Monitoring?

President Obama said in a news conference today when asked about the events taking place in Iran: “We are going to monitor and see how this plays itself out before we make any adjustments about how we proceed” (MSNBC). Um, ok. People are standing up for the cause of freedom and the leader of the free world is going to see how it ‘plays itself out’? Well, its playing out, Mr. President, and people and people are giving their lives for the cause of freedom, including this young women who was captured dying on film (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,528441,00.html).

 

Mr. President, are you monitoring this?

 

BQP

Sotomayor: Republican's Waterloo

“Once again, AVOID the breach, dear friends!” (The battle cry of the modern Republican Party)

 

I long for the days of political dissent. Not the politics of personal destruction that has been equated with political dissent in recent years, but true, honest, passionate debate on issues. For a myriad of reasons, debate over issues is a thing of the past. At the forefront is an unwillingness to offend anyone; an unintended (or intended, as it really is) consequence of political correctness.

 

The Republican Party has been beat down into total submission. Republicans have heeded the warnings of people like Sen. Chuck Schumer who warns Republicans not to oppose Judge Sotomayor’s appointment to the Supreme Court. So, dutifully, they won’t. They fear being called racist, segmenting the Hispanic vote, and opposing a popular President (also for fear of being called racist for doing so).

 

It seems that Republicans will not confront Sotomayor on the issues: mainly she’s an activist judge who believes in legislating from the bench, that justice should be meted out based on emotion, oh, and she’s a bigot. She believes she can better judge because she is Latino than can a white man. That’s a bigoted comment. But she can get away with it 1. because she is a minority and is incapable of bigotry (a tenet of political correctness) and 2. the Republican Party is impotent and refuses to enter such a fray.

 

Failure to enter said fray may be the death knell of the Republican Party. Many (mostly those on the left and power hungry self-servers among Republicans) say that Republicans have to moderate in order to survive. That’s a recipe for certain failure; that’s why they are saying it. The Republican Party has moderated, i.e. John McCain, and look what happened with him.

 

Sotomayor is unqualified to sit on the Supreme Court. Not because she is a Latino woman, who cares about that. It is because she has contempt for the legislative process and thereby our system of government as a whole; demonstrated by her saying “the court of appeals is where policy is made”. No, the court of appeals is where the judicial process takes place; without passion, emotion or prejudice. Policy is made by lawmakers, not judges. Sen. Schumer also has said, speaking of Sotomayor’s impending appointment that "I don't think any American wants nine people on the Supreme Court, all of whom have ice water in their veins." Wrong. Ice water is the life blood of jurisprudence. (And by the way, Chucky, quit putting words into my mouth; you are anathema to everything I believe as an American).

 

Conservatives like me are looking for elected leadership in the Republican Party. It’s not there. We’re busy in-fighting and trying to get along with our opponents, all the while missing golden, nay platinum, opportunities to define and contrast ourselves with the Democrat Party. This road to moderation of the Republican Party is only leading to perdition.

 

BQP

 

Rock On, Dick Cheney

Hear that? That’s the sucking sound generated by the enormous, gigantic (or gijantic, as my brother used to say as a kid), massive, colossal, stupendous, and ever more cavernous vacuum created by the lack of leadership in the Republican Party. Quick, who’s the front-runner for the Republicans for 2012 Presidential election? (I’ll be syncing my iPod while I wait). Ok. No answer? Yeah, me neither. And who of all people has stepped in to be the voice of opposition to the oligarchy, otherwise known as the Federal Government? None other than former VP Dick Cheney.

 

Follow me on this: who, perhaps, is more hated in this country than George Bush? Dick Cheney. Who has nothing to gain by putting himself in the political arena? Dick Cheney. Who has served (and been beat up for it) his country for nearly 40 years, and is entitled to (and should) retirement? Dick Cheney. So why in the world would he enter the political fray at this moment in time?

