Posts by edsheppa

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • According to Polls, Fred Thompson Foundering

    11/14/2007 6:23:00 PM PST · 528 of 544
    edsheppa to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
    What's ironic is that you don't even really think that.

    Of course I do. Unlike Thompson I would support a human life amendment and criminalizing abortion while recognizing as a practical matter that neither can be obtained now.

  • According to Polls, Fred Thompson Foundering

    11/14/2007 12:33:31 PM PST · 513 of 544
    edsheppa to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
    People like you, who aren't that keen on applying the Constitution when doing so doesn't fit your particular personal way of how things should be done?

    Uh, no. People like me who think the right to life is more important than federalism. Just like we think abolishing slavery and giving women the vote is more important than federalism.

  • PBS Telling Teachers to Violate First Amendment, Group Says

    11/14/2007 12:31:12 PM PST · 132 of 271
    edsheppa to steve-b

    That’s an interesting line of argument but I don’t think it quite hits the mark. The equivalent question and answer in that context would be “can you accept war and still believe in religion?” and “yes. The common view that war is inherently antireligious is simply false.” The distinction (which I admit is a fine one) is that the a government’s war policy isn’t saying that those who’re opposed to it on religious grounds are wrong, merely that they’re in the minority.

  • According to Polls, Fred Thompson Foundering

    11/14/2007 9:21:39 AM PST · 502 of 544
    edsheppa to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

    Your post is an execellent apologetic - convincing only to those who want to be convinced. Thompson is the only candidate to whom I’ve contributed but now I’m sorry I did. And the reason he’s sinking in the polls, and is now unlikely to be the nominee, is because there are a lot of people like me.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/14/2007 8:53:12 AM PST · 191 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan; JasonC
    I didn't think that you would admit the differences between neutron star models and beta plus decay and you clearly won't.

    Are you actually so anal as to hold against me that I said beta plus decay when I should have said inverse beta decay or electron capture? OK, fine I was wrong. I will correct it.

    Thanks Jason, but what you wrote is entirely theoretical and can’t be observed. ... We see it going the other way (neutron > proton-electron-neutrino), but not that way except in our theories and imaginations.

    You're wrong. This happens in so-called inverse beta decay (or electron capture) which is observed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

  • US has no option in a Pakistan nuclear “nightmare”

    11/13/2007 11:10:13 PM PST · 47 of 94
    edsheppa to sukhoi-30mki

    Is that report reliable? And I’m not talking about the potential Israeli-Indian joint action. After all, Israel knocked out the Iraq nuke facility before Hussein could develop his weapons, why not Pakistan too? Makes, and made, total sense to preempt Pakistan developing them too. Too bad it didn’t happen.

  • US has no option in a Pakistan nuclear “nightmare”

    11/13/2007 10:54:28 PM PST · 32 of 94
    edsheppa to sukhoi-30mki

    Thanks again President Clinton for letting Pakistan get nukes on your watch. That was almost as helpful as Jimmy Carter letting the mullahs take over Iran.

  • New technique creates cheap, abundant hydrogen: report

    11/13/2007 10:43:36 PM PST · 79 of 95
    edsheppa to Myrddin

    Those are all good questions (to which I don’t have the answers). I’m skeptical of the so-called hydrogen economy too. I was just replying to your point about the power output of the hydrogen generating facility being an important consideration but that slower power can be offset by more generating plant if it’s cheap enough.

  • Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? (new critical review of climate models)

    11/13/2007 10:38:31 PM PST · 134 of 135
    edsheppa to Robert A. Cook, PE
    Sorry, I don't see the relevance of your reply to my post.

    However, about that 800 year lag. What's the relevance to today's conditions when CO2 is increasing, not because of warming (as presumably those charts show), but supposedly due to human activity?

  • New technique creates cheap, abundant hydrogen: report

    11/13/2007 6:10:15 PM PST · 72 of 95
    edsheppa to Myrddin
    If generating 288% more energy takes 288% longer to accomplish, you haven't really made any progress.

    You have a good point about power being a consideration, but this point doesn't necessarily follow. If the plant is cheap enough more scale can overcome the lesser power output.

