When the U.S. Congress changed the rules
pertaining to the use of filibusters, making it a
process that could be used through notice rather
than actual physical effort..The U.S. Congress
help set the stage for a serious downgrade in the
effectiveness, representational content, level of
debate ect.. in this critical branch of our U.S.
government.

The misuse of this process under current rules has
clearly been contributory to the current public levels
of performance dis-satisfaction, through ongoing
entropic stalemates, and inaction.

As currently being used this filibuster process is
dis-proportionately separating our U.S. congress
from being able to fulfill it's mandate to represent
the will of the voting populace in a more traditionally
regular proportion to the votes being cast in the
electorial process..

CSM

I find this to be one, predictable- unfortunately.. Sadly
funny in a respect..It's kind of a situation where we have
the pot calling the kettle black..

With the Christian denominations, once you get outside
of the basic tenants of the ten commandments you can
really start getting into some very irrational processes,
(and even with the Ten Commandments..the parts about
God, graven images..get a little goofy),

These "biblical" processes become even more problematic
when you view them outside of the historical/cultural
context under which they came into existence. I.E. The
biblical literalist...

The problem with the Mormon situation, is that it came
into existence as a "form/branch/weed" of Christianity
in fairly recent history.. At the time of it's formation it's
organizational/historical underpinnings/claims were
beyond the means of mainstream society to dispute,
or hold up as the fabrication of some creative minds.. 

Little could the creative thinkers that formed up this
"new faith" have known that right around the corner was
coming the advent of modern archaeology. Within a
hundred years or less key points behind much of their
formative structural history could be logically/academically
demonstrated to be false/wrong..If the product of actual
communication with supernatural beings..these beings were
either very confused or ignorant about history, and the real
facts having to do with the America's. 

The rational conclusion being that Mormonism is the
product of some creative thinkers..creative thinkers that
had no educational background in central American native
cultures/histories, or the indigenous animal species.  

(Most/all monotheistic faiths suffer from similar short-
comings...)

Do I want someone who believes in the more
discriminatory aspects of the Mormon belief system to
hold any type of public office..hell no.. No more than I
would want followers of any religious belief system that
supports or advocates discriminatory policies or 
processes to hold public office.

Do I think that any adult that is willing to stand up and
proclaim that they actually and fully believe as
fact/truth some of the more outrageous aspects of the
Mormon faiths view or rendition of historical events are
unqualified to hold public office..or
God forbid get control of the nuclear football?

Go to www.whatismormonism.com


Hell yes.. I feel the same way about any adult that
actually thinks Jesus walked on water, that the story of
Adam and Eve is true etc..

Why do I believe this is more of an issue today than in
the past.. well for me it's because I believe our planet
is dying, our political and social and economic processes
are failing.. and I see far too many connections to these
failures in our western societies to the beliefs systems-
methods of operation propagated by the biblical literalist.

{ I use the term biblical literalist...this can often time be
exchanged for "biblical mis-interpretationist", or biblical
myth creationist etc..}

All the above---

(Does not explain what is going on in China, or other non-
Christian developing nations...I think, at least as far as
China goes..the problems are based upon a natural desire
or need to achieve material/living standards or equality.

That they should have all that the west/or other developed 
nations have, and have had for so long... There are other
issues involved here as well based upon societal
issues supported by the actual/real suffering they have had
to endure to stay in "the game"avoid collapse, or various
other disasters..and they want what they want for their
society/people.

My problem with the current mainland China
development process is that a large aspect is moving
forward with the same, "and the so what if humanity goes
extinct in the process", process that we see here in the west
ect..

Some might be quick to point out that a large
portion or that suffering their government/economic model
forced them to endure.., and there is a certain truth behind
this perspective, but still,..I can imagine the resentment.

We "The U.S." have failed to keep our house in order,
"economic/social/environmental etc..", our processes
have often fallen far below the "Good Neighbor" standard..,
granted sometimes for cause, more often inexplicably
for not... China is putting tremendous efforts towards
clean energy production, but as the data demonstrates,
when you are trying to cover as much ground as the
Chinese with the current levels of help and global
co-operation now seen/available, it's not a big surprise
when you become the worlds largest polluter..In many
key areas finally over taking the U.S.

Need to clearly do better. but do we have the time?

Where were the corrective processes of the Christian faiths,
Muslim? How about the Masons? Skull and Bones..? Tri 
lateralists.Bildenbergers?? Bottom line... our epitaph may
well read

Here lies the human race, had some real potential..but
went and over bred themselves to death.  Like rats!
"They found reality and rationalism to be too much work" 

I just don't think we can afford to put up with the goofy
level of this shit for very much longer..

Update-12/9/11, (Recent research is showing strong
evidence that rats have very strong empathetic/and
altruistic behavior traits..so lets work to adopt these
traits for our selves, while seriously taking steps to 
address the "over bred themselves to death" scenarios
in a positive/timely progressive fashion.)  

CSM

It's going to be real interesting when the glacial ice has
been reduced to the point that it is no longer able to
function as a global cooling agent.

The debate over the U.S. military killing of
leaders of Anti-U.S. militant groups has been
heating up as of late..

Another level of concern has been raised due to
the fact that a recently targeted/killed Anti-U.S.
militant leader was a U.S. citizen.

