Sunday, December 03, 2006

Frankenstein’s Lawyer

In justice’ battle against repression, Davis County’s high school boundaries fight is a small but instructive tussle. Years of planning, millions in expenses, ten weeks of dedicated and open consideration, produced fair and workable recommendations to be presented in open meetings to the School Board. This is a system, used many many times in many many school boundary changes in counties throughout the state for many many years, but now, Attorney Randy Edward’s claims that the process is against the law. His accusation is at best un-established in court, and in fact totally false. On a technical extrapolation of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act, Edwards shopped judge Allphin to slap an injunction on the presentation of the boundary recommendations to the School Board. It is ironic that now the “technical” observance of the law allows a single consultant to make submissions to the School Board. Thus Randy Edwards and judge Allphin have created the very monster in fact they sought to slay in fiction. Of course Edwards is enraged by the School Board’s use of this technicality. (A typical neo-lib ploy - “we can cheat but you can’t!”) It is the pompous pretense of the “stop the boundary change” mob that makes Randy’s actions all the more monstrous. His pretended indignation and bogus accusations of lawlessness are repugnant. The simple fact is that he doesn’t want his daughter to go to Viewmont High School. He and his neighbors are school boundary bigots and they have sharked up a judge to “legally lynch” Davis County.


Clarence Thomas referred to the false and political charges stitched together to prevent his conformation as “Legal Lynching”. When the law turns to a fiend set on murdering justice, it becomes a terrible monster.


I have never read Mary Shelly’s book, (Mia Copa) but I don’t believe Dr. F intended to create a monster. The community’s stupidity and bigotry surely added to the disaster – but in the end the creature became a threat. For discussions sake I reference the child killing, master murdering, ugliness of the movies. In the image of that “Frankenstein” I reverence other rotting monstrosities that have been created by legalist fiend factories.


Consider the disaster of Utah’s Legacy Highway; held up for ten years and tens of millions of dollars to satisfy a lawyer’s monstrous hubris.


Consider the boundless resources of Alaska’s North Slope, monstrously withheld from our nation; while soaring energy prices deepen the suffering of poverty, stifle economic growth, and fills the war chests of terrorists.


In Bountiful Utah, a rotting lawyer calls for the release of a murder because policemen, responding to a request to check on the welfare of a woman, found her body stuffed in a freezer. Because the police found the corpse before they had a search warrant, the murderous son, who stuffed the body in his mother’s own freezer, may be freed to prey on society again.


Remember Al Gore’s putrid performance after the 2000 presidential election.


Now in a fiendish exhibition legal monstrosity, lawyers mob the Supreme Court, seeking to force the government to regulate C O2 emissions. We’re soon to be taxed for breathing!


And what about Ramsey Clark? Once the Attorney General of the United States, who has taken his perverse hatred of America to Baghdad seeking to question the legitimacy of the Constitution of Iraq in order to place a monster once more in power there.


When the law turns destructive of those people and institutions it was made to serve, when it begins to decay; our response probably should not be to march to the castle with torches and ropes but we should surely question the integrity of those who misapply their skills to make monsters.

87 comments:

Anonymous said...

"According to DISTRICT policy, Davis District was not OBLIGATED to open the committe meetings to the public. That decision led to increasing suspicion by angry parents that their concerns were not being weighed. They could not attend the closed-door meetings to find out if that was the case."

I do not know why Davis County school patrons would be suprised that decisions concerning the "public welfare" would be made BEHIND CLOSED DOORS in Davis County -- no Democrat has been elected there for more than twelve years and the county has long since become a "theocracy" thinly disgused as an all powerful Republican party.

The LDS church makes all ITS decisions behind "closed doors" too and then undergoes a pretense of affirmation that serves to identify and isolate the "ner-do- wells" for punishment and public vilification.

Well, of course this process is the modus operandi of the school board -- it is because that's how they've ALWAYS DONE IT!!!!

No discussion or authority to MAKE decisions, just "input". No participation in the decision making process, just "input". The decision is made already, but "we" will allow for "input", but not for nay saying -- that's NEGATIVE, DISLOYAL and UNPATRIOTIC.

TRUE Democratic processes are chaotic, expensive, and time consuming. However, there ARE places in the country that still believe in DEMOCRACY -- they're just not in Davis County.

The whole process disfavores democracy, but that seldom matters in Davis County where paternalistic oversight and "theocratic" POWER is the REAL name of the game.

What happened this time?

Well, it's just like the Bush White House and Rummy -- sometimes the ROTTING CARCASS just STINKS SOOOOO BAD somebody, with A LOT of courage, points out the hypocrisy!!!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe if the local democrat party offered candidates with actual IDEAS and plans and vision, they might stand a legitimate shot.

This last election? No difference. What did we get? Slogans. Yet when it came to actual ideas it was all the same rhetoric. Attack what is being proposed and offered...but dont offer anything of your own.

That is a remarkably familiar theme in the Agora as well.

We have already seen the democrat two step and they havent even been inaugurated. They promised the moon but have now backed off dramatically. So...we'll see. Heck...I'll even give them a fair shot. For the sake of the country I hope they actually bring forward ideas and plans that are successful. I'm not holding my breath...but we'll see.

To borrow from the local democrat campaign..."Had enough? Try an actual idea and plan!"

Anonymous said...

Had enough economic growth? Vote democrat.
Had enough stock market growth? Vote democrat.
Had enough inflation controls? Vote democrat.
Had enough lower taxes? Vote democrat.
Had enough retirement income increases? Vote democrat.
Had enough increases in school funding? Vote democrat.
Had enough improvement in minority employment and business growth? Vote democrat.
Had enough increase in funding of the fight against AIDS in Africa? Vote democrat.
Had enough of a real effort combating terrorists? Vote democrat.
Had enough of a president that doesnt have sexual relations with every woman in Washington DC EXCEPT his wife? Vote democrat.
had enough of a leader that doesnt take his political direction based on polling? Vote democrat.

Like I said...we'll see how the dems do. And again...I HOPE they succeed!

Anonymous said...

OK...After some reading...

There were 39 members of the redistricting board. I can only imagine the chaos that would ensue if the board meetings were open to the public. I gather that the meeting minutes ARE public domain and can be easily obtained.

I wonder...maybe the solution is "school of choice" legislation. it would certainly point out the trouble spots.

Then again...I have been in all of the high schools from Woods Cross to Weber HS...I dont see what the big deal is.

I DO see one big argument. Using DHS as an example, there are a LOT of parents and community members that have invested a lot of money and time in their programs. DHS is one of those schools that has a lot of lifetime involved graduates and parents. I can see how if I had several kids and had worked for years to help with, say, the marching band or orchestra program to make sure it was successful and then because of a redistricting program my kids were not then eligible to attend, I can see how that would bother some folks.

truth to power said...

Direct democracy is next to impossible, even on the scale of a single school district. The democratic election of representatives, who then appoint others to share the workload, seems to be the best solution there is. Being open to the public is a good ideal, but sometimes policymakers just have to make policy--especially on controversial issues where they simply can't please everyone.

Anonymous, your claim of a county "theocracy" seems a little out of place. Is this just a knee-jerk anti-religion, anti-Republican reaction, or do you believe there is some sort of religious issue involved in the school redistricting process? Are the protesting parents non-Mormons whose children are being moved where they will be more easily indoctrinated?

Anonymous said...

"Direct democracy is next to impossible."-TTP

The possibility or impossibility of Democratic processes really depends on the citizen's level of COMMITMENT to Democratic principals and NOT their CONVENIENCE or INCONVENIENCE. As Iraqis discover daily -- Democracy is not very convenient.

Why is it that those most OPPOSED to Democratic principles and processes want to protect others from the sacrifices and the"chaos" the process REQUIRES.

Debating a question without resolving it is MUCH BETTER than resolving a question without Debating it -- at least in a Democracy and even in Davis Countty!!!!

