Missouri Ban on Gun Ban Legislation?

Someone in the Missouri House of Reps thinks it would be a good idea to make it a felony for any state government representative to propose legislation against anything to do with gun bans in Missouri.  Can we all assume that that idea is a really bad idea because it demands that we toss the first amendment to the constitution out the window to defend the second amendment.

Legislation introduced Monday by state Rep. Mike Leara, a Republican from St. Louis, thinks it should be illegal and a class D felony for his fellow legislators to propose any bill that would restrict any gun ownership in Missouri.  Sorry Mikey, you can't make a law banning legislators from LEGISLATING LAWS.  It is what we the people vote them into public office to actually do.

I did a quick search and I could not come up with an actual bill on the statehouse web site that Leara claims he submitted.

Constitutionally, it is a lame bill if ever there was one.  We really need to get some people that actually think before they act in the Missouri State house.  Somebody should seriously consider getting a logical group of folks together on something called a committee to come up with some common sense ideas that will actually work.  Submit those ideas to the governor and let him duke it out with the people in the house.  Past that, people like Leara would bring back the Guillotine and have a field day at the cost of the United States Constitution.  

Papamoka

Cheney Off to Wyoming Finally!

Dick Cheney gave what is supposed to be his last interview before leaving office over at Fox News this past Sunday. I didn’t get a chance to catch it but the sound bites out of the interview are classic Dick Cheney without the Dick Nixon expletives. More or less he called Biden and Ass that has no clue as to what Constitutional law is, chucked the bird at the Congress, and declared George W. Bush a saint that defended the Constitution. And he was drop dead serious when he said it.

I’ll wait till you stop laughing before I continue with the post. Take a few minutes. Okay, you just peed yourself… Go change your pants and get back to the post afterward. Don’t be ashamed, there is an elderly gentleman in Boston that just soiled his pants altogether laughing. Now we have a woman in New York that needs to change too. London, Munich, two folks in Ontario, and now the Australians are pissing themselves laughing. Yes, I have a pissy pants locator on this blog. We monitor the warmness in your crotch from satellites overhead for drastic changes in temperature that could signal urine or a nuclear attack. Technology courtesy of Vice President Dick Cheney’s office. I can’t reveal the details at this time due to national insecurity or incontinence issues. Oh damn, Seattle just went yellow on the warning meter.

If you ever wondered how dangerous Dick and George were as Co-President then all you have to read is this line from the “More powerful than a speeding train” Vice President during his interview with Chris Wallace at Fox News…

Vice President Cheney mocked Vice President-elect Joe Biden's grasp of the Constitution, defended former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and said President Bush "doesn't have to check with anybody" before launching a nuclear attack. - Fox News

Did you ever wonder who initiated the wiretapping of US citizens? Who ran the show on surveillance right here at home on all those domestic terrorist posing as soccer moms? Dick did it! He ran the whole damn show and admitted it to Chris Wallace. He never mentions that the President asked him to oversee it, nope. He ran it all! Check it out for yourself…

WALLACE: Let's drill down into some of the specific measures that you pushed — first of all, the warrantless surveillance on a massive scale, without telling the appropriate court, without seeking legislation from Congress.

Why not, in the aftermath of 9/11 and the spirit of national unity, get approval, support, bring in the other branches of government?

CHENEY: Well, let me tell you a story about the terror surveillance program. We did brief the Congress. And we brought in...

WALLACE: Well, you briefed a few members.

CHENEY: We brought in the chairman and the ranking member, House and Senate, and briefed them a number of times up until — this was — be from late '01 up until '04 when there was additional controversy concerning the program.

At that point, we brought in what I describe as the big nine — not only the intel people but also the speaker, the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate, and brought them into the situation room in the basement of the White House.

I presided over the meeting. We briefed them on the program, and what we'd achieved, and how it worked, and asked them, "Should we continue the program?" They were unanimous, Republican and Democrat alike. All agreed — absolutely essential to continue the program.

