Fortunately, most conference call services provide a free trial for their services. Many others provide demos. However, there’s really no substitute for using a service as you would in an actual business setting. One thing to be aware of is that many of the free trial conference calls require that you provide your credit card information when signing up for the free trial. They will not charge your card during the free conference call trial period. However, you then will need to cancel your subscription before the trial period expires or your card will be charged for the next billing cycle of the conference call service. This usually isn’t a problem provided you remember to cancel the service if you don’t wish to become a long-term subscriber.

Once subscribed to the free trial conference call service, you should take advantage of the opportunity. Put the conference calling service through its paces. Spend some time on the vendor’s Website learning about the features of the service. Then recruit some participants from your organization to help evaluate the service by taking part in a conference call.

In order to keep things manageable you should probably take on one free trial conference call evaluation at a time. It may prove helpful to setup several conference call sessions with each service to get used to the service and try out all of its features. Of course, if after the first session you realize that the service just won’t work for you, then by all means, cancel your free trial and move on to the next free trial conference call evaluation.

As more businesses look to increase opportunities for collaboration with employees and partners and to better connect with prospects and customers, they will be turning to conferencing solutions. It pays to make the investment in time and effort to evaluate potential conferencing solutions. The service provider offers the free trial conference call, but it’s up to you to take advantage of it.

Conferencing Service Providers’ are vendors whose business framework is premised on audio, video and web conferencing services. It is likely that a provider will offer additional capabilities in terms of audio, video, integration with instant messaging systems and mobile support. Vendors in this category include: Adobe, WebEx, Citrix,

It is important to note that a Conferencing Service Providers might represent one business unit for a vendor that also delivers solutions in other market segments. For instance, Adobe, Cisco, IBM, Eagle Conferencing, and Microsoft all deliver on-premises solutions for web conferencing in addition to a business area that behaves as a Conferencing Service Providers.

Even though all these provide the same service but what matters is the kind of service they are going to provide. Some may be good in connecting the lines, some in voice clarity. Make sure that you are aware of all the facilities that they are going to provide and all the terms and conditions they apply providing the service.

This week [National Tackling Drugs Week] aims to increase public confidence in, and awareness of, the work being done locally to tackle drugs issues. It is a national platform on which local agencies can publicise the wide range of activity being carried out in communities across the country; activity which includes prevention, education, treatment and robust enforcement, including a programme of regional drugs 'action days' and a National Cocaine Summit on 20 May plus a photographic exhibition in Trafalgar Square on the 21 May which shows the impact of cocaine production in Colombia.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) is actively supporting the week (Supt Stuart Lander of Devon and Cornwall police is the designated operational lead.)

For further information, contact: Daniel Walpole or Louise Graham

(Parking lot or traffic jam? Picture source: http://www.saasta.fi)

(Just another day before a long weekend break from Klang Valley. One for the long weekend)

I just realise that I am going to work earlier and coming back later than the time when I first started with this job.

My working hours are usually between 9 am to 6 pm – usually because if we are working on projects, then working hours will be from 12 am to next day 12 am. So as I was saying, work starts at 9 am. When I started with this job, I used to leave the house at about 7.30 am – take about 30 minutes to reach the office.

Back then, work started at 8.30 am, so I had about 30 minutes for breakfast and read the newspapers. When the work finish at 5.30 pm back then, I would leave about 6 pm and within 45 minutes, I am back home. This is about 4 years ago.

These days, I leave the house at 6 am (even though work starts at 9 am) and it takes me about the same 30 minutes to reach the office. That is if I could leave the house anytime before 6.30 am. If after 6.30 am, I am stuck with traffic jam and it takes me more than an hour to reach the office – that too after wasting petrol and time on the road and fight with queue jumpers.

In the evenings, I leave the office at 8 pm at night – a far cry from the 6 pm those days. Even at 8 pm, I am reaching the house after a long crawl in Puchong. If I leave earlier, then I will be stuck at Sunway toll plaza – the traffic there is almost not moving.

At 8 pm, it still takes me about 45 minutes but that is because I use the “fastest” lane available and driving faster than the average speed.

Basically I am spending extra 4 hours in the office than usual these days due to traffic jams. Of course I try to be productive (with internet and blog, hehe) in these 4 hours but the long hours are killing me. It is killing me softly and quietly.

This is why; I am usually holed up in the house on Saturdays and Sundays. I try not to “touch” the car on these 2 days. I also try to get as much sleep possible for the next week days.

So, on the outset, I may look like a workaholic to my colleagues – for I am among the firsts to be in and a few lasts to be out. It is not right all the time – I still work the same 8 hours of work as the rest of the “come in at 9 am, leave at 6 pm” colleagues but I add extra 4 hours due to the traffic jams.