I know, it is very difficult to imagine ANY dissent comming from Davis County. That if dissent happens it has to be some of that "knee jerk" NEGATIVISM that REAL patriots and "spiritual" people cannot abide.

If there were "religious issues" involved in redistricting plans then I KNOW there would be near perfect AGREEMENT among the "factions" -- with decisions having already been made behind the closed doors of the Temple and not the school board.

I think a county government that was 100% manipulated by partisans of the Democratic party would as well be EQUALLY abusive of inherent Democratic rights.

truth to power said...

"Why is it that those most OPPOSED to Democratic principles and processes want to protect others from the sacrifices and the"chaos" the process REQUIRES."

Don't capitalize "democratic" in sentences like this. I doubt you really meant to insult the Democratic Party that way.

I believe very much in citizen involvement. I think most of us could and should make more sacrifices to be engaged in government. Still, I stand by my statement that direct democracy is next to impossible. We can't all vote on every decision, nor should we try. I agree that we have allowed government to become too closed and isolated from individual citizens, while at the same time giving them ever greater power over our daily lives. These are dangerous trends. But sometimes we really should let our democratically elected representatives go ahead and represent us in the decision-making process.

Anonymous said...

Anon...in THIS democracy you elect representation. Your representatives work and vote on behalf of the citizens. Thats how this democracy has worked since the country was formed.

Have you ever been to a town hall meeting? 3-10 people in Layton on a good night.

Voter percentages are always pretty dismal. Shameful, really. And those that dont participate have no one to blame but themselves.

Anonymous said...

This is a second anonymous. I would like to point out a few things to the first anonymous. First, the reason Lysis brought this whole thing up is to point out that the people that filed the lawsuit are abusing the system. Do you think they would have said anything if they would have gotten their way? Of course not. The lawsuit was never about open meetings it was filed simply because the people didn't get their way. Second, you have complained that Davis County doesn't believe in democracy anymore. Well, first of all, we are talking about which people will go to which high school, not taxes or new freeways or something like that. Second, you said: "No discussion or authority to MAKE decisions, just "input". No participation in the decision making process, just "input"". Ok. Are you aware that Davis School District is one of the largest in the nation? There are seven high schools (almost eight) that each have about 1900 kids in each one. Hey, lets do it your way! Let's have ALL the parents of more than 15,200 students make a decision! Do you really think that it would even be the slightest bit possible for more than 15,000 people to all agree on boundary lines? Of course not! That is absurd. And another thing: if you do not consider open houses and representatives that read e-mails and letters (which they did!) participating in the decision making process, then what is? How much authority can you give to everybody when your district has more than five cities in it?! Honestly, think it through next time. Your criticism of the school district is quite dumb.

Oh, and as for Davis County being a theocracy? I have something deep and profound to say about that too.

It's also dumb.

Have a nice day.

Lysis said...

Democracy; meaning the rule of the demos, the people, is a good thing; a gift all who have it should seek to share. But democracy that is the rule of the majority, the rule of the mob, the lawless tyranny of the many, or the mindless confusion that is power in the hands of the ignorant, is an evil much to be avoided. The Romans were wise enough to realize that a Republic combining the best of monarchy, oligarchy, and direct democracy is the best way to insure justice. Our republic is as Truth to Power and Mindmechanic have argued a Representative government. The democracy comes on Election Day. Our founding fathers went to great effort to avoid putting power into the hands of the mob. Now we have a crack-pot lawyer demanding anarchy in the name of democracy, and a mindless and facile word smith defining democracy as he would have it defined for the sake of his attack on Utah rather than as it has successfully operated in American for over two hundred years and in Davis County for at least half of that time.

All appeals to passion and screaming about the beauty of Democracy aside – the elected representatives of the people of Davis County had put in place an open and legal process to assess what would be BEST for all the students of the county. A bunch of boundary bigots have thrown a monkey wrench in the wheels of democracy; with the help of a misguided judge. Time would have cured this egregious error, but as time is not available to the county or the school district, we are now forced to go the very route that Randy claimed to despise in order to circumvent his dastardly obstruction.

Flaccid;

The level of commitment you crave is found in our school board and the district administrators, and was exemplified by the sacrifice of those who served on the advisory committee. The came to hard compromises in difficult and wise deliberation and were ready to proffer their suggestions, not dictate any action.

The inconvenience of democracy you laud is simply a shield for bigotry and bias; for selfish putting the few ahead of the many; the very reverse of the democracy you pretend to want.

As for your mindless attack on Mormonism as the manipulating factor in this; I only regret that at the County Wide Stake Conference of last month, Elder Monson did not tell the good Mormons of Davis County to grow up and put the welfare of their children ahead of their prejudices about school mascots.

Debating a question may be good, but to derail action in the name of debate because of mindless rancor against people you don’t even know is sinister and a painful example of the classiest bigotry our schools should seek to dispel.

Mindmechanic;

Parents who have made a band or drama program successful in one school can do the same in another. Realize that the parents that serve one year’s group of student soon are replaced by a totally different group, and service can be given in Bountiful as easily as in Kaysville. I would suggest that active parental involvement in the individual life of any student at any school is by far the most important key to success in academic and extracurricular activities alike.

Let’s remember the purpose of schools is to educate children not produce marching bands or football teams. As the Major would say, “as you travel down life’s highway, let this be your goal; keep your eye upon the donut and not upon the hole.

The parents cooked up this lawsuit for imagined and prejudice based bias of the moment, threaten to destroy the efficacy of eight high schools for decades to come. This injustice is exactly why we are blessedly a republic and not a direct democracy. That so many are ignorant of the truth and necessity of this is amply proof of the need for such a intricate defense of Justice.

Lysis said...

To the “new” anonymous above;

Thank you for the knowing insights. Please do not expect our “other anonymous” to accept your reasoned explanation of the facts of what actually happened. Facts are simply obstacles to his agenda and can be easily be trumped in his mind by his opinions.

Still, there are plenty of us out here who seek to hear the voice of reason and want the facts.

Anonymous said...

I went to the school board site...as I understand it, local government and school boards dont run on party affiliation...do they?

And if I am understanding the original argument, the conflicxt is not about the school board's action, it is the follow on action of disgrubntled parents that are going to be affected by the re-zoning...

or am I missing something...

Is anyone besides me bugged by the new google logon?

Anonymous said...

Lysis...

"Parents who have made a band or drama program successful in one school can do the same in another."

I agree...and I also agree with the premise that in time it would have happened. Just pointing out the concerns (legitimate concerns I believe). That doesnt mean people will be thrilled and happy about it.

Recently our stake went through a boundary change. All 8 wards were redistrcited and there were minor rumblings of anarchy. Of course...it never happened and the change has been beneficial to all. Several of the wards were struggluing due to a shortage of youth and priesthood leadership. It has been a very good thing.

Still...there are those less than thrilled. But it was the right decision.

Oh...BTW...it was also a decision made behind "closed doors." Thats for two reasons. 1-The church is NOT a democracy and it is not led by the will and goals of man, and 2-Leaders are called to make such decisions. (Just as representatives are elected to make decisions). You want an example of how bad it would be if the church WAS run by public concensus, there are plenty of modern day examples to choose from.

Anonymous said...

"Abunch of boundary bigots have thrown a monkey wrench in the wheels of democracy; with the help of a misguided judge." -Lysis

I didn't hear car bombs or see disgruntled Davis High School patrons strapping on IED's to disrupt ANY democratic processes, Lysis.

In fact, the PROCESS that you seem so opposed to is a LEGAL and DEMOCRATIC option provided by the State/Federal Constitutions for disgruntled citizens seeking relief from 'tyrannical' abuses of elected officials and their ilk.

You oppose the "misguided" judge who imposed the ruling? Is he not a democratically sanctioned judge empowered by the people of Utah and Davis County to make decisions concerning the public welfare? Or do you merely support DEMOCRATIC processes and judges when they favor your "special" bias????

