POLL: Read four paragraphs, guess who wrote them.

[DemBones DemBones]

Poll question: POLL: Read four paragraphs, guess who wrote them.

PLEASE -- if you KNOW who wrote the article, don't be a spoiler and tell everyone. :hippie:

If you don't know and you don't think it's anyone listed, go ahead and post your best guess.

Of course I had to leave out some good parts of the article to meet the copyright laws and I'll give a link later, as well as telling you who the writer is.


"Just last month in testimony before the Congress, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales again dismissed the notion that habeas corpus guarantees the right of all persons detained by the government to have access to a court to determine if they are being held lawfully. Gonzales reached this conclusion because he apparently discovered that the Constitution of the United States did not "expressly" guarantee the right of habeas corpus. The attorney general's distressing conclusion followed by two months a speech by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich that the guarantee of freedom of speech, enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution, is at least to some extent incompatible with the need to wage all-out war against "terrorists" and we should therefore consider curtailing that particular freedom."

<snip>

"I have reacted with profound disagreement to these attitudes that are dismissive of fundamental rights and procedures reflected in and based on our Constitution and its Bill of Rights. However, on more careful examination, it appears that perhaps the attorney general, the former speaker, and the district attorney are on to something here. Why shouldn't the Bill of Rights reflect simply the popularly held views of "the people"?"

"Moreover, insofar as recent studies seem to confirm that most people don't understand the Bill of Rights anyway, changing them to reflect such ignorance would make the job of the government — and the courts — simpler. In much the same way that biblical scholars have taken the King James Version of the Bible and through successive revisions dumbed down that magnificent tome so it is more "readable," we could shorten and simplify the Constitution."

<snip>

"We easily could trim the cumbersome, nearly 500-word document down to a more manageable couple of dozen words: "... The right of the people to be secure in their persons, homes, papers and effects ... shall ... be ... delegated to the United States." Much simpler. Much easier. Now back to Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith."

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. Wow - the King James comment is really throwing me off. I thought Cal Thomas

because of that, but all the choices are liberals (I think) that I can't imagine would think that the King James version is the end-all be-all of Biblical tradition.

I'll guess, and say Jon Conyers.

[DemBones DemBones]

14. Good guess, both

Cal Thomas and John Conyers, Cal because is was written by a conservative, and Conyers because he or any of them could have written it. I think I'd have guessed Olbermann, mostly for the ending.

Sorry the KJV threw you off. I read it more in the context of Bible as literature because there's a thread in LBN about courses teaching the Bible as literature and history and lots of people, like me, have studied it that way.

I appreciate the beauty of the KJV's language but it slays me that people think it's the original Bible. It's also funny because most devoted readers of the KJV have no idea that King James was notorious for his male lovers, a fact which is often quite at odds with their views.

[Buzz Clik]

2. If you don't KNOW who wrote them, you wouldn't KNOW that the correct answer isn't a choice.

[DemBones DemBones]

3. Huh? If you think you know who wrote it,

you WILL find a choice there that applies. If you don't think it's someone named, you mark "Other."

No wonder we lose elections if many Dems read so carelessly. Not just you, but a lot of DUers will make a comment in a thread that shows they did not read the OP clearly.

Reading is fundamental.

[tkmorris]

5. That was needlessly rude

Especially because the person you respond to already knows that there is a choice that "applies". What he/she is saying is that the specific choices given don't apply, merely the general one.

Being so critical of others reading skills is poor form at best, but doing so when your own have just failed you is just sad.

[MADem]

7. I thought the OP's instructions were quite clear.

Read the thing, take a guess as to who wrote it--any of the named folk, or someone else. If you are guessing, give us your guess. If you absolutely, positively know the answer, don't be a spoiler.

[tkmorris]

8. Never said they weren't

But if someone responds to something I write in a way that indicates that they MAY not (I contend he/she probably did) have understood me clearly, my first instinct isn't to insult them.

I know, I know, manners are so last century. Call me a dinosaur.

[MADem]

10. That's not how I read post two.

I read post two as a "You fucked up" type post. And yes, manners do count. On both sides of a discussion.

So I guess mileage varies, here. It's the printed word, and EMPHASIZED words are often taken as SHOUTS. I took post two as a throw-down.

[achtung_circus]

4. I was guessing

either Jonathon Turley or Glenn Greenwald.

I was wrong.

[MADem]

6. I know who wrote it, but I won't spoil it.

I happened to come across it a while ago.

Life is full of surprises. Now back to Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith, indeed!

[MonkeyFunk]

9. I know who wrote it

and none of the choices apply even remotely.

I don't understand the point of this exercise - are people supposed to go "woah! Mindfuck!" when they find out? Anybody who pays attention knows the author is a long-time civil libertarian.

[MADem]

11. It's a small exercise, a bit of amusement.

And the answer is interesting, indeed. Of course, there are a lot of very young people here. The answer may not resonate with some.

[snowbear]

12. This dude...

[DemBones DemBones]

13. Thanks to all those who participated without being spoilers!

:yourock:


The quotes are from an article by former Representative Bob Barr (R-GA). Personally, I thought it sounded a lot like Keith Olbermann and I see many of those who responded agreed.

You can read the rest of it here: http://www.bobbarr.org/default.asp?pt=newsdescr&RI=827

*************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************


With all the talk about former Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), I wondered what Bob Barr was up to these days. I found out he's practicing law in Atlanta again -- he was a federal prosecutor in Atlanta before he ran for Congress -- still a consultant on privacy issues for the ACLU, speaking at various conferences, etc., and, obviously, writing articles.

For those too young to remember what Republicans were like in the Fifties and Sixties, this article gives an idea. The GOP used to be concerned with individual liberty, fiscal conservatism, and, during the cold war years, anti-communism. Democrats were concerned with much the same things. I wish both parties would get back to the essential issues government should deal with.

There should be no one in government or the judiciary who disagrees with this article by Bob Barr. That there are, and their name is legion, tells you how far this country has fallen.

[Rydz777]

15. Robert Byrd

I was thinking Robert Byrd until I got to the part about Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith. I doubt he has ever heard of them. However, he knows all about Livia's activities in ancient Rome.