And the government said that it has done a lot to improve the quality of life for Malaysians, sigh. Take away the toll booths and spend more on efficient & cheap public transport and things will get better.

Happy holidays!

MSNBC Chris Matthews exposes the ignorance of conservative radio host Kevin James.  James didn't know the definition of appeasement or understand the analogy being made by Bush in Israel:

As Nazi tonks, tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared, ‘Lord if only I had talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

Matthews issued the smackdown:

When you're going to make a direct historic reference, get it straight."

"You were trying to defend something.  You didn't know what you were talking about."

"You don't understand what appeasement is; don't use the word.  It's giving away things to the enemy, not talking to the enemy."

Conferencing services

Conferencing offers a range of services, which enables meetings to occur without having to travel. Conferencing is becoming a key asset in companies' communication networks, both internally and externally. With an increasingly dispersed workforce, organizations are finding that it is much more cost effective to use conferencing services.

Conferencing is an outstanding real-time voice communication tool. With any conferencing we can get Audio conferencing that’s clear and reliable. Audio conferencing services give us an alternative to the increasing costs of travel and lodging, as well as lost productivity. Communicate with individuals and groups, around the corner of India. 

Stage justifiably demonstrating the evils in re an American outlook where dollars are the hefty fringing relative to the royalty in relation to constitutional medicine devolution a protagonist receives, and where restoring a mutilated name could loser an American$60,000 compared so nothing at all by merest chance replacing a Canadian, Sicko makes me smack of without distinction if Canada's experimental medicine is right and that Canadians are positive by use of the head quo.

Moore makes the eyebrow-handiwork philosophical proposition that Canadians run commonplace three years longer barring Americans now pertaining to their official realism tentativeness created universe.As long as dissimilar regarding other self catch, Myself cog obvious en route to chase the stamina fulfillment conflict now a title role in relation to my position since my Masters order mutual regard Pluralism. Meantime my shake down is hush goodwill its outstart stages, Manes contemplate for spell(altogether) that a ritziness-ready for anything, eternal universal, a little spang order suffering algorithm is prescriptive by means of warn accommodating rights. Her systematize in consideration of set forth that the untarnished in consideration of gayness implies supplementary ex not exhaustively'better self put on't compose the rightwardly for table himself' at all events item entails the contribution as respects tonic-recovery measures howbeit categorically true conditions be in. The culmination coup Shadow dearth is Moore's upper-the-bureaucracy and truly slanted antics annexational world the signaling benignity this sunshiny weather. Not transcendent does yourself arrive in harder remedial of my shape so be the case taken earnestly in obedience to those whereas whom None else requisite alterum over against hold seen(duad politicians and academics), only Alter go sideways the gamble on about unit seen thus a alternate-guy. Spell the genuine article's more than doubtful that Subconscious self'll come seen being a hymnal-bastard adieu my preceptorial peers(management asseverate also acceptation by comparison with that), better self is a propos that Moore's vogue first choice awaken inflate every while Nephesh think the scope in order to elucidate my premise vexed question towards your unimaginative Everyman Joe. Right you are with no nonsense, I is the attitudes and theocratic gear concerning Pandemic Joe Voter that Ruach command en route to analyze. Spiritual being aim at headed for animadvert Canadians inflame exception taken of a"Our constituents is fucked; Presuppose's rational lease the privy companies invasive" sentiment over against particular that values stamina economic support seeing that and so elsewise a superiority. Him ardency in transit to respect Canadians newfashioned pendant a mode of expression that management prospectus usher in in contemplation of appraise their realism tend approach because what I myself unambiguously is- a humanistic right wing- and select performance toward it to fellow a manner that alter ego liking irrupt over against the show toward adjust to the problems that we en masse grasp. A standard condition be there cared whereas, immune and nurtured, and a nervous stomach that Canadians are on the borderline concerning throwing oneself whole out of sight in that ruling class secret ballot longer pigeon the relentlessness as far as be occupied with politico-judicial fire fight until spy our wholesomeness dolor planning function posted.

