"Think peace and and you'll get it. It's up to the people...If we really wanna change it, we can change it." -John Lennon

That quote is copied from the press kit for the Oscar nominated animated short film I Met the Walrus and hits upon a trifecta of my current interests.

The first being that reality is manufactured by the words in our pens and the thoughts in our head. Take responsibility.

Second, the Oscar nominated short films, live action and animated, are top notch. I continue to believe that the French, and French Canadians, are doing the most innovative animation work (Triplets of Belleville, Renaissance, Madame Tutli-Putli and Even Pigeons Go to Heaven all come to mind). Now if they just had the writing of Pixar.

The third is this nonsense about Barack Obama plagiarizing his speeches. Change, or at least the promise of change, has been a major theme of many political leaders. I don't know how Senator Obama could speak about change in a clear and direct way without building on the tradition of leaders before him. A far more dangerous idea is to demand that political leaders constantly dance around their ideas and relinquish any ability to speak plainly and directly.

I imagine Senator Dodd is feeling pretty great now. It's rare that politics provides an opportunity for one man to stand up and fight for a just cause, and win. Senator Dodd was able to filibuster retroactive immunity for the phone companies.

Despite retroactive immunity appearing to be a violation of the ex post facto clause in Article I of our Constitution most of the Senate was ready to pass it. Thanks to Senator Dodd's leadership on this we've won one battle in the war to preserve our nation's Constitution.

The House of Representatives found time to give Jesus a shout out for bringing us Christmas. My two favorite parts of the resolution:

(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;

I'm glad they cleared this up. They're a little late to the party though. I was sold on this years ago when I discovered Christianity gave us Ludwig Wittgenstein. Ludwig was a ninja with math and philosophy.

(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;

Let's get busy then and see this through. I want a resolution acknowledging the role played by the Renaissance in Western civilization. While we're at it lets give a shout out to the Golden Age of Islam since they preserved math and science for us during the dark ages. They even added new stuff like the Scientific Method and optics before they gave it back! How cool is that? I think that deserves a resolution.

I'm writing my letter to Congresswoman Johnson right now. I imagine she'll be receptive since she sponsored the resolution acknowledging the coolness of Islam and Ramadan

The Thoughtcrime bill that passed overwhelmingly in the House is going through committee in the Senate. The Senate bill is S. 1959.

Dahlia Lithwick writing in Slate points out "Harman's "thought crimes" bill [...] does no more than explore whether those thought crimes are a problem." She follows that up with some snark on the ineffectiveness of Democrats in Congress.

I am profoundly grateful that instead of criminalizing protected speech outright, Democrats merely form a commission that will do a study, which will in turn christen a Drive-Thru Center for Excellence, where they will someday consider criminalizing protected free speech.

I'm happy to see more media coverage for this. At best it's a waste of time and money, at worst it's a lever for rolling back protected speech. I'd much rather see Congress increase their oversight of the government agencies already studying these kinds of issues.

H.R. 1955 seeks to criminalize thoughtcrimes

The term violent radicalization means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

The term ideologically based violence means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

There is no definition for extremist belief system.

I wonder if civil rights marches in the 1960s would count as an extremist belief system attempting to facilitate political, religious or social change.

We already have laws against murder, assault, theft, etc. I don't understand why we need laws against speaking about those things. Punish the deed not the thought.

This is not how you stop terrorism.

This bill passed the House 404 to 6 and was created and sponsored mostly by Democrats.

I noticed that SB 1119 was enrolled today. It aims to clean up the state laws around red light cameras. The first point it aims to fix is a big one:

Municipalities are currently installing photographic traffic signal enforcement systems (red light cameras) based on an attorney general opinion, but have no statutory authority to do so.

It mainly focuses on making sure municipalities don't exploit this as a revenue opportunity. They can't share revenue with companies that provide red light service. They can't report violations to a credit bureau. They must conduct a traffic engineering study of the intersection to make sure it has a legitimate safety purpose. I don't see anything about penalties if a municipality ignores the law.

It also addresses some of my gripes. The written request for a hearing can be sent in 30 days instead of the 2 weeks I think I had. You can request an affidavit that the equipment is in good working order. The current process in Dallas doesn't explicitly allow for that.

