Now
Fair
77°
High
88°
Low
73°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Letters
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Letters, 7/9: Court decision a slap

Comments 24 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

Sunday, Jul 09, 2006 - 12:11:41 am CDT

The Lincoln Journal Star’s July 2 editorial which applauds the Supreme Court’s Hamdan v. Rumsfeld decision has been blinded by liberal legalese. The editorial quotes Justice Breyer, “Nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary.”

In fact, that authority has already been granted by the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, specifically crafted for the Hamdan case which states that, other than the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the DOD at Guantanamo Bay.”

This decision is also a slap to Congress, which has given the president the authority to handle combatants of war, as now and in the past. After the Civil War, the courts were removed from jurisdiction in Ex Parte McCardle to allow a military tribunal for a publisher of incendiary articles. Again in World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt tried Nazi saboteurs who landed in the U.S. in a military commission, and executed them soon after the guilty verdict.

Oddly enough, the Supreme Court has in fact signed a treaty with al-Qaida by absurdly believing that these terrorists are not a nation, therefore the global war on terror is not “international.” Please disregard their fighting in the U.S., Somalia, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Never before in the history of the United States have enemy combatants, with zero regard for laws, ever had it so good.

Brian L. Johnson, Lincoln

Skyrocketing taxes

As I drove through Lincoln Tuesday night watching all the fireworks, a thought occurred to me. Every aerial burst I saw was at the absolute minimum a cost of $7. (I am being very gracious on the low side, because I believe it proves my point even further.) That comes to 49 cents tax per burst.

I saw at least one air burst every 5 seconds. My drive was 25 minutes of spectacular beauty. That adds up to 300 air displays during my drive through town. I believe that adds up to $147 in taxes.

Not much, but there is at least 180 minutes of reasonable darkness (9:30 to 12:30), which now turns into $1,058.40 in tax revenue, of which the city will get its share.

I’m sure everyone reading this understands my point (with the exception of the mayor and City Council). Yet we all wonder why our property taxes skyrocketed. Oh yeah, I think I saw them somewhere in south Lincoln exploding with a wondrous brilliance in the beautiful Nebraska sky.

Matthew H. Gable, Roca

Too many of us

I, too, hate seeing people dying from AIDS, malaria, starvation and wars just like others, but to give $31 billion to “save” million of lives could be better spent on family planning.

Please, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, give equally to both. It is irresponsible to save more lives while Mother Earth has reached a crisis of overpopulation. Human demands for survival have exceeded the sustainability of Earth to supply our needs and wants. We are literally consuming our very source of life. Isn’t it more realistic to cut our own numbers?

How can these two very rich men who work with numbers every day not see the connection between human numbers vs. Earth’s resources? Human reproduction is the same as compound interest.

We have been given a marvelous brain by the Creator that can reason, calculate, foresee, etc. … yet it is evident we are refusing to use it. Instead we are choosing to let our childlike egos reign supreme. All of the deaths from wars, diseases, starvation, natural causes have not limited our population’s growth. We are increasing worldwide approximately 81 million every year over and above all deaths. Do your math.

Where did we get the idea that we humans were created superior to all the others the Creator made? There is not one single solitary problem anywhere on this Space Ship that is not directly connected to overpopulation and we know it. Women worldwide have begged for birth control to limit pregnancies. Why are we ignoring their suffering? Where is our responsibly and love for our fellow humans, to all creations and to Mother Earth?

Population is a moral issue, but the head-in-sand approach cannot continue. There is only X amount of arable land, X amount of potable water, period. We are running out of both.

Lynn Darling, Lincoln

Sticking it to you

It seems someone found it their Christian duty as a loyal patriot to rip the “Godless American” bumper sticker off my car. Not to worry, though, because I already have its replacement: “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. — Sinclair Lewis.”

Jack Huttig, Lincoln

More like Pete needed

As a mother, grandmother and with a son just back from a year in Iraq, I am devoted to the future of my children and grandchildren.

I think America is crying out for strong new ideas and leadership. After meeting Pete Ricketts and his family, hearing his ideas about balancing budgets, protecting our family values and Reagan-like conservative beliefs, Pete has won my whole-hearted support for the U.S. Senate.

We need the business community to find more leaders like Ricketts willing to step up and run for the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

I think the future of America as we know it is at stake.