I then said, "Do we need to come to the Congress and get additional legislative authorization to continue what we're doing?" They said, "Absolutely not. Don't do it, because it will reveal to the enemy how it is we're reading their mail."

That happened. We did consult. We did keep them involved. We ultimately ended up having to go to the Congress after the New York Times decided they were going to make the judge to review all of — or make all of this available, obviously, when they reacted to a specific leak.

But it was a program that we briefed on repeatedly. We did these briefings in my office. I presided over them. We went to the key people in the House and Senate intel committees and ultimately the entirely leadership and sought their advice and counsel, and they agreed we should not come back to the Congress. - Fox News

By the way, you can check the entire transcript from Fox News at the above mentioned link. I could not make this stuff up if I wanted to.

For some odd reason I am truly surprised that we survived the last eight years of Cheney. When he wasn’t shooting his hunting buddies he was actually looking for ways to make sure all of us were good little goose steppers in line with the Furer… I mean President. Could you even imagine what kind of world this would be if Cheney ever became President? I’m thinking lots of mushroom clouds and my grandchildren glowing at night.

Go back to Wyoming Dick and spy on some cattle or something. Those big eyes are watching for something, what do they see that you don’t? Could there be terrorists in those fields? Grab your gun Dick! (Lawyers and friends duck)

Papamoka

HILLARY LOVES YOU

BY MICHAEL LINN JONES

Following this presidential race can have adverse effects on one's appetite. That might be good; perhaps by November I'll have shrunk to the weight the doctors say I should be. Thing is, I choose to be stupid and follow the path of personal health self-destruction. While not a consumer of alcohol or drugs, I do adhere to Oscar Wilde's quote that "I can resist anything but temptation."

So imagine my consternation when I read this piece in the NEW YORKER, THE IRON LADY by Ryan LIzza. True, the article is certainly not complimentary of Senator Clinton, but one part sticks out there all by itself. It was uttered by Senator Clinton during an "economic summit" during the campaign for the Ohio primary. It took place in Zanesville.

It was as if the sheer display of iron-pantsed discussion would further underscore her insistent theme: the hollowness of Obama’s charisma. When one speaker offered encomiums to Clinton rather than economic prescriptions, she gently reprimanded her, saying, “We’re going to put a moratorium on compliments.” Then, with the bonhomie of a high-school health teacher, she turned the conversation back toward government programs to help people “quit smoking, to get more exercise, to eat right, to take their vitamins.”

Is Ryan Lizza making this up? The comment is apparently not "newsworthy" because it doesn't have "substance." In the modern media glossary, "substance" is defined as that which can cause the greatest amount of childish interest within the political sandbox. It should be looked at further, and since the big boys and girls won't touch it, I will.

Many moons ago I read Henry David Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience." 19th century English can be a handful to read, and Thoreau's prose adds to the challenge. But, what I gathered from his writing is that the individual is paramount. That is the acme of Western thinking. The government, or state, is secondary to the individual. In fact, our Constitution goes to some lengths in the Bill of Rights to expressly underline that notion.

When the state becomes the oppressor instead of the protector, then the individual has a choice: either submit or not. Submission is always less painful; at least in the short term. However, over time individuality will seek to assert itself no matter what the state says. What Thoreau wrote was studied by Gandhi and Martin Luther King. All three men were philosophers, pains in the backside to those who prefer people not to think. Thinking is painful, after all, and the struggle to maintain individuality in a politically correct word is an agony.

When Franklin Roosevelt died in 1945, a contemporary writer gave a good description of FDR as a leader. He was America's bus driver. With a grin and his cigarett holder at a jaunty angle, Roosevelt steered the country down some dangerous road and heart-stopping curves. Sometimes it was scary, but everyone knew that while he was in the driver's seat, he never stopped listening to the passengers.