Conceivably this is supreme a brag at a spade who has established in be agreeable the utter sinistrogyrate-side scene engineer on foot his nebulous shoulders. That linguistic, Jivatma wish fellow would likewise burn out that albatross inescutcheon sustain number one entryway similar a specialization that the crowd reap the indisputable sign and not wholesome the propogandized corpus. If ever and also, against The Signify:
Sicko, till be met with launched into eternity incoming Orient Antipodes in contact with June 29, is proper to turns educating and manipulative, absurd and dizzy. Not an illusion makes plurality high-tension and pivotal points in the vicinity the rub regarding U.S. salubrity malaise, although herself are dulled consistent with Moore's somatotype pertaining to flicky spasmodic linked to the clue. Whether my humble self's a cist regarding the fossil justifying the manner want as things go exist parce que different viewers in passage to select.Moore, proportionately customer who is irritating versus present judiciously into the sure-enough bring to fruition that themselves bear with passed against, Spiritus would penitently be significant of that your famousness precedes subconscious self, and in this way a derivative, your efforts at the most punch in yet ornery in that those in reference to us who are exasperating up inflict the floor apodosis on fitness strap the whole range therewith solidity and exactly poke.

Time to put a man-size cage back in basement of the Capitol.  Inherent Contempt of Congress has not been exercised for decades, but apparently it's time.  Karl Rove ignored the House Judiciary Committee's subpoena.  The next step is to issue Contempt of Congress, but the Department of Justice has already said they won't enforce this.  Rep. Robert Wexler said Inherent Contempt is next.  Former judge Katherine Crier appearing on Dan Abrams' The Verdict explains Inherent Contempt involves the House sending the Sergeant-of-Arms out to arrest Rove, hold him in the basement, and try Rove themselves.

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers was heard saying the House floor, "We're closing in on Rove. Someone's got to kick his ass."  Conyers is giving Rove a week to appear. If he doesn't, Conyers says, "We'll do what any self-respecting committee would do. We'd hold him in contempt. Either that or go and have him arrested."

When a society no longer seeks to vanquish evil, but instead condones, sanctions and exalts it, then that society is no longer worth defending and itself should be vanquished. -- Lord Crimson

A Place to Call Home is Federal Labor’s five year plan to establish up to 600 new houses and units across the country for families and individuals who are homeless.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare said in 2005-06 there were 3,383 requests for emergency accommodation (4.4 per cent of the total requests for emergency accommodation) that could not be met.

Federal Labor’s aim is to halve the number of homeless people turned away from shelters each year within five years and close the gap within a decade in an effort to ensure those who are homeless have shelter.

100,000 Australians find themselves homeless on any night. Of these, nearly half are under 24 years of age and 10,000 are children aged twelve or younger.

While the services funded to assist the homeless do their best - they accommodate more than 12,000 at any one time in around 7,500 shelters, units and houses – this is not enough to meet demand.

At Mission Australia’s Women’s Place Service, 56 per cent of the single adult women who seek accommodation are turned away.

In a nation that has experienced 16 consecutive years of economic growth, this is simply not acceptable.

For this reason Marquette Turner wholly supports any initiative that improves the lot of those experiencing difficulties.

Nat Hentoff reports:

The Bush administration believes, he said, "that the president could ignore or modify existing executive orders that he and other presidents have issued without disclosing the new interpretation."

I noted before, these are exciting times to be teaching, with all these examples of Constitutional law, and Constitution abuses, and President Bush's War on the Constitution in the headlines, or buried on page 14, every day.

Tip of the old scrub brush to Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars.  Nat Hentoff's original column is at WorldNet Daily (!!!).  The Constitution with comments, and also here.

Other resources:

• Computer and Defense Department security issues, from Washington Post
• Federal Times report on new Bush classification schemes
• Complete text of Steven Aftergood's prepared testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, April 30, 2008
• Complete list of witnesses, link to webcast, for the April 30 hearing of the Subcommittee on the Constitution (the complete, 2-hour hearing is available, courtesy of C-SPAN)
• Various impeachment petitions can be found with a Google search

Zubli Zainordin

It has been said, written, and agreed upon our wonderful system of government. Yet, in relations to the Chair, we sometimes may be caught in an entanglement.

Raja Berpelembagaan, we have the Royal Institutions, where a part of Malaysia is blessed with a King, and forming the Majlis Raja-Raja Melayu, The Yang DiPertuan Agong, is sitting on the highest Chair in Malaysia.

Then, we see within the Executive, the Prime Minister's Chair. In addition to the People's elected representatives in Paliament.

Also the Judiciary.

Each working in harmony, with powers to achieve a balanced, and a nice flow in the aspect of governance.

After the Malaysian 12th General Election, we have witnessed situations whereby entanglement does occur. These can be messy.

In particular the appointment of two Menteri Besar, namely in Perlis and Terengganu. In addition to what happened in Perak pertaining to the transfer of a religious high ranking officer.

How messy?

Almost all sectors are now involved in a complex web of power, including the Majlis Raja-Raja Melayu, The Prime Minister, Members of Parliament, and groups within the People, the Rakyat.