  • Colorado Supreme Court Gives Green Light to Restore Personhood to the Unborn

    11/13/2007 5:32:14 PM PST · 18 of 28
    edsheppa to azcap
    I would love to see the abortion debate shifted to the 14th Amendment

    Not trying to pick a fight, but an originalist would say this initiative would not *necessarily* bring that into play. According to that legal philosophy, whatever the framers of that amendment meant by "person" is binding in its interpretation. And if they had a specific conception of personhood that did not include the unborn, this initiative wouldn't prevent abortion on 14th Amendment grounds.

    On the other hand, they might have had a more "living" interpretation of personhood, leaving it to the people of each time to decide. I doubt that though.

    My point is that, even if the initiaitive passes, it's not a slam dunk even by conservative legal philosophies.

  • Colorado Supreme Court Gives Green Light to Restore Personhood to the Unborn

    11/13/2007 3:48:07 PM PST · 7 of 28
    edsheppa to wagglebee

    Is there any real possibility of this passing? Colorado seems a very unlikely venue.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/13/2007 3:38:17 PM PST · 187 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan

    There is no error in that statement except a grammatical error (sb “is observed”). If you disagree, spell it out.

  • Wal-Mart profit up, expects good holiday (Stocks rally, oil drops; Dow up 300 plus)

    11/13/2007 3:24:25 PM PST · 24 of 36
    edsheppa to NormsRevenge

    You left out “doom’n’gloomers hit hardest.”

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/13/2007 3:23:17 PM PST · 185 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan
    Well maybe you did somewhere and I didn't see it, but do poor small-brained me a favor. Provide the explanation in your reply to this post. Tell me why you think the sentence on gravity is context for the fact claim in this sentence.
    We see it going the other way neutron > proton-electron-neutrino), but not that way except in our theories and imaginations.
    And just so we're perfectly clear, "that way" is proton+electron => neutron+neutrino which we do observe in a form of beta decay (I may have been wrong in calling it beta plus - this particular decay is called "inverse beta decay" or "electron capture." But my point stands, protons and electrons combining to create neutrons observed, just as is postulated in the formation of neutron stars.)
  • US Will Retake Economic Superpower Crown

    11/13/2007 2:55:07 PM PST · 26 of 56
    edsheppa to 1rudeboy
    We are not "evolving away" from manufacturing, in a strict sense. We are evolving away from having a large segment of the labor force involved in manufacturing.

    I see it slightly differently. We're evolving away from manufacturing being the main economic driver. Both in terms of employment, *and* output, manufacturing will become smaller as a fraction of the national economy. But this is true of the world as well.

    And, by the way, I see this as a good thing as I suspect you do too.

  • US Will Retake Economic Superpower Crown

    11/13/2007 2:49:23 PM PST · 25 of 56
    edsheppa to madvlad
    Here's a good one from the comments:
    Posted by Mike on November 12, 2007 11:46 PM

    Declinism? Here we go again. Been there, done that. If I had a nickel for every time over the last 40 years I've heard or seen bloviations about The End of American Hegemony, I'd be as rich as Gates. Let's rewind the tape, shall we?

    1968: US cities in flames, MLK RFK shot, Tet Offensive victory magically transformed into Crushing Defeat => The End of American Hegemony.

    1973-1975: The American Hegemon reels under presidential scandal, inflation, the end of the gold standard => The End (this time, we REALLY mean it) of US Hegemony.

    1979-1980: OK, we're not kidding around this time, this really is the end: stagflation, unemployment, interest rates >18% Japanese increasing market share in manufacturing, humiliation in Iran + Soviet Union on the march =>The End of American Hegemony.

    1982-83: Hey, this ain't funny anymore. This is the end, honest: cruise missiles, arms race, SDI, Beirut humiliation, farm crisis, unemployment in the rust belt, A Nation at Risk + The Fate of a Nation => the End of American Hegemony and The Dawn of World War III. Run for the hills!

    1990-92: Did I say Soviet Union? I meant Japan! The Japs are coming, and boy, is America ever screwed: Japanese juggernaut's buying up Rock Center and Pebble Beach and has Kidder Peabody, Atari and American Motors in its gunsights. Post Cold War-America's a pitiful musclebound giant, its Hegemony Soon to End.

    1999: America, the paper tiger, about to unleash World War III in the Balkans, its hegemony On the Wane.

    2007: Hey, did I say Japan? I meant China! End of Hegemony Time, buddy. Get ready, I can feel it in my bones.

    Isn't punditry fun?

