A New Chapter Some of you may have noticed that I have not been posting much lately. There are three reasons for this: 1) a lack of fresh news combined with the fact that I have already written about many of my views, 2) a lack of time due to a particularly intense semester at law school and 3) my desire to only write posts that present fresh ideas arrived at through thoughtful deliberation. This third reason demands further explanation. Nearly all of the views I've written about have been arrived at only after a long, deliberative process. Sometimes it's easy to express these long-held views as they apply to new situations that arise in the news. Other times, it's not so easy. Often situations are so complex and involve such a wide array of issues that it would be intellectually dishonest to begin writing about them as if I were fully informed. One example would be the recent flack over the United Arab Emirates control of U.S. ports. Many liberals thought Bush + further weakening of port security automatically made this a horrible decision. But those same liberals allied themselves with racists on the right who just didn't want people with brown skin running U.S. ports. Sometimes these kinds of coalitions are inevitable due to the multitude of issues involved in a given situation. Other times these coalitions indicate that one side or the other is leaping to a conclusion without properly considering all the issues involved. My opinion on this matter was never that emotional nor interesting to merit an article. I think that as long as we are going to allow foreign countries to control our ports, we shouldn't discriminate on the basis of the race of the country. My personal wish would be to make the operation of our ports a government enterprise considering the massive safety ramifications. On the other hand, I don't really know enough about the finer points of port management to honestly say that my proposal is the best idea. My larger point is that I have come to dislike knee-jerk reactions to complicated social problems. Those problems which have an easy solution -- the problems of SUVs, the unconstitutionality of the death penalty, the horrible failures of Bush during Katrina, the deplorable records of Justices Roberts and Alito -- these problems provide me the best opportunity to speak my voice. For I can speak it knowing that I have been intellectually honest. The problem for me is that I have written about most of the easy issues for which I am duly informed. Blogging is, in a way, very easy when someone like George Bush is in charge. His absolute moral bankruptcy -- reflected by his aggressive corporate agenda, his war on the environment, his failure to separate church and state and his illegal war in Iraq -- all provide clear examples of what's obviously wrong. At the same time, I find these kinds of posts to often be the "low-hanging fruit," i.e., obvious to spot and therefore somewhat uninteresting. I've tried to provide a unique angle on this blog and have stayed away from posts that merely restate the obvious. An example of this would be the recent video that proved that Bush knew that the levees in New Orleans would not last. But I said the same thing months ago due to the enormous amount of circumstantial evidence; there's nothing that newsworthy about this video because the logical conclusion was already clear to all those willing to think about it. As such, I found no reason to write about this unless I had something original to add. My point is only to explain my lack of fresh posts and to explain the limited amount of posts that will come in the future. Part of my training to become a lawyer involves the careful process of crafting law. Some people who I admire very much, such as Justice Brennan, at times became too results-oriented and harmed the integrity of the judicial process. (I plan to write on this issue in a future post.) I certainly do not want to stray down that path. I believe liberalism is the correct ideology because it is more fundamentally sound and reasoned than conservatism. Similarly, I'd like the quality of my posts to outweigh the quantity of my posts. Mainstream blogs rely upon daily posts, often several daily posts. This blog will never become one of those because I lack the time necessary to write duly informed comments on a daily basis. (Most mainstream bloggers do as well, so they write crap instead. I digress.) Nonetheless, the War on Corporate Evil must continue. Expect new posts weekly, or perhaps bi-weekly, but expect the posts to be more thorough, unique and thoughtful. |
Top Twenty
- 1. Daily Kos
- 2. 538.com (Nate Silver)
- 2. Eschaton (Atrios)
- 3. Huffington Post
- 4. Juan Cole
- 5. The Black Commentator
- 6. This Modern World
- 7. AMERICAblog
- 8. Talking Points Memo -- Joshua Marshall
- 9. TalkLeft
- 10. MyDD
- 11. ed fitzgerald's unfutz
- 12. Eschaton (Atrios)
- 13. Hoffmania
- 14. Pharyngula
- 15. Billmon
- 16. Eric Alterman
- 17. Unclaimed Territory
- 18. Bartcop
- 19. Left in the West
- 20. The Blog From Another Dimension
Recommended News Resources
- Buzzflash!
- The Nation
- The Texas Observer Allafrica.com
- Corporate Crime Reporter Cosmoetica
- Mother Jones Narco News
- Nowpublic Open Democracy
- Today in Iraq Tom Paine
AltWeeklies.com
American Reporter
Am. Politics Journal
Antiwar.com
Arts Journal
Bear Left!
