That’s…..that’s…..I’m actually at a loss for words here. Your agreement or disagreement on Roe becomes a non-issue. Those who argue against Roe make a legitimate claim that the Constitution does not contain an explicit or inherent right of privacy and SCOTUS overstepped it’s bounds.

But that’s not what Palin argued. She ceded the point that there is an inherent constitutional right to privacy–essentially agreed with the legal holding, the underlying basis of Roe. And then proceeded to say that the states can violate it at will. Think about that for a second. A candidate for the vice-presidency has argued that the states can ignore a constitutional right if they choose. Because she started out by ceding that privacy is an inherent constitutional right.

Either she doesn’t have the slightest inkling of how constitutional law works and how legal holdings lead to pragmatic results….and therefore, I don’t see how she ever could have passed high school civics, or she doesn’t really believe in the Constitution. Either way scares the hell out of me.

Oh, and then she couldn’t name another case besides Roe. Which really starts seeming unimportant in comparison.

Oh wait. I forgot. But…but…Ayers! And Wright! And she’s only running for VP! There’s no way a VP could *ever* do damage to the Constitution! Does that about cover it?

I’m sure you mean the _veterinarians_ are trying to stop “unlicensed” horse massage, and IJ is opposing them.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

That being said, if your defense of Palin only knowing the name of one SCOTUS case is “But…but….Ayers!”, well….weak. Just weak.

OTOH, the voluminous criticisms of her lack of whatever it is this week seem oddly one-sided when compared with the **utterly nonexistent** similar criticisms of the *democrat* VP candidate. biden has shown himself repeatedly to be A) incredibly stupid B) childish C) dishonest D) arrogant E) by any reasonable yardstick, a serious liability to obama.

yet we don’t read about that. we don’t have 30 ‘agitator’ posts detailing his lies; and moronic utterances; and his plagiarisms; and the fact his little sonny *lobbied for businesses his daddy regulated*. nope. not a peep. oh, sure, there are vague amorphous MSM notations that “gee, he’s not all he could be and maybe it’d be better if he was hillary”, but that’s about it.

as to specifics, is biden’s vast history of lies/embellishments/plagiarism not a valid reason to doubt his ability to be president? or does that not matter when the person in question is a democrat? it’s funny how you choose not to mention that.

let’s put biden on camera, and let a hardcore rightwinger play ‘gotcha’ with him. then let’s let that same hardcore rightwinger EDIT the interview to showcase him at his absolute worst. (you know, like couric the hardcore left-winger did to palin.) think biden would look too good? “senator biden, you’ve been sucking on the government tit for 35 years now, and as far as we can tell, your accomplishments add up to a big fat zero. why should anyone think you’re qualified to be anything but an empty suit? what exactly have you accomplished in all that time?”

as for your statement of “republicans are the only ones i’ve seen suggesting she should step down”, well…..you’re either blind or lying, nick. which is it?

*i’ll* wait very patiently for *your* response, nick. remember now! stick to defending biden, not taking gratuitous cheap shots at palin.

It’s funny how you chose not to defend Palin on her own merits or her substance as a candidate. Are the criticisms of her lack of knowledge and experience unwarranted, unfounded, irrational? If so, please explain why? Also explain why she is a good candidate and qualified to be the President? Specifically, is only knowing one Supreme court case not a valid reason to seriously doubt one’s ability to be chief of the executive branch? Why not?

I’ll wait VERY patiently for your response.

Oh, and Republicans are the only ones I’ve seen reportedly suggesting she step down.

they just couldn’t BE more earnest. owlishly pointing out her faults; solemnly noting that she and those faults are going to hurt mccain; helpfully tossing out suggestions that, perhaps, if she were to drop out, perhaps mccain would have a better chance in the election.

because that’s what the media is all about, really: trying to make sure mccain has a good shot at getting elected. that’s why we get news of the obama/rezko connection every day. why we get bill ayers updates every day. why the obama/ACORN connection is being scrutinized so closely. heh.

OR, you could be all cynical and suspect that palin *terrifies* the left and they’re desperately trying ANYthing; saying ANYthing to make her go away. if threats won’t work, maybe helpful suggestions will.

More importantly, breed-specific legislation has been empirically shown to be ineffective.

If you can only name one case (and I’d bet my first-born child she can’t tell you the arguments or legal issues in RvW) then you have not thought anywhere near long-enough about the constitution and role of government to be qualified to be President. Hands down.

1.) She’s probably been so crammed full of talking points and “what not to say”s, that the question caught her a bit of guard. She’s being interviewed on national TV. If she said, “Marbury v. Madison”, would that have been better? Would all of her detractors suddenly seized up and said, “Here’s a conservative we can support?” Give me a break.

2.) All the candidates have pretty said ridiculous things on the campaign trail. We have a laundry list of misstatements, uhs and malapropisms by Obama, McCain and Biden. Once and while you even get to see one by Biden (but never by Obamessiah). Is Biden the gift that keeps on giving because he thought the McCain ad was bs? Because he told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up? Give me a break. We might have seen on NBC if Biden was a Republican. Or “57 states” by Obama, too. Oops.

This campaign is between two flawed candidates – one of which clearly has the media supporting while the other one doesn’t. If you want to criticize the choice of McCain’s people to keep putting her in front of hostile interviewers, that’s fine. The Gibson interview editing was a joke. But the main reason Gov. Palin is seen as a “gift” to Sen. Obama is because she’s on the wrong ticket that media supports.

(If these councils only knew what these dogs were bred for)
And why is that?

Dalmatians are coach dogs, meaning their job is to trot with the horse and protect it, both from animals and brigands. They are quick to rush out and attack anything that enters their “zone”.