  • Why Are Reporters So Gullible?

    11/13/2007 2:37:57 PM PST · 53 of 74
    edsheppa to kathsua
    Everybody is gullible when what they're hearing matches their personal "narrative." It is hard to do otherwise. But we ought to try even if we don't always succeed.

    And, by the way, this applies just as much to the anti-AGW True Believers who often post on this site.

  • Iran hands IAEA nuclear blueprints (meets a key demand turning over long-sought blueprints)

    11/13/2007 2:35:19 PM PST · 19 of 24
    edsheppa to NormsRevenge

    I will sleep so much better know they’ve given *copies* of the blueprints for their nuke. Which are totally unaltered of course.

  • PBS Telling Teachers to Violate First Amendment, Group Says

    11/13/2007 2:30:48 PM PST · 50 of 271
    edsheppa to gondramB
    This is absurd. These people are absurd.

    Well, yes they're absurd (didn't they refuse to help defend ID in the Dover trial?) but in that particular sentence they have the teensy-weensiest of claims. There are religious people who think evolution can be reconciled with religions and other religious people who disagree. That statement is siding with the former against the latter and so might conceivably put a toe across the SC's neutrality standard.

    Better to stick with facts that don't claim truth for one position or another. They might, for example, quote some of the many scientists like Francis Collins who've reconciled evolution with their faith. And then they could quote creationists who say these celebrated scientists just lying to themselves because the Bible must be taken literally.

  • According to Polls, Fred Thompson Foundering

    11/13/2007 2:07:55 PM PST · 294 of 544
    edsheppa to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
    Probably because federalism is a more sure way to stop abortions than trying to ram through a not-even-possible Constitutional amendment.

    That is *not* his reasoning. He was very explicit. He is opposed philosophically to criminalizing abortion and he thinks HLA is contrary to federalism. He wasn't making a *practical* argument but a philosophical one.

    By the way, I am sympathetic to the practical argument.

    Good on him [wants to fix Social Security by destroying it]. I want to do the same.

    Bad on him because he claims he's trying to save it. If you plan to take down SS, be clear about it. But also be prepared to be destroyed politically.

    How so [isn't he addressing immigration]?

    I've heard he wants to "get tough" but I hadn't heard he supports building a fence. But IMO that isn't nearly enough and doesn't get to the heart of problem. for example, it doesn't address all the illegals aready here and it doesn't say how the labor void will be filled.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/13/2007 1:56:04 PM PST · 182 of 183
    edsheppa to Mr. Silverback
    I find your statement that the due process would come after to be highly amusing.

    I see why. I thought I knew what it meant but I've read up on it now and see I was wrong. My prior interpretation was that basically due process was you were entitled to your day in court to challenge the legality of government action. Now I see that it refers to the legality itself. Of course there's not much practical difference.

    If the law takes away the pharmacist's freedom without due process, that's a 14th Amendment issue.

    With this new understanding, the meaning of the 14th is that government can't take away freedom unless it can lawfully take away freedom. (That not *exactly* a tautology but it is very close.) This says nothing specifically about what freedoms can be lawfully taken away. The courts have decided that it's lawful to tell landlords to rent to homosexuals even if they object on religious grounds. So obviously religious objections are not *in themselves* sufficient grounds to overrule regulations even though religious freedom is guaranteed in the Constitution. I don't see why the same reasoning wouldn't apply to the pharmacy regulation. So what *other* right is being traduced in this case?

    Really, by your standard is there any right that a state couldn't take away from its citizens?

    Yes, of course, there are many. The state cannot require me to belong to a church. It can't prevent me from running a newspaper and printing whatever political opinions I choose. I can petition the government to make new laws or change or repeal existing ones. Etc.

    ... why wouldn't they be able to to force a sports car delership to hit a hybrid sales quota? [etc.]

    It would be dumb but I suppose they probably could. Of course it'd really be up to the courts. But I don't see any difference in principle between this and requiring average fleet MPG.

    You seem to have a vision of Fred Thompson as a guy who believes that federalism is about allowing people to violate Constitutional rights as long as those people don't work for the federal government.

    That is not what I said which is that Thompson opposes the HLA on federalism grounds (and also because he doesn't think abortion should be criminalized). To me this says that he values federalism more than the right to life. And by the same reasoning, I think he ought to oppose this judge's meddling or else the basis for it. Unless, that is, he values religious freedom so much more than the right to life. Is that your position?