 

The answer is that he simply could not be silent. Now he could rally behind his party and use his influence and power behind the scenes to strengthen the opposing voice. Wait, there’s that sucking sound again…

 

Things must really be bad to bring VP Cheney out of retirement to soundly thump the current President’s policies. Usually, previous administrations are silent on their successors policy. Of course, Al Gore and Bill Clinton are the exception that prove the rule. And Obama’s policies, particularly on national defense, are abominable. He has made a political issue out of our nation’s defense, all the while accusing Republicans and the previous administration of the same. How else can you explain closing the Guantanamo detention facility two days after taking office with no plans of how or what to do with the detainees? Pure political pandering. Obama is systematically dismantling the measures put in place after 9/11 that have kept us safe from attack since. This is fact; thwarted terrorist attempt after thwarted terrorist attempt proves it. He is doing so, he says, to make us stronger. Huh? That’s like saying we’re going let prisoners go and expect the crime rate to drop. Or firing detectives on police forces everywhere because they’re existence only encourages more crime. Ridiculous.

 

It’s unsettling to even think about but we’re headed for another terrorist attack. The waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed produced intelligence that stopped a plot to carry out a terror attack on Los Angeles (article link). While Obama is giddy to release documents on alleged abuse of detainees, he has refused to tell the American people that enhance interrogation techniques have worked. This can’t be anything but playing politics with our own security. Wow. All this serves him politically but puts us at greater risk.

 

Keep up the good work, Mr. Cheney; it’s getting results. And nobody else in the Republican Party is going to stand up to President Obama.

 

BQP

Goldwater Quote

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

(Acceptance Speech as the 1964 Republican Presidential candidate)

Annoying Distraction???

Check out this headline:

Pirates pose annoying distraction for Obama

By Steve Holland
WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters)

 

Annoying distraction? Is that all it is to President Obama, an annoying distraction? Here’s the first paragraph of the article:

“Ragtag teams of modern-day Blackbeards are posing an annoying distraction for Barack Obama, forcing him to add Somalia to an already long list of foreign policy challenges.”

 

Yo-ho-ho, a pirate’s life for me! It all sounds so romantic, doesn’t it? Eye patches, wooden legs, parrots on shoulders. Woohoo! Pass the popcorn!

 

Here’s the next paragraph: “American presidents are told to expect the unexpected, and Obama is seeing that this week. First it was a North Korean test of a ballistic missile last weekend. Now comes a swashbuckling high-seas standoff with armed renegades.”

 

First it was a little missile fired over Japan by a tyrannical dictator. Now its “a swashbuckling high-seas standoff with armed renegades.” Doesn’t the rest of the world know that the election of Obama was going to be the end of unrest in the world? When are these people going to put aside their own ambitions of world domination and let us get on with accomplishing peace in our time?

 

So here we are. Pirates (who, by the way, are Islamic terrorists) have hijacked American citizens on the high seas and it’s considered a distraction and described in flowery language of a by-gone era, almost longingly so. VP Biden says the US is working ‘around the clock’ to come up with a solution for the crisis. The clock should have never had to go all the way around to come up with a solution. Here’s the solution: decisive and aggressive use of force to defend American citizens. In this day and age of perceived rights and government involvement in almost every facet of our lives, we lose sight of what the government MUST do according to its Constitutional authority. Consider this, the preamble to the Constitution:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

 

Look a little further in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8: “The Congress shall have the power to…provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States…(Paragraph 1), To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the Law of Nations (Paragraph 10)”.  Now I’m no Constitutional scholar but I think I can see the authority to rectify this situation; no working around the clock is necessary.

 

Our inaction to secure the blessings of liberty for these Americans is appalling. It is a show of weakness and the world is watching. The next line in the sand will encroach America a little more, and give more ground to those who seek our destruction.

 

Say Hello to Big Brother Tim

As Author, Obama Earns Big Money and a New Deal

By JEFF ZELENY

Published: March 19, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/us/politics/20disclose.html?_r=2&ref=books

WASHINGTON — The power of President Obama’s pen is $8,605,429, and counting.

