Pinellas judges abuse the privilege.

Judge expands school lawsuit

In giving the lawsuit class-action status, a judge rules Pinellas schools have failed to narrow the achievement gap for black students


ST. PETERSBURG - A lawsuit charging Pinellas County Schools with failing to educate black children was granted class-action status Thursday.

Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge James Case made the ruling in a case filed nearly four years ago on behalf of William Crowley, who is black, and his son Akwete Osoka, then a second-grader at Sawgrass Lake Elementary School.

The decision means the suit now represents all 21,000 black students in Pinellas and all black children who attend the county's public schools in the future.

"The court has taken a giant step," said the plaintiffs' lead attorney, Guy Burns of Tampa.

Superintendent Howard Hinesley and School Board attorney John Bowen could not be reached for comment late Thursday. School Board Chairwoman Jane Gallucci said she could not comment without conferring with Bowen.

"I wasn't fully aware that it was still floating around," she said.

The families of all black Pinellas students are expected to be sent notices about the lawsuit, and Case will consider a specific plan for that notification within 45 days.

The suit says the district has failed to narrow a yawning achievement gap between black and white students, in violation of the equal protection clause in the state Constitution. It asks the district to craft a solution.

The suit was announced at an October 2000 news conference with several community leaders, including Omali Yeshitela, head of the National People's Democratic Uhuru Movement. Its filing came just a week after U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday approved a settlement between the school district and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, declaring schools free of discrimination and ending a 36-year federal lawsuit that required cross-county busing for desegregation and race ratios in schools. The district, now headed into its second full year of a new school choice system, also pledged in the settlement to address black student achievement.

With the Crowley suit "it appears we're trying to re-litigate the same thing, only this time couched in state court," Bowen said at the time.

Lawyers for the school district also have argued that the lawsuit should not be granted class-action status because the circumstances of each child's success or failure can be different. But Case rejected that argument, concluding the plaintiffs are arguing that the system has failed to meet its constitutional duty to provide a "high-quality" education to black students.

"Although individual cases reinforce the statistical data, it is the system as a whole that is being challenged, not how that system has dealt with a particular student on an individual basis," the judge wrote.

Case wrote in his order that the plaintiffs "have cited an overabundance of statistical evidence indicating that black students are achieving far below white students in every category and are receiving statistically significantly more discipline referrals than their white counter-parts."
A hearing is likely within a few months.Stuck on Stupid

judy
More Wacky Pinelles County Judges

Judge George Greer ruled that Terri Schaivo could be dehydrated and starved to death without due cause.

Judge W. Douglas Baird ruled that Governor Bush and the Legislative member's of Congress wrote a law was an unconstitutional intrusion on judicial authority. "Terri's Law".
Nomarchy
QUOTE(judy @ Nov 16 2005, 06:15 AM)
More Wacky Pinelles County Judges

Judge George Greer ruled that Terri Schaivo could be dehydrated and starved to death without due cause.

Judge W. Douglas Baird ruled that Governor Bush and the Legislative member's of Congress wrote a law was an unconstitutional intrusion on judicial authority.  "Terri's Law".
[right][snapback]151782[/snapback][/right]


How do you go through life with a throught-process like that?
Guest
Hey Goglebot!

C-SPAN SUCKS COMMUNITY!!
judy
Lawsuits drain school dollars
(and allow for judicial legislation)

Legal matters siphon away money that Hillsborough and Pinellas school districts could better utilize in the classroom.


In Pinellas County, two Palm Harbor University High School baseball players sued the school district claiming they were wrongly booted from school because of a roughhousing incident that occurred on a team road trip.

In Hillsborough County, Robinson High School senior Nicole "Nikki" Youngblood filed suit after her picture was left out of the school yearbook when she refused to wear a feminine drape instead of a shirt and tie as she wished.

These two cases only scratch the surface of lawsuits filed against local public school districts on an almost daily basis. More and more, offenses that used to be settled inside the schoolhouse now end up at the courthouse.

The result, educators say, is less money for learning.

"We spend millions and millions on attorney fees every year that has nothing to do with the classroom," said Wayne Blanton, executive director of the Florida School Boards Association. "Every lawsuit we have to defend is money that doesn't get to the classroom."

There are discrimination suits filed by students and teachers alike. Disputes over school construction. A large number come from people injured in school bus accidents.

Some, all parties agree, are legitimate complaints. Others border on the ridiculous, attorneys say.