In reality you only support DEMOCRATIC processes when they prop up your very narrow agenda -- and when they don't you spit venom about gross manipulations of justice and the people's will!!!!

"This society will not be a bag to swing about your head Mr. Putnam."

I have no opinion about the particulars of the boundary decision either way -- I am sure good and honorable people on BOTH sides have worked hard.

My dispute is with patronizing ANTIDEMOCRATIC "closed door" Davis County political attitudes and the nature of those kinds of decisions. Those who feel that THAT is the way things HAVE to work in a democracy or a religion are simply airing their ANTIDEMOCRATIC bias and substituting CONVENIENCE as a greater good -- you can expect only DUMB people to agree!!!!

Anonymous said...

If the intent of the individual that filed suit is solely because he/she objected to the closed door session I might agree that it was a necessary suit. I highly doubt that is the case. I believe the suit has been filed because they didnt get the results they wanted.

I would like to see 1 thing changed in our civil process-that any individual AND their attorney filing a suit is responsible for ALL court costs and legal fees of both sides if they lose their case.

I am not seeing anyone suggest we are bordering anarchy. I DO think there is ample evidence that people file frivolous lawsuits to stop and delay processes. It IS our system and it is to my experience still the best system going...but that does not mean it isnt subject to abuse.

I dont share Lysis' opinion re Judge Alphin. I know Judge Alphin. I dont think he is the type that is up for sale on any issue. I have faith that he is doing what is required by the law.


I dont know of too many religions that are 'democracies.' I think if you see a religion that IS a democracy you can bet that it is a religion of man. I dont know of too many businesses that are democracies, nor families. Schools are not democracies. Sports teams are not democracies. That you include religion in your argument speaks to your bigotry. i LOVE liberals and their twisted and warped sense of 'tolerance.'

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

You are right; no bombs are going off, yet. There has as yet been no need to turn to violence to stop the process; they have been able to twist the law to do their misguided bidding. The simple fact is that the suit against the School Board would have failed in the end. The process followed was completely within the law. The suit is the delaying tactic of a bunch of bigots. Jim Crow laws were once the law of this Democratic (TTP – I capitalized the word on purpose) nation and many a judge ruled on the necessity of segregating the races for the benefit of the vocal bigots who pulled their strings.

All of the legal monsters I mentioned above are examples of monstrous misuse of the law. The FACT that the law can be misapplied does not make it right.

What is particularly odd about your attack on truth is that, while extolling the right of boundary bigots to follow their constitutional right to delay justice, you seem eager to disparage my Const6itutional right to freely express my opinion about their misdeeds. Once again a masterful example of neo-lib double standard at work.

You accuse me of only supporting democratic processes when they prop up my agenda – which is your agenda. The only bag swinger around here is you, and that is all you have to swing, a limp and empty bag.

Again, though telling you won’t make a difference, the recommendations of the committee did not constitute any kind of closed door decision. No decision was made; no binding weight was carried by the recommendations. They were all openly presented to the public on many occasions and comment was continuously sought. The process was the very definition of “Open Door”. I my self attend one of the Open Houses offered by the committee. I happen to know that every suggestion present at this and three other open houses held through out the county were read by the people asked to make suggestions to the school board. It is also obvious to all but the Galacticly Stupid, that no decision of binding force concerning anything was made. To scream ANTIDEMOCRATIC is the height of dishonesty. Your same groundless arguments can be used to support “Democratic” necessity of segregation and call as you call any who opposed such legal monsters dumb.

Mindmechanic;

I too have some knowledge of Judge Alphin. I had his brilliant and charming children in my classes over the years. However, I cannot agree with you that he has some justifiable reason for supporting this outrage. I do not know if he is an elected judge of not, but unless he can provide some reason for his obstructionisms, I am forced to judge him by his actions.

All true religion is democratic. The constituency, one; the choices made and votes cast with every action we take.

Anonymous said...

". . . bet that it is a religion of man." -MM

As opposed to a religion of . . . ???? Who???? Monkeys????

What absudrities!!!!

Now Lysis feels he has a constitutional right NOT to be disparaged. WOW, what an absurd imaginary Democracy he must live in!!!!

Anonymous said...

"As opposed to a religion of . . . ????"

Oh...maybe...God?

Anonymous said...

"but unless he can provide some reason for his obstructionisms, I am forced to judge him by his actions"

Totally out of my realm of expertise here, but if a complainent files a suit the judge has to examine if there is sufficient grounds for the case to go forward. The judge can't just summarily dismiss it if it follows the law.

Or maybe I am wrong...

Where are our legal experts here when we need them???

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

You are saying that in the democracy you espouse there is no freedom of speech! Your democracy where lawyers rule and no one but judges have the right to speak their minds is far more absurd and imaginary than anything I have championed

Mindmechanic;

Judges make judgments, it is their job. Stretching the law to cover the opinions of bigots is not a reasonable standard for ruling on any case. Caving to pressure is cowardice not prudence.

Anonymous said...

Lysis,

Assumption-If the court case as presented shows some form of legal just cause then the judge (regardless of his or her personal feelings or opinions) is bound to follow the law.

Your personal strong opinion notwithstanding, I'm fairly certain a man such as Michael Alphin is not engaging in the sinister or the politic. He is doing his job based on his experience and within the confines of the law.

I'll leave the analysis of greek and roman literature to your expertice, but I am certainly willing to cede to his on legal matters.

Anonymous said...

MM

What would God need a religion for?

OH, God's religion!!!! Wink, Wink, nod, nod . . . and Which religion is God's religion? . . . and would you like to know more?

I would agree that God chooses to be worshiped, but I hardly think He/She needs a "religion" for that.

"The whole bloody thing is man made, including the idea that it's NOT man made."

MANY religions function DEMOCRATICALLY through votes which choose leadership and agendas -- because YOU don't know any, simply bespeaks YOUR limitations, not the facts.

Some religions VOTED to confer blacks unqualified membership. Other religions had to accomplish this by fiat because they knew they would never get MEMBERSHIP consensus DEMOCRATICALLY!!!!

Well, Lysis, I never claimed that there wasn't plenty of INPUT . . . however, suggestions are NOTHING MORE THAN INPUT.

If not, why don't you inform us of the final vote for EACH of the different SUGGESTED "boundary change recommendations". And how each board member voted or abstained and WHO and HOW the RECOMMEMDATION decision was made if they didn't vote.

Which side of the closed door were YOU on -- the same one as I and the disgruntled parents, I would suppose.

If Lysis believes "no decision was made" then I guess we can call the disgruntled parents' grievings SUGGESTIONS that seek to further ammend the board's 'ephemeral' RECCOMMENDATIONS -- no harm no foul.

I see. The judge ordered a restraining order on recommendations that do not have the force of law!!!!????

In the 'universe' of stupidity what is bigger than galactically stupid? -- maybe infinity times infinity stupid????

Lysis said...

Mindmechanic;

In this case – regarding Judge Alphin - I would like to agree with you, to the extent that the judge no doubt did what he believed he had to do. That does not in anyway diminish my position, that the suit was brought maliciously, and that in the end it will be shown that Randy has nothing to stand on but our wasted time and money

Flaccid;

For once you got it right, there was no decision on the boundary lines made – only suggestions prepared for presentation; and the judge did indeed issue a restraining order on recommendation that do not have the force of law!!!!! Enjoy your momentary success. It’s it too bad I had to point it out to you.

Anonymous said...

Anon...to be blunt...I think you are just being silly and playing with words.

Which religion is true? I hope that if you are catholic you truly believe it is catholocism. If you are baptist, I hope tyou truly believe it is the baptist faith. If you are a buhdist, etc etc etc.