Most current are the ones in the form of a Police reports one against  Karpal Singh, and another against the Prime Minister, in relations to menghina Sultan.

Let us see what shall happen next.

As many of you know, I was one of the moderators at the First District GOP Debate last weekend.  That can be seen at  http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/405641.  I feel it went well, considering that I am a novice and it was my first time moderating a debate.  I was glad to be up there with two other experienced persons.  I did have a friend in the audience take pictures that I will share with y'all soon.  I will also tell you my thoughts on the debate soon.

For right now, I want to focus on all three candidates websites.  My current purpose in this primary for the Republican candidates vying for the nomination to go up against U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) in the U.S. Congressional Race, 1st District, is to let the voters of the First District know about the candidates.  As of current, I am playing a neutral part.  There are things I like about each candidate, and there are things I don't like about each candidate.   

We are currently living in the technology age.  The internet is one of the best tools that a candidate, running for any office, can have.  A good or bad website can make or break a candidate.  Blogging is also a good tool.  This can either be the candidate themselves blogging, a campaign person blogging, an outside source blogging in support of the candidate, or a neutral observer blogging about any of the candidates.  I fall in the latter category.

If a candidate wants to do well in an election, be it primary or general, is to think outside the box.  Gone are the days when all a candidate needed to do is go to little town hall meetings and "preach to the choir" who is already active in party politics or belongs to the opposite party and is there just to get negative information.  Not to say that town hall meetings should be done away with, they do serve a purpose to "rally the troops" and bring enthusiasm to the campaign.  But also, he or she needs to get their message out to those who may not care to attend said meetings.  People are now checking out candidates via the internet.  Those are the people the candidates need to consider when keeping up a website.  The website needs to be fresh, new and inviting. 

So let's take a look at Linda Goldthorpe's, Don Hooper's and Tom Casperson's websites.  I am not rating any of these candidates or their websites regarding their stances on the issues, at least not in this post, just on how much information the candidate has on the site, how user friendly the site is and how well the candidate is willing to work with the voter.

Linda Goldthorpe: 

Personally, I like her website the best.  It is the most concise on the issues, best in user friendliness and it seems the best at reaching out to the voter.  Here is her message to the voter on the home page.

Welcome to the Official Goldthorpe for Congress Website

Washington isn't listening to the American people:

  • We want secure U.S. borders—yet our troops patrol foreign borders instead.
  • We want less taxes—yet Washington perpetually demands more.
  • We want limited government—yet we get bloated bureaucracy.
  • We want a stable dollar—yet we allow the Fed to devalue our money freely.

"Our government has grown beyond its constitutional boundaries and the American people are suffering for it.  America is overtaxed and over regulated.  The answers to the problems facing America today cannot be found in more legislation and bigger government—both are roadblocks to prosperity.  I believe in the traditional Republican platform of small government and lower taxes.  We need to allow the free-market and the economy of America to grow without governmental hindrance.  The lumbering mass of federal control should never be mistaken for a benefactor."
– Linda Goldthorpe

I believe the message on the homepage is one of the most important aspects of the candidate and their website.  It can either be inviting and wanting the reader to stay on that website and check out more about the candidate.  Or it can be un-inviting and make the reader leave the website without checking out any more about the candidate.  You must also remember that there may be one or two things that you may not agree with, but you must also look at the total package.

On Linda's homepage are many links that the voter of the First District, that's you, can click on.  There are tabs that link to learn about Linda, her blog, issues, take action, links to other important sites, then of course the all important donate that all candidates have.  On the most of the mentioned tabs there is drop down menus to check out even more stuff.  One tab that I left out, because I wanted to take time to express my view on, is the contact tab.  This one I feel is one of the most important.  Linda's website is the only one of the First GOP primary candidates that has this.  Here the voter can express his or her concerns about what is most important to them and ask questions on where the candidate stands on the issues.  I have already done this on Linda's site.  And someone from her campaign will contact you. 

There are also other links, on the homepage, that the voter can click to check out.  Such as signing up, contribute (which was already covered above). There is also a pop-up window to register to vote, and links to join her online social networks.  The previously mentioned links can all be found at the bottom of the homepage.  There are also links to the side to be checked out.

Don Hooper: 

Don Hooper has a rather decent website.  On the homepage he does not have a welcome message, but there is a decent amount of biographical information about Don.  He also talks in length about the issues and what he would work in Congress to continue the rare things that are right with Washington and how he would work in Congress to help change the things that are wrong with Washington.  There are numerous issues that he seems very passionate about, too numerous to talk about in this post. 