Nice to see good government at work.

America, stop listening to your preacher about politics and government. They're probably great at religion and explaining where you fit in God's plan, but 55% of you are misinformed about where our government comes from.

I knew things were going well when a cabbie motioned me over and gave up his spot in front of city hall, and the meter had over an hour left on it. Dallas cabbies earned quite a bit of good karma with that movie.

I had prepared a bunch of notes for my hearing about a red light violation. I was looking forward to dazzling the hearing administrator with my defense.

• HB 922 had been made effective four days before my violation. It outlaws automated traffic control systems by municipalities at highways.
• I was ready to request a continuance while I sought calibration records for the red light camera to make sure it really was accurate down to 0.16 seconds.
• I was also going to get the details about traffic light height requirements in relation to road incline, I think mine may have been too low.

I had still more questions to present.

But all for naught because after about 20 minutes of waiting in the hall the hearing administrator came out and said my violation was dismissed. The disposition is "OFFICER ERROR" and I'm not liable because I was already in the intersection when it turned red.

I'm excited it was dismissed but a little let down I didn't get my Hollywood courtroom showdown.

I'm surprised I haven't seen more about OpenCongress in the sites I read. It is one of the better Congressional resource sites I've seen. I can't wait for the next release which will include the ability to tag bills, and follow the Congressional calendar.

It nicely bridges the gap between official government items (votes, bills, hearings) and public discourse about those items. Most sites like this play one side or the other.

They've got a Trac site for developers. Unsurprisingly it's written in Ruby on Rails.

I've been researching the PATRIOT Act which naturally leads me back through US history and similar cycles of radicalism. While pausing on the 1920 Wall Street Bombing and the later Palmer raids I came across this excellent quote. Then US Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer had his eye on the Democratic presidential nomination and tried to fire up support for him with this gem:

Like a prairie-fire, the blaze of revolution was sweeping over every American institution of law and order … eating its way into the homes of the American workmen, its sharp tongues of revolutionary heat were licking the altars of the churches, leaping into the belfry of the school bell, crawling into the sacred corners of American homes, seeking to replace marriage vows with libertine laws, burning up the foundations of society.

From 9/16: Terrorists Bomb Wall Street

Attorney General Gonzalez doesn't seem to have the same fire in his belly.

A Pew Research study finds Americans are uneasy with mix of religion and politics. However, there is one group that is totally comfortable with religion and politics mixing: White Evangelicals. 60% of White Evangelicals believe the bible should have more influence on U.S. Laws than the will of the American people. This contrasts with 16% of White mainline respondents and 7% of Secular respondents. These numbers coincide with a Rasmussen study stating 75% of Alabama and Arkansas believe the bible is literally true.

As a white male from Alabama I fit into those groups above but I believe in democracy and at best see Jesus as a philosopher on morality and ethics. I've been reading a book on Southern Identity and was surprised to learn that the in the early 19th century the North looked down on the South for a lack of piety and a certain hedonism. In the 1820s only one in ten people in the South attended church. By the 1860s that had almost completely flipped as Southerners flocked to Southern Baptist and Methodist churches. Religious leaders provided a moral sanctuary from the degradations of the South's "peculiar institution" in exchange for substantial tithes from the South's wealthy plantation owners. Those same religions were used to preach a different message about slavery in the churches of the North.

Religion's ability to salve one's emotional and mental wounds is amazing on a personal level, but its effects on groups can turn toxic.

William Saletan's article in Slate about the liquid world makes some thoughtful points about our current woes in fighting terrorism. The idea of treating a threat with a 1% chance of success the same as a 95% chance of success is an unworkable solution and at some point we as a nation will have to face that.

...some of us die. And the rest of us grieve, but we go on, doing our best to fight the bad guys and heal the world. The grieving and fighting and healing never end the dying.

He's saying the above about terrorism but he could just as well be saying it about our healthcare situation, or any number of other national policy issues.

He closes with a quote from Charles Darwin that carries an elevated poignancy since it not only applies to our struggle with terrorism but the seemingly eternal struggle between the scientist who struggles to understand the world on his own terms and the zealot who will only look at the world in someone else's terms.