In 1985, Seminole High School twins sued the Pinellas County School Board after being forced to share valedictorian honors with a third student. In Hillsborough several years ago, a man sued the school district after he rode his motorcycle around the chained track at Hillsborough High School after hours and broke his arm. The case was dismissed.

"Lots of people file suit," said Crosby Few, Hillsborough School Board attorney. "A lot of them are frivolous."

School districts have long been easy targets for lawsuits, with constitutional issues such as free speech and religion at the heart of many challenges. Lawsuits, in fact, helped end the segregation of students by race in the public schools and ensured the adequate education of children with disabilities.

As education has become more complex with the pressures of achievement tests and accountability measures, the soil is even more ripe for legal challenges, some educators say. A 1999 study by the American Tort Reform Association found that 25 percent of school principals said they had faced a lawsuit or court settlement in the last two years.

"The school system is a big target," said John Bowen, Pinellas County School Board attorney. "Attorneys see it as a big pocket to go after."

Last year, Hillsborough spent $926,650 on legal fees, the largest bills dealing with employee disputes and real estate and construction issues. In Pinellas, the district spent nearly $1.3-million, with the most spent on liability and workers' compensation claims.

Zero-tolerance policies - in which students can be suspended or expelled for one offense - have also resulted in more lawsuits. One such case made headlines three years ago.

Two Palm Harbor University High School baseball players, Chris Pachik and Brian Pafundi, sued the school district after they were suspended for 10 days and reassigned to an alternative school for holding down a teammate during a team trip.

Believing they were the victims of a heavy-handed principal who used poor judgment, they tried to get their punishment overturned. They sued to attend their graduation but were denied.

Their attorney, Sherwood Coleman, said zero-tolerance policies leave no wiggle room for principals to determine the appropriate punishment. They are given definite actions to take for a whole host of offenses.

"Now you make the principal the real linchpin in the process," Coleman said. "That's a tremendous amount of power to put in the hands of the principal."

Sometimes schools could resolve complaints against them without going to court.

That's the belief of Karen Doering, staff attorney with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, in the case of Nikki Youngblood.

Lawsuits, she said, are always the last resort.

"Our first effort is always to contact the School Board and see what we can do to resolve this," she said. "In Nikki Youngblood's case, at some point, they drew a line in the sand."

In the fall of 2001, Youngblood was not allowed to pose for her senior yearbook picture in a jacket and tie because female students were required to wear a scoop-necked drape. Male students, however, could wear a white shirt, tie and dark jacket.

Youngblood said the policy was discriminatory because, as a lesbian, she does not wear traditional female clothes.

Her attorney, Doering, said she asked the Hillsborough School Board to change its policy and allow students to wear professional attire no matter their gender. Her request was turned down.

Doering sued in federal court, something she said the school district brought on itself. The case is pending before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"It's a horrible waste of money," she said. "It's shocking the School Board would choose to spend resources this way instead of coming to a number of reasonable compromises."

Attorneys say school districts have no choice but to spend thousands for lawyers.

Some districts, like Pinellas, have in-house legal staffs. Others, like Hillsborough, hire attorneys on a retainer. Almost all dole out certain cases to outside firms that specialize in negligence, workers' compensation and environmental claims.

The number of suits also can be linked to an increase in education laws, which blossomed in the 1960s.

Bowen, a school attorney since 1973, points to two books on a shelf in his office. Both were written on existing education laws by E. Edmund Reutter Jr. The first was published in 1960 and had 96 pages. The second came out 10 years later with 654 pages.

Today, Bowen's law library holds seven volumes of education laws.

"Look at all the laws we have," he said, referring to statutes addressing everything from freedom of expression to the rights of disabled students. "With the amount of legislation there is, there's no way a school district can get away without having an attorney."

While most everyone agrees the money spent on lawsuits takes funds away from the classroom, whether legal claims have undermined the education system is debatable.

The American Tort Reform Association's survey found that 57 percent of educators said lawsuits affected school programs.

In the book, Judging School Discipline: The Crisis of Moral Authority, the authors argue that the hundreds of lawsuits challenging school disciplinary procedures have hurt the quality of public education.

One of the authors, Richard Arum, an associate professor of sociology at New York University, said just the threat of lawsuits keeps teachers from taking charge of their classrooms.

Indeed, while the number of lawsuits climbs, threats to sue are even more common.