You play with words like a baby eats crayons. A religion of man (not men, ya bonehead) is one that is similar to, oh, say the American Episcopalian faith (and BTW, if you are Episcopalian, I hope you embrace it fully as the one true church), where annualy they gather to decide what God believes about subjects X, Y, and Z. A religion of God would be one that is centered on His word and His teaching, not mans current and socially evolving philosophies.

Dont be dense. I DO know of religions that operate on a 'democracy' principle. Heck, we had a nice gathering of Baptists here a few years back. During their visit they prounounced their version of a proclamation on the family. It was a wonderful document. But then...certain factions decided that women and mens relationships that were based on the words of the bible were too demeaning to women and implied they should be subservient...so they voted out that plank. The restrictions on homosexuality were too...well...maybe harsh, so they got rid of that verbage, but kept others in tact...

In the end they came up with a perfectly fine, democratically approved proclamation that was voted down...out...abandoned.

Yep...gots me a LOT of faith in that one...

Rumpole said...

It seems to me that the key point of this post has been somewhat understated in the discussion. The lawsuit that has been filed in the name of the open meetings law was not filed to insure that justice and the common good of the people of Davis County be served; it was filed to pursue a personal agenda.

I live in the boundary area that is affected. My children attend Davis. My neighbors don’t want to go to Viewmont. They promote the rational that Davis is much closer, and thus a safer commute. If I may be blunt, the reasoning is bull. They just don’t want to go to Viewmont.

The irony here is that these people believe they are as conservative a group as you will ever find. Yet when it comes down to a personal agenda, their tact is no different than Rocky Anderson’s was in his attempt to stop construction on the Legacy Highway. Rocky didn’t care a bit about wetlands; his agenda is to force mass transit. My neighbors don’t care a bit about the open meetings law; their agenda is to avoid attending Viewmont.

I applaud the school board for out-maneuvering Edwards. They beat him at his own game. What I disdain is that this decision ever went to any court. Unfortunately there are far too many “Judge Allphins” serving on the bench (i.e Ginsburg and Brier). We are at risk because we have subjected ourselves to judges that are willing to rule because they “can”, rather than rule according to the law.

It reminds me of the debate of Agamemnon’s virtue in the last thread. I have never read the Iliad, so at the end of the last thread I picked up the book.

Unless I am mistaken, the Anonymy defended Agamemnon. At this point in my reading, Agamemnon has proven to be nothing short of a scoundrel. I haven’t finished the book yet, so if you have some compelling evidence to contrary, Anonymy, please bring it forward now.

Agamemnon broke the law set forth by the gods. He knew that when the ransom was offered for Chryseis he was obligated to return her. When Achilles pointed out to Agamemnon that he was wrong, Agamemnon was angry with Achilles. And he was angry, not because he was wrong, but because someone had the courage to point it out to him. He proved that by taking Briseis from Achilles.

The contempt that I feel for Agamemnon does not lie in his actions; rather, it lies in the fact that Agamemnon did what he did because he could.

Allphin’s ruling was no different. No law has been broken. But Allphin issued the injunction because he could. Now Edwards claims righteous indignation because he was out-maneuvered. It’s too bad the Church wasn’t there to immediately ring the school bell for the students in Davis County. They were ready with the dozers to quarry the granite for the new conference center, and they were ready with the same dozers to dig out Main for the new parking lot. I guess they left that role to the school board this time.

Anonymous said...

"That does not in anyway diminish my position, that the suit was brought maliciously, and that in the end it will be shown that Randy has nothing to stand on but our wasted time and money"

Ah!!! But I dont challenge that position...only that as the Anon pointed out, that IS his legal recourse, like it or not.

Which is why I think they ought to change the law to STILL ALLOW them to file the frivolous lawsuits but have to PAY for them handsomely.

Anonymous said...

Teaspoon here,

I'm a bit late, but I just wanted to point out--our Constitution was framed behind closed doors.

Anonymous said...

Rump:
"Allphin's ruling was no different. No law has been broken. But, Allphin issued the injunction because he could."

Allphin has made initial rulings, But Rump tells us that NO LAW HAS BEEN BROKEN!!!!

Ladies and gentlemen welcome the new Magistrate from Davis County!!!!

Without legal expetise, legal standing, legal authority or democratic sanction HE KNOWS KNOWS KNOWS
NO LAW HAS BEEN BROKEN!!!!

GOD must speak to Rump and Lysis (it is NOTHING more than that) and they KNOW the truth for Judge Allphin, for Davis County citizens, for the boundary disputants and for ALL at the AGORA.

Sadly, we lesser individuals must use DEMOCRATIC processes and LAWS to find OUR way!!!!

Anonymous said...

"I don't know of too many religions that are democracies. I think if you see a religion that IS a democracy you can bet that it is a religion of man."

versus

"Don't be dense. I DO know of religions who operate on a 'democracy' principle."

Dense, perhaps, but not so dense as to not to be able to recognize a DIRECT CONTRADICTION when I see it.

You might quibble that not knowing too many religions means knowing SOME, but that would be a LIE, from the original intent wouldn't it!!!!

Thank you for your "generous" depiction of Baptists wrestling DEMOCRATICALLY with a difficult issue -- you obviously feel great comfort and superiority with "truths" ISSUED to YOU rather than EARNING them in a democratic forum -- and THAT brings me to my original position on the issue of theocratic Davis County politics!!!!

Lysis said...

Flaccid,

You are dense. (That’s probably a contradiction) You win a point with Mindmechanic, he admits it, and then you trash him for agreeing with you. With you, bashing others is always more important than the argument.

I agree with Rumpole, that the Open Meetings Law was not broken. Of course to you, Flaccid, it will only matter how the courts rule. Or will it? Let’s wait and see what you do when Rumpole’s declaration is supported by some judge’s ruling. But that is the significant difference between a thinking person and a neo-lib reactionary. People who think for themselves can see that judges and lawyers make egregious errors all the time. To sit back and pretend such injustice is not perpetrated is to acquiesce to evil.

Courts are often wrong, and citizens have the right to disagree with their rulings. The court Killed Socrates, and Jesus; a court freed O.J. Simpson and put Martin King in jail. Courts often send innocent men to jail and set guilty ones free. The Florida Supreme Court even ruled for Gore’s scam, until they were set straight and forced to apologize by the U.S. Supreme Court. Courts are not the perfect manifestations of justice you pretend them to be; nor are reasoning citizens required to agree with them. Hundreds of years of court rulings supporting slavery did not justly make a human being into a piece of property.

Flaccid your problem remains your inability to admit the existence of truth; or of right and wrong. All you have is opinion, yours or the courts. No wonder all you can do is flip flop and fizzle.

Anonymous said...

Anon...

Please...

"I don't know of too many religions that are democracies. I think if you see a religion that IS a democracy you can bet that it is a religion of man."

I dont know of TOO MANY. I do know of SOME. I can cite you examples. I did. The religions are 'democracies' are religions of man. I am pretty sure you are smart enough to get that. Here's hoping.

Anonymous said...

Quibble? Posh! There is no contradiction. The whole commentary was in regard to the difference between religions that are democracies (man made, man driven) and religions that are theocracies (derive their foundation in the word of God).

I do not know of TOO MANY religions that are democracies. Those that are are religions of man.

Anonymous said...

"Thank you for your "generous" depiction of Baptists wrestling DEMOCRATICALLY with a difficult issue -- you obviously feel great comfort and superiority with "truths" ISSUED to YOU rather than EARNING them in a democratic forum"

Indeed. I would not have joined a church if the church was a democracy. I do indeed take great comfort in the religous truths issued from God vs convenient truths issued by edicts of men like David Koresch, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Baker, etc.

I have great respect for catholics for their foundation of faith, even though I do not agree with them.

I also have great respect for those that struggle with the very concept of God. Agnostics...I understand. Athiests? Not so much.