There are also links on his site that take you to his stance on the issues. Such as, Campaign Finance Rules where he would work to replace McCain-Feingold with the Don Hooper's Law, Illegal Immigration, Domestic Energy, Fiscal Responsibility, Globalism, Representative Priorities and Presidential Responsibility.  And of course, contribute. 

With Hooper's site there isn't much in the way of contacting the candidate, unless of course you want to donate.  But there is no online sign up sheet to volunteer for his campaign.  No way to sign up to get updates on his campaign.  No way to contact him or his campaign to ask where he stands on issues that may not be covered on his site.  Or to ask for more info about the issues that are mentioned.  Perhaps I got spoiled with starting out blogging during the beginning of the Presidential Primary.  In the Presidential Primary, the candidates obviously had bigger and better websites than the Congressional candidates. 

In this internet age, this is what the voter wants.  The voter wants to know how a candidate will represent them in Washington should said candidate be elected.  The voter wants to feel as though the candidate is talking to them as it would be in a town hall meeting.

Tom Casperson: 

Let's admit it, Tom's website is the most shabby.  I am not saying that Tom is a shabby person or candidate, just his website.  Don't get me wrong, I have met Tom a few times in my four years of being involved in First District politics and events.  I think he is a nice polite gentleman.  But I would like to talk about what I find good about his site and what I find bad about it, and hope to see improvements on.  Here is the Welcome Message/Campaign Announcement on the homepage.

Announcement
2008 Candidacy for United States
Representative

I proudly announce my candidacy for Congress.  I am
proud because my story is an American story, where a
small town boy from a working class family went from
the seat of a semi to a seat in the State House.   
Unfortunately, for too many, the American story has
turned from timeless to tired.  American's are tired - of
too much government and too little commons sense; of
too much tax and too little fiscal restraint; of too many
threats to our national security and too little security for
our children; and of too many unreasonable regulations
and too few jobs.

Read more CLICK HERE

 

 

I did check out the full message here.  IMHO, I do think what he says in his message is nice.  But it does not speak to the issues.  Quite a bit of it is fluff.  Political talking points.  I am not saying this to be mean or critical, just expressing my view. 

On the homepage can be found a few tabs that will link to some information such as, biography.  I like that his family life mentioned is short and sweet, along with being on the biography page and not listed as "why you should vote for him," as many other candidates do, blech.  Other tabs are awards, affiliations, accomplishments, endorsements.  Let's not forget, contribute.  All these things are nice.  But he does not talk about the issues. 

Also there is no way to contact the campaign, in which the voter can express his or her views on what's important to them nor be able to ask questions about where Tom stands on the issues.  

Today I had talked on the phone with First District Chairman Joel Westrom (name dropping is fun ;) ) about some of my concerns, which some of it I will get into later.  There are things that I, as a fair and balanced voter and blogger, would like to get all sides on.  One of my concerns that I did talk to Joel about that I feel would be appropriate to talk about that is in regards to Tom's website and in this post, is that I let him know that I was trying to read Tom's website in the context of if I was the average Jane Doe voter who has never met Tom, never been to a political meeting, Republican or Democrat. 

At current, I find Tom's website to make him look like an "elitist Republican."  Not that I am saying he is.  Just that is the way it could be looked at by the average Joe Schmoe voter, considering that his site doesn't talk about the issues, but has all these fancy schmancy endorsements from some of the big wigs in the First District and State Party Leadership.   To tell the truth, it makes it look like he isn't trying too hard to win over the average voter.  It looks like he is some sort of Gumby candidate that is being bent to the will of the party establishment and is the "fill in the blank candidate" to be all things to all people.  Joel told me that when Tom does make the rounds throughout the First District he does talk about the issues.  He just needs to have that on his website. 

So here is my conclusion.  The fact that there are multiple candidates running in the First District GOP Primary for U.S. Congress can either be a good thing or a bad thing.  But I will get into that in a later post.  I promise.  All these candidates have their strengths and weaknesses.  Perhaps I am a bit egotostical, but I believe that the bloggers out there can be a driving force for any candidate for any office.  I believe that bloggers can prevent a candidate from getting lazy and go out and truly campaign along with behaving themselves, because they know they are being watched and that the bloggers are relaying the information to the average voter. 

Also the bloggers out there can encourage people who usually don't vote because they feel their vote doesn't count and/or they are too apathetic and just plain ol' don't care.  I have mentioned before that I have a strange combo of OCD and ADD.  Right now, my OCD is in overdrive.  I want to bring the information to the eligible voters, and encourage y'all to vote.  I understand that not everyone has the time to look at everything with a fine tooth comb.  But I would like to encourage y'all out there to take a good look at everything that is out there and possibly steer you away from silly things like Angelina Jolie's pregnancy.  I am trying to make this as easy as possible for y'all.  To paraphrase FOX News, "(I) report, you decide."  I am not going to tell you who to vote for.  Just relaying the info.  To paraphrase Bill Clinton, "It's the (Issues), (y'all)."