Yvonne Lyons, executive director of the Hillsborough Classroom Teachers Association, said teachers are often threatened by angry parents when they give out less than perfect grades to some students.

"When all else fails, that's what you come back with, "Well I'm going to sue,' " she said. "There are some parents who make this threat every single year to every single teacher their child has.

"Usually it's just frustration. New teachers, it just really scares them to death."

With many counties beginning new school choice student assignment plans, and graduation and grade promotion now attached to state achievement tests in Florida, some attorneys expect even more lawsuits. Case in point: The Largo father who sued the state after his son failed the test needed for him to receive a standard diploma. The father wanted to see the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test and his son's answer sheet.

An appeals court said he had no right to see the test. The case, which may be headed to the Florida Supreme Court, could force the state to make the FCAT available to parents, something state officials said could cost taxpayers millions.

(and the Florida Supreme Court has a history of legislating from the bench, rewriting law and were slapped down twice by SCOTUS in 2000.)

Blanton, of the school boards association, sees no end to the proliferation of lawsuits as long as legislatures are making new laws and law schools are graduating attorneys.

"I don't think there's any limit to what type of lawsuit we face," he said. "The only advice I give (to school districts) is stick to your policies and do what's right."

Article
davisął
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Nov 16 2005, 08:18 AM)
How do you go through life with a throught-process like that?
[right][snapback]151785[/snapback][/right]



NS. The case can go through how many judges, how many courts. It's still not enough. Retry the case till you get the results you want.
judy
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Nov 16 2005, 10:18 AM)
How do you go through life with a throught-process like that?
[right][snapback]151785[/snapback][/right]

You become a JUDGE! user posted image
davisął
But I suppose Christian lawsuits are just to right a wrong, defend rights, or to fight government tyranny?
Friend Judy
"Terri's Law" was, pardon my blunt metaphor, an abortion of justice. It boiled down to an assertion that, if ANYONE is available who wants to continue a non-life, the usual decision-maker is removed from acting, and judicial preference is given to anyone, even a "someone" with no standing before the court, like the parents of a married adult, shall be substitued instead.

Or even worse. That the courts should decide what the decision WILL BE, instead of their proper role of decided who is lawfully authorized to make decisions for the disabled adult.

Myself, I feel empathy beyond words for Terri Shiavo's parents. They had deluded themselves into believe she "saw" them (despite being blind) and was "reacting" to them (despite such evidence as the video showing, if you looked carefully, that the dad was moving the balloon to stay in front of Terri's random eye movements, rather that that she was "looking" at the balloon".

But, I am on Terri's behalf sickened at the thought of her parents wanting to keep her physical body alive, and use it like some Barbie doll, dress it up and play with it, because her parent's wanted it so much.

I really and truly don't know how I feel or what I think about this. It certainly wouldn't have hurt TERRI for them to use her as a Barbie doll. She was long gone. But there's just something so CREEPY about artificially continuing her empty body's "life" to serve her parents' psychological needs that wierds me out beyond words.

It's just plain WRONG, demeaning to humanity, to preserve an empty body for the comfort of living people who want to play pretend. Just something very close to necrophilia about it.

Makes my hair stand on end!
davisął
The autopsy showed her brain could not have recovered ... ever. But that won't stop judy.
judy
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Nov 16 2005, 10:31 AM)
"Terri's Law" was, pardon my blunt metaphor, an abortion of justice.  It boiled down to an assertion that, if ANYONE is available who wants to continue a non-life, the usual decision-maker is removed from acting, and judicial preference is given to anyone, even a "someone" with no standing before the court, like the parents of a married adult, shall be substitued instead.

Or even worse.  That the courts should decide what the decision WILL BE, instead of their proper role of decided who is lawfully authorized to make decisions for the disabled adult.

Myself, I feel empathy beyond words for Terri Shiavo's parents.  They had deluded themselves into believe she "saw" them (despite being blind) and was "reacting" to them (despite such evidence as the video showing, if you looked carefully, that the dad was moving the balloon to stay in front of Terri's random eye movements, rather that that she was "looking" at the balloon".

But, I am on Terri's behalf sickened at the thought of her parents wanting to keep her physical body alive, and use it like some Barbie doll, dress it up and play with it, because her parent's wanted it so much.