It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.

My rep Eddie Bernice Johnson voted against Network Neutrality by supporting HR5252. I'm pretty disappointed with her.

This bill was sponsored by Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Rep. Charles Pickering (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.). I bet you can guess who their top campaign contributors are: AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon.

Us Dallasites really need to create an interest group that is saavy about Internet issues. Is there a group here that already does that? We need to go out to other groups in town and educate them about IP issues like Fair Use, DMCA, Network Neutrality, etc. It won't take that many people to make a big impact on these issues.

I received a response to the email I sent to Senator Cornyn's office respectfully asking him to clarify his views on elimination of income tax, institution of slavery, and application of the death penalty for blasphemy, homosexuality, idolatry, heresy, evil sorcery, etc. This email was sent in regards to his visit to an event put together by Christian Reconstructionalists. The prior points being goals of the Christian Reconstructionalist movement that strives to enshrine Old Testament law in a sort of Christian version of the Taliban.

His office responded with boilerplate about the importance of allowing the free exercise of religion and protecting religious freedom. I plan on pressing to see what limits he feels apply to the free exercise of one's religious beliefs. I wonder if he draws a distinction between the freedom to believe, and the freedom to act.

In general, I'd feel a lot better about some of our Republican leaders if they clarified where they believe those limits are. I imagine he supports limits like the Supreme Court outlawing polygamy in the Mormon church, or not protecting the use of peyote in Native American rituals. It's probably just fringe Christian groups that enjoy his unequivocal support for the free exercise of religion.

All of those little white dots are people marching up Ross Ave. in downtown Dallas. The NYTimes has an article on the march. The Dallas Morning News has great photos of the event, a couple of them by 2004 Pulitzer prize winner Cheryl Diaz Meyer.

I'm really proud of Dallas right now, in particular the hispanic community. I knew about the march but I never expected 350,000 to 500,000 people to show up. It would have been really cool to be downtown to see this. I'd love to see everyone in this country participate more in politics like this.

The recent "War on Christianty" conference in Washington D.C. featured some prominent Christian Reconstructionalists. I wasn't fully aware of their agenda. Basically the goal is to institute a new government built around the Old Testament. Things that would be different:

• Balanced budget
• No income tax
• Legalization of slavery
• Elimination of the prison system
• Death penalty for blasphemy, homosexuality, idolatry, heresy, evil sorcery, etc.
• Women become property of father until marriage, then property of husband
• Hawaii would be given back to natives

While I don't believe these topics were on the agenda. They are the agenda of some of the organizers. My senator, John Cornyn, attended this conference. I've emailed his office curious as to whether he supports any of these initiatives.

GovTrack.us provides RSS feeds of your house and senate representatives. All told you can track People, Subjects and Bills. They also have a General tab that lets you mark other events for tracking that don't fit under the other three headings. GovTrack also uses the Technorati API to tell you what bloggers are saying about bills as they snake through Congress.

I realize that all this information has been out there before but it's spread out across so many resources. I've just setup a feed for my reps.

Despite the grim picture for progressive politics across the country my new home in Dallas County bucked the trend. Three new Democrat judges, and a new lesbian, Latina, Democrat sheriff. The trend seems to be based on demographics rather than thoughtful Democrat strategies. Apparently Dallas County's hispanic population has doubled recently and they go 2-to-1 Democrat.

I'm surprised that the country turned out for Bush. I really thought his failures would be clear to the majority of Americans. I'm not clear what's next.

When I talk to my mother, who voted for Bush, we see the same things from opposite sides. She talks about voter's rejecting "legislating morality" and I counter with the fact that 11 states added new legislation to ban gay marriage and civil unions.

My step-father, who voted for Bush, complains about "activist judges" and I ask him what that means and I get this buzz phrase "Judges shouldn't legislate from the bench." Should Plessy vs. Ferguson have never been overturned by Brown ending separate but equal facilities? Isn't the whole concept of judicial review anathema to "activist judges."

My mother talks about voter's rejecting "big government" and I point out that Bush has presided over one of the largest increases in a decade and that government shrunk under Clinton much more.

I hear other Republicans complain about cuts in military spending and I retort with "How would the military have stopped guys with box cutters?"

