2009.07.01
Wednesday open thread
I wanted to become the seeker, the aroused and passionate explorer, and it was better going at it knowing nothing at all, always choosing the unmarked bottle, always choosing your own unproven method, armed with nothing but faith and a belief in astonishment.
What are you armed with today?
RSS feed 
Great article about Obama... published by the Canada Free Press, if you can believe that.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/11866
Comment by Jack — July 1, 2009 @ 8:33 am
CFP is also subtitled.."Conservative Free Press".
Here's a brief bio of the author.
"Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and freelance commentator. “Daniel comments on political affairs with a special focus on the War on Terror and the rising threat to Western Civilization. He maintains a blog at Sultanknish.blogspot.com."
Thank goodness someone's focusing on the "rising threat to Western Civilization". Basically he's another RW blogger.
Comment by Kristen — July 1, 2009 @ 9:10 am
Great article, Jack! Thanks for pointing it out!
Comment by Danny — July 1, 2009 @ 9:11 am
Another in a long line of Obama bashing commentary from this guy. I realize that Obama was supposed to have saved the country from the greatest economic disaster since "The Crash" and "The Great Depression" in less than 6 months, but the rest of the world sees these attempts for what they are. President Obama is trying to fix things that need fixing, that have needed fixing for a long time and sad for the Conservative and Republican efforts, the American people get that. I know honesty matters to most people, how about at least labeling opinion as opinion or commentary, so we can tell when to skip the effort?
Comment by Sandi Saunders — July 1, 2009 @ 9:19 am
Please stop referring to him as Obama and refer to him for who he really is... The Messiah.
Get it right, Sandi.
Comment by Jack — July 1, 2009 @ 11:21 am
Jack...
Just so you'll know, I've never referred to Obama as anything more than President of the United States nor do I believe that anyone else believes he is anything more than that. It's ironic that most conservatives seem to view him in the iconic state of Messiah. Perhaps that's telling about the void that might be apparent in the lives of most conservatives?
I don't think it's unreasonable to have great expectations of the leaders that are elected. Regrettably, they let us down more often than not. There are quite a few issues that Obama has not addressed that I believe are worthy of immediate consideration and action.
Comment by Will — July 1, 2009 @ 11:43 am
Jack, I personally take comfort in knowing that if anything untoward should happen to my president, he'd be back on the job in 3 days.
Comment by Kristen — July 1, 2009 @ 12:23 pm
He'd probably have to run again, though. Doubtful he would win a second time.
Comment by Jack — July 1, 2009 @ 12:30 pm
Ya think so Jack?
Seems like Limbaugh has already conceeded that Obama will be President through 2016 since he's convinced himself that Obama will strike some kind of law that will let him run for a third term (although Constitionally impossible if Rush would read the articles, but that hasn't stopped him before from making stupid and irrational and unfounded comments).
Comment by Will — July 1, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
It might take a Messiah to resurrect the GOP.
Comment by Kristen — July 1, 2009 @ 12:43 pm
It could possibly be done through executive order. Something along the lines of "this nation is in serious crisis... and you Americans voted for me in 2008 because you want ME to be the one to fix it. Because of this, I am issuing executive order XXX whic allows me to remain your president until such time as our country's crisis has been resolved fully."
Comment by Jack — July 1, 2009 @ 12:51 pm
Jack...
Executive Orders of the President can not overide existing amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Since the term of the President is detailed in the 22nd Amendment, any modification or repeal would require a majority (and I would have to check the exact percentage) of the states to ratify the change. Secondarily, the sitting President couldn't impliment the change as it would be construed as a conflict of interest for the sitting President to sign an order presumably benefiting himself.
Comment by Will — July 1, 2009 @ 2:34 pm
It might take the Messiah to resurrect the United States, particularly personal freedom. People thought individual liberties were trod upon when some e-mails were read without a search warrant. The government was unduly intruding on our freedom, right? The new energy bill includes a clause that requires anyone who wants to sell a house in the United States to first bring it up to some arbitrary "green" standard set by the government. This is far more broad and will adversely affect the property rights of far more Americans than warrantless wiretaps and e-mail interception ever could.