I really and truly don't know how I feel or what I think about this.  It certainly wouldn't have hurt TERRI for them to use her as a Barbie doll.  She was long gone.  But there's just something so CREEPY about artificially continuing her empty body's "life" to serve her parents' psychological needs that wierds me out beyond words.

It's just plain WRONG, demeaning to humanity, to preserve an empty body for the comfort of living people who want to play pretend.  Just something very close to necrophilia about it.

Makes my hair stand on end!
[right][snapback]151793[/snapback][/right]



Bad law on top of bad law. What it all boiled down to was Michael Schaivo being appointed guardian. We don't need to revisit the case here but many people suspect Michael Schaivo of being responsible for Terri's unconsciousness, waiting 90 minutes to call 911, her broken bones, his refusal to let Terri have therapy, and even permission to be taken out of doors. He was the beneficiary of the law suit, he had a live-in common-law-"wife", two children and was hardly the suitable candidate to make any decision for Terri.
judy
QUOTE(davisął @ Nov 16 2005, 10:34 AM)
The autopsy showed her brain could not have recovered ... ever. But that won't stop judy.
[right][snapback]151795[/snapback][/right]

Is this the new standard? Brain damaged people are killed? I thought you were the board's official "Torture Policeman"... how do you let this slip by? Wasn't Terri tortured by the judicial system?
davisął
QUOTE(judy @ Nov 16 2005, 08:42 AM)
Bad law on top of bad law.  What it all boiled down to was Michael Schaivo being appointed guardian.  We don't need to revisit the case here but many people suspect Michael Schaivo of being responsible for Terri's unconsciousness, waiting 90 minutes to call 911, her broken bones, his refusal to let Terri have therapy, and even permission to be taken out of doors.  He was the beneficiary of the law suit, he had a live-in common-law-"wife", two children and was hardly the suitable candidate to make any decision for Terri.
[right][snapback]151798[/snapback][/right]



Everything you said has been through a court of law many, many times over. Those allegations have been debunked.

But I understand your motivation all too well.
davisął
QUOTE(judy @ Nov 16 2005, 08:45 AM)
Is this the new standard?  Brain damaged people are killed?  I thought you were the board's official  "Torture Policeman"... how do you let this slip by?  Wasn't Terri tortured by the judicial system?
[right][snapback]151801[/snapback][/right]



No she was not tortured. YOU are the one who wants to change the definition of the word torture.

The Shaivo case was settled by the court. Pro-life advocates will never, ever admit it.
Friend Judy
QUOTE(judy @ Nov 16 2005, 08:42 AM)
Bad law on top of bad law.  What it all boiled down to was Michael Schaivo being appointed guardian.  We don't need to revisit the case here but many people suspect Michael Schaivo of being responsible for Terri's unconsciousness, waiting 90 minutes to call 911, her broken bones, his refusal to let Terri have therapy, and even permission to be taken out of doors.  He was the beneficiary of the law suit, he had a live-in common-law-"wife", two children and was hardly the suitable candidate to make any decision for Terri.
[right][snapback]151798[/snapback][/right]


And, the court found no merit, no persuasive evidence to support those charges (although I recognize that YOU believe them).

But, absent a persuasive showing of such evidence, the court upheld the societal norm: That absent any showing to the contrary, a husband is presumed to be the next of kin, and the decisionmaker in that sort of situation. That a woman has CHOSEN her husband, not inherited him as she inherited her family, and that he, being chosen by her, is most likely to accurately understand and act upon her wishes.

If you don't like that standard, what exactly is it you're proposing to replace it?

QUOTE(judy @ Nov 16 2005, 08:45 AM)
Is this the new standard?  Brain damaged people are killed?  I thought you were the board's official  "Torture Policeman"... how do you let this slip by?  Wasn't Terri tortured by the judicial system?
[right][snapback]151801[/snapback][/right]


She was not "brain-damaged". She was unaware of her own existance, and blind and deaf.

As I said before, the problem with the Terri Shiavo situation was that there was no "there" there. She was long departed, and the dispute was over the disposition of her physical remains. Should her body have been allowed to die and be buried, as her husband wanted and believed that SHE would have wanted, or should the empty shell have been continued on feedings so that her parent's could play Barbie doll with it?

And, of course, the central question of who should decide, and whether and how much the info from doctors who overwhelmingly said there was no longer any "Terri" present should have weighed as a factor.

