From the Coalfield Progress: The people have spoken. Loudly. Clearly. 72% of area residents want the power plant to be built. A larger mandate one won't find.
Power to the people!
Click on image to enlarge.
Power to the people!
Click on image to enlarge.
Trail aims to attract locals, touristsImagine that. Dickenson County can expect "hordes" of tourists flocking to its new hiking trail. The same hordes that officials in Smyth County, Carroll County, and Grayson County are soon to be forced to turn away for lack of capacity. The same hordes that Bland County, Wythe County, Montgomery County, and Pulaski County are forced to beat away with a stick ... soon. Not to mention Buchanan County's hordes. And Wise County's. Tazewell County. Washington County. Dickenson again. Lee County. Giles.
By Teresa Mullins, Staff Writer, The Dickenson Star
Cranesnest — Imagine hordes of people hiking, biking and horseback riding across scenic countryside in the Appalachian Mountains. Although many might guess those folks are enjoying the well-known Virginia Creeper Trail in Abingdon, it may not be long until people are coming to Dickenson County to enjoy the Cranesnest Trail. (link requires paid subscription)
"There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda," said Helen Epstein, author of "The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS." "I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way." (my emphasis)Okay. Ms. Epstein was referring to the alarmism that the U.N. used to drive the AIDS prevention debate, not the U.N. alarmism that fuels the global warming prevention debate.
Devastating New Revelation of Holocaust Warning and Missed Opportunity
By Ron Rosenbaum
My friend and former colleague Craig S. Karpel often e-mails me eye-opening links to stories that don’t get the attention they deserve.
This piece from the Jerusalem Post is an example, a true shocker: it’s about a new book published in Hebrew that reveals that an explicit warning of Hitler’s plan for exterminationist death camps for Jews was passed on to British officials, perhaps even Churchill himself, in the spring of 1942, months before what had been previously regarded as the first explicit report of the industrialized mass murder the one that came in August of ‘42.
But to my mind even more important than the timing is what the book reveals accompanied the warning: a proposed practical course of action that might—who knows now?—have made a difference in forestalling it. (link)
THE SUPREME COURT'S THIRTY-FIVE OTHER GUN CASES:Read the whole thing. Be informed. The founding fathers didn't outline for us ten rights that are inviolable just to have a government declare them to not be so. We the people must prevail. Now and always.
WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT
Among legal scholars, it is undisputed that the Supreme Court has said almost nothing about the Second Amendment. This article suggests that the Court has not been so silent as the conventional wisdom suggests. While the meaning of the Supreme Court's leading Second Amendment case, the 1939 United States v. Miller decision remains hotly disputed, the dispute about whether the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right can be pretty well settled by looking at the thirty-five other Supreme Court cases which quote, cite, or discuss the Second Amendment. These cases suggest that the Justices of the Supreme Court do now and usually have regarded the Second Amendment "right of the people to keep and bear arms" as an individual right, rather than as a right of state governments. (link)
There has been extensive and lively discussion of [District of Columbia v. Parker], yet I think the legal commentariat has not quite grasped how momentous a cert grant would be. It's not often that the Supreme Court takes up the core meaning of an entire Amendment of the Bill of Rights, in a context where it writes on a mostly clean slate from the standpoint of prior holdings. If the Court takes the case, then October Term 2007 becomes The Second Amendment Term."The Second Amendment Term? " Mike O'Shea, Concurring Opinions
How many Americans would view District of Columbia v. Parker as the most important court case of the last thirty years? The answer must run into seven figures. The decision would have far-reaching effects, particularly in the event of a reversal.
Beyond grappling with fairly esoteric arguments about the Second Amendment, the justices need to responsibly confront modern-day reality. A decision that upends needed gun controls currently in place around the country would imperil the lives of Americans.According to these guys, modern-day realities preclude any need for critical interpretation of the Constitution. We therefore are not a nation of laws but of political ebbs and flows. Welcome to the New York Times vision of The Banana Republic of America.
The Supreme Court took a big case on Tuesday that will determine whether our elected representatives can write sensible laws on guns, or instead have to sit by helplessly in the face of rising gun violence.Sensible laws? To him maybe. But then there are those who believed in sensible poll tax laws. And laws barring women from voting. And "separate but equal." Even in sensible laws that allowed for one individual to own another.
Here is hoping that a conservative activist court does not block the democratic process, upholds the 1939 precedent, and let's DC's law stand.
NOT EXACTLY POSITIVE COVERAGE FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:Try to help. Fat chance.
"Democrats in Congress failed once again Friday to shift President Bush’s war strategy in Iraq, but insisted that they would not let up. Their explanation for their latest foiled effort seemed to boil down to a simple question: 'What else are we supposed to do?'
How about admit things are going much better, and try to help?