Posted by
flagwaver on Monday, May 18, 2009 11:55:47 AM
Do any of you watch "Morning Joe" on MSNBC? I usually don't but I switched over this morning from "Fox & Friends" (who wants to watch another story about that danged dog protecting its mother anyway?), and I saw Bob Shrum on there swearing that Nancy Pelosi had been consistent in her statements about the CIA lying to her and Congress. Is it just me, or is the Democratic Party filled with professional liars, who think we are too stupid to know when we're being lied to?
Since Obama finally gave his much discussed commencement address at Notre Dame, I am going to put my two cents into the discussion. The media has done its level best to turn this into a situation where those protesting Obama's speech are trying to shut him up, when that is not the case at all. This is all about ND ignoring the edicts of the Church and honoring a man with degree who stands diametrically opposed to the Church's position on abortion. The President, as well as any other speaker chosen by the university has every right to speak, and no one was objecting to that. The objection was to the university putting the wishes of the administration for a speech by the Pope of Hope over the words of the actual Pope of Rome, who is supposedly in charge of the Church.
Can someone give me a quick synopsis of what 'cap-and-trade' is? I hear about it, and I think I have something of a handle on it but can someone give me a layman's version if it? I am having a terrible time wrapping my head around it all, so anything that helos me clear it up will be greatly appreciated.
Finally, I know that this may be pretty unpopular, but does the $20 million bail amaount for accused murderer Drew Peterson bother anyone but me? Our Constitution says, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed...", yet the court in Peterson's case found a $20 million bail to be reasonable. Now, I understand that bail should be imposed, but $20 million for a guy who has never had that type of income? And it seems to me that he isn't being held for the single crime that he has been charged with, but for every other crime he is alleged to have committed. And if our system is based on a presumption of innocence, where the state is tasked with proving guilt, then does not the imposition of such a huge bail amount not send a clear signal to the community and prospective jurors that Peterson is dangerous and is to be judged guilty of some crime? I'm sorry, but no matter what the public mood is, no one should be held out as guilty before trial and astronomically high bail amounts do just that!