But, judy, I am sure that nothing I say is going to influence your opinion, since you seem to have your own "facts" on this subject, and your facts don't include the autopsy evidence. If you continue to believe that somehow her eyes were following a baloon or "looking" at her mom and smiling in the absence of a physical visual cortex, there's not much I can do about the magical thinking you're doing, is there?
davisął
When Bill Frist, a surgeon, stands on the floor of the Senate and makes a diagnosis from a video, what can you expect?


judy
Judy and davis,

My point and I made it badly was regarding the Judicial Legislation from Pinelles County. There is something horribly wrong there.

If I remember correctly, little Jessica Lundford was raped and buried alive in Pinelles County by a sex offender who shouldn't have been free, a sherrif who couldn't find him, and policemen who didn't search for her when they were at the same trailor? (This is from the top of my head and I may have some facts mixed up)

In any event, I do have a living will. I have written instructions that I do not want my life prolonged in those situations. (But I didn't have a living will when I was 26 years old.)

I'm not going to discuss Terri Schaivo's murder with either of you because it's a waste of time.

What I was bringing up was the Class Action Law suit that Black Students in Pinelles County don't do as well academically as white students and they get into trouble more often. The law suit is against the SCHOOL! I think that is a more interesting subject than dissing my Christian beliefs.

davisął
QUOTE
I'm not going to discuss Terri Schaivo's murder with either of you because it's a waste of time.


dry.gif friggin, fraggin dmm shmm skmmm
Friend Judy
judy, that's a SEPARATE issue from whether or not a spouse should be presumed to be the decisionmaker for a disabled spouse.

YOU wanted to discuss Ms. Shiavo, and I suspect you want to discuss it because you believe that since your desired OUTCOME was not achieved by the standard rule, you want to change the rules.
davisął
QUOTE
I think that is a more interesting subject than dissing my Christian beliefs.


Challenge anything you say and we're dissing your beliefs. But I understand completely.
judy
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Nov 16 2005, 11:26 AM)
judy, that's a SEPARATE issue from whether or not a spouse should be presumed to be the decisionmaker for a disabled spouse.

YOU wanted to discuss Ms. Shiavo, and I suspect you want to discuss it because you believe that since your desired OUTCOME was not achieved by the standard rule, you want to change the rules.
[right][snapback]151822[/snapback][/right]



I didn't want to discuss Terri Schaivo, I used that case as an example of Judicial Activism in Pinellas County. I was talking about the Judges there.

Do you think the school is responsible for poor student achievement and discipline problems of Black children or is their home life a factor?
Nomarchy
QUOTE
Do you think the school is responsible for poor student achievement and discipline problems of Black children or is their home life a factor?


Remember the above question next time you "blame" schools for something YOU disapprove of, and over the causal factor for which schools have little control.

You have to come to a consistent position as to whether schools are 'neutral media' of transmission of pre-existing or exogenous differences or not. You can't pick and choose in an ad hoc manner.
davisął
Why didn't Republicans want the oil CEOs to be put under oath at last weeks hearings? Because they KNEW they'd lie and THEY DID.


Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force

By Dana Milbank and Justin Blum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, November 16, 2005; Page A01

A White House document shows that executives from big oil companies met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001 -- something long suspected by environmentalists but denied as recently as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress.

The document, obtained this week by The Washington Post, shows that officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. met in the White House complex with the Cheney aides who were developing a national energy policy, parts of which became law and parts of which are still being debated.


Testifying at a Senate hearing last week were, from left, Lee R. Raymond of Exxon Mobil, David J. O'Reilly of Chevron, James J. Mulva of ConocoPhillips, Ross Pillari of BP America and John Hofmeister of Shell Oil.
Testifying at a Senate hearing last week were, from left, Lee R. Raymond of Exxon Mobil, David J. O'Reilly of Chevron, James J. Mulva of ConocoPhillips, Ross Pillari of BP America and John Hofmeister of Shell Oil. (By Chip Somodevilla -- Getty Images)


user posted image

This is what a pack of lying profiteers looks like.

In a joint hearing last week of the Senate Energy and Commerce committees, the chief executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips said their firms did not participate in the 2001 task force. The president of Shell Oil said his company did not participate "to my knowledge," and the chief of BP America Inc. said he did not know.


Chevron was not named in the White House document, but the Government Accountability Office has found that Chevron was one of several companies that "gave detailed energy policy recommendations" to the task force. In addition, Cheney had a separate meeting with John Browne, BP's chief executive, according to a person familiar with the task force's work; that meeting is not noted in the document.

