Tennessee Court rules against opponents of gun law change.

I posted a few days ago about the hoopla surrounding a change in the criminal law in Tennessee removing the penalty for handgun permit holders who carry their weapons into restaurants.

I noted that it was a tempest in a teapot.

I got some flack from friends who disagreed.

It seems the court generally agreed with my assessment today.

My prediction was that restaurant owners could post a sign prohibiting patrons from carrying guns. The judge said essentially the same thing.

So the effect? The law goes into effect tonight.

The judge will entertain arguments in three months on vagueness.

The Law is the Law: No one is above it.

Before people begin taking sides in the whole "failing to disclose to Congress" matter, perhaps we should examine the obligations imposed by law n the Executive Branch.

Specifically, 50 U.S.C. Section 413 reads in paragraph (a):

The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity as required by this subchapter.

I think the statute is pretty clear that the Executive Branch has an affirmative obligation to keep Congress informed.

I'm sure we can all agree that the Executive Branch is NOT above the law since it derives its power from said law.

For Dick Cheney to argue that his failure to disclose such activities was in furtherance of ostensibly protecting our national security is bullshit, plain and simple. This is an either/or situation: Either the Executive Branch followed the law OR they failed to do so. Where's the middle ground?

The Executive Branch lacks Constitutional and statutory authority to ignore this law. It does so at its peril to the law. Every good, law-abiding, citizen should demand prosecution for this illegal conduct.

Apparently, too many place party loyalty above the Constitution and the law, since they argue against prosecution.

Patriotism is not merely for our convenience.

AG Holder should prosecute.

Cussing has palliative value.

These results are awesome!

Now, I have a scientific excuse for my foul mouth.

When you hurt yourself, it's good to let fly with a stream of expletives to reduce the perception of pain.

Cool!

Traitors in our midst--Cognitive Dissonance must give way to justice.

For years I've complained of the illegality of warrantless wiretapping by the Bush administration. My patriotism and my support for our War on Terror has been questioned because I exercised my duty as a citizen to question our government. The founding fathers would be aghast at the ideological demands of the right.

Now, it seems my criticisms of the Bush administration's flaunting of the law in an effort to thwart the Constitution were not so far off the mark.

When the executive branch of our government goes to great lengths to conceal illegal activities, regardless of the motive, then we have a serious problem.

Dick Cheney and his cronies skirted the law, much like Nixon. They violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution and to support the laws of our nation.

These traitors deserve justice.

Fudging the law to fight our enemies makes us no better than those who attacked us. If you ignore these crimes because of party affiliation or ideology, then perhaps you should read the Constitution again.

Health care rationing is a reality but Wall Street makes the decisions instead of doctors

When I read this article, I became quite angry because the subject says what we already know to be the case, viz.,. Insurance Companies get rid of costly customers for their bottom line.

Our current system violates every moral fiber of my being. The subject of the article finally awoke to the immorality of serving Wall Street over Main Street.

The best point made by the article: Health Care rationing is a reality.

The reality: Insurance Executives do the rationing now to mollify their Wall Street masters.

This begs the question: Who would you rather ration your health care? An executive whose primary interest is to shareholders?

OR

A government that is subject to the will of the electorate at least every couple of years?

I don't know about you, but I'd prefer a government beholden to me and my fellow citizens over an executive beholden only to shareholders.

I leave you with this: What's the moral choice here? Leave the greedy in charge or let doctors, patients, and elected officials decide?

Tennessee authorizes gun permit holders to carry weapons in restaurants---big deal.

Tennessee has changed the law to authorize concealed carry permit holders to exercise their right to carry in restaurants.

Everybody is up in arms about this---to a ridiculous degree.

Even a Nashville restaurant owner has gotten in the act by suing to have the law declared unconstitutional.

My reading of the State Constitution at Article I, Sect. 26 tells me the lawsuit won't succeed. The legislature has plenary power to make laws related to the right to bear arms. They've done so here.

Here's why I think it's a tempest in a teapot: Nothing in the law requires a restaurant owner to admit anyone who carries a gun. The law only authorizes those with a permit to carry it in a restaurant.

Randy Rayburn needs to take a chill pill and just put up a sign on his door that reads: No Guns Allowed.