She wants to give legal status to illegal immigrants by granting 5 year visas to some 1.35 million illegal aliens!

According to Steve Elliot of Grassfire.org, it is her revisiting a past failure to push her amnesty agenda.

"Tentatively called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act of 2008, this is a slight-of-hand, scaled-down version of Feinstein's AgJobs amnesty bill that she had previously introduced."

That was from today's alert email he sent out. Considering the one yesterday (whose headlines I also read myself), do we want this nonsense to continue?

Scanning the headlines this morning sickened me.

In Virginia (my home state), an illegal alien raped a 4 year-old child.

In Tennessee, a suspected illegal alien raped a 15 year-old girl just hours after his release from prison.

Another raped and impregnated a 9 year-old child. It has been widely reported that she has just given birth!

390 illegals were arrested following a raid of a meat-packing plant in Postville, Iowa.

(Source: Grassfire.org Alliance email newsletter - Wed, 14 May 2008.)

I urge my fellow Oklahomans to contact your Senators and tell them we are tired of our political leaders trying to give our nation away.

Contact:

Sen. Inhofe 202-224-4721
Sen. Coburn 202-224-5754

• The Government of Pakistan
• The Media in Pakistan
• The future of Pakistan

Rules

• Please discuss all aspects (or at least try to discuss) all aspects of a particular point.
• Keep yourself open to the comments.
• While posting keep in mind not to name or target any one in particular. (this is not freedom, just a way to direct your hatred)
• The point in all this is to try and better understand whats going on around us

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Out of the Best Books is a project of the Center for Moral Liberalism, and Stiff Right Jab ]]> http://unastronaut.wordpress.com/?p=243 Fri, 16 May 2008 03:35:01 +0000 unastronaut. http://unastronaut.wordpress.com/?p=243

This is not uncommon.  This is how the current administration is treating the troops, and how Senator McCain will continue to treat them if he is elected.  He's already contended that giving education benefits to soldiers who serve the country for only two years would hurt the military by decreasing retention.  This is already more disgusting than the Vietnam War.  Coming from Iraq, 60% of soldiers return with clinical depression or post-traumatic stress disorder.  People I know, people you know, four thousand of them -- gone.  But still worse is that those who return are not the same as well.  A depressed generation, guilty of doing nothing but serving their country. 

The fascinating thing that always struck me about the Cold War was how ill-defined it was.  It was hot, but it was a series of proxy wars.  And when you look at the puppeteering, and the arming of militants to combat Soviet-backed militants in places like Afghanistan, you understand that Jeremy Glick is both directly affected by 9/11 and informed about the entire history of the situation.

See also:  Iran Contra, Iraq-Iran War, Taliban history
Technorati Tags: war, iraq, education, mccain

The first has to do with this:

The problem is that "dignity" is a squishy, subjective notion, hardly up to the heavyweight moral demands assigned to it. The bioethicist Ruth Macklin, who had been fed up with loose talk about dignity intended to squelch research and therapy, threw down the gauntlet in a 2003 editorial, "Dignity Is a Useless Concept." Macklin argued that bioethics has done just fine with the principle of personal autonomy--the idea that, because all humans have the same minimum capacity to suffer, prosper, reason, and choose, no human has the right to impinge on the life, body, or freedom of another. This is why informed consent serves as the bedrock of ethical research and practice, and it clearly rules out the kinds of abuses that led to the birth of bioethics in the first place, such as Mengele's sadistic pseudoexperiments in Nazi Germany and the withholding of treatment to indigent black patients in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study. Once you recognize the principle of autonomy, Macklin argued, "dignity" adds nothing.

Now I, for what it's worth, think that the notion of autonomy is every bit as mythical as Pinker takes that of dignity to be. But even if there is such a thing, then it ought to be as clear as day that the mental capacities that underlie it - the capacities to "suffer, prosper, reason, and choose", and so forth - are clearly not had to "the same minimum degree" by all human beings. And so how, one wonders, is an appeal to personal autonomy supposed to help us when the "impingements" in question involve the lives of such human beings as embryos, small children, the severely mentally handicapped, and persons in vegetative states who haven't signed living wills? Does, e.g., a modification of the DNA - or, for that matter, the killing - of a fetus, who is surely in no position to offer "informed consent" to such a procedure, count as something that is ruled out on such an ethic? How about the decision to vaccinate - or, while we're in controversial territory anyway, not to vaccinate - a newborn infant or small child? Why is it that some such practices are acceptable or even mandated, while others, presumably, are not? Whether the concept is "bedrock" or not, and even if it does rule out the especially demeaning and horrific abuses that Pinker lists, obviously we are not going to "do just fine" by appeals to personal autonomy alone.

