Glad to see you participating in the sixth Skeptics Circle.
The basics about me, conflating the blurb at the top and the "about" link at the upper right.
I am the editor of a suburban Dallas weekly newspaper. I'm pretty strongly progressive on most political issues, such as being against the invasion of Iraq from the time it was first publicly bandied about in mid-2002.
More germane to the Skeptics' Circle, I am a secularlist naturalist -- titles descriptive of my approach to understanding the world, and not a snapshot of what I do not believe in -- who has a graduate divinity degree and can therefore do verbal judo on the IDers, or people of strong, unwarranted faith in general.
Contact me here with your submissions. A URL for the actual blog post, a title, and a 2-3 sentence précis would be appreciated.
I hope you take the time to look around while you're here.
Steve
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
Pages
▼
April 09, 2005
April 06, 2005
So what about Bush v. Gore 2000, Sen. Cornyn?
Texas Sen. John Cornyn said this on the floor of the Senate April 4 as part of his general diatribe about so-called “activist” judges and their failure to respect the so-called “culture of life” as determined by good GOoPer conservatives:
“I believe insofar as the Supreme Court has taken on this role as a policymaker rather than an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people, it has led to increasing divisiveness and bitterness of our confirmation fights that is a very current problem this body faces today.”Gee, John, wasn't “Election 2000” a policymaker decision by SCOTUS?