That is apt, because we, the passengers on the national bus, are the sovereigns of this republic. Plain, simple citizens are the ultimate rulers of the nation. The past seven years there hasn't been a bus; we've had a spoiled brat in a soapbox derby car (that his daddy built) rolling downhill. And we've been expected to keep up with him while dragging bags of cement behind us.

And now....well, it looks like one candidate (or possibly all three right now) foresees her role as a herder; someone to herd those wayward souls who just don't get it. What I don't get is why the power of government has to be used to further a collective goal at the expense of the individual. The context within which I am speaking relates to personal behavior only. If the state declares that an individual's right to abortion, or sexual preferences, or religious preferences. THAT I can understand, as it is in the direction of government staying out of an individual's decisions. It does not matter whether I personally agree or not; the key point is that the individual is, again, to be protected by the state. No matter how stupid they are.

But smoking? Exercise? Eating habits? Vitamins? If this is the epitome of 220 years of a constitutional republic, then it is sad and disheartening.

We need another bus driver. And there ain't no room on the bus for a throne.
***********************************
Cross-posted at Michaellinnjones.com

Bush Throws Another Log Onto the Pyre of his "Legacy"

By Michael Linn Jones

Ever notice how a word or phrase starts to creep into the language? In listening to Rudy Giuliani endorse Sen. John McCain yesterday, I heard a phrase that has become disturbing. Even more disturbing, it passed by without comment.

Giuliani said that John McCain was the best-qualified candidate to be “the Commander-in-Chief of the United States.” Call me crazy, but I thought the Constitution specifies that the President is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States.

I’ve argued for several years now that the semantic placing of the presidency with the word “commander” is a leap into the abyss of strongman rule. It is, in essence, no different than those dictatorships that exist around the world, where the people, like children, need a strong father (or mother) figure to take care of them.

So I come across this in the Boston Globe: Bush asserts authority to bypass defense act.

WASHINGTON - President Bush this week declared that he has the power to bypass four laws, including a prohibition against using federal funds to establish permanent US military bases in Iraq, that Congress passed as part of a new defense bill.

Bush made the assertion in a signing statement that he issued late Monday after signing the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008. In the signing statement, Bush asserted that four sections of the bill unconstitutionally infringe on his powers, and so the executive branch is not bound to obey them.

“Provisions of the act . . . purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the president’s ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as commander in chief,” Bush said. “The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.”

SNIP,

The Bush administration is negotiating a long-term agreement with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The agreement is to include the basing of US troops in Iraq after 2008, as well as security guarantees and other economic and political ties between the United States and Iraq.

The negotiations have drawn fire in part because the administration has said it does not intend to designate the compact as a “treaty,” and so will not submit it to Congress for approval. Critics are also concerned Bush might lock the United States into a deal that would make it difficult for the next president to withdraw US troops from Iraq.

Obviously I am not an expert in Constitutional law, but it confuses me when someone swears an oath to “faithfully execute the laws of the United States” but then says he’s not going to execute a law of the United States because it would interfere with his ability to faithfully execute a law of the United States. Perhaps I need to further my education, and to borrow a phrase from President Bush, Citizens does learn.

Problem is, the learning curve is sharp and irreversible. This goes way beyond George W. Bush. I have argued with supporters of Bush that this is a constitutional issue, not a political one. Yet in today’s America, the two have become one.

I also was not aware that a president is empowered to declare laws to be unconstitutional. I thought that was what the courts were for. And, that if a president disagrees with a law passed by both chambers of Congress, he or she is granted a veto by the constitution.

This particular signing statement is bogus, and one doesn’t need a law degree to see why. In the statement President Bush says that he needs the latitude he demands in order to “protect national security.” There are laws in existence…been there for decades…that require a careful monitoring of who enters the United States. Yet in over seven years Bush has ignored those laws because they conflict with an agenda that he has never really spelled out.

What IS clear is that in less than one year a new president will be in office, inheriting all of the expansion of executive power vacuumed up by George W. Bush.