I know people that cherry-pick parts of religions that are convenient for them. If it provides them some sort of spiritual foundation...good on them. Its just not my way fo believing.

Anonymous said...

Lysis...

As I read the court case, the judge ordered a temporary injunction. The complainents are considering (and probably will proceed) if they should press for a permanent injunction. The basis of the case was existing Utah state law requiring public meetings for policy decisions.

Worse case scenario, the district holds public meetings for all of the decisions made (I know...you said they already held some public meetings). At the worst, those that are the vocal minority will show up, become disruptive, and will discredit themseloves in the process. Whatever the board decides it will decide. This makes the process fully compliant with the law.

Anonymous said...

I understand.

TRUTH for Lysis, because he 'communicates' with God.

No need really for encubering DEMOCRATIC processes of decision making when one already has all the ANSWERS provided by "Divine Jupiter".

Yes, I've understood that from the beginning.

Lesser mortals who do not have Lysis' and Rump's "special" access to Olympus on high need to have much more than THEIR "self-serving delusions" to serve as TRUTH.

I believe TRUTH is best accessed through HARD WON democratic processes and decisions and not from those who readily seek to IMPOSE TRUTH on others with BOGUS authority!!!!

Lysis said...

I am not really concerned with the gods here. The truth is that the committee developed their recommendations in an open and legal way, that the School Board was prepared to make its decision in an open meeting before anyone who was interested, and that Randy and company stopped the process out of bigotry and not out of any interest in any law.

It is also the truth that the School Board, in compliance with even Alphin’s misconstrued interpretation, has now appointed a consultant to recommend the boundaries and those boundaries will be set and Randy will be enraged!!!! This does not require any god to revel, it just is.

It is also the truth that there are endless examples of “judicial” injustices. To sight them is to present unimpeachable evidence of the need to questioning the motives and acts of lawyers and judges, it does not invoke any divine inspiration nor does in necessitate anything but honest to recognize.

Ah, Flaccid, there’s the rub!

Anonymous said...

Is there a democratic process provided that decisions by government officials will have oversight by judicial authority?

Is there a democratic process for judicial authority to cure abusive decisions made by government officials?

Is there a democratically sanctioned process that would impeach or remove incompetent judges from the bench?

Lysis.
Why don't you show more FAITH in DEMOCRACY?

Or do you think DEMOCRACY serves TRUTH ONLY when you and yours are in the majority.

Name one judicial abuse and I will name even GREATER abuses by government officials many times over!!!!

Rumpole said...

MindMechanic,

We have talked a little about sarcasm. As the newly ordained Magistrate from Davis County, my humble view on the most critical element of sarcasm is knowing when to use it and when not to. So, in the spirit of the holidays . . .

Anonymy,

No law has been broken! On what planet must one have “legal expertise, legal standing, legal authority or democratic sanction” by your definition in order to determine if laws have been broken? Are you that intimidated by a difference of opinion? What do you do with disagreement in your classroom? Do you demand that all accept your view? Is the thinking questioner immediately banished?

Where has anyone here at the Agora attempted to “IMPOSE TRUTH on others with BOGUS authority!!!!”? Are you really so desperate to silence debate that you would make such a claim? C’mon Anonymy, I’ve seen you put out far more impressive arguments.

May I be condescending for a moment? The beauty of a republic, and probably the part of the process that you hate the most, is that conservative hacks like me have just as much a voice as perceived educated elites like you. Fortunately we think much more clearly. What you must hope for is that there are still enough of us left to save the Republic.

And by the way, God has spoken to me! He was not very complementary of you. Don’t worry, I’ll be your advocate.

Additionally, what you ignore in my previous post is the description of the intent of the lawsuit. It is what perceived educated elites like you do when the error of your position is pointed out. This lawsuit has NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING to do with the open meetings law. It has EVERYTHING EVERYTHING EVERYTHING to do with a personal agenda.

Sadly our society, on both sides, has come to the point where if you can’t get what you want, you litigate. You appear anxious (by your posting “Without legal expetise, legal standing, legal authority or democratic sanction HE KNOWS KNOWS KNOWS
NO LAW HAS BEEN BROKEN!!!!) to see that trend continue. I can only hope that you are in the minority.

Anonymous said...

While I DISAGREE with the individuals intent re filing the lawsuit and AGREE that their motives are selfish, the fact remains that whether or not it is the reason for the suit, there IS a law and process that at least appears to have been violated which created a law to exploit. Yes...they are exploiting that law.

This IS how the law works.

So...again...the school board will reconvene. The people will attend and give their input. The decision will be made. Some people will be unhappy. Life will go on.

Lysis said...

Dateline – Bountiful Utah:

Enraged Ut Lawyer shuts down Iraq War Study Groups findings.

Early this morning Bountiful Ut. Attorney Randy Edwards reported his intention to file papers to place an injunction on all recommendations of the Bipartisan Iraq War Study Group’s report to President Bush. Sighting an obscure and as yet undisclosed point in Utah’s Open Meetings Law, Edwards is looking for a judge to prevent any of the groups recommendations from reaching the President or others involved in directing the war effort.

“If these people think they can break law and come up with solutions to difficult problems without the DEMOCRATIC input of every citizen with any connection to the war, they crazy” Edwards said.

When asked if he wasn’t a little late in seeking legal recourse to stop the Committee’s report from reaching the President and the people Edwards replied, “Once my judge rules, it will be back to base one on this project.”

In a related story President Bush is reportedly thinking of turning the mission of the study group over to retiring Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “No one can doubt Don’s experience with this thing,” Bush said, “and no one can accuse of him coming to decisions based on committee concensus.”

Anonymous said...

Lysis...

The tongue in cheek thing would work here IF the Iraq report were created and presented as a Utah document, where there exists the Open debate policy. In Washington DC, there likely isn't a similar law, since congress regularly uses closed door sessions to discuss sensitive policy issues.

Anonymous said...

OH...BTW...

If the Iraq report came out FAVORING extended action and praising Bush's decisions in Iraq I have no doubt that many libs would try to find some way to appeal to a federal court, probably the wacky US 9th Ckt court of appeals. And they would likely be successful in getting the injunction. And the 9th courts decision would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court just like they overturn MOST of the 9th courts decisions (59 of 80 decisions overturned in a 1 year span).

Lysis said...

News flash up date:

Salt Lake City Utah. Salt Lake City Mayor and former flying squirrel, Rocky Anderson, came out this morning in support of Randy Edward’s petition (see story 9 pg 1) to block the findings of the Iraq War Committee from being presented to the U.S. Senate today.

“This bunch of biased crack pots met behind closed doors to discuss policies that affect all Americans. There are 300,000,000 of us who had a right to speak out on this before any recommendations could come before the President of the United States.” Anderson fired the sure death shot on the commission today when he added, “These guys, didn’t even get an environmental impact statement. Unless they got some nice property to hand over to the city I’ll make sure this project gets nowhere!!!”

“The idea the Bush and Blair are planning to meet in secret today and discuss this affront to the Constitution and the environment is an assault on DEMOCRACY!” Rocky added. “I haven’t been this steamed since Bullwinkle and I left the ACLU.”

Anonymous said...

Ervil La Rump:

Nothing so common amongst conservatives is the claim "God speaks to me!"

'Other voices' is the first signpost along life's journey that indicates the LUNATIC fringe. (Twilight-zone music)

I don't worry about the "voices" Rump, but I DO worry about what STRANGE things the voices tell you and the MANY other "God talkers" to THINK!!!!

Do the voices get louder and more irrascible when the Anonymous ilk post at the Agora?

Grape flavored Koolade is the favorite beverage among the "God talkers." Also, you will soon need to convert other disciples who will need YOU to translate and refine the 'garbled' God talking messages in THEIR heads.

Also, it is rumored that God likes you to have many WIVES in order to procreate MANY other little God talkers.

Good Luck!!!!

Anonymous said...