What gives Obama the right to tell anyone they have to have a certain type of door or window. Was this what he meant when he said Americans need help now? It has only been six months and have already seen a massive expansion of government power and control over the individual. What will the US look like after four years of this?
Comment by C Ramsey — July 1, 2009 @ 11:31 pm
"The new energy bill includes a clause that requires anyone who wants to sell a house in the United States to first bring it up to some arbitrary "green" standard set by the government."
I live in a 60-year-old house. This really sucks. Thankfully, though, all of the doors and windows have been replaced with new, energy efficient ones. But still.
Comment by Jack — July 2, 2009 @ 7:42 am
C, can you provide a link that shows the bills text in this regard? I've been going through the bill, all 1400 pages of it, trying to find it and I'm not having any luck. If you've seen this, I would love to have the opportunity to peruse the correct section because I'm having a heck of a time finding this needle in that big of a haystack!
Comment by Other John — July 2, 2009 @ 9:00 am
On top of the new taxes and everything else...how are we suppose to afford bringing homes up to some arbitrary "green" code? I'm still waiting to hear how we afford to pay for universal (only 1/3 of the uninsured) health care...
Comment by Danny — July 2, 2009 @ 9:07 am
OJ, I'm still looking too. I'm relying on an interview with the assistant White House Press Secretary who was asked about this issue. He didn't say that the assertion was in error. He said that the President felt that this increased efficiency was important in decreasing our energy use over the long-term. He didn't really answer when asked the question of how making it harder to sell homes would be helpful to the recovery of the housing market. I think the difficulty you have in finding it is exactly the goal of ramming a 1300+ page bill through on the fast-track. Just like all the major legislation passed so far, it's a done deal before anyone even has time to know what it says.
Comment by C Ramsey — July 2, 2009 @ 11:27 am
Agreed C. It takes me about a week or so to read a good 500 page novel. Sitting down to read a 1300+ page bill in all of its boring repetitiousness and tedious legalese would take a heck of a lot longer.
Comment by Other John — July 2, 2009 @ 12:25 pm
@ Will # 12:
"Executive Orders of the President can not overide existing amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Since the term of the President is detailed in the 22nd Amendment, any modification or repeal would require a majority (and I would have to check the exact percentage) of the states to ratify the change. Secondarily, the sitting President couldn't impliment the change as it would be construed as a conflict of interest for the sitting President to sign an order presumably benefiting himself."
You might want to look up Abe Lincoln's suspension of Habeas or FDR's interment of Japanese Americans without due process.
Now, I don't think Pres. Obama will demand a thrird term through fiat, but to simply say that no president can override the Constitution by executive order requires one to forget several glaring instances where they have done so before.
Comment by Mike W. — July 2, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
C. Ramsey, your first paragraph of Post 13 was indeed a great reason the slippery slope argument was used when the "individual liberties were trod upon when some e-mails were read without a search warrant". What starts as a simple and innocuous "need" turns into massive intrusion and hardship. It is, generally, much harder to stop the second guy from doing what the first guy got away with. THAT is what many of the Constitutional Scholars have been saying for years (of course they all thought the Hill and Bill show would be in the White House next).
Comment by Sandi Saunders — July 2, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2454eh.txt.pdf
Page 617: "...shall establish a commission to develop and recommend model mortgage products and underwriting guidelines that provide market based incentives to prospective home buyers, lenders and sellers to incorporate energy efficient upgrades and location efficiencies in new mortgage loan transactions."
That is all I could find that mentions selling a home.
There are 61 uses of "retrofit" which talks about how to get money for doing it and how it is to be valued and measured for efficiency so maybe that is where the confusion lies.
the pdf is at least searchable... happy hunting!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — July 2, 2009 @ 2:54 pm