Four years ago, Mr. Obama became a millionaire through the popularity of his autobiography, which was quickly followed by a second book, “The Audacity of Hope.” It is a gift that keeps on giving: $3.89 in royalties for Mr. Obama for each hardcover, $1.03 per paperback and $4.50 for an audiobook.

In a week when Mr. Obama scolded business executives for creating a culture of runaway salaries and bonuses, a disclosure form filed Tuesday showed that he signed a new $500,000 book agreement five days before taking office in January.

Aides said Mr. Obama would receive $250,000 of that for an adaptation of his autobiography, “Dreams From My Father,” for young readers. The other $250,000 will go to the publisher in the deal, which was first reported Thursday by The Washington Times.

The publishing agreement was not announced by the White House but was noted in a routine financial disclosure form in the Senate Office of Public Records. It is the latest indicator of how Mr. Obama has profited from his books as the reach of his celebrity has grown.

When Mr. Obama wrote “Dreams From My Father,” which came out in 1995, he did not sell enough books to pay back the advance of $30,817. But when it was reprinted after his speech to the Democratic National Convention in 2004, sales flourished, which led to another book deal worth $1.9 million.

For that, Mr. Obama agreed to write another nonfiction book and a children’s book. He wrote in his disclosure report that he intended to delay both books until he left office.

Robert B. Barnett, a Washington lawyer who represents Mr. Obama on his publishing work, said Thursday that the $500,000 agreement was not for a new book but rather for a license so the president’s autobiography could be condensed into a book for middle-school students. Mr. Obama has already signed about 50 similar licensing arrangements, Mr. Barnett said, typically when the book is translated into another language.

A review of Mr. Obama’s disclosure reports since he arrived in Washington four years ago as a senator from Illinois shows a rapid ascent in his wealth, thanks to his work as a best-selling author. In 2005, he reported royalties of $1.23 million and in 2006, $572,490. In 2007, after his second book was published, royalties increased to $4.1 million. They were $2.46 million in 2008.

He will continue to receive book royalties while president.

As he talks about his proposal to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, Mr. Obama counts himself in that category. That was not the case before his book sales soared.

“Before the book, we had gone through some pretty tough financial times,” Mr. Obama said in a 2005 interview. “Part of it was getting us out of the hole that we’ve been in. None of that at all is to cry poor. It’s just that we still worry about paying the bills.”

Will Mr. Obama keep the $250,000 from the latest book agreement or give it to charity? The president has not yet decided, a White House spokesman said Thursday.

 

Bill of Attainder II

Bill of Attainder

Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."

"The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply - trial by legislature."  U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).

"These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted.  A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial.  Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment."  William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.

"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils.  They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community."  James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.

Supreme Court cases construing the Bill of Attainder clause include:

• Ex Parte Garland, 4 Wallace 333 (1866).
• Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wallace 277 (1866).
• U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437 (1965).
• Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S.425 (1977).
• Selective Service Administration v. Minnesota PIRG, 468 U.S. 841 (1984).

Source: www.thetechlawjournal.com

 

 

Bill of attainder

Posting this remotely so please forgive any goofs. Prerequesit for this posting, read the constitution, article 1, section 9, paragraph 3, and/or google bill of attaider, look for techlawjournal hit.
As americans, we should be outraged (and afraid) of the bill that was passed in the house to tax the receipiants of bonuses at AIG. Whether you agree to the validity of the bonuses or not, they were paid according to the terms of a legal contract between two private parties. (a contract that was in place at the time of the bailout, by the way, so these politicans who are crying foul are exposing their own hypocrisy). The government has decided, for political expediency, to violate the terms of the contract and seize private property (in this case money) from private citizens. Katie bar the door! If they get away with this, who's next. 'You, me, everybody, everybody.' wherever the sun may shine for political haymaking, your government will be there to seize your property for 'the public good'. Be afraid, be very afraid...
BQP