The Bush foreign policy!

"Stay the course." "Stay the course." "Stay the course." "Stay the course." " Stay the course." "Never mind."

Anonymous said...

Nothing so common amongst conservatives is the claim "God speaks to me!"

Or apparently to Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton...the two democrat frontrunners.

"Do the voices get louder and more irrascible when the Anonymous ilk post at the Agora?"

What arrogance! To assume the voices even waste time with the Anon drivel. The only sound likely to be heard following the reading of MOST of the anon posts is laughter.

I'd go on...but really...why bother? Your bile and hatred speaks more of you and your life than anything I could say about you.

Lysis said...

Rumpole;

You have made a tactical error here. You have assumed that Flaccid comprehends sarcasm. This was your mistake, for Flaccid is a relativist, a mental condition shared by neo-libs in general, and is therefore incapable of recognizing a sarcastic jab when delivered. You see to comprehend sarcasm one most understand the existence of the truth and have some knowledge of it. Then when a sarcastic remark is delivered one is capable of recognizing it for what it is.

However, if your delusion renders you incapable of discerning truth from fiction, if all opinions carry the same weight of truth with you, then you assume, as Flaccid has, that even the most blatant sarcasm is sincere and are forced to deal with it rather than laugh it off.

What is a particularly biting irony in this is that while Flaccid virulently attacks all people of faith, as religious fanatics, he fails to comprehend that it is the religious snobbery of the “Farmington few” that motivates their onus against Veiwmout High with its population of “lesser Mormons”. Thus in his mindless attack on the Davis County School Board, the people who really care about the children of our community, Flaccid is taking the side of the boundary bigots whose religious fanaticism forces them to resort to judicial injustice to keep their “pure ones” uncontaminated by the world.

Flaccid;

The only religious fanatics claiming god given direction in murder are the terrorists directing their attack against the U. S. and the West. That you have allied yourself with them in you attacks on the Bush administration is just another example of the irrational behavior you continue to exhibit here at the Agora.

Anonymous said...

MM
Sorry if any got on you.

Truly!

I was only making an 'appropriate' response to Rumps' previous comment that "God was not very complimentary of you. I shall be your advocate."

He can respond in kind -- I'm sure he will -- you already have. I don't take offense!!!!

Anonymous said...

Reporting from the "I LOVE France" desk...

Police are now being blamed for the deaths of the two arab youths that set of the recent race riots.

The police wrecklessly stumbled onto three young men as they were robbing a construction site. The police dared to give chase to the youths, forcing them to run and ultimately hide in a power sub-station.

The police were then "surprisingly distracted" and showed a "lack of thought" by looking for the youths instead of abandoning their search and ordering the power grid to be shut down to ensure the safety of the innocent poor boys who were surely only engaged in a youthful prank.

To accentuate the police departments culpability, the media posted a picture of mourners and a photgrapher taking a picture of a monument documenting tragic loss. Unfortunately, the monument was actually a tribute a victim from 1986 and had no actual bearing on the case, but that didnt stop the media from clouding and obfuscating the facts.

Anonymous said...

MM
Please provide a document source verifying with a direct quote the time and place of Barrak or Hillary saying "God speaks to me."

However, that these two people have spoken of FAITH in God" I would not be surprised. FAITH in God has my unqualified respect and honor -- MANY liberals, neo-libs, neo-cons and conservatives have FAITH in GOD!!!!

However, some people, like Lysis, have confused a person who believes that God SPEAKS to him/her with a person who has FAITH in God. I think these conditions are antithetical.

People of FAITH have HUMILITY that is so prized by the scriptures and examples of Christ.

Those who CLAIM that God SPEAKS to them, though, have little need for FAITH!!!! They seem to me to be inflated with a PRIDE and ARROGANCE that deserves much contempt!!!!

I do not know, but I suspect, that many/most terrorists ALSO believe that God persomally speaks to them.

Anonymous said...

"However, that these two people have spoken of FAITH in God"

Anon...would that include faith in prayers and faith in answers to prayers?

Lysis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lysis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lysis said...

Flaccid;

If you have ever seen me write or heard me speak a claim that ANYONE talks or has talked to God, outside of myth and ledged, please provide a “documented source” so that I can retract it.

Once again your total inability to stand up to any of my arguments is demonstrated by your artificial erection of a position to play with. I have never claimed that God speaks or has spoken to anyone – let alone me.

Rumpole:

Please ask God if He has ever spoken to me – just incase I forgot. (For Flaccid, and any readers below the age of fourteen; that was sarcasm.)

Anonymous said...

I dont know your relationship to God or if you even have one. I do know of my own relationship. I t is not of a subservient life form to the all knowing all powerful God. My relationship is of a son to a father. That being the case I have no problem praying to my Father and I have no doubt that I have recieved answers to those prayers on many occasions. Does that mean I have heard voices? Now, nor have the stars realligned to spell out answers. It doesnt mean those answers werent clear and powerful.

And honestly...I really believe that is all that has ever been meant here from anyone, including our liberal friends Barrack "Dont call him Osama for crying out loud Teddy" Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Rumpole said...

I knew I had heard someone else speak in triplicate but I couldn’t remember who it was. Then, again in the spirit of the Holidays, it came to me! The voice was quite and garbled at first, but then it got louder and louder! It was the Evil Magician in "Frosty the Snowman!" My conversations with Divinity tell me that its time for someone (the Anonymy) to get BUSY BUSY BUSY! Does that seem strange to you, Anonymy?

Well, no matter. I have much to do myself. Two of the four little conservatives were born this time of year, and it’s never too late to plan for a fifth! We have one extra seat in the Mormon Assault Vehicle. Unfortunately I don’t think the Conservative-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed would go for another righteous seed producer, so she’ll have to take on that responsibility herself.

We need to do our part to continue the demographic shift toward conservatism. If the current trend continues, the number of like-minded voters will soon be in our favor!

Anonymy, I noticed that you have completely dropped any discussion of the current topic. What’s the matter? Has the truth tied you tongue?

Lysis,

God assures me that he has not spoken to you. He is still angry with you because of your attitude about Nephi. He suggested that you return to Sunday School and drink deeply from the “Well of the Grape”. That “purple nectar of the gods” is the magical potion that will return all to his favor! It might even loose the Anonymy’s tongue!

Anonymous said...

Great! Wonderful!

EVERONE at the Agora concedes that God does NOT talk to them -- that "we" were just being SARCASTIC, and that dim anon just didn't get the joke -- wink, wink, nudge, nudge, nod, nod.

Well, take refuge in the familiar Agora "mind meld" position of denial -- however, I am SURE the topic will SOON need revisiting!!!!

Note:
I've been SARCASTIC TOO!!!!
(don't ask when)

Anonymous said...

NO! NO!

I WAS WRONG.

I WILL BE TRUTHFUL!

I WAS BEING SARCASTIC . . .

ABOUT . . .

BEING SARCASTIC.

(I like my sarcasm with a sprinkle of paradox and a big ejaculation of irony!!!! busy, busy busy)

Anonymous said...

Hold the phone!!!

I've learned my sesson.

My LAST sarcastic statement at the Agora will be that I will NEVER EVER be sarcastic again!!!!

That I want to be the first to wish everyone Merry Christmas and a Flaccid New Year!!!!

My present to Lysis this year will be a case of Salt Peter to counteract the effects of the case of Viagra he received from "person's unknown".

Lysis said...

Flaccid:

You’re kidding me? Right?

Lysis said...

Flaccid’s confessions above have been a revelation to me. I have spent too much of the last two days (time I will never get back) watching Al Gore’s “movie” *aninconvenienttruth*. Now I understand. Gore was simply spouting an obscene joke. It wasn’t interesting; hard to laugh at something so crude!

Anonymous said...

Lysis:
Thank you for being such an excellent example and "firewall" against the everpresent and corrupting effects of obscenity and crude innuendo.