Is is said that we “are a nation of laws, not men.”

George W. Bush’s legacy will be proof that the opposite is true.

Originally posted at Michaellinnjones.com

Huckabee wants U.S. To Be "Arsenal of Theocracy"

By Michael Linn Jones

From The Firesign Theater’s “Don’t Crush That Dwarf; Hand Me The Pliers”:

The Hymn For the Church Of The Presumptive Assumption Of The Blinding Light:

“Oh blinding light,Oh light that blinds,I cannot see,Look out for me!”

Prior to the involvement of the United States in World War II, President Roosevelt made the claim that the U.S. could be “the arsenal of democracy.” This was said at a time when isolationism was quite strong in America; there was opposition to Americans fighting in foreign wars, but no one could really argue against producing the armaments needed to keep the nation safe.

Almost exactly 70 years later we have a candidate for the presidency going right off the rails in his well-intentioned fervor. By stating that the Constitution be amended to bring it more in line with his God, Huckabee proposes fighting Islamic fascism with a Christian-based government.
Next thing you know, we’re going to have young knights, scribes, and pages storming the gates of Jerusalem. Or maybe not; those doing the assailing will be, as is custom now, members of the peasantry utilizing M-16’s, Abrams tanks, F-16’s, F-18’s, and Humvees.

Recently I wrote politely (for me, anyway) about Huckabee’s use of his particular faith in his quest for the presidency. This may be a little more blunt. Pandering to certain fears and suspicions is normal fare in some elections, but what is going on in South Carolina is a bit much.
We are still in the month of January, named after the Roman god Janus. Janus had two faces; one looking forward and one looking backwards. It’s an appropriate way to start the year, but not a presidential primary season.

I say this in light of Huckabee’s recent comments about the Confederate flag, and where the pole should be stuck if any “outsiders” want to tell South Carolinians where to put it. Like Janus, South Carolina can look either forwards or backwards, and it is sad to see someone pandering to the past. The argument about the Confederate flag can go on forever, but what cannot be disputed is that such a contraversy is NOT going to solve or address housing, healthcare, wars, economics, or anything else.

It is possible for a southern white male to see the point of view that the Confederate flag represents the best of southern ‘heritage’ without being inclusive of rascism. That same southern white male can look upon Robert E. Lee and Martin Luther King with equal admiration. Lee was a military genius who made the decision to help re-unite his nation rather than tear it apart with endliess guerilla warfare. King was a gift to America, a rare true philosopher who delivered a message that we still, nationwide, don’t pay much attention to.

However, such a perspective took years of experience and thought. What anyone proudly waving the Confederate flag must acknowledge is that Dr. King is as much a part of southern heritage as any confederate. On the other hand, waving that flag as a token of resistance to non-whites being recognized as equal citizens appeals to some.

But not all, and to ignore those who choose to look forward is an insult to a region and a state. I am not a great admirer of Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. He’s too conservative for me in many ways, but recently he made an observation that underscores the insult of Huckabee’s remarks.

Sanford made the point that while he would never vote for Barack Obama (as a Republican and a conservative he could not endorse his policies), he said that South Carolinians had a unique opportunity to welcome Obama’s candidacy. This is so because for the first time in history, the cradle of the Confederacy may, in its Democratic primary, select a black American as its candidate.

Sanford deserves credit for stating something that needed to be said. A generation ago he would have ended his career by saying such things. Time marches on….forward always…and so has South Carolina. Gov. Sanford is a fine example of that, no matter how misguided his views on economic policy are, and I say that with respect.

But Gov. Huckabee? No. He has lost all credibility. His appeal for a new Crusade and his veiled pitch to the Klan are not in step with an America aching for a positive change.

You’re offering us a sweet-smelling crap sandwich, Mr. Huckabee. How about something with a little beef?