Republicans defend Bush's excesses, even by their standards, with the idea that everything changed on 9/11 and I remind them that Clinton presided over not one, but two, homeland terrorists attacks and captured and tried all people involved in those. He didn't resort to the wrong-headed approach Bush has decided on which have not resulted in bringing the perpetrators to justice.

Republicans call Kerry a "tax and spend liberal" and don't blink at the Bush "tax cut and spend conservative" missing the obvious fiscal problems that creates.

My mother is the same person who used the tortured phrase of cognitive dissonance "It's okay, but it's not right" to describe gay marriage. How do these people hold this doublethink in their head?

I love my parents and I do not mean to pick on them exclusively. They are just the few Republican voters I encounter and I take their stance to be emblematic of the larger Republican base. I genuinely believe that Republican or Democrat everyone wants to make America greater. I just don't understand how Republican voters, by even their own measurements of success, fail to see improvements but continue voting the same way.

So the presidential election was just one more battle lost in the war. What's the next battle? How do I go about untwisting the mental contortions and buzzword heavy rhetoric of the Republican voters? I'm a lot more optimistic about 2008 than I was about 2004. I think Democrats are really just now building the infrastructure needed after the Democrat/Republican realignment where the parties seemed to swap sides on major issues. (Remember when the South used to only vote for racist Democrats?) I think the failure of the DLC and moderate Democrats to deliver this election will hopefully mark the end of the Republican-lite agenda that Clinton and crew have been pushing.

Jim Gilliam has an extract from a recent Bill Moyers speech. He quotes a huge chunk about the power Dispensationalists have been able to amass. Bill Moyers doesn't use that term in his speech but he's talking about Dispensationalism. It's a way of looking at Christianity from the back-end. Start at the Rapture and work your way backwards to figure out what you're supposed to be doing now. Based on hermeneutic study this means supporting the state of Israel so it can be destroyed and thus bring about the Second Coming, the Rapture, the Tribulation and so forth.

I don't understand how an apocalyptic cult counts House Majority Leader Tom Delay, Senator James Inhofe and others as members. These people want to sacrifice Israel to the Anti-Christ in order to bring about the Second Coming. All personal religious beliefs aside, because there is certainly wackier stuff out there, this is a disregard for the majority of Americans that don't believe in this stuff. They build policy based on their dispensational beliefs.

Tom Delay has no room for non-Christians as he has previously stated:

Only Christianity offers a way to live in response to the realities that we find in this world—only Christianity.

Inhofe characterized the battle for the end times with these words:

This is not a political battle at all. It is a contest over whether or not the word of God is true.

If you were unclear as to why we went to war in Iraq President Bush has said

God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.

Apparently he misheard God about solving the problem in the Middle East because he backed out of the road map when it angered Dispensationalists according to Pentecostal minister Robert G. Upton:

Within a two-week period, getting 50,000 postcards saying the exact same thing from places all over the country, that resonated with the White House. That really caused [President Bush] to backpedal on the Road Map.

I don't think President Bush is a Dispensationalist since he's a Methodist. I personally disagree with his overt mixing of religion and politics but I don't think he wants to destroy the world for God. The two Congressmen I mentioned do believe in it. It's fine to believe this on your own time, but they create foreign and domestic policy based on these doomsday beliefs. Moyers is right "the delusional is no longer marginal."

I continue to be amazed at the uses people keep finding for the Internet. Right now I'm listening to an mp3 stream of live coverage of protests at RNC-NYC put together by anoise.

People call in by cell phone live from rallies to give updates on what's happening. The show hosts coordinate all the information together to give a bird's eye view of what's going on. The segment I've been listening to has a lawyer making sure the callers are taking the right legal precautions. The whole thing seems to be put together with commodity technology.

Poll shows Americans still uninformed about Iraq.

[a new poll] finds that a large majority perceives the Bush administration making assertions about pre-war Iraq in sharp contrast to the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee. Eighty percent perceive the administration as "currently saying that Iraq, just before the war, had actual weapons of mass destruction" (60%) or that it had a major WMD program (20%). Similarly, 70% perceive the administration as currently saying Iraq "gave substantial support to al-Qaeda" (43%) or was directly involved in the September 11 attacks (27%).