    That's crap.

    It's not. here's what you said

    Why are you so eager to place your fellow man in chains because some black-robed potentate screwed someone over on a slightly similar issue?
    which is an attack on me, not my position (because I am not "so eager," not eager at all, as I've been at pains to explain), and therefore ad hominem.
  • Space Defense Program Gets Extra Funding (Space Bomber)

    11/13/2007 1:04:44 PM PST · 45 of 58
    edsheppa to tlb

    How did this get through a Dim Congress? Why aren’t the moonbats up in arms?

  • Thompson Unveils His "Four Pillars of a Revitalized National Defense"

    11/13/2007 12:54:37 PM PST · 53 of 78
    edsheppa to jaybeegee

    I don’t see how the 4.5% and one million soldiers is rationally related to the threat we face. If he’s planning to attack Iran, we either need a lot more (for a successfull invasion and occupation) or not as many (because we’ll be mostly bombing).

  • According to Polls, Fred Thompson Foundering

    11/13/2007 12:16:41 PM PST · 144 of 544
    edsheppa to snarkybob
    As to why he’s trending down, I have no idea.

    I do. I think a lot of people are like me. They looked over the field pre-Thompson and didn't like any of the candidates much. Then the Thompson buzz started and he was kicking MM's ass on YouTube and writing good, sensible stuff at National Review and thumbing his nose at the Enemy Media and moderate R elites and we got excited.

    But lately we found out he thinks federalism is a more important policy than protecting the right to life. And he wants to fix Social Security by destroying it. Even his immigration plans aren't really very good because he doesn't get to the heart of the matter.

    And so it's natural that's he sliding.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/13/2007 11:44:08 AM PST · 181 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan
    or how much explanation I give

    You haven't given any. And we all know why.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/13/2007 8:26:29 AM PST · 177 of 183
    edsheppa to Mr. Silverback
    And there you go...you just admitted that the federal government can override the state's policy here.

    I did? How? Wasn't your question specifically about a state policy and whether I agreed with it or not?

    Maybe the problem is that we're not agreed on the meaning of "agreed." There are two senses and you should keep the distinction clear. One is whether a law is constitutional. The other is whether the law is good. For example you can have a constitutional law that is bad and an unconstitutional law that is good. The other combinations are possible too but these are the more interesting.

    See Amendment 14, U.S. Constitution. There is no due process of law to take the pharmacist's liberty away.

    It's my understanding that due process would follow afterward. That is, suppose a pharmacist disobeys the policy. He then couldn't be punished unless he had his day in court. Due process is important, but it doesn't mean that the government can't regulate.

    Yeah, and the chick with the grabby boss isn't really "required" to sleep with him to keep her job.

    Apples and oranges. Maybe I'm mistaken, but isn't that governed by discrimination laws? Before those laws, the "chick" didn't have a "right" to her job.

    But since you raise the issue, I'm sure Thompson would have opposed those laws too on federalism grounds.

    Why are you so eager to place your fellow man in chains because some black-robed potentate screwed someone over on a slightly similar issue?

    And when did you stop beating your wife? If you want your arguments and questions to be taken seriously drop the ad hominems.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/13/2007 8:02:21 AM PST · 179 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan
    I see that you aren't able to admit that you changed the context of my remarks

    Except that you can't explain how that omitted sentence provides context for the remark. And I don't see that it does. But I'll give you another opportunity.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/12/2007 4:44:12 PM PST · 177 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan

    I see, you aren’t able to explain how the omitted sentence added context to your claim. Therefore by leaving it out, I wasn’t misrepresenting you. Thanks for confirming.

  • Rare dead star found near Earth

    11/12/2007 3:29:44 PM PST · 175 of 217
    edsheppa to GourmetDan; JasonC
    You think I misrepresented you. I don't think I did. Let's see.

    You said:

    We see it going the other way neutron > proton-electron-neutrino), but not that way except in our theories and imaginations.
    Do you think gravity plays any noticeable role in this process?
  • Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? (new critical review of climate models)

    11/11/2007 4:41:31 PM PST · 99 of 135
    edsheppa to I got the rope
    there was a 80 year shift (fabrication) in the Ice Core vs Mona Loa data so that it would fit the graph.