Originally posted at Michael Linn Jones.com

United States of Jesus Christ

In this little experiment that we call America there is the freedom of religion as one of the many foundation blocks of our entire society. Added to that foundation is our freedom of speech. Toss in the Bill of Rights and you have a firm base to build your nation on. Then you add in all the decisions by the Supreme Court that becomes the support beams to hold up the roof.

When it comes to the Presidency in the Unites States it is not a bad thing for the President to have a strong sense of faith and belief that there is a higher power but you can not govern by it. Square peg, round hole. With such a diverse population we are not a society of one size fits all and when it comes to religion that little theory can or should implode a candidacy for President. We may be a nation under God but we are also one nation with many variations under God. Over at the Washington Post they have this interesting piece of Reverend Huckabee’s version of faith and the Presidency.

Huckabee Stands by 'Christ' Comment

By LIZ SIDOTI
The Associated Press
Sunday, December 30, 2007; 5:19 PM

DES MOINES, Iowa -- Mike Huckabee, a Republican relying on support from religious conservatives in Thursday's hard-fought presidential caucuses, on Sunday stood by a decade-old comment in which he said, "I hope we answer the alarm clock and take this nation back for Christ."

In a television interview, the ordained Southern Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor made no apologies for the 1998 comment made at a Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Salt Lake City.

"It was a speech made to a Christian gathering, and, and certainly that would be appropriate to be said to a gathering of Southern Baptists," Huckabee said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

He gave the speech the same year he endorsed the Baptist convention's statement of beliefs on marriage that "a wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ." Huckabee and his wife, Janet, signed a full-page ad in USA Today in support of the statement with 129 other evangelical leaders.

Snip - Cut - Co-Pay

In the NBC interview, Huckabee, a longtime opponent of legalized abortion, said he does not believe that women should be punished for undergoing the procedure, but that doctors might need to face sanctions.

"I don't know that you'd put him in prison, but there's something to me untoward about a person who has committed himself to healing people and to making people alive who would take money to take an innocent life and to make that life dead," Huckabee said.

He also argued that his emphasis on his Christian beliefs does not mean he's alienating atheists. He said, if elected, he would have no problem appointing atheists to government posts. - Washington Post

Where do I start when it comes to Governor Reverend Huckabee? I’m just guessing that Mike Huckabee believes that God made women with smaller feet than men so they could get that much closer to the kitchen sink to do the dishes. For that matter all of you woman that were beaten or abused by an abusive testosterone bag of bones should have pulled a Tammy Wynette and stand by your man. Bruises heal, bones mend and you probably did something wrong anyway. In his mind or in his teaching woman are and will always be second class citizens and that is just simply wrong. Then there is the added point that if Hillary is elected then Bill is really the President. That hurts my head to even think how that would work.

Roe vs. Wade, under Huckabee, nope. Kiss it good bye under the cause of the Christian Right. All you pro choice people that think your body is your own will need to line up for womb inspections under Das Fuhrer Huckabee. You better start praying that your babies didn’t have sharp finger or toe nails. Any scratches on the sacred chalice and life building organ will be cause for lethal injection. He isn’t totally against the death penalty but I could be wrong.

Then he pulls a Paul Pot from Cambodia and locks up all of the OBGYN doctors that might have performed an abortion. Then they can focus on all of the Lawyers that fought for and defended Roe vs. Wade and lock their asses up too. He will pay for it first by the added tax on one bedroom trailer home sales for back alley locations that will skyrocket as Planned Parenthood and other such medical offices are shut down. Then he might just add a wire coat hanger tax but that is a little to graphic to explain.

Mike Huckabee is standing by his statements on bringing America back to Christ but he can’t see the difference between Americans and America. No two American’s are alike and where one person finds abortion totally disgusting and wants the law changed, that same person believes that the death penalty is appropriate for crimes against our citizens. Pick one but you can not have it both ways if you swear to God above to be righteous.

As for all you Atheists or other icky religious persona non grata, the Post Office will be plastered with Huckabee appointees. Don’t even think about SCOTUS. Those positions will be reserved for zealous religious proponents of bringing America back to Christ.