LIVONIA — Diana Judge never had anything against pit bulls until she was ambushed this summer by a pair that escaped from their owner’s yard in her neighborhood.

She fought one off. The other mauled her hands, ripped off a fingernail and killed her 12-pound Pembroke Welsh Corgi. Now, Judge is urging the city to strengthen its dangerous animal law to require special handling, obedience training and licensing. The suggestions are awaiting City Council consideration.

Translation:

The pit bulls either charged or attacked her dog so she picked the dog up to protect it. The pit bulls continued to attack and mistakenly bit the woman on the hand (probably the one holding her dog). All-in-all a dumb move. In a dog fight, never try to break it up by picking up one of the dogs. Get help and seperate all dogs. Yeah, I know that that isn’t always an option, but anything else is risky in terms of placing yourself in between to fighting animals…not a good idea.

And that being said these dogs need to be removed from their owner, the owner needs to be fined, pay for medical bills, and possibly restricted from owning other bully breeds. The owner was negligent in not making sure the dogs were secured. Keep in mind this owner almost surely violated at least one law. Prosecute on that law, enacting another one that will be hapharadly enforced isn’t the answer.

“The dogs seem to be more aggressive than most types. They are innately more prone to attacking,” said City Councilman James Flynn, a member of the committee working to craft the ordinance. “My biggest fear, as an elected official is someone coming to me and saying, ‘Sir you had the opportunity (to do something) about a known threat and opted not to.’”

My APBT is dog aggressive. I know that. However, in most cases it is the other dogs that display far higher levels of dog aggression than my dog. I’ve taken my dog to UCLA’s Festival of Books and every time she is charged, barked at, and challenged by much smaller lap dogs that “wouldn’t hurt a flea”. I, knowing my dog, have trained her to ignore these dogs as best she can and to keep moving. People who have small dogs, IMO, tend to be the poorer types of owners. Figuring that since their dog is small they don’t have to correct for such anti-social behavior. In fact, these owners often behave in ways that reinforce such behavior.

Blame should fall upon owners, said Chuck Gillenwater, animal control officer for Wyandotte.

“It doesn’t matter what breed: if it’s going to bite, it’s going to bite,” said Gillenwater, noting pit bulls account for few — maybe 5 percent — of the city’s dog bite cases annually.

“There’s not a major outbreak of pit bull bites.” Redford Township and Farmington Hills have taken a similar stance, passing “vicious” and “dangerous” animal ordinances instead, requiring owners to obtain liability insurance, special signage and licenses.

Exactly right. What makes pit bull so dangerous is the media’s fascination with such dogs. Also, many articles are written by the ignorant and/or stupid. They automatically assume “fighting dog” = “man biter” when in actuallity that is simply not the case.

Farmington Hills-based attorney Glenn Saltsman, who handles hundreds of dog bite cases annually, claims bully breeds are the overwhelming culprit in his most serious dog bite cases.

“I know what these dogs are capable of,” he said. “It’s totally mind numbing and unbelievable until you’ve seen a picture of what these dogs have done to kids or people. It’s sickening.”

See. Sounds great. But what is completely lacking is any kind of perspective on how often this happens, how common such dogs are in the area etc. If you have 3 serious dog bite cases and 6 dogs living in the surround area….then yeah you might have a problem with such dogs, or possibly the owners. But if you have 3 cases and 300 dogs then it is a completely different picture. Passing a law that affects 300 dogs and their families because of the bad actions of 3 dogs and their owners is just the morons form of regulation (Butler T. Reynolds).

But what exactly is a Pit Bull?
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

And what percentage of pit bull does the dog have to be before it is destroyed? The whole concept of a breed related law seems silly. The problem is aggressive/uncontrolled dogs, not what they look like. I wouldn’t want to authority of determining my dog’s lineage to fall to some untrained animal control/police officer.

I’d be more likely to support all dog owner’s whose animal has a bite strength greater than X, be required to take a safety course. This at least would be easy to measure objectively. Determining a dog’s lineage is not. Even better might be a required class for all dog owners in general and leave any testing aside.

Today’s News-Leader has another, slightly more informative article reiterating the cops’ earlier claims that they fired on Hutchinson to keep him from bounding out into traffic. With his punctured lung and his broken back. (They forgot to mention his badly broken heel.)

The Missouri Highway Patrol is also investigating this thing separately. Just to make double sure that there really truly is nothing to see here, I suspect.

(If these councils only knew what these dogs were bred for)
And why is that?

Their history/lineage is somewhat in dispute, but they were coach/chariot dogs. Possibly used war and as guard dogs. They still have a high guarding instinct and can be aloof with strangers and dogs they don’t know. They have a high prey drive and it isn’t unknown for them to hunt smaller animals such as rats, rabbits and possible cats. They’ve also been used in hunting as well upto and including boar (the APBT is another breed that excels at boar hunting).

All of the above means, once again, not a dog for everyone. A dog that is aloof with strangers, has a high prey drive, and stong guarding instinct is a recipe for disaster with a half-assed owner–i.e. some dipshit who say 101 Dalmations and thought it would be a great family dog without checking this all out. It is imparative that such a dog be socialized with children in the household and that they learn that humans are higher in the heirarchy. They require an owner who is firm and fair and can stay calm when things go sideways. They should never be alone with children (they weigh 45 to 60 pounds so they are medium dog and a possible issue with children even in their early teens). The children need to be trained also on the correct way to play with such dogs and to always behave in a way that lets the dog know that the children are also dominant over the dog. And for God’s sake don’t just toss the poor dog in the back yard and ignore it 23/7. These dogs need to be around people, you will have to let the dog into your house.