If he does so, the law will back him up if he wants to throw someone out. Simple enough.

Instead, everybody has to go all ape-shit over nothing just for press attention. Makes me sick.

I support the 2nd Amendment, but I also support the right of restaurant owners to bar those who wish to pack heat too. This law doesn't interfere with either right.

Climate change is undisputed. Deniers are liars.

For all you climate change deniers out there, I'd like to provide you with a link to a study that shows just how stupid your asinine recalcitrance has become.

I suspect that climate change deniers (liars?) prefer sticking their heads in the sand because to admit error is tantamount to becoming a liberal.

For those of you with the spine to read the study, I half expect you to shoot the messenger by claiming it's some vast intellectual conspiracy.

For those of you afraid to critically examine the evidence, I suspect you'll believe the pseudo-intellectuals in the media who agitate and lie about a leftist plot to destroy the free market.

Either way, you're being an idiot unless you use your brain.

Oklahoma politician showing her stupidity through proclamation--what else is new.

Politicians who do things like what Sally Kern from Oklahoma has done make a mockery of our political system.

Do I think she should be stopped from asserting her opinion? Absolutely not.

Do I think she's a bozo? Absolutely yes.

Bigotry and narrow-mindedness in any form is anathema to a free society. When a politician uses her position to advance an agenda of stupidity and ignorance, then maybe her constituency should reconsider their choice in representative. If they like Ms. Kern then it says a lot about her constituency.

Can't we get a proclamation against stupidity and bigotry please?

Closed-mindedness linked to insecurity in recent study---Proof at last.

This study confirms what many of us already suspected.

Closed-mindedness travels in the same coach as insecurity.

When I read studies like this I'm reminded of my days in church--Baptist church--where so many were so quick to judge and so quick to dismiss any notion of tolerance.

Thankfully, the faith of my childhood was left to my childhood.

Bottom line: Closed-mindedness is a compensatory facade for chickenshit.

Capitalistic medicine defies the laws of economics and risks patient lives

Our medical system has many problems. Greed is the worst feature of the system.

When the primary motivation for doctors or future doctors is money, patient health and well-being take a backseat.

When the demand for primary care physicians isn't being met, then the invisible hand of economics has broken down.

Capitalism is great, but to ignore its problems won't improve our system. It's time for a change.

Palin-Letterman donnybrook nothing but a tired attempt to remain relevant with irrelevant fake outrage. Please.

The whole Palin-Letterman dustup shows how devoid of ideas the Republican party truly is.

Instead of working to improve our nation, Palin, her crew, and the Republicans would rather turn a joke by a tv host into the central issue of the week.

This is why the Republicans lost the election in large part. They have nothing but fabricated outrage over stupid stuff said by a tv personality that amounts to nothing more than a hill of beans.

What happened to substance over style?

Palin's a loser without any redeeming qualities except her attractiveness and moronic right-wing ruthlessness--isn't it time we call bullshit on that old style of repudiated politics?

I think so.

If Palin and the Republicans can't offer up more than an Atwater/Rove retread tactic, then they deserve exile. No wonder McCain has nothing to do with Palin now...he knows she lost him the election.

Good riddance.

Lies, damn lies, and agendas. Hoaxer causes more harm to her agenda by lying.

When people with an "agenda" do things like lying to push their views on people then it bespeaks more of their lack of integrity and their dearth of intellectual honesty than in the value of their worldview.

Escaping those of faith who champion their particular religion through dishonesty and deceit is the fact that hypocrisy kills any legitimacy their particular beliefs might have.

This woman who blogged about a fake troubled pregnancy to garner sympathy did nothing more than anger those sympathetic to her plight. What was she thinking? How do you translate sympathy based on a lie into a change of heart in those who were duped by the lie?

You don't. Lying is counter-productive.

This is the problem with agendas. When agenda supersedes the truth, then we are left with nothing but an unfounded belief upon which to built a edifice of trust. All based on lies.

60% of Bankruptcies caused by medical bills--shocking!

This story sums up the problem with health care, as it is currently run, in this country.

When our system prefers to send people to the poor house so that medical providers can rack up significant bank, then something is askew.