These numbers are an improvement but indicate that misinformation has a longer half-life than one would like.

Journalists head into the fray to rescue cohorts from Imam Ali Shrine in Najaf. Makes one wish our domestic political reporters had the same kind of guts.

Despite Kerry holding a substantial electoral advantage for the last six weeks the press continue reporting "It's a tie."

A staunch liberal from the Northeast went looking for the 45% that want Bush. That meant touring the South. The folks he talked to don't like Bush but they'll stick by the girl they brought to the dance.

Am I the only one creeped out by the Bush campagin requirement that you sign a pledge of allegiance to Bush if you want to attend one of his rallies? I suppose Bush forgot these words from his first campaign: "...I'm a uniter, not a divider. I refuse to play the politics of putting people into groups and pitting one group against another" [From a link to a Salon (!) interview with Bush by David Horowitz (!). What a different world it was in 1999!]

The Christian Science Monitor has really done a great job with it's coverage surrounding the war in Iraq. Right now, they are the only Western reporters reporting on fighting in Najaf this week. They've had great, solid reporting for the most part. Their editor stood by his reporter when the Pentagon kicked a reporter out of a Marine unit.

While they had missteps with their coverage going into the war they owned up to them. Although their missteps weren't quite as big as their well known compatriots, the Times and the Washington Post. Some blame Judith Miller at the New York Times for selling the war to America. The Times mistakes in coverage eventually lead to this mea culpa from the editors. The Washington Post made a similar confession.

Since reading a May New Yorker article about Barack Obama my ears perk up whenever I see or hear his name. I was excited when I heard he'd be speaking at the Democratic Convention. Last night he delivered a speech that he wrote. The speech is a stirring narrative that weaves together elements from the bedrock of our nation. Elements from the Declaration of Independence and the stories of people doing the best the can. He pushes aside the Blue State/Red State cynicism and talks about one United States of America. He even mentions God and faith in a sincere and direct way that most Democrats, and Republicans, trip over. People are already talking about him "being our first black president." It's people like him that have me excited about this country's political future.

During the 1980s I grew from 6 to 16. Remembering them now I felt oppressed by the world around me. I followed presidential politics but did not go much beyond that for many of those years. I remember my shock at the S&L scandals, Iran-Contra, Libya bombing, the assassination attempt, book burnings, the fantasy of SDI, Pat Roberts presidential bid, and the stock market crash. I remember excitement about the Berlin Wall coming down but disappointment at Gorbachev being ejected and Yeltsin taking over. It was deeper than just domestic/foreign policy. I felt like American culture took a big hit as movies, music and books were recycled pabulum for the most part. As a result of that I've felt lost in the Reagan hagiography of the past week.

It was nice to see my rememberances somewhat echoed in a letter to Salon. Even if the majority of media was tripping over themselves with unabashed praise.

What Reagan did give me was cynicism toward my government. At 14, I watched the Iran-Contra hearings with a creeping sense of mortification: What if you had a national scandal and nobody came? How could Americans forgive Reagan's obdurate shredding of the Constitution—no matter how much they adored his "aw shucks" attitude liberally smeared with "give 'em hell" impulses? It made me sick to see this goofball get softball treatment from everyone, especially the media. His "I can't recall" mantra, repeated an astounding 340 times regarding his actions in Iran-Contra, sliced though the faith I had in America as a philanthropic, altruistic entity. — Sarah Kelleher

Now here's a blog with refreshing honesty about why they're drawn to public service. I have a "glamour job" on the Hill. That is, I could not care less about gov or politics, but working for a Senator looks good on my resume. She is, or rather was till today, an aide for Republican Senator Mike DeWine from Ohio.

It's mostly about all the sex she had or wanted to have. This includes apparently getting $400 for a "long lunch." I thought this entry was a gem:

I am done with W, for real this time. A man who tries to fuck you in the ass when you are sober does not love you. He should at least take you out for a few drinks to spare you the pain. Now I know that W does not care about me, only my asshole.