    I'm puzzled why anyone would really care. It seems to me recent ice cores can't be very helpful in an absolute sense on such small time scales because of diffusion.

  • Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? (new critical review of climate models)

    11/11/2007 11:44:47 AM PST · 83 of 135
    edsheppa to I got the rope

    One the one hand you say “direct chemical measurement” is very accurate. On the other you say that IR measurement is very accurate. And yet the chart shows these two methods have very different behaviors in variation. So, did CO2 just decide to “settle down” about 1957? That’s the only way I can see your two opinions being consistent.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/11/2007 11:39:07 AM PST · 164 of 183
    edsheppa to Mr. Silverback
    Why would you vote against it?

    Several reasons. First, and obviously most important, abortion is generally wrong, not always, but generally. And certainly it is wrong as a mere "lifestyle choice."

    Second, government requiring people to do what they don't want to should be rare. Any diminishment of freedom must be very well justified. Taking away the freedom of pharmacists or (more seriously) doctors is not justified just because it lets women (and men) have more carefree sex.

    Third, these policies will decrease the quality of health care. Good druggists and doctors will leave their professions rather than go against their beliefs.

    So a state government forces a person to commit murder...

    Murder is a legal judgment (and unfortunately today abortion is not murder) so let's ask rather whether a person can be required to kill. Consider conscription. Except for religious reasons, conscientious objector status is not required. A person who objects to killing on non-religious grounds can be drafted and sent to war and expected to kill and will be punished if he refuses.

    But an important distinction you're omitting is that the druggists (and doctors) aren't required to go against their conscience because they can always choose to change professions. As I've said, this isn't different in principle from requiring landlords, who object on explicitly religious grounds, to rent to homosexuals. The courts have upheld that policy, have they not?

  • Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? (new critical review of climate models)

    11/11/2007 10:55:43 AM PST · 78 of 135
    edsheppa to I got the rope
    Why should I conclude anything from that chart except that "direct chemical measurement" is very inaccurate? Did atmospheric CO2 know that the measurement scheme changed in 1957 and decide it'd better settle down?

    Or is the point of the chart that IR measurements at Mauna Loa aren't reliable?

  • Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? (new critical review of climate models)

    11/11/2007 10:49:04 AM PST · 77 of 135
    edsheppa to Paladin2
    Your first curve seems to show ...

    What it seems to show is that CO2 significantly affecting global temperatures isn't a hare-brained idea. The time asymmetry indicates to me that increased CO2 could plausibly be keeping temps quite a bit higher. IOW it could exerts significant warming tendencies.

    Now if the chart, like the second, had shown no correlation at all, that would be the end of the discussion. And about that second chart, I wonder just how reliable it is. I don't feel the same way about the first since I understand how the data was collected and the assumptions that went into it (which of course could still be wrong).

  • Democrats hit licenses for illegals

    11/10/2007 2:14:17 PM PST · 17 of 30
    edsheppa to neverdem
    If the GOP blows this...

    What do you mean "if?" Are you offering odds?

  • The Real Reason to Worry About the Dollar

    11/10/2007 1:56:21 PM PST · 24 of 32
    edsheppa to frithguild

    Didn’t productivity grow at a nearly 5% pace last quarter? That will take a big bite out of inflation.

  • ANALYSIS: Thompson's Social Security Plan

    11/10/2007 10:43:05 AM PST · 44 of 47
    edsheppa to jaybeegee
    Thompson declared, accurately, that the current system is "unsustainable. ...

    "And by taking many tens of billion dollars a year out of the system to match funds in private accounts, I will make it go bust sooner."

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/10/2007 10:08:13 AM PST · 139 of 183
    edsheppa to Always Right
    Fred is not overly extreme about it.

    The problem I see is that Fred has a very "unextreme" pro-life position. I'm not saying the fellow isn't pro-life, but rather that he thinks federalism is more important than the right to life.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/10/2007 10:02:10 AM PST · 138 of 183
    edsheppa to Mr. Silverback
    If Washington state decided that doctors must provide abortion services at their office location to be licensed, would you agree to it in the same way you've agreed to this licensing requirement?

    In the same order. First, I would oppose that policy. If it were on an Initiaiative, I would vote against it. I would vote against politicians who vote for it. Can I make it any clearer that I wouldn't "agree" with it? I feel the same way about this drug regulation at hand.