Explain why health care for profit benefits our country when we see results like this?

Things must change.

Think on this: If you had to choose between a doctor who practiced medicine because they saw it as a calling or doctor who went into medicine because of the income possibilities, which one would you choose?

Our medical system needs a lifestyle adjustment.

Study indicates our tendency to ignore news that conflicts with our worldview.

Studies like this one underscore the necessity for reading or viewing a number of media sources instead of relying on one or two.

As we age, the danger of viewpoint ossification increases. We seek certainty. When a news story contradicts our particular worldview, then chances are good we'll minimize its value, criticize its source, or seek out other stories to offset the perceived threat to our cozy little worlds.

The Founding Fathers, especially Thomas Jefferson, were acutely aware of this natural tendency, despite having no name for it. Jefferson felt so strongly about the dangers of narrow-mindedness and simple-mindedness in the electorate that he donated all his books to start a library (University of Virginia). Along with the other founders, Jefferson noted that the dangers of a free press were far outweighed by having no press at all.

We find ourselves in an awkward situation today. Our media strives for profit. Profit motive fuels the tendency of the media to feed consumers what they want instead of what they need, viz., real news and conflicting stories.

My prescription: Read many sources, take them all with a grain of salt. Don't parrot some bozo who makes his or her money from maintaining an audience instead of actually adhering to a code of journalistic ethics.

Customer service is making a comeback---thankfully.

I'm of the opinion that automated phone systems are designed to thwart customers instead of addressing service issues.

Think about it: Who benefits from wasting your time and possibly frustrating you to the point that you hang up and maybe go away? You most assuredly don't benefit, but the companies do.

Service will differentiate the good from the bad. Price pressures from competition will keep price differences minuscule, so intangible--like good service--will inform the choices.

The internet makes it so much easier to hassle key decision makers so things will change.

It's time we get back to being Americans and live up to our Constitution

Stories like this highlight the vast dividing line between rich and poor.

I've been fortunate to grow up middle class. I've had every opportunity to succeed. My parents were not so lucky. Both came from poor country stock and both carry the attitudes and proclivities of the poor.

Those attitudes impacted me in a significant way--making me sensitive the the plight of the poor and downtrodden. These lessons, more than anything, explain my tendency to support the many over the few--the weak over the strong. Essentially, growing up with middle class resources, but a lower class mindset shaped my political values.

For many decades now, a scary, class-ist, and ultimately aristocratic attitude has governed our society. Hopefully, its final expression in the Bush administration and their mouthpieces in the press (Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck to name a few..) will be nothing more than a death shudder of a narrow and mean view of society.

Policies enacted over decades make it easier to exploit those with little social power. Greed--encouraged by an ideology of self-reliance and a laissez-faire agenda reminiscent of pre-Depression era government and country, has resulted in an exploitative society that is nothing less than predatory.

It's time we own up to meanness. It's time we live united as a people. Too long have self-interest and the narcissism of certain self-satisfaction governed our land.

We should begin by treating the poor as people instead of like peasants to be abused for our own gain.

If we fail, then it won't be too long before our aristocratic tendencies lead to our undoing.

Cafferty Agrees with me on dealing with Bush Administration...for what it's worth.

As a charter member of the crotchety old fart club, of which I consider myself a member in good standing, Jack Cafferty of CNN calls for a special prosecutor for the Bush Administration.

Obama is making a big mistake by ignoring the crimes of the last administration. Until the matter is examined, publicly and fully, then our country won't be free of taint from the Bush years.

I say again that it's not a liberal/conservative or Republican/Democrat issue; it one of crime and justice.

It should surprise no one that two cronies from the Nixon Administration (Cheney & Rumsfeld) share a large part of the blame for the screw-ups and law-breaking of the Bush years. You can't teach old dogs new tricks. Both Cheney and Rumsfeld learned at the feet of the master--Tricky Dick. These two bozos retained the paranoia and the deceit that marked the Nixon administration. On top of that, they had something to prove.

I think Cheney and Rumsfeld went to great lengths to turn the Bush Administration into a continuation of the Nixon years. In some sick psychodrama, they sought redemption for themselves and Nixon by making policy indicative of their previous tenure. America is saddled with the results of these two geezers who couldn't let go of their ignominious service with Nixon.

