First some old business: Last month I had intended to include a list of Democratic senators who voted to fund the war in Iraq, despite overwhelming public sentiment to end the thing ASAP. The following are the cowards and the states they putatively represent:

Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Not Voting
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Webb (D-VA), Nay

Included in the list is the addled Joe Lieberman, whose stance on the Iraq war I cannot seem to figure out at all. The best I can come up with is that he staked out his position relatively early (even before Bush kissed him) and is afraid of being tagged a flip-flopper, or he actually believes the CIC and Cheny-the Hut can pull off some last quarter miracle and settle the mess. I tend to believe the former because if the latter is true, he is indeed addled. In the clinical sense. As for the rest of the imbeciles, I guess they think that cutting off funds would be seen as not “supporting the troops.”

Well…

Since Bush would veto the bill ANYWAY, the troops will be fully supported as long as the Republicans in Congress stay on the reservation and fail to override the veto. In the last few days, three more Republicans have expressed opposition to the war, thereby breaking with the Executive. If the trend continues, eventually such a bill might pass, Should that occur, Bush would have two options: First, he could bring the troops home. Second, he could keep them there without food or bullets. His choice. Thinking it over, he has a third option: He could pay for the war out of his own private funds. Let him simply dip into his family fortune and buy the munitions himself. Or even MORE interesting, he could introduce legislation calling for the sale of war bonds to the public. That is precisely how we funded and fought WW2. Taxes were not raised a single penny. I’m sure the public at large would rush to partake of these bonds. If they showed no interest in purchasing them (no pun intended), well, that would be sort of a referendum on the war, wouldn’t it?

••••••••••••••••••••••

This from the NYT:

WASHINGTON, June 28 — Striking down an antitrust rule nearly a century old, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that it was not automatically unlawful for manufacturers and distributors to agree on minimum retail prices.

The decision will give producers significantly more, though not unlimited, power to dictate retail prices and to restrict the flexibility of discounters.

Five justices, agreeing with the nation’s major manufacturers, said the new rule could in some instances lead to more competition and better service. But four dissenting justices agreed with 37 states and some consumer groups that abandoning the old rule could result in significantly higher prices and less competition for consumer and other goods.

The court struck down the 96-year-old rule that resale price maintenance agreements were an automatic, or per se, violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In its place, the court instructed judges considering such agreements for possible antitrust violations to apply a case-by-case approach, known as a “rule of reason,” to assess their impact on competition. The new rule is considerably more favorable to defendants.


There has been a spate of 5-4 decisions of late, all of them favoring conservative doctrine; such doctrine consisting of a theory that all progressive legislation passed since 1830 is harmful and unnecessary. I guess that’s why we’re all brushing our teeth with toothpaste containing coal oil manufactured in China. The “winds of free trade,” and all that, ya know!

Here’s another 5-4 gem, again from the NYT:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that ordinary taxpayers cannot challenge a White House initiative that helps religious charities get a share of federal money.

The 5-4 decision blocks a lawsuit by a group of atheists and agnostics against eight Bush administration officials including the head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

Oh BABY! This is getting RAW! I don’t know where to begin with the above lunacy! Ordinary taxpayers? What in hell is an “ordinary taxpayer?” Does that equate with a “Commoner?” Is Thomas More to be retried for failing to recognize the divine authority of King Henry? Can these idiots not grasp the separation clause in our constitution? I tell you, that last cited decision scares me as much as or more than anything else this bunch of traitors has yet come up with. And as for Alito sitting in front of a congressional committee and professing his profound respect for previous court decisions, I consider you a liar of the lowest order, and a hell of a low-stroller!

And I would still dearly love to know what might constitute an extra-ordinary taxpayer. If your decisions are destined to be full of ideological bullshit, at least try to write them in understandable terms.

••••••••••••••••••••••

This last once more from the NYT:

BOSTON, June 30 — With the mandate that everyone in Massachusetts have health insurance taking effect on Sunday, more than 130,000 people — about a third of those who were uninsured a year ago — now have coverage, officials say.

Kathleen Knox of Arlington, Mass., switched insurers to save money under a state law intended to provide health care to all state residents.

But most of those who have signed up are poor enough to qualify for free or state-subsidized insurance.

People who must pay the full cost themselves, who are crucial to the success of the nation’s most ambitious effort to achieve near-universal coverage, may now be a majority of the state’s uninsured and not all are rushing to get coverage. Many of them are healthy young people in their 20’s and 30’s, state officials say.

“A lot of the population we’re trying to reach right now are young folks who don’t have insurance for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is they don’t think they’re ever going to be sick,” Gov. Deval Patrick said.

There you have it! They don’t think they’re ever going to be sick!

What about injured? What happens when you wipe out on one of those racing motorcycles you speed around on? Or your appendix bursts? Who pays for your medical care then?

No matter. The law is the law, and eventually you will be forced to do what common sense dictates. Don’t like it? Think we have too much “government interference” in our lives? Perhaps we do.

Then again, as Madison said: “If you would have less government, try not acting in a manner that seems to call for more.”

Thank you once more for your indulgence, and I welcome any and all comment and criticism.