State Secrets Privilege

If the government determines a document to be secret, then you cannot bring action against the government even if you know what the document says. If it's secret, then the government contends you can't do anything. This is the government's argument before the 9th Circuit Court.

It's a case that was brought against the government. The government had accidentally released a top secret document to the plaintiffs. The document proved that the government had been spying upon the plaintiffs. But, since the document has been coded as top secret, then no case can be brought against the government even if everyone knows what the document says.

So, if they're allowed to do such things, any acts by the government that are illegal or embarrassing could just be made top secret to cover it up. Call it national security and no one can touch it.

Unchecked power usually doesn't have good boundaries. I sure hope that we have some extraordinarily trustworthy people in the executive branch of the government.

Newt's comparison

Watching a snippet of Newt Gingrinch comparing UPS to the federal government upset me and I turned off the TV. No more C-Span tonight!

He talked about how well UPS & Fed Ex are in their business. UPS tracks 13 million packages every day. You can go on-line and track your package. I agree they're very good at what they do.

He compared that to the federal government's inability to track 12-20 million illegal immigrants.

Hmmm...isn't this like comparing apples & oranges? How does UPS's ability to track packages (which are not human beings) compare to the government tracking millions of illegal aliens?

This is a false comparison. If he was going to compare properly, he should compare UPS to the US Postal system. By the way, I think the post office actually does a pretty good job.

His overall point is probably correct - that private industry is often more efficient than government agencies.

But for someone who is looking to run for president, I suggest he come up with better comparisons.

Debating Republicans

I watched the Republican debate this morning. I struggle to remember anything noteworthy.

Debate is really the wrong word for this. It's really just a group of guys saying rehearsed lines that fit in short time snippets and sound good on TV. They're just reiterating their well known positions.

If anything, it gives some of the guys who are behind a chance to get their ideas into the mainstream media. Yet, those positions are mostly similar to the other candidates except for Ron Paul of course.

What's challenging is picking a good president. When someone gets into the job you don't know if they were saying what you wanted to hear in the primaries or if they will actually do what they say.

For example, George W. Bush, in 2000 ran a campaign on limiting government. He also said that we should seek to cooperate with other countries and shouldn't try to do nation building. The guy I voted for in 2000 is not the guy who showed up to be president.

I've read that in one of his first national security meetings it was about how to militarily intervene in Iraq. Too bad they weren't also ready to do nation building. Government spending under the Bush administration has been out of control even with a Republican Congress. But, that's OK, just put it on the national credit card.

So, can I trust one of these guys to stay true to their word?

New Man endorses Huckabee

I don't like New Man magazine's endorsement of Mike Huckaby for president. "New Man thinks he's the right man for the job." New Man magazine is published by Strang Communications who also published Charisma magazine. It's a magazine aimed at helping Christian men.

Here's my problem with this. When a Christian magazine endorses a candidate you're also endorsing the policy positions of the candidate. And then what happens is that the name of Jesus gets attached to a particular set of political positions.

For example, Mike Huckabee is a big supporter of gun rights. He claims to be the first governor to have a concealed gun license. He proposes that the gun owner rights are there to oppose government tyranny if it were ever needed. When Jesus announced the Kingdom of God, He didn't include anything about the rights of the Jewish people to carry swords against Roman oppression.

So, does New Man magazine support strong gun rights as a Christian position? Probably not, but when you endorse a candidate then most people assume you also support their positions on the issues.

I do appreciate the fact that they're letting people know about one of the presidential candidates that looks to be a good, solid leader but isn't getting much attention. I just wish that they had not endorsed him.

Quirky cats

Mocha made me scream yesterday! Mocha is our 10 year old cat who is sweet and lovable.

Yesterday I was vacuuming upstairs in our guest bedroom. In my attempt to get as far under the bed as I could I must scared Mocha out of one of her lives. She was somewhere far under the bed. It's one of her hiding places.

Suddenly this black streak came rushing out from under the bed and brushed my leg. I was in my own little vacuuming world so I was startled to have something come running out from under the bed. I screamed (a manly scream of course).

All was well when I realized it was our frightened little cat.