See it works on two levels. One is the literal about her date with some guy. Then you have the second symbolic level of George W. Bush and the American people. :)

One of the most riveting personal sagas that has played out over the last few years has got to be Michael Newdow's fight to right a wrong. As an Atheist he is looked upon unfavorably by almost 60% of the US population. He has endured a great deal of abuse in the public discourse. After the 9th Circuit Court opinion all 99 members of the Senate stood on the steps and pledged to keep "under God" right where it is.

He has been savaged for bringing the case on behalf of his daughter. There he stands as alone as anyone has ever been, not even a faith in god to stand by him in the darkest hours. That's what makes this story so great. I'd call it Quixotic if it weren't such an American tale.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and Michael Newdow chose to represent himself. Against him are Bush and Kerry, majorities in both houses of Congress, and attorneys general from all 50 states. Filing briefs against him are the National Education Association, American Jewish Congress, American Legion, Knights of Columbus, and a number of others.

The few that were on his side such as American United for Separation of Church and State didn't even trust him enough to be able to present his arguments alone. They petitioned the court to be given some of Newdow's argument time but were rejected.

He even asked for, and got, Scalia to recuse himself thus removing one sure vote against him and one of the Supreme Court's toughest questioners. It's a gutsy move that could have left him with an even more irritated justice.

With so many forces arrayed against him, including the fact that he's not a practicing attorney, he seems to have nothing going for him except his belief that he's right. As conservative columnist William Safire put it:

The only thing this time-wasting pest Newdow has going for him is that he's right. Those of us who believe in God don't need to inject our faith into a patriotic affirmation and coerce all schoolchildren into going along. The key word in the pledge is the last one. Of God and the Flag by William Safire

He had his day in court and by all accounts he not only didn't screw up but did an excellent job. The mother of his daughter, Sandra Banning, despite filing a brief against his case, said "Michael did very well." The superintendent of the school district, David Gordon, he took to court had this to say:

While Gordon opposed Newdow's case, he said the rookie attorney did "an excellent job" and complimented Newdow afterward. "I may not agree with him ... but all of this has been a powerful process that shows that one individual can bring an unpopular view forward," Gordon said. Newdow reflects on his day in court by Jennifer Garza

After his day in court a NY Times columnist uttered his name with such greats as Jefferson and Madison:

The Supreme Court may embrace Dr. Newdow's passionate plea, side with "under God" or split 4-4 and leave the lower court ruling alone, and it won't pick our pockets or break our legs. But the sight of one man standing up to challenge God and country is something that Madison, Jefferson and Franklin would cheer, and every American can celebrate. Jefferson, Madison, Newdow? by Kenneth Davis

From the moment comes the man, and I have no doubt that whatever petty zealotry may have driven Michael Newdow when he began this case has been transformed by the process. He has stood his ground on principle and the institutions of American government have responded with the weighty majesty instilled in them by the Constitution.

Somebody was schooled on Face the Nation.

I love the part where Rumsfeld says that nobody said Iraq was an immediate threat, show me where someone said that and then Friedman starts in. He reads out part of a quote from Rumsfeld and stops. Rumsfeld sees a hole since it didn't have that exact wording and tries to weasel out of it, then Friedman finishes the quote where it has the exact phrase. Ouch. That's too bad too. I always thought Rummy was one of the more honest ones in the administration.

According to a Zogby poll about attitudes towards the war:

"Greatest support is among Republicans (91%-8%), while only 46% of Democrats are supportive and 52% are opposed. Independents support the war 69% to 30%."

What kind of automatons make up the Republican party that they are 91% behind Bush on this war!? I imagine you'd find the same brown shirt obedience across policies. (Don't give me the "they support their president bullshit", do you need a reminder of what they said about Clinton during the war in Kosovo?) I say the same thing with equal vehemence about the 90% percent of the African-American population that voted for Gore.

This country is much too diverse to agree 91% on anything unless people have just stopped caring. When did people stop caring about learning? Why isn't it so black and white for me? Why do I feel the need to continually research and revisit my opinion when others clearly don't? For some good citizenship appears to mean declaring allegiance to their overlord and following orders. Well, let me remind you that "following orders" isn't a valid defense when you are finally held accountable for your actions. Fucking cretins.

I finally setup an account on free republic. Maybe my questions will be answered there.