Black Commentator
Bush Watch
Capitol Hill Blue
Common Dreams
ConWebWatch
Consortium News
Corante
CrimeLynx
Cursor
Death Penalty Information Center
Democratic Underground
Dissident Voice
Drudge Retort
Drugwar.com
Eat the State
Econ in Crisis
Failure
The Gadflyer
Grist
History News Network
Hollywood Investigator
Identity Theory
Intervention
The Jackson Progressive
Liberal Oasis
MedialChannel
Memory Hole
Michael Moore
Military Week
The Morning News
New American Media
The New Standard
No Logo
PopMatters
Pop Politics
Press Action
Progressive Review
Raw Story
The Revealer
Salon
Scoop
Slate
Sp!ked
Take Back The Media
The Daily Planet
The Smoking Gun
Truthdig
Truthout
Unknown News
What Really Happened
Wired News
Working for Change
News Services
- Agence France-Presse
- Alternet
- AP
- BBC
- Google News
- Inter Press Service
- Indy Media
- Knight Ridder
- Reuters
- UN
Reference
Government Reference
-
U.S.Constitution
Bill of Rights and Amendments
Contact President Bush
Find Your Representatives
House Web Sites
Senate Web Sites
Blogroll
- Feedster Top 500 Blogs
- The Agonist
- Alas, a Blog
- Amnesty's Death Penalty Blog
- annatopia
- Asian American Empowerment: ModelMinority.com
- Balkinization
- Bartcop
- Billmon
- Blog of the Moderate Left
- The Blogging of the President
- Brains and Eggs
- Brilliant at Breakfast
- Burnt Orange
- The Carpetbagger Report
- David Corn
- Democratic Veteran
- Demagogue
- DMI Blog
- DownWithTyranny
- Easter Lemming Liberal News
- Effect Measure
- Electronic Darwinism
- Emerging Democratic Majority
- Enivornmental and Urban Economics
- ePluribus Media Community
- Eric Alterman
- feministing
- First Draft
- From the Roots
- Gropinator
- Happy Tulip's Xanga Site
- Sister Helen Prejean
- ImpeachBushCoalition
- Informed Dissent
- itlookslikethis
- Just Another Blog
- kid oakland
- Left in the West
- LeftyBlogs.com
- Liberal Street Fighter
mediagirl.org
- Mark Crispin Miller
- Mathew Gross
- The OCD Gen X Liberal
- Orcinus
- Orwell's Grave
- Peking Duck
- Political Cortex
- The Poor Man
- Progressive Blog Digest
- Public Intelligence
- Reaction, The
- Red State Rabble
- Religious Liberal Blog, A
- Republic of T
- The Rude Pundit
- Running Scared
- Sadly, No!
- Say No to Pombo
- ScaramoucheBlog
Skimble
skippy the bush kangaroo
- sustainablog
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh/a>
- A Thought Vacuum
- Truth Serum Blog
- Unclaimed Territory
- Upper Left
- Various Miseries
- Washington Note, The
- White Man Ranting
- World Changing
- Zaphod's Heads
- DMI Blog
Organizations Fighting Corporate Evil
- ACLU
- Americans United For Separation of Church and State
- ATLA
- Buy Blue
- CensorBush.org
- Center for American Progress
- Center for Media & Democracy
- ComcastWatch
- Consumers Union
- CorpWatch
- Democrats.org
- Fair.org
- Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights
- House Democrats' Committee on Government Reform
- Human Rights Watch
- Media Matters for America
- National Organization for Women
- Natural Resources Defense Council
- OpenSecrets
- People For the American Way
- Progressive Democrats of America
- Public Citizen
- Think Progress
- Union of Concerned Scientists
- Union Voice
- WakeUp Walmart
Law Blogs
- ACSBlog
- Arbitrary and Capricious
- Capital Defense Weekly
- CrimProf Blog
- Decision of the Day
- Discourse.net
- Is That Legal?
- The Legal Reader
- Public Defender Dude
- Real Lawyers Have Blogs
- SCOTUSBlog
- Sentencing Law and Policy
For Laughs
Recent Battles in the War on Corporate Evil
- Their Wealth Matters More Than Your HealthTomorrow...
- A Moral Obligation Exists to Stop Genocide180,000 ...