The task force's activities attracted complaints from environmentalists, who said they were shut out of the task force discussions while corporate interests were present. The meetings were held in secret and the White House refused to release a list of participants. The task force was made up primarily of Cabinet-level officials. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club unsuccessfully sued to obtain the records.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who posed the question about the task force, said he will ask the Justice Department today to investigate. "The White House went to great lengths to keep these meetings secret, and now oil executives may be lying to Congress about their role in the Cheney task force," Lautenberg said.

Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, declined to comment on the document. She said that the courts have upheld "the constitutional right of the president and vice president to obtain information in confidentiality."

The executives were not under oath when they testified, so they are not vulnerable to charges of perjury; committee Democrats had protested the decision by Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) not to swear in the executives. But a person can be fined or imprisoned for up to five years for making "any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation" to Congress.


Alan Huffman, who was a Conoco manager until the 2002 merger with Phillips, confirmed meeting with the task force staff. "We met in the Executive Office Building, if I remember correctly," he said.

A spokesman for ConocoPhillips said the chief executive, James J. Mulva, had been unaware that Conoco officials met with task force staff when he testified at the hearing. The spokesman said that Mulva was chief executive of Phillips in 2001 before the merger and that nobody from Phillips met with the task force.

Exxon spokesman Russ Roberts said the company stood by chief executive Lee R. Raymond's statement in the hearing. In a brief phone interview, former Exxon vice president James Rouse, the official named in the White House document, denied the meeting took place. "That must be inaccurate and I don't have any comment beyond that," said Rouse, now retired.

Ronnie Chappell, a spokesman for BP, declined to comment on the task force meetings. Darci Sinclair, a spokeswoman for Shell, said she did not know whether Shell officials met with the task force, but they often meet members of the administration. Chevron said its executives did not meet with the task force but confirmed that it sent President Bush recommendations in a letter.

The person familiar with the task force's work, who requested anonymity out of concern about retribution, said the document was based on records kept by the Secret Service of people admitted to the White House complex. This person said most meetings were with Andrew Lundquist, the task force's executive director, and Cheney aide Karen Y. Knutson.

According to the White House document, Rouse met with task force staff members on Feb. 14, 2001. On March 21, they met with Archie Dunham, who was chairman of Conoco. On April 12, according to the document, task force staff members met with Conoco official Huffman and two officials from the U.S. Oil and Gas Association, Wayne Gibbens and Alby Modiano.

On April 17, task force staff members met with Royal Dutch/Shell Group's chairman, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, Shell Oil chairman Steven Miller and two others. On March 22, staff members met with BP regional president Bob Malone, chief economist Peter Davies and company employees Graham Barr and Deb Beaubien.

Toward the end of the hearing, Lautenberg asked the five executives: "Did your company or any representatives of your companies participate in Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001?" When there was no response, Lautenberg added: "The meeting . . . "

"No," said Raymond.

"No," said Chevron Chairman David J. O'Reilly.

"We did not, no," Mulva said.

"To be honest, I don't know," said BP America chief executive Ross Pillari, who came to the job in August 2001. "I wasn't here then."

"But your company was here," Lautenberg replied.

"Yes," Pillari said.

Shell Oil president John Hofmeister, who has held his job since earlier this year, answered last. "Not to my knowledge," he said.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5111501842.html
davisął
WTF? This is a fraud. When I had read the bridges to nowhere were shot down I thought we'd save the money, but no, they just handed them a check instead. No savings whatsoever and they can even use the money on the bridges if they want. No sacrifice by Stevens that's for sure. He still gets his pork.

Two 'Bridges to Nowhere' Tumble Down in Congress


By CARL HULSE
Published: November 17, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - Congressional Republicans decided Wednesday to take a legislative wrecking ball to two Alaskan bridge projects that had demolished the party's reputation for fiscal austerity.

Straining to show new dedication to lower spending, House and Senate negotiators took the rare step of eliminating a requirement that $442 million be spent to build the two bridges, spans that became cemented in the national consciousness as "bridges to nowhere" because of the remote territory and small populations involved.

The change is not going to save the federal government any money. Instead, the $442 million will be turned over to the state with no strings attached, allowing lawmakers and the governor there to parcel it out for transportation projects as they see fit, including the bridges should they so choose.

