Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Thwarting Democracy...

Democrats sure do not act Democratic at times. The only reason gay marriage is the law in Massachusetts is because a court imposed it on that state.

Now, in order to thwart an intelligence program that they lack the votes to stop, they decide to let the trial lawyers handle it, as the Wall Street Journal explains:
We asked one phone company executive what he'd do, after Friday's expiration, in response to a government request for cooperation. His answer was blunt: "I'm not doing it. If I don't have compulsion, I can't get out of court [and those lawsuits]. . . . I'm not going to do something voluntarily." Having talked to telecom executives, we can tell you this view is well-nigh universal.

Mr. Reyes claims that existing wiretap orders can stay in place for a year. But that doesn't account for new targets, which may require new kinds of telecom cooperation and thus a new court order. Mr. Reyes can make all the assertions he wants about immunity, but they are no defense against a lawsuit. For that matter, without a statute in place, even a renewed order by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is likely to be challenged as illegitimate. A telecom CEO who cooperates without a court order is all but guaranteed to get not merely a wiretap lawsuit, but also a shareholder suit for putting the company at legal risk.
George W. Bush wins two presidential elections. He is the commander-in-chief, and as such, is responsible for this country's security. His approach was explicitly chosen in 2004, during the war.

Instead, trial lawyers and activist judges will subvert the will of the people.

5 comments:

Charlotte said...

When it comes to gay marriage in Massachusetts you don't know what you're talking about. Marriage is a basic civil right that should be attainable by all Americans. For the truth about gay marriage check out our trailer. Produced to educate & defuse the controversy it has a way of opening closed minds & provides some sanity on the issue: www.OUTTAKEonline.com

Ken Prescott said...

When it comes to gay marriage in Massachusetts you don't know what you're talking about. Marriage is a basic civil right that should be attainable by all Americans.

We already restrict it considerably, most notably in terms of forbidding high levels of marital consanguinity.

Outside those restrictions, a man may choose to marry any woman who would have him, and any woman may choose to marry any man who would have him.

What you seem to be intent on doing is to redefine the word "marriage" to mean something other than what it means to the vast majority of Americans. And those Americans are getting pretty sick and tired of that sort of thing.

The love that dare not speak its name now has no idea of when to shut up.

MLEH said...

On the subject of "redefining marriage", I highly recommend this article:

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/2932146.html

It requires some pretty heavy lifting in the intellectual department, but gave me a whole new perspective on the topic.

MLEH said...

Alas, the URL was clipped in my previous post. Tack on 46.html
and you should get to it.

Ken Prescott said...

Here's mleh's link, ready-to-click.