- There's No Easy Way to KillLethal injection consti...
- Ignoring Global WarmingThe Republicans continue to...
- Bits & PiecesOrwellian News Media Strikes Again --...
- Why the AUMF doesn't allow for Warrantless Wiretap...
- John Kerry Suspects that Bush Stole the 2004 Elect...
- Bush's Beef Incompetence Will Kill YouAs many of y...
- RACIST GOP TRIES TO UNDERMINE VOTING RIGHTS ACTUnb...
- DEMOCRACY: DEAD OR ALIVEPart 5 of 5The Forbidden Q...
Archives
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- August 2008
- September 2008
- November 2008
- January 2012
- June 2013
Corporate Tool Archive
California Resources
San Francisco News
-
Beyond Chron
East Bay Express
Marin Independent Journal Oakland Tribune
SF Bay Guardian
SF Chronicle
SF Examiner
SF Sentinel
SF Weekly
San Jose Mercury News
The Usual Suspects
- SF Indy Media
- SF Bay Area Indy Media Center
- The Bay Area is Talking
San Francisco Resources
American Newspapers
-
Todays Papers
Boston Globe
Chicago Tribune
Detroit Free Press
LA Times
Miami Herald
NY Daily News
NY Newsday
NY Post
NY Sun
NY Times
The Oregonian
Phil Inquirer
Pioneer Press
SP Times
USA Today
Washington Post
Wall Street Journal
International Newspapers
-
NewsLink
Asia Times (HK)
Globe and Mail
Guardian/Observer
The Independent
London Times
Moscow Times
Other Foreign
Pravda (Eng.)
Telegraph U.K.
Times of India
Toronto Star
Magazines
- American Prospect
- Atlantic Monthly
- The Baffler
- Billboard
- Bust
- The Economist
- Found
- Harper's Index
- In These Times
- Left Business Observer
- McSweeney's
- Modern Drunkard
- Mother Jones
- The Nation
- The New Republic
- New Statesman
- New York
- The New Yorker
- Newsweek
- NY Observer
- The Progressive
- Progressive Populist
- Radar
- Reason
- Roll Call
- Time
- US News
- Utne
- Variety
- Wash Monthly
- Weekly Standard
Comments on ""
Well I thank you for your kind words. I'll try to post as often as I can, but at least until this semester is over it probably won't be much.
As for these fathers who want to escape financial responsibility for unintended children, I would think that they don't have much of a case. First, the right in Roe dealt more with personal autonomy to decide one's own medical procedures as opposed to the decision whether or not to have children. It's much more intrusive to make laws telling people what to do with their physical bodies than it is to make laws ordering financial support. Second, equal protection, as I understand it, applies to laws that legislatures pass, not decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. There is no legislative law that permits abortion. As such, levels of scrutiny cannot really apply; they involve analyzing legislative acts, not acts of the Supreme Court. Even if equal protection concerns apply to Supreme Court decisions, one can argue that men have the same right to have an abortion, just that the laws of science prohibit it since men cannot get pregnant.
Finally, the rights of the child are at stake when it comes to financial responsibility, not the rights of the mother. "Parens patriae" is the idea that our government, in a way, functions as a type of parent-figure for all Americans. In particular, courts have consistently ruled that the care of children is a compelling state interest. Children should not be penalized due to the decisions of the parents. From what I can remember from Family Law, there is no way to opt out of financial responsibility for one's own children.
I'd say this is just a frivilous lawsuit. Of course, I could be wrong. I know that arguments similar to this one have put forth to support the idea that potential fathers should have a say in whether a woman can obtain an abortion.
Nice post Mike, even I'll miss your opine's.
I think the "Rov v. Wade for men" is an interesting case. It falls apart when you think about it at a specific level, if the right in Roe is to terminate a pregnancy, and nothing more.
But if you describe the fundamental right in Roe more basically, to use Brennan's words which were cited in Casey, the "right to bear and beget children" then you might ask yourself, why don't men have any say in whether or not to have children if it is such a fundamental right? Of course there's no way to reconcile the right of each parent to choose when they disagree. Another way is to give the man some rights by not forcing him to support a child when it was not his choice to do so. I don't suppose there is any remedy for the father if he wants to have a child and the mother decides not to.
I admit that from a social standpoint I'm against the plaintiff in this case, he should be forced to pay child support, but I agree with him that it's about time this issue was brought into the arena of debate.