Lawmakers said widespread news coverage had turned the bridges near Ketchikan and Anchorage into symbols of Congressional excess. Some members of Congress said they got more questions at town meetings about the bridges than about the new Medicare drug program. A Republican pollster warned that the projects were a political albatross.

"You can't defend it," said Representative Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, one of the conservatives who has been trying to kill not just the bridge project but also the almost 6,000 other pet projects included in the $286 billion highway bill approved earlier this year.

Mr. Flake and others said outrage over the highway spending in general and the bridges in particular was also complicating Republican efforts to advance a broad package of $50 billion in spending cuts over five years, with lawmakers anxious about cuts to Medicaid and food stamps saying it was hard to back those proposals if the bridges got money. But House leaders said they intended to win final approval of that plan this week.

As they finished up the bill covering 2006 spending for transportation, Treasury and housing programs, negotiators agreed that the provision requiring the money for the bridges - known as an earmark - had to go.

"Frankly we just thought we could not approve the project in good faith," said Representative Joe Knollenberg, Republican of Michigan, who is chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that controls transportation spending.

The bridges - a mile-long, 200-foot-high bridge connecting Ketchikan to a sparsely populated island and regional airport and a second one linking Anchorage to a port nearly two miles across an inlet - have been aggressively defended by Alaskan lawmakers, who said the projects would promote growth. They complained that their state had been maligned and were able to defeat a move in the Senate to direct the bridge money to hurricane relief.

Senator Ted Stevens, a powerful Republican from Alaska who had threatened to resign had the Senate shifted the money to the Gulf Coast, said Wednesday that he was resigned to the elimination of the requirement that the money go to the bridges.

"While I am not happy with it, I think that under the circumstance it was the best we could expect because of the publicity that came with the Sunday supplements and whatever," he said. "Everybody is talking about what to do about our bridges."

Budget watchdog groups celebrated the reversal. "Instead of forcing taxpayers to buy a pair of boneheaded bridges, money would be freed up for much more important Alaskan transportation priorities," said Jill Lancelot, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Representative Flake of Arizona, who wants a 10 percent across-the-board cut in the highway bill, said he and other lawmakers in the House and Senate would continue to press for all of the earmarks in the bill to be eliminated.

"We ought to do away with $24 billion dollars' worth, not just one bridge," said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.

The action on the bridges came as the House and Senate attended to a batch of spending, tax and budget measures before heading for a Thanksgiving break.

In the House, the Republican leadership expressed confidence that it could win approval of spending cuts this week. Passage of the cuts has eluded them for weeks because of resistance from moderates who are uneasy with the cuts and conservatives who have grumbled about concessions made to win moderate votes.

"We are just tying up the loose ends," said Representative Deborah Pryce of Ohio, chairwoman of the House Republican Conference.

The leadership would not predict when it would bring the budget plan to the floor, though Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the acting majority leader, said the House would remain through the weekend if necessary to complete its work.

The House and Senate also began advancing separate tax bills that were drawing criticism from Democrats for providing tax breaks for the more affluent while adding to the deficit at the same time spending cuts were being aimed at programs for the poor. Republicans dismissed that assertion and said inaction on taxes would allow rates that had been lowered in recent years to snap back.

"I think it is important to put these tax policies out there and do our best to make the truthful case that anything short of this would be a tax increase," said Mr. Blunt as the Senate began debating its $60 billion tax plan that differs in significant respects from the nearly $57 billion proposal emerging in the House.

Congress is also trying to dispose of its remaining spending bills, including the transportation measure from which the bridges were removed.

On Wednesday, the Senate sent the president a $58 billion measure covering the Commerce, Justice and State Departments as well as science programs. A stop-gap measure covering federal spending is due to expire Friday but will probably be extended while Congress seeks to finish work on the bills.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/17/politics...artner=homepage
Friend Judy
Yes, that's what I mentioned earlier in "Bush in the Bunker". The tax cut extension on the dividends got quietly shelved, too, for lack of votes, and as did extension of cuts for those making over $300,000. ANWAR went down. And, of course, the bridges went poof. The cuts to Medicaid and food stamps and school lunches got whittled some. (The college loans isn't really an issue, or rather shouldn't be, since it was a repeal of the double-dipping by LENDERS, not a ding on students.)

I wish I could say that the senators found their backbones, but they're being a profile in non-courage one more time. Their constitutuents scared the hell out of them.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.