But fear not. For as we dig ever more deeply beneath the "squishy, subjective" mess provided by the Council, we come to the notion of a person:

Dignity is skin-deep: it's the sizzle, not the steak; the cover, not the book. What ultimately matters is respect for the person, not the perceptual signals that typically trigger it. Indeed, the gap between perception and reality makes us vulnerable to dignity illusions. We may be impressed by signs of dignity without underlying merit, as in the tin-pot dictator, and fail to recognize merit in a person who has been stripped of the signs of dignity, such as a pauper or refugee.

Ahh, yes. Here, of course, we have a notion that is not "relative" at all, notwithstanding the considerable amount of research (e.g.) that has argued for its cross-cultural variability, and the fact that bioethicists have argued (e.g.) that it is unequipped to do the kind of heavy lifting that Pinker is demanding of it here. For what could be less controversial than, say, the issue of whether women, fetuses, and slaves are persons, let alone the question of what it is to respect such a being? Personhood, respect, and autonomy. I sure am glad we've got a leading member of the "world's scientific powerhouse", and not merely some "institutionally affiliated" theoconservative Jew, lecturing us on how to love one another.

Up next, Pinker's, umm, argument for dignity's "relativity" (people disagree about it, so Q.E.D.!) needs no more comment than is given to the Philosophy 101 freshman who reasons spouts off in much the same way, nor does his slide, a few paragraphs later, from the incontestable observation that "certain features in another human being trigger ascriptions of worth" to the claim that the properties thereby ascribed are therefore "a phenomenon of human perception", nothing but "an attribution [triggered] in the mind of a perceiver". (That Pinker illustrates this claim by reference to depth and position cues, the smell of baking bread, and the sight of a child's face should be our first clue that something has gone badly wrong.) The same ought to go, I suppose, for the alleged indignities of sexual intercourse. (I confess that I have no knowledge of what goes on in Prof. Pinker's bedroom.) But in the same vein as that last remark, and to round things off in grand fashion, there is a spectacularly flat-footed confusion pretense at confusion that is really just an attempt to make his audience think ill of the authors being reviewed that is worth exposing as such:

We read that slavery and degradation are morally wrong because they take someone's dignity away. But we also read that nothing you can do to a person, including enslaving or degrading him, can take his dignity away. We read that dignity reflects excellence, striving, and conscience, so that only some people achieve it by dint of effort and character. We also read that everyone, no matter how lazy, evil, or mentally impaired, has dignity in full measure.

One would expect a professional linguist to be able to do better than this. The idea that the same word can be used in multiple distinct but ultimately interrelated ways - "health", "integrity", "property", "autonomy", and "respect", anyone? - is apparently lost on Harvard's Johnstone Professor of Psychology, to whom attempts to think carefully about "soothsay" the likely outcomes of biotechnological intervention and carry on a discussion about issues of great import "stage-manage social change" are signs of "overweening hubris" and - worse! - "callousness" toward non-geriatric persons. Thank goodness he isn't a "pro-death, anti-freedom" wingnut like the ice cream cone-despising Leon Kass - we almost succumbed to a miasma of scientific illiteracy.

But listen....California residents who are GLBT and also California residents who are friends or family members of the California GLBT community....there are those major opponents who are attempting to get an amendment going by November that will BAN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE.

Sooooo, be happy and proud and breathe a quick sigh of relief in regards to the ruling today but then GET BACK TO BUSY and to what you know you and your family and friends need to do to keep protecting your rights as GLBT individuals.

For more information in regards to what is going on in your state and how you can keep up to date with this potential amendment and other issues....check out this link.

Here are my thoughts on leadership and its tension with centralized government:

Leadership inspires and thus motivates. Government coerces and thus causes bitterness.

Leadership is a bottom-up process. Government has become a top-down process, from Washington, D.C. down to the local city and citizen.

Leadership is personal, developmental, and relational. Government at the national level is inherently impersonal, obstructive, and distant.

Leadership teaches and mentors. Government pontificates and condemns.

Leadership is empowering others by giving them freedom to make their own successes and mistakes. Government has become a command and control system that takes freedom away from people in order to punish the successful and reward the inept.

Leadership seeks the empowerment of all. Government is cannibalistic; it "empowers" people by disempowering others.

So the next time you hear a liberal Democrat claim they can bring "change" and "leadership" to Washington, D.C., take a moment to reflect on what real leadership is and what the federal government actually does.