Sharon Yost, Superior

It’s not a conspiracy

I am pleased to report there are now five citizens in the greater Lincoln area who pick up litter. Rosalind Morris’ welcome letter to the Journal Star (July 3) revealed she is one of us. The other three shall remain anonymous, to avoid crank calls and hate mail from the ignorant and superstitious.

After all, what is one to think at seeing another person commit the strange and suspicious act of bending over and picking up a piece of trash? It reeks of subterfuge and demands explanation.

The most likely motivation in most people’s minds is that the perpetrator is an al-Qaida agent, looking for something to attack. Worse, we are even depicted as liberals by many who are so shocked and offended at the sight.

Nevertheless, we struggle on, trying not to be too flagrant about it. You don’t want parents to have to take their kids to counseling because they can’t explain why that crazy man picked up their picnic food wrappers and dropped them in a nearby trash barrel.

Maybe we’re just dreamers, out of touch with reality, but our goal is to double our numbers by the turn of the next century.  Imagine our descendants being stunned at the sight of another citizen picking up a piece of trash — possibly twice or more in their lifetimes. With almost a dozen perpetrators it could happen.

You can’t come to our meetings. Our cabal can’t afford a metal detector yet.

Tom deShazo, Lincoln

Use your vote wisely

Two years ago, a simple majority vote of the Legislature could repeal a law passed by ballot initiative. In November 2004, Nebraskans approved Initiative 418, which changed the state Constitution — now it takes a two-thirds majority vote of the state Legislature to strike down a law passed by ballot initiative.

This constitutional change has left our state laws wide open to influence from interest groups based anywhere in the world who can pay to place signature gatherers on Nebraska sidewalks.

A two-thirds “supermajority” agreement of our elected representatives will be needed to repeal laws created in this way, so please vote with care.

Sarah Easton, Lincoln


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Letters > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
db wrote on July 9, 2006 4:43 am:
" Sharon, We do not need people like Pete who spouts supporting Reagan-like conservative beliefs. Those beliefs do nothing but increase spending, the government and the deficit to all-time record highs and ignores the budget altogether. Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr has yet to have a balanced budget. The last time we had a balanced budget was under Clinton. All Reagan and Bush can do is spend, spend, spend. We need someone who will do their best to have a balanced budget and Pete with his Reagan-like conservative values will not do it. "

 Patrick wrote on July 9, 2006 6:35 am:
" The reason why the Supreme Court decided in favor of the detainees is that while Al-qaida is not a party to any international treaties, the country where the combat is occurring is a party to the treaty as is the United States. Any person deemed to be enemy combattants and taken prisoner are then considered Prisoners of War, and then must be treated fairly according to the Geneva Conventions. As you so eloquently cited the Nazi in WWII, you must remember they were guilty of crimes on US soil, but the same Roosevelt administration along with the Truman administration were responsible for insuring our own combattants would be treated fairly during future conflicts. We must also remember that a large number of these so called "terrorists" at Guantanamo have yet to be charged with any substantive crimes and maybe in there due to being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. CNN did a wonderful piece about a Pakistani man living in the UK who was detained in Afghanistan while on a humanitarian mission. He had initially went to Pakistan for a family wedding and agreed to help out an International charitable group. He spent a significant amount of time in Guantanamo, yet is now living free in the UK once are military realized he wasn't a terrorist. "

 Judy Cantrell wrote on July 9, 2006 10:49 am:
" Jack Huttig, good luck in your battle with the "Christian" cowards of Nebraska. "

 SamJ wrote on July 9, 2006 10:50 am:
" Pete has a friendly boyish disposition mothers like. But we have to consider grown up reality. As a Republican I can hardly stand Nelson. But can Nebraska afford to lose a key position on the Armed Services Committee? Pete, as a Republican, wouldn't fill that valuable Democrate position in which Nelson has acted with Republican resolve. STRATCOM is stronger and has a key role in the states economy... WE could use someone like Ricketts in the Unicameral...he just isn't in the right place at the right time. "

 AAaauughhh wrote on July 9, 2006 10:57 am:
" And liberal beliefs do not increase spending? Give us all a gigantic break. Clinton balanced the budget ONLY because he sat during the dot com bubble. It was an anomalie, based on paper value that was never even there. The bubble evaporated and it all came crashing down. Stop playing dress up with history. It is a silly thing to do, and you can't fool anyone. "