    Second, Thompson would (should) oppose a federal judge overruling it on grounds of federalism.

    Third, it still wouldn't be an overreach on a purely legalistic, constitutional basis. That is, I don't see the difference, in principle, between regulating doctors this way and the WA regulation of pharmacies.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 11:43:07 PM PST · 130 of 183
    edsheppa to Mr. Silverback
    So, the state can tell a person, "You have a choice between giving up your livelihood or doing something that your faith teaches is child murder," and you don't think that's an overreach for the state?

    First, I think this policy sucks (this should answer your later questions).

    Second, a person like Thompson who values federalism more than an amendment guaranteeing the right to life would, if he's consistent, oppose this federal judge's interference (my original point).

    Third, on a purely legalistic, constitutional basis, no, it isn't an overreach in my opinion. It's not different, in principle, from requiring landlords to rent even to certain people of whom they vehemently disapprove on religious grounds. And, so far as I know, that regulation has been upheld.

    But we shall see. If the courts overturn the policy I'll be very interested to see their reasoning.

  • Thompson: Reduce future retiree benefits

    11/09/2007 9:18:25 PM PST · 34 of 67
    edsheppa to NormsRevenge
    The government would match the first $20 in monthly individual contributions with $50 from the existing Social Security Trust Funds. Additional contributions would be matched at the rate of fifty cents on the dollar.

    That is crazy because SS will then go broke much sooner. Suppose every worker partcipated and the average wage were $50K. I figure the average matching contribution from SS would be almost $1000. Multiply that times 150 million workers and you're looking at 150 billion dollars a year.

  • Gloom envelops world markets

    11/09/2007 8:50:38 PM PST · 14 of 43
    edsheppa to P.O.E.
    [China has] already overshadowed the US as largest contributor to global GDP.

    In 2006, US GDP was 13.2 trillion dollars while China's was 2.6. IOW the US contribution to world GDP was five times that of China.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 8:39:29 PM PST · 114 of 183
    edsheppa to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; Mrs. Don-o
    I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. The claim has been made that
    the [unenumerated] number of rights to free activity, including economic activity, which comprise the concept of "liberty." The Ninth and Tenth Amendments cover it:
    And that is a very strong claim. MDO is saying that "free economic activity" is a right protected by the 9th and 10th. Obviously this could only be a restriction on the states since the Constitution gives the feds explicit regulatory authority on interstate and foreign trade. So, have there been cases where federal courts have invalidated state regulations because they interfere with the unenumerated right to free economic activity? For example, I know porn shops have contested restrictions on free speech grounds (and lost), but have they ever prevailed on the basis of free economic activity?
  • Is Homeownership Antidemocratic? Do We Need To Eliminate The Mortgage Interest Deduction?

    11/09/2007 6:12:13 PM PST · 99 of 321
    edsheppa to shrinkermd

    We can only hope the Dims make repealing the MID a platform plank.

  • Thompson proposes 401(k)-style Social Security fix

    11/09/2007 5:45:43 PM PST · 127 of 267
    edsheppa to 2ndDivisionVet
    Workers would be able to contribute 2 percent of their monthly wages and the federal government would match that contribution.

    WTF is he thinking? I can only hope he's been misreported.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 5:09:12 PM PST · 110 of 183
    edsheppa to babygene
    Your an idiot, ...

    Learn to spell, idiot.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 5:07:20 PM PST · 109 of 183
    edsheppa to Mrs. Don-o; Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
    The state can enact reasonable regulations

    So far as I know, states have plenary authority to regulate economic activity except where it would contravene some specific prohibition. Can you point to even a single example of the Court rejecting a state regulation based on the 9th or 10th Amendment?

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 12:36:54 PM PST · 99 of 183
    edsheppa to Mrs. Don-o
    Your post doesn't make sense. If that provision actually establishes rights to free activity, including economic activity then economic activity cannot be regulated and so there can be no question of whether an activity is permitted by law because such laws would be unconstitutional.

    But your conception of the Amendments is obviously wrong because economic activity has always been regulated by state and local governments.

  • BREAKING: Judge halts state's morning-after pill rules (drug stores CAN opt out)

    11/09/2007 12:26:06 PM PST · 97 of 183
    edsheppa to TNPatriot

    That’s just silly. The courts have been able to reconcile even the draft with that prohibition.