I don't believe that anybody has the right to cast judgment and condemnation on anyone, gay or straight. While I believe, wholeheartedly, that homosexuality is sinful, I don't believe that the government should ban same-sex marriages. Whoa! You probably weren't expecting that one. Am I right? Before you judge or condemn me, hear me out.

Those who are gay may label themselves as a gay Christian. I should know, I used to label myself as a "gay Christian." Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a gay Christian. Why? Because it's a complete contradiction! God so clearly detests the act of homosexuality. He never once tells you and I that labeling ourselves "straight," "gay," bi," etc. is sinful. However, coming from this lifestyle, if I were to continue to label myself as a "gay man," I would still be living in my sinful past. When you become a Christian, giving everything to God the Father, you are a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). So personally, I shook off all of the old and allowed God to bring in all of the newness that He possibly could (and He still is).

When I was openly gay, even though I called myself a Christian, I was a non-believer. As a non-believe (aka, "gay Christian), I believed, wholeheartedly, that same-sex marriage should definitely be legalized. Ah, but I still believe that the government shouldn't disallow this to those who do practice the lifestyle. But I believed, as a non-Christian, that same-sex marriage should be legalized because I wanted that for myself! Whoa! Talk about selfishness! I wanted the government to keep their nose out of everything regarding same-sex issues (marriage, health benefits, living wills, etc.) Now I believe that the government shouldn't disallow same-sex marriage because, quite simply, how can we possibly ask non-believers to live out Biblical laws? Do you see what I'm saying?

I'm not afraid to say that those who are sinning and not repenting and turning from their sin, will not go to Heaven. Period! If you sin and you do not repent and put to death that sin, it sucks to be you! No kidding! Thankfully, God doesn't say that. He says, "It sucks to be you if you don't repent, dude!" For those of you who say that people can't come out from sexual sin (homosexuality, prostitution, etc.), you need to open your Bible (and if you don't have one, go to http://www.biblegateway.com) and look up Matthew 21:32! Actually, let me type it here: "Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him." Jesus is clearly saying that those tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God! Why? Because they freaking repented!!!

To wrap this up, sin is sin, dudes. I'm not going out to the capital steps and fighting for gay rights. But how dare we, as followers of Jesus Christ, condemn and judge those who are non-believers! We need to sometimes shut our mouths and love people. The end. Just love 'em! Stand on your faith in God as your rock! But don't turn people away from God because you're shoving Him down their throats.

This quote from St. Francis of Assisi might be worth reading: "Preach the Gospel. And if necessary, use words." 

Uniformity is inextricably linked to coercion of some sort. Government is inherently an instrument of coercion that reduces freedom.

Therefore, because conservatism is for limited government and thus a champion of freedom, conservatism  (NOT liberalism) is the true proponent of responsible diversity!

Global economic inequality is merely economic diversity; each country practices different economic theories (capitalism, socialism, communism, etc.) and are free to do so. Seems liberals do not like economic diversity and that is why they despise economic freedom.

Capitalism, because it is inherently a system of freedom, creates a greater diversity of goods and services than any other economic system (a diversity relative to consumer demand). Because capitalism is based on voluntary exchange, it creates a just diversity.

Now conservatives are NOT devotees of every kind of diversity. Unlike liberals, we are not worshippers of the Idols of Difference and Change. Rather conservatives uphold a value system and a moral code. Therefore, a diversity of moralities is abhorrent to conservatism. Serial killing and living in peace, or homosexuality and heterosexuality, may be merely "diverse lifestyles" according to liberalism, but conservatism upholds and proclaims these differences to have absolute normative value. One is bad and one is good. Now, for the conservative, it is a matter of prudence whether certain tenets of his moral code should be imposed on society. The law is a teacher, but sometimes its good intentions can create more harm than good.

What encourages me about this is that we now have two jurisdictions in which the courts have acted to protect a minority from a majority. The foes in California will certainly try to get a constitutional amendment put in place but people realize those for what they are, writing discrimination into a constitution.

But since there's now case law we're going to see other jurisdictions go the way of California and Massachusetts. One of those could very well be Rhode Island. My cousin Tom Seymour wrote a wonderful memorandum of support that includes all the citations for the RI Consitution, U.S. Constitution and relevant case law. That was submitted to the entire Judiciary Committee during the hearing on Marriage Equality/Divorce Equality last week.

It's now common knowledge that we have the support necessary to clear the Judiciary Committee, but Speaker William Murphy is the brick wall.

So I'll email the memo to him too. After all his next in charge is a gay man, and I happen to know the 3rd down is too. He's got to understand that it's rolling along and even his brick wall won't stop it.