 Josh2 wrote on July 9, 2006 11:32 am:
" If Lynn Darling were so worried about overpopulation, she would work to change the Catholic Church's ban on contraception. "

 Fireworks not from taxes wrote on July 9, 2006 12:20 pm:
" Taxes did not pay for the Lincoln city fireworks display. It was provided by Pepsi-Cola. "

 Cheopys wrote on July 9, 2006 12:53 pm:
" Actually we DO need people with Reagan-like beliefs. The trouble is that Ricketts is not a Reaganist. He is parroting the official Republican party platform, which has unfortunately been taken over by Christian zealots. I think Ben Nelson is a hell of a lot closer to a classic Republican than this new Republican Ricketts is. Why the Republican Party would bother trying to get Nelson out of office when he votes like a Republican is way beyond me. PS I am a Republican, but until they get the fundamentalist Christian planks back out of the platform I won't be a contributor. "

 ERic wrote on July 9, 2006 1:17 pm:
" A vote for Ricketts is putting the country at stake. That write-in by Sharon sounded like it came directly from Pete's campaign, not from a person. "

 Bert wrote on July 9, 2006 1:57 pm:
" Pete is not a Reagan conservative, nor are his values Nebaskan. He should speak on what is really stands for. A Carl Rove yes man. We don't need any more of his kind in Washington. Oh, by the way, he doesnt'have all the women under his thumb, some see him for what he really is. "

 Lisa wrote on July 9, 2006 3:20 pm:
" I'm also a republican and refuse to vote for my party for the same reasons - fundamentalist Christian party platform. I will be voting against my party in this election and will be voting for democrat Ben Nelson. Nelson has proven himself to be committed to all Nebraskans, doesn't just follow party lines! "

 Tom J. wrote on July 9, 2006 4:45 pm:
" For all those opposed to Ben Nelson, I cannot see why you want to have more voting power that might possibly oppose "Team Republican" in Congress. After all, what could be more inefficient and costly than investigating the benefits and drawbacks of legislation based on the actual merits of said bills? That kind of thing just slows the down efficiency and wastes taxpayer money on frivilous debates. If we vote for a thrifty man, such as Pete Ricketts, who accepts the position stated by the Executive Branch as Gospel, we might expect Congress to drag on with efficient topics of legislation such as gay marriage and flag-burning while the Executive Branch uses its consolidated power to make the important decisions for us. Heck, let's align all three branches of government in the same line of thinking and save even more tax money. Then AM talk radio could be used for more constructive discussion, like praising the efforts of the powers that be. Vote Pete Ricketts, 2006. "Hail victory!" "

 Picket Ricketts wrote on July 9, 2006 5:22 pm:
" I told a Ricketts fund raiser the other day, that because of that call, I was voting for Nelson. The fund raiser was calling from Arizona, and was rude, condescending, and would not end the call. Even after I told him that, he said... so I don't suppose you would be willing to help us with just $30 then. I just about blew a gasket. Pete Ricketts, if you are reading these comments, you better get a handle on your team fast, because I meant what I said to the man, and I would much rather vote Republican. But Ben Nelson bucked the Dems when it was the right thing to do, and he often responds to correspondence on issues. It is a far cry from the Ricketts telephone shakedown that I just experienced. Listen up or you may as well quit now. "

 Rod wrote on July 9, 2006 9:17 pm:
" Along with Sharon I believe the future of America is at stake. Unfortunately Pete Ricketts nor the Right Wing Christian Fundamentalists are the ones I want shaping our future. we dont need religion, no matter which discipline, forced upon us. We need sound, intelligent leadership. At this time in history that isnt coming from the Republican Party. Wake up voters before its too late. "

 Bill Hubbard wrote on July 9, 2006 9:55 pm:
" Seems to me that a good Senator looks at how an issue might affect his State before voting. Ben Nelson has proven that he is willing to do so at the expense of his position in the Democratic Party. That is the type of loyalty that I'm looking for, not the other way around. "