Your example has been an inspiration to me in particular!!!!

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

You are welcome. It is nice to see you can be sincere when you want to be.

Anonymous said...

I am sincere as often as I am sarcastic!!!!

Anonymous said...

First time poster, long time reader.

Lysis, I think the person you call Flaccid is offended by that title and thinks it is some kind of crude innuendo. I know you have explained to him that “Flaccid” is simply a reference to the limp nature of his arguments – but to some of us it seems it might emphasize another one of his shortcomings. Since you are using it as a descriptive of his arguments as well as a title to distinguish him from others, who might not wish or know how to post other than anonymously, why not call him boner. His claims are always mistaken; so it would be just as descriptive; but he might feel better about that name. Just a suggestion.

truth to power said...

It never occurred to me that someone might not be able to figure out how to post as other than "Anonymous" here. Right under the "Leave your comment" window it says "Choose your identity". Click the "Other" radio button and type the handle of your choice in the "Name" box.

OK? No more excuses!

Now, back on topic. I expected to see more discussion on Lysis's original point, but it didn't materialize. "Frankenstein's Lawyer" goes far beyond the immediate issue in Davis County School District.

The legal system in modern America has a big problem. It's being abused right and left. A lot of people like to blame the lawyers, but it's really the people who employ them who are at fault.

The sort of people who like to scream DEMOCRACY!!!! (was that enough exclamation points?) seem to do so only when the majority agrees with them. Nowadays every political controversy turns into a lawsuit by the losing side. In my opinion, this is a perversion of our constitutional separation of powers.

But I don't see a political or legal solution to all of this. It's not really a political problem; it's a moral one. People do this sort of thing because their selfishness has overridden their sense of honesty and fair play. And the law is powerless without the morality of the citizens.

Echo said...

Thank you “truth to power”. Now I’ll know what to do if I every post again.

You are right about the need to get back to the topic here and have done a good job of it.

I’ll just keep listening.

Anonymous said...

"Transparent" Anonymous:

What a piece of work you are . . .

I can see ALREADY the effect of Lysis' example on your values and diction.

I am sure he is proud -- but NOT sure his taste for grotesquerie extends, quite yet, to your "depths".

Anonymous said...

truth...

In the "for what it is worth" category, I gave my solution early on. Allow the lawsuits but make sure the person filing the frivoluous lawsuits is liable for ALL costs associated with the trial if they loose.

Of course...that wont stop the cases from being filed...particularly because with all the accident attorneys and ambulance chasers, thar's gold in them thar attorney mills.

Cant really blame the lawyers though, OR the plaintiffs if the juries keep handing out obscene amounts of money for onscene cases with obscene results.

Just read the other day of a case where a woman filed a lawsuit and WON...she sued the store she was in because she tripped and fell...over her own son.

As long as juries award money for that, there will be people seeking it.

Anonymous said...

"Nowadays every political controversey turns into a lawsuit by the losing side."

First, your teacher (if he/she were conscientious and attentive in instruction) needs to explain to you the importance of quantifiers that procede generalizations.

ALL and EVERY, FEW, SOME, MANY, MOST, MAJORITY and ALL make important distinctions in your thesis, of which you seem unaware.

So if you say "every political controversey . . . " you are claiming NO exceptions and making NO distinctions what-so-ever.

IS THAT what you are claiming?

All? No way!
Many? perhaps.
Most? no chance.
A few? That is your best choice -- now go to significance, warrant and evidence and then cross your fingers and hope that one day you'll be able to make a valid argument. Then your "WHATEVER high school" can reward you with a T shirt that says, "I survived the downward-bound school of argumentation and learned a better way -- exclamation marks are ALWAYS optional!!!!

Anonymous said...

Anon...a little bit concerned about your fascination and infatuation with spurtfests and ejaculations...

just sayin...

Anonymous said...

Anon...

Parsing words again, eh?

I gather that dang near everyone here (notice how I didnt say just EVERYONE) is smart enough to get that 'all' in this example meant 'many.' EVERYONE SHOULD be that smart...but not everyone obviously is.

To illustrate...

The democrats had lawyers lined up this election to file lawsuits and challenge results at a large number of locations. Why, the election was sure to be doomed and fraught with peril and fraud. The voting machines were rigged! People were to be denied their rights!

and then the election came and the results were favorable to the left...and son of a gun...no lawsuits.

Now...I know...in your mind you are already preparing your response. They HAD to be ready because that was the problem LAST time...right? SURE it was...and so where/when has it ever been proven? Where was there presented even REMOTELY credible evidence?

I have said here before...you show me ONE case where someone was denied their voting rights and I am right with you side by side on the lawsuit. But of course...it never happened...did it. Jessie Jackson talked about it, but 6 full years later never produced even ONE.

And hey...lets not forget those whacky Colorado democrats. Taken straight from the Denver post..."The Democratic National Committee's Colorado Election Day Manual urges voters to cry wolf with a "pre-emptive strike" against voter intimidation. In essence, the DNC has suggested voters fabricate claims of intimidation without a shred of proof. …

"I would have preferred 'proactive' over 'pre-emptive,"' admits state Democratic Party chairman Chris Gates, who believes this is more a case of poor wording than devious intent. "But I think that Republicans literally took one phrase in a 66-page document and misconstrued it. We don't apologize for the fact we are going to be very, very aggressively proactive about this."

The DNC manual goes further than just pro-action, recommending that Democrats "prime" minority leadership with talking points and urging them to "place stories in which minority leadership expresses concern about the threat of intimidation tactics." …

The point...even when there IS NOT anything resembling fraud, dems prep lawsuits to claim fraud so they can ultimately get what they want.

EVERY dang time! Unless they win.

Anonymous said...

MY???? fascinations?????

WOW, Mr. referee did you miss FIRST FOUL on that one.

But, that's, right you only can see out of ONE of your eyes!!!!

Anonymous said...

I didnt miss it...you started w/ the spurtfest (how did that go by the way?) and continue on.

Anonymous said...

Oh...wait a sec, wait a sec...was it a different anonymy that got your juices flowing? I have a more difficult time telling you all apart.

Anonymous said...

Lysis...

"What is a particularly biting irony in this is that while Flaccid virulently attacks all people of faith, as religious fanatics, he fails to comprehend that it is the religious snobbery of the “Farmington few” that motivates their onus against Veiwmout High with its population of “lesser Mormons”. Thus in his mindless attack on the Davis County School Board, the people who really care about the children of our community, Flaccid is taking the side of the boundary bigots whose religious fanaticism forces them to resort to judicial injustice to keep their “pure ones” uncontaminated by the world."

I almost missed this. OUTSTANDING point.

(keep in mind I still agree with their right to follow the law as the law allows_ I DONT disagree with you about their intent...just that they are allowed to sue whatever tools they have and will within the law)

But still...EXCELLENT. To me, thats kind of a 'spike.'

I have said before I think sometimes the anon collective argues for the sake of arguing and son of a gun...I think this sort of seals it.

Anonymous said...

Anon...

"But, that's, right you only can see out of ONE of your eyes!!!!"

Whenever I see you type things like this, I just cant help but laugh. Out loud. At you.

I have been on YOUR SIDE on at least half of this discussion throughout. Check back over the last SEVERAL threads and you will see CONSIDERABLE disagreement, dissension, and debate amongst MANY of the participants and yes, that includes w/ Lysis as well.

You WILL see a difference. You will see discussion, debate, critique, all done with only a minimum of name calling. A gift it is for intelligent people to be able to disagree, debate, and ultimately agree to disagree.

The ONLY group I see slurping the slime of constant partisanship is the anon collective. With the exceptions of the few and new, time and time again you sprain yourselves in your congratulations of each other.

Flaccid you may be, but there are far stronger and more appropriate words that better describe you.

Anonymous said...