Obama must excise this blot from our collective conscious. Pelosi, although a good conciliator, should own her failure to impeach Cheney and Rumsfeld; she could have stopped the tragedy of the Bush years caused by the Dicky & Donny Show.

Pelosi dust-up is tacit admission that Bush administration engaged in torture.

In a display of "gotcha" politics," the Republicans have pounced on Nanci Pelosi's allegation that the CIA lied to her about torture.

I don't know who to believe in this dust-up. I'm inclined to think Speaker Pelosi was informed of the torture. Thinking back on my general complaint of the Democrats during the time in question, I suspect she was. Democrats displayed such spinelessness just prior to the mid-term elections in 2004, so it's in keeping with their character at that time.

What should result from this?

If the Speaker was informed, then she should admit her complicity in the torture for failing to act. On the other hand, if she was misinformed, then those responsible must account for their omissions.

In my opinion, the best approach to resolving this matter--the ENTIRE matter--is to seat a Truth Commission to evaluate and report on everyone involved in the torture issue--including Nanci Pelosi.

The Republicans, by attacking Pelosi, tacitly admit torture occurred by the Bush-led government. Owning up to their part in these sordid events instead relying on a logical fallacy (Tu quoque - "you did it too") to score political points would begin the process.

I don't expect that to happen.

Now's the time for the Obama administration to show some leadership and jettison the impunity granted by their "looking to the future" agenda. This isn't a liberal or conservative issue, but one of justice and criminal activity going unpunished.

The current administration shirks their responsibility by ignoring the criminality of those aligned with the previous administration. Looking to the future doesn't mean ignoring the crimes of the past; it means we must properly resolve issues of the past in order to move into the future.

Letting previous malefactors slide as a courtesy scarcely qualifies as responsible governance.

Morons on parade.

The more I work with corporate America, the more I understand that the value of ....shall we call it VALUES!

For a time now, I've provided advice and other services to a corporation.

In the scant two (2) years of my association, I've experienced a caricature of corporate America.

First of all, this company (although one I hold deep regard for in my personal life...) seems to hire what I charitably call "flunkies" for their management staff.

These people spend most of their time avoiding responsibility, shirking work, and shifting blame rather than actually working.

Secondly, whenever I provide any advice, legal or otherwise, if it conflicts with their bottom line, I immediately suffer demonization and threats against my future tenure.

What I've learned from this experience?

Schmoes work in corporate America. They sacrifice integrity for their own self-interest.

I don't think the founding fathers had this in mind when they set up our great country.

I've also learned that the truth is really scary when money in involved.

Why?

It seems that every decision made by my corporate affiliate gets resolved in a fashion that results in maximization of their cash-flow NOW rather than for their long-term financial stability.

Such is the life of Mr. Brutal Honesty.

Obama has ticked me off! Military brass is a bunch a wusses.

Obama has finally pissed me off.

I'm sorry that the troops might be put in danger over the release of the photos of abuse.

But all I have to say is "Tough shit."

If they're so damned worried about the effect it might have then perhaps they should have obeyed the Constitution instead of following the dictates of their Commander-In-Chief (Bush) when they had the chance.

Need I remind everyone that soldiers take an oath when they join the service. Every last one of them swears to uphold the Constitution before anything. Next in the oath is to follow the orders of the President. If the President gives an order that contradicts the Constitution then as I see it, every soldier has a legal obligation to disobey.

Why? Because the Constitution governs all of us, including the President. Otherwise, we are no longer a nation of laws, but one of tyranny.

The way I see it, if the military want's to act like a bunch of pussies and worry about the effect that photos of their malfeasance and broken oaths might have, then perhaps they should have thought about that before they violated the damn law!

I may get hate mail for this, but one thing I am not is a wuss. I speak the truth and when Obama wimps out on the truth because some pansy-ass Generals are worried about hurt feelings and the potential consequences, then I draw the line.

These Generals are more worried about their careers than they are about their oaths to uphold the Constitution and defend our county. If they aren't smart enough to follow the law then they need to be replaced.

Sometimes to the truth hurts. Grow a spine you sissies.