 KAB wrote on July 9, 2006 10:06 pm:
" It used to be I’d read the Letters To The Editor for a laugh –not a pleasant one- then a day like today comes along. Mr. Johnson speaks with a position of knowledge. Mr. Gable points out the tax opportunities, although I expect many of the pyrotechnics he observed were not bought in Lincoln, or even Nebraska. Mr. Huttig understands how insecure the religious are in their supposed beliefs and is prepared to exercise his 1st amendment rights with backup. And best of all, Mz. Darling states what has been obvious for so long. What our cowardly, cow-tow to the “increase and multiply morons” so called leaders, dare not say. Namely, that all problems in this world are secondary, and cannot be fixed until population growth is controlled and reversed. Mr. Gore, yes there is global warming, but Kyoto won’t fix that. Could you get Mr. Bush to distribute condoms? The last time the news media dished us a “happy” story about some woman receiving an overdose of fertility medication and pumping out 6+ greenhouse gas producers did you weigh in and object. You are both worse than useless. Mz. Darling, although I cringe at your reference to a creator, you are on the money when it comes to accepting that this planet can only sustain so many people. This is a problem only we humans can solve. For every life the Gates Foundation saves (and yay for that!) let them also prevent 2 unplanned from being born to bring us all down to a miserable end. "

 Fancher elementary teacher wrote on July 9, 2006 10:34 pm:
" What me worry about overpopulation? Our planet can sustain our insatiable appetite for energy and resources forever, especially at U.S standards. "Be fruitful and multiply", so says the Lord. A giant invisible man in the sky will take care of things, so have no worries as you trade your ashes for dreams. "

 Jason wrote on July 10, 2006 12:01 am:
" I am planning on voting for Ben Nelson. I am a democrat you doesn't always like the way Nelson votes, but I also know that he listens to everyone in the state of Nebraska. To me, that is sometimes more important than party lines. Pete Rickets will hurt this state and the country. "

 Population Unexplosion wrote on July 10, 2006 8:55 am:
" There is no population explosion. The native population of the United States is getting older. People don't realize, that 25% of all pregnancies in the United States are terminated by abortion. The shrinkage of population in old Europe is even worse, and they will be unable to sustain their workforce very soon. Yes there is a serious imbalance going on, but the third world needs to slow its birth rate, while the rest of us need to step it up. "

 Gary B wrote on July 10, 2006 10:46 am:
" What I don't understand is how the comments like those made by KAB and Judy Cantrell are able to make it onto the comment board...as they are clearly violations of the terms of use to remain respectful towards other's viewpoints. While I respectfully disagree with KAB's position of atheism, I do not attack them for it nor do I poke fun at their belief. Judy Cantrell, on the other hand, has made multiple unprovoked attacks against religious beliefs...cowards? It's much easier to throw jabs like that with the anonymity provided by the internet. Beyond being disrespectful, they are just plain rude and mean-spirited. I am certainly not insecure in my beliefs, in fact, I would go so far as to say that I am as secure in my belief as KAB is in their non-belief. I agree with promoting birth control as a means of slowing population growth, and that some sects of religion aren't as strong of advocates in that area as they should be. Yes, having kids is great...but I've taken a strong stance that I will only have 2 children so that I do not contribute to the world-wide growth of population. Even having more than 4 children is a wild excess, and very few families have the means to support than many children...so taxpayers foot the bill for their indescretion. And I also agree that the Kyoto Protocol is a complete joke...while the U.S. and other industrialized nations do need to control their pollution in a very bad way, allowing developing countries to pollute uncontrolled is lunacy...as 2 countries in particular could cause the atmosphere untold damage if they are allowed to pollute in a unregulated fashion. "

 Molly wrote on July 10, 2006 11:31 am:
" Josh2--have you ever tried to change a Catholic's position on anything? Sometimes you can't change one group's agenda, but you can work around it and protect the people beyond their grasp. "

 Julie wrote on July 10, 2006 12:43 pm:
" Sharon, I'm sure that Pete appreciates your vote... and the 5 others that he'll get. The man's digging himself in a hole faster than I ever thought was possible. "

 Flip Flop Not wrote on July 10, 2006 2:41 pm:
" We understand how important the flip flop maneuver is to democrats, Molly. Have you really ever tried the concept of being steadfast, and resolute in your beliefs? If it is worth believing today, it should be worth believing tomorrow, else it wasn't worth believing in the first place. Unconfucious "

 peb wrote on July 11, 2006 8:58 pm:
" Flip Flop Not: Imagine where this world would be if "being steadfast and resolute in your beliefs" has been the motto since the beginning of time. "

Ads by Yahoo!

More Stories In Letters