By the way, screw all you Jew’s too from the Huckabee campaign. Merry Christmas, Happy Easter and all of the other religious holy days we as Christians will stuff down your throat under a Huckabee administration.

Thomas Jefferson is rolling in his grave at about fifteen thousand RPM’s right now. Look up for yourself on Google why he wrote the separation of church and state. Then look up whom he wrote it for and against.

Voting for Mike Huckabee is voting against all that America was founded on. Your right to believe in the choice of faith you want or to ignore faith entirely. Huckabee is hoping that many people will take their faith to the poll and elect him as America’s beacon of light back to Christ but I personally do not believe Jesus ever wanted a political office that proposed hate or judgment on anyone he loved. All you non believers included.

Our nation and the foundation it was built on will stand strong when we have a President that believes that his or her faith can not come first when governing. We are a house built with many products called faith and the roof needs to be replaced. Mike Huckabee is not Jesus Christ, I know Jesus Christ Sir. And you Sir are no Jesus Christ.

I’ll probably go to hell for that last one but I could not resist.

Papamoka

Cross posted at Michael Linn Jones.com and Bring It ON!

Technorati Tags:
Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson, Freedom of Religion, Faith, Faith in America, Politics and Faith, Republican Religion, Democrat Religion, American Religion, Governor Huckabee, Mike Huckabee, Reverend Huckabee, President of the United States, Primary Election, Caucus, Faith in Politics, Mitt Romney, Mormon, Baptist Politics, Evangelical, Bible Belt, Election 2008, God, God and Politics, Iowa, New Hampshire, Picking a President, Voting for President, Republican Hypocrisy, White House, Bush, Clinton, Hillary, Washington Post, Liz Sidoti, On Faith, Christian Politics, Jewish Faith, Muslim Faith, Hindu Faith, Separation of Church and State, Supreme Court, Roe vs. Wade, Abortion, Choice, NOW, National Organization for Woman, Pro Life

Congressional Ethics Police… LOL!

Don’t get me wrong, I love Mike Capuano from Mass A Two Sticks but he is living a pipe dream. He is proposing a regulatory independent agency to more or less police the Congress for ethics violations. The only problem with his plan is that Constitutionally this outside law force would have to be armed with feathers. Gives a whole new meaning to “Packing Heat” does it not?

I’m thinking little tiny down feathers in little tiny holsters on a lawman from the old west. Armed agents patrolling and roaming the halls of the Congress ready to arrest anyone that steps over the line of truth, justice and the American way. Stepping into the dark corners of the law and breaking the ethics rules just might get you a handful of feathers tossed in your face. Take that you wrong doer!

Over at the Washington Post they have this to say on it…

House May Add Outside Watchdog For Ethics

By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 20, 2007; Page A27

A House task force yesterday recommended creating an independent Office of Congressional Ethics that would have the power to initiate reviews of lawmakers' behavior.

The new office, whose creation requires the approval of the full House, which reconvenes in mid-January, would be the first in either chamber to allow an outside body of nonmembers to examine alleged ethical misdeeds.

"It breaks the appearance of the good ol' boy network," said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.). Capuano headed a task force that spent a year trying to craft a compromise for the new ethics office in the wake of the lobbying scandals that helped sweep Democrats into power.

But some ethics watchdogs warned that the office, if approved, would not be strong enough, particularly because it would lack subpoena power. - Washington Post

Keystone Cops mentality all over again…



Not to mention the fact that any Congressional member could at any point in time, when under fire for ethics violations, recite the Constitution and then express a raspberry with their tongue.

For those in the Congress not knowing what a raspberry is, you insert your tongue between your lips, gently press down with your lips and exhaust air from your lungs in a rapid exhale. Not through your nose People! Take two. Insert your tongue between your lips, gently press down with your lips on your tongue, and exhale rapidly through your mouth. Not through both your nose and mouth Congressman. This is going to take some practice. Most of these folks have not lived in reality for a long time so you might want to check back later. When you do come back could you bring about four hundred pair of underwear. That last try had some of the older members of the House in a most discomforting position. That’s a first isn’t it!

