Morning Reads – Thursday, May 30, 2013

On this day in 1431, Joan of Arc was burned at the stake for heresy. By that notion, all of us posters would have been martyred about 10 years ago.
I will also take the back seat for Best Morning Reads this week, but only because Nathan did them yesterday and not Ed.


Jimmy Carter

Sweet Tea

Liberty Drum


    • pettifogger says:

      Getting rid of Bachmann is a good thing IMO, as a Republican. If only there were some rule that Dems now had to cast one of their own ridiculous members off the island.

      I’d nominate Hank Johnson, but he gets a pass this week for helping Holder get into some trouble.

  1. A minor correction: The rail article talks about a line to Charlotte, not Chattanooga. 🙂

    I have a few friends in the Charlotte area and might actually ride that train up there occasionally to visit, depending on the cost.

    • sockpuppet says:

      No rail line to Charlotte because that would help Charlotte more than Atlanta. Charlotte is Atlanta’s #1 economic competitor plus it has the benefit of being in a region and a state that is generally supportive of it and gives it what it wants (unlike Atlanta which has to deal with a region and state that is constantly trying to kneecap it). A rail line to connect Charlotte to Atlanta would help Charlotte address their primary competitive disadvantage to Atlanta, which is Atlanta’s prowess as a transportation hub. It could also make Atlanta’s disadvantages to Charlotte (i.e. Charlotte’s well-funded public transportation system, its prowess in finance, engineering, science and information technology, North Carolina’s superior higher education system, Charlotte being in a state with multiple economic engines where Georgia only has 1) worse instead of better.

      Georgia should implement the brain train between Atlanta and Athens, freight rail between Savannah and Atlanta (with passenger rail piggybacking on it) as well as rail to other parts of the state (Macon and Augusta at minimum … as a matter of fact Mercer in Macon and MCG in Augusta should be considered extensions of the brain train idea) before we even think about connections to Charlotte (or Chattanooga/Nashville) for that matter. If rail to another state is a good idea for interstate commerce, then let the feds build it. Our rail money needs to be spent on developing our own economy, not helping our primary economic competitor.

    • Dave Bearse says:

      Proposed Charlotte-Atlanta service is approaching 20 years old. It won’t be built if there are no funds to operate it, and there’s nothing to indicate Georgia will ever pay to do so.

      The southern terminus of a pair of trains through Raleigh is Charlotte, plus I think NC is contributes to Amtrak for an additional two pair of trains daily between Raleigh and Charlotte, three train daily in each direction, plus Charlotte is served by the Crescent (that doesn’t operate via Raleigh). SC I think helps fund additional SC intercity Amtrak service from the north through Charleston to Savannah (where it not surprisingly ends).

  2. sockpuppet says:

    “Another clueless male comments on women’s health and contraceptive access, this time, an Oklahoma Republican.”

    Women’s health and contraceptive access? Please. It has been a neat PR trick for the pro-abortion side to shift the debate from abortion – which is about when life begins and is very much inconvenienced by the reams of science on fetal development that seems to seldom get reported by the media – to contraception and the media plays along. The reality is that only a tiny percentage of the anti-abortion movement wants to ban or limit contraception. You just have some employers – mostly conservative Catholics – who resent being forced to cover contraception through their employee plans. That is all, and there isn’t a bit of evidence that refusing to do so limits access to contraception, which is cheap and widely available. And stopping taxpayer money from going to Planned Parenthood – which is sought because they perform abortions, not family planning or provide contraception – would not cause that organization to close, as they acknowledge that they only get a tiny percentage of their funding from Planned Parenthood. So it is all ideological.

    But the main thing goes to how the debate has shifted from when life begins to contraception because that is a battle that the pro-abortion side can win IF they FALSELY claim that access to contraception is being threatened (it isn’t). But the “when life begins” debate is one that they will lose, because the science on the issue makes it impossible to oppose a law that makes abortion illegal (save for protecting the life/health of the mother and other legitimate medical exceptions) past 24 weeks like in Pennsylvania. And oh yes, the law in Pennsylvania is based on old scientific research. With the newer fetal development research, there is legal basis for making abortion illegal past 20 weeks and even earlier.

    “Where did the party go that felt some decisions in a woman’s life should be made not by legislators and government, but rather by the women, her conscience, her doctor and her God?”

    Sorry, that line doesn’t work any more. We all know that the decision to go out and shoot, poison or knife a 35 year old is not something in a person’s life made not by legislators and government, but rather by people, their conscience, their doctor and their God. Instead, we know that legislators and government have declared that to be murder. As science has conclusively proven that life begins before birth, the same should be applied to abortion law, and when it has been, it has withstood court challenges time after time because the law can distinguish between Roe v. Wade on one hand and what medical science says about fetal development on the other. So, it means that Barack Obama’s Harvard Law Review opinion stating that there should be absolutely no restrictions on abortion does not pass constitutional muster because that opinion was based on ideology and not science and the law.

    • taylor says:

      What if the science is a lie from the pit of hell? We need to watch out for that type of science.

  3. seenbetrdayz says:

    The non-interventionist foreign policy argument typically states that we shouldn’t be getting involved in the middle east conflicts because we never really know who we’re helping.

    McCain stops in Syria for a photo op with a few rebels. Turns out one of them might be an infamous kidnapper.

    A spokesman for McCain said none of the people he met identified themselves as Nour and it had not been his intention to meet anyone of that name.

    “A number of the Syrians who greeted Senator McCain upon his arrival in Syria asked to take pictures with him, and as always, the senator complied. If the individual photographed with Senator McCain is in fact Mohammad Nour, that is regrettable,” spokesman Brian Rogers said.

Comments are closed.