I used the term "ejacultion" (a sudden emotional outburst -- that was the meaning that fit the sentence) ONCE.

Salt Peter (Potassium Nitrate or Sodium Nitrate) was used ONCE. Viagra was referred to once.

Only YOU have used the term "spurtfest" -- now twice and one "juices flowing".

Refer to Lysis 4:28 posting yesterday. Count the examples of innuendo -- at least TRY to be objective.

Now count the Flaccids and Boners and other innuendo.

Do the Math.

And if you're going to PLAY referee, do not make irresponsible generalizations, keep BOTH eyes open or keep BOTH eyes closed!!!!

truth to power said...

"ALL and EVERY, FEW, SOME, MANY, MOST, MAJORITY and ALL make important distinctions in your thesis, of which you seem unaware."

So Anonymous tries to teach his grandmother to suck eggs. Is this intended to be retaliation for my remark that "Democratic" and "democratic" are different words?

Yes, I know logic. I also know rhetoric. Do you? Fortunately, no natural language is confined to literal statements.

You want to be a pedant? Don't quit your day job! Granted, Lysis' writing is torture for the spelling nazi, but you run him a close second with your ALL CAPS and exclamation points!!!! And might I recommend cut and paste for quoting other posts? You quoted me as writing "controversey"! Have you no shame at all, sir or madam?

Anonymous said...

"Fortunately, no natural language is confined to literal statements."

"Nowadays every political controversey turns into a lawsuit by the losing side."

Then, of course, the above statement must be FIGURATIVE.

Perhaps the "Nowadays" introduction is meant not literally but to present a folksy tone that harkens back to "bumpkins" and unschooled fencepost philosophers.

Perhaps the next term "every", doesn't act as a syllogistic qualifier but as a "symbolic" manifestation of demonic powers to appear at once, but then disappear as the narrator so chooses -- how clever.

Well, enough of that.

Sir. The above statement is not only nonsensical partisan political bunk, but it is POORLY WRITTEN nonsensical partisan political bunk!!!!

The SHAME is ALL YOURS!!!!

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

You seem to be able to concoct innuendo everywhere while not casting any. Once more you prove a perfect example (as both Mindmechanic and Truth to Power have pointed out) of the very things you claim to despise.

Let me attempt to explain it to you. You get angry and see vulgar meanings in things said by others, then say things which other’s (Echo perhaps) might see as untoward. You then defend these words with a “straight face” as if you had no other intent than their most benign interpretations.

Example: You say, “I used the term "ejacultion" (a sudden emotional outburst -- that was the meaning that fit the sentence)”

No one pointed to the word ejaculation (maybe TTP should check your spelling this time) as in any way crud. You jumped to defend it as if someone had. This seems to indicate that you thought it crude when you wrote it. Such sins are obviously in the heart and mind of the beholder or in this case the preparatory. The only one beholding them seems to be you.

Truth to Power;

First thanks for your tolerance concerning my spelling (no sarcasm intended). I have often wondered where life would have taken me if I could ever have learned to spell. I continue to do my best and indulge the kindness of all my readers.

As to your most cogent call to a return to discourse:

My original post touched the tip of this frightening ice berg. An ever growing monster (if I may mix metaphors) that threatens to destroy our ship of states. Since Marbury v. Madison the courts have continued to grow their power. They are now the branch of government least responsive to the will of the people and welding the most power.

Again, let me reiterate, it seems to me that the power of the courts has grown unchecked these past two centuries. As Mindmechanic has pointed out, people have the right to go to court for any silly reason, but courts must not be a place for silly reason. The first step in dealing with monsters or icebergs is to recognize their dangerous nature and to discover and chart their existence.

Mindmechanic:

Thank you for restating what I truly think is the heart of our discussion here. Not only on the schools’ boundary case, but on all the frivolous miss-uses of law we are discussing. It is so often the case that those who resort to law do so to leverage the very behaviors they pretend to decry. Remember how the Gore gang, suing to make sure every vote got counted, then sued to make sure that only votes in “Democrat Majority districts got recounted” and that the absentee votes of servicemen wouldn’t be counted at all?

The most painful example of this has always been how the ACLU and others who claim to be for human rights can go to court to define unborn humans as something other than humans – “a woman’s choice?” Such a corruption of the law is our most tell example of the rottenness spreading throughout the monster we have allowed our Lawyer Frankensteins to create.

truth to power said...

What could possibly be partisan about decrying the trend for political losers to file lawsuits to try to force results they can't get democratically? I hope no one besides Anonymous assumed I was accusing only one segment of the political spectrum. I hate this sort of thing whether it's done by Democrats, Republicans, the Silly Party, or a concerned group of Bountiful parents.

Anonymous quoted me as writing "controversey" again!

Anonymous said...

Actually Anon...you may have missed it...not surprisingly... that I admitted I may have falsely attributed the 'spurtfest' comment to you when it may have been your anon brethren. I dont tell you all apart as well as others here do. At least ONE of the anonymy in the previous post started on the sprtfest for peace comments, then to see an anon with ejaculate on the brain...well...you can see how that might be cause for concern.

Again...apologies...guilt by association there.

maybe if you went by Anon1 Anon2, etc....

Anonymous said...

Anon...

I missed this one...

"EVERONE at the Agora concedes that God does NOT talk to them -- that "we" were just being SARCASTIC, and that dim anon just didn't get the joke"

I think your response is more dim than not "getting the joke".

I will speak only for myself for clarity's sake. I DO speak to God. He is my spiritual father and I have ever reason and faith to believe that he hears those prayers. I also believe strongly that he has answered those prayers. 'Talks' to me? no...not with a voice that can be heard. Speaks to me? Oh yes. Answers my prayers? Absolutely...even when that answer is no (mind you, not an audible 'no').

I just didnt want you to think I was safe from (or denying even) your label as the whacky lunatic fringe.

Anonymous said...

Lysis has previously posted:

"Flaccid . . . demonstrated by your 'artificial' 'erection' of a 'position' to 'play' with."

Later Lysis posts:

"You defend these words with a "straight face" as if you had no other intent than their most benign interpretations"

Well, of course, that is WHY I used the term "ejaculation" -- it is the counterpoise to the "flaccid" you seem so much to abhor and wax so OBSESSIVELY and PERVERSELY about (see above).

Also, I am glad that you saw behind the PRETENSE, LIES and HYPOCRISY of claiming the clinical rather than the notorious side of the definition!!!!

Lysis is so dim that he didn't even understand the SARCASM -- let alone the paradox and irony!!!!

Anonymous said...

Shows Development System for Floating-Gate and MirrorBit Flash Memory Products at MEDC 2007
cheap viagra online
Find the acura you are looking for on AutoExtra.com. Search by Zip or browse through the second largest online database of used vehicles

Anonymous said...

FREEDOM HEPPINESS HEALTH ....BUY LOW-COST VIAGRA , CHEAP CIALIS LEVITRA ONLINE
Sildenafil citrate, sold under the name Viagra is the first of a new group of medication which allows adequate sexual stimulation, relaxes the blood vessels of the penis and helps erection..More info
AND FREE OF CHARGE TO YOUR HOME DELIVERY


Teen perfect teen couple sex boobs, teen upskirt thumbs teen models teen preteen xxx mpegs.




The only reason I'm on Asian Adult FriendFinder is because I like to fuck





Tom, Not as this, free internet sex chat free internet sex chat room glowed purple. ...



Couples Seduce Teens DVD movie video $18.55 in stock at CD Universe,




hymen pornography naked women youngyoung porno hardcore pantyhose porno



Gay fetish sex is just a click away




ebony sex porn german ebony xxx vids download free wmv ebony ass little ebony free ...



Adult / Girls Home Alone - A little


What is hardcore lesbian porn sometimes hardcore asian tight ass porn hot lesbians ass teen lesbian sex




porno school women photos nude free porn porno sites with movie clips of spanish women