There is a another issue involved having to do
with what the rules, or legal constraints should be
in regards to the U.S. military engaging in military
operations in which said operations require that
they enter/cross the legally recognized borders of
a sovereign nation without first obtaining the
approval to do so from the Government of said 
sovereign nation.  

I summarize my analysis as follows.

If the current U.S. military operations currently
engaged in, in several nations, are under legally
accepted conditions/mandates, allowing U.S. military
operations--  say vs.. a purely "civilian law"
enforcement response/issue... Then I believe that if
a group of enemy combatants are located, they can,
and should expect to be targeted by any and all
available and reasonably used U.S. military
resources.

I would say that if you are a U.S. citizen and you
have clearly allied yourself with active Anti-U.S.
militants and are clearly taking part in military
operations against the U.S.--even if your role
is more involved in the planning vs the operations
end of things.. and all the conditions discussed in
the above paragraphs exist, you should reasonably
expect a cruise missile up your tail pipe..or if
possible, perhaps a Navy Seal will come a knocking
on your door.

Same goes for those enemy combatants that are
not U.S. citizens..

Sometimes a mission has the ability to meet it's
objectives and the taking of prisoners is going to be
an acceptable part of the op..After which they can,
should expect to be processed according to legally
acceptable military doctrine/rules/rights/regs ect..

Other times an op might be a plane flying over head,
dropping a bomb on target, not really possible to take
prisoners.

( I do want to come to a clear understanding about
what actually took place in the "Bin Laden" compound.
This in light of the conflicting accounts that are now
circulating.) I believe shooting/killing an unarmed
enemy combatant could under various circumstances
be a considered a "war crime".. really want to have
these conflicting stories vetted.. and dismissed or
acted upon.--and-- serious legitimate consideration
should be given/and expected towards those involved
in the operation, and the degree of threat they
considered themselves to be exposed.--  If it was
an assassination--which could only be determined
by examining the details of the op--well again,--
shooting unarmed captives "can be/is" a war crime.

I also believe that some act's of terrorism should
clearly be treated as "criminal acts" to be addressed
using the resources of the targeted nations civilian
law enforcement/criminal court system. VS something
that will be expected to trigger a nations full military
response

It really comes down to the size and scope of the
(terrorist?) operation, and location of point of origin,
I.E. domestic or foreign..If you have allied yourself
with governments that protect you and provide you
sustenance...If you engage in militant strikes across
the globe--you should anticipate your actions to be  
considered an act of war, and responded to accordingly.

As far as the border crossing issues go, I would say that
crossing a border into an allied nation without prior
approval does appear to be potentially illegal.. 

I would expect that if something like this was done 
under the auspices of a "lessor of harms" defence
that I'm sure the gratitude of the violated nation would
require that they choose not to make an issue of it..
No called harm, no called foul..

If said violated nation does cry foul then the issue
exists, and any complaint should expect to be given
full legal consideration, and sanctioned accordingly.

I also think that if a nation that claims to be an ally,
is in fact found to be harboring a person engaged in
acts of war..or terrorism/extreme violence..said nations
may find that they have also engaged in an act of war?

With all the expected response to said "acts of war" to
also be within the realm of possibility.

The U.S. government that I'm willing to support does
not shoot unarmed prisoners..It also does not violate
international law..Right now I give the benefit of the 
doubt to the U.S. in reference to these issues, but I
want to see, in due time, an in depth analysis of these
matters. 

CSM

P.S. I also wanted to add that I agree with those that
want to make sure that proper review processes, record
keeping, and hard wired constitutional legal requirements
exist for any type of government sponsored homicide,
that can/could be grouped into an extra-judicial process/es.

These types of actions no matter how appropriate? Push us
as a society towards a slippery slope..As a democratic 
republic that recognizes the importance of having a
multiple/independant branches,- form of government..
We do not wish for such power to reside within the grasp
of any individual, or branch of government that is not
exposed to regular, and transparent public disclosure,
and stringent review. With clearly stated criminal
penalties for the abuses associated with such processes
clearly defined as well.

1/6/2012- Update.. I also wanted to add, so that my
position is even more clear...If you have some one
who is engaged actively in "making war" against the United
States- in active theatres of recognized conflict, a legal/
expected military type of response/action should not be
unexpected...Nor do I believe it poses a serious legal/
constitutional concern.. How-ever, as I have said else
where the legitimacy of this type of response is to be
measured against the size & scope of the activity..

If you have a small group of individuals..operating outside
of the recognized theatre of active "traditionally understood"
military conflict.. then these are "civil criminal" issues that
should be pursued and prosecuted as such..

We recognize that under the ever changing world that "grey"
areas exist..where things/responses could get "confused"?

We believe that erring on the side of caution must be the
policy I.E. ensuring the rule of law and constitutionality of
the process...That a process of full review and transparency
must be followed, while protecting recognized intelligence
assets. With full legal accountability..criminal prosecution
for those..who make a mistake..and deprive an individual
or individuals of life, liberty, ect.. without due process of law.

We realize that this can give some bad people the first
"shot" or "punch" sometimes.. But we're supposed to be
the good guys..It goes with the territory, and the values that
we are supposed to hold as sacred.

Acts of war are one thing..illegal assassination another.. the
fact that our government has become so lost constitutionally,
AGAIN, that we are having these discussions is disturbing.