Oh screw it, they could just lift up the middle finger, close the rest of their fingers and show it to the Congressional Police. No, No, NO Congressman. You close your thumb too! Everyone knows that is how you hail a cab for a F’n ride. This is going to take a long time to educate these folks about how American’s really live. When you come back with the underwear would you bring some coffee too.

Speaking about how American’s really live, when we have corrupt leaders in our government, if they do not police themselves, the voters can fire them at the polls. For Congressional members that happens every two years, President is every four, and Senators every six years. Then again there is this whole whacky thing called freedom of the press that sometimes can shame SOME people in our government into resigning from office.

I applaud the attention that Congressman Mike Capuano has put into this but I fear that any outside influence on the Congress would be the first step in finally killing the Constitution. That is something as an American that I could never accept. Neither should you and that is why we all should vote based on our own personal ethics. Democrat, Republican or Independent political mindset, if you see a wrong then right it with your vote. It is as simple as that.

Papamoka

Feel free to borrow this post…

Cross posted at Michael Linn Jones and Bring IT ON!

Technorati Tags:
Washington Post, Mike Capuano, Paul Kane, Democrat, Republican, Ethics, Congress, Senate, President, Election, Corruption, Government, Constitution, Police, Watch Dog on Congress, Congressman Capuano, Cambridge, Vote, Get out the vote, Voting

AHMADINEJAD DISPLAYS HIS IGNORANCE ONCE AGAIN

By MICHAEL LINN JONES

OPEC comment drives oil close to $95 is the headline for this AP story by Pablo Gorondi.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, called the dollar a "worthless piece of paper," and said the cartel's members have expressed interest in converting cash reserves into a currency other than the U.S. dollar — a sentiment echoed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who called the euro a better option.

This is the best president a theocracy can come up with? What a putz. Referring to the dollar as a "worthless piece of paper" shows how ignorant this guy really is. Yeah, yeah, I know Ahmadinejad has it in for the U.S. We're the great satan, blah, blah, blah.

At least he could get his facts straight. Everyone knows that it's the U.S. CONSTITUTION that is a worthless piece of paper. Our own President Bush said so, and he should know since he's the Decider and all that.

His quote did not use the word "worthless" but the meaning was the same, I think. "It's nothing but a goddamned piece of paper" translates pretty close to "worthless" but then I'm no linguistic expert.

On top of that, President Ahmadinejad needs to do some polling of President Bush's "base," that is the "haves" and "have-mores" (as Bush refers to them). There ain't a one of them going to tell you that a dollar (or the puruit of them) is less valuable than a constitution, human rights, national security, or much of anything else.

So if the president of Iran has plans to wreck the U.S. economy, I have news for him. Someone's already way ahead of you on that score.

So you're wasting your time. Being Americans, we can destroy an economy better than anybody else.

We're # 1, after all.
************************
Cross-posted at Michael Linn Jones.com

WHAT AN AMIGO THEY HAVE IN GEORGIE

Picture courtesy of the Supreme Court

BY MICHAEL LINN JONES

Bush, Texas at odds over death case reads the headline of this AP article by Mark Sherman.

WASHINGTON - To put it bluntly, Texas wants President Bush to get out of the way of the state's plan to execute a Mexican for the brutal killing of two teenage girls.

Bush, who presided over 152 executions as governor of Texas, wants to halt the execution of Jose Ernesto Medellin in what has become a confusing test of presidential power that the Supreme Court, which hears the case this week, ultimately will sort out.

The president wants to enforce a decision by the International Court of Justice that found the convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexican-born prisoners violated their rights to legal help as outlined in the 1963 Vienna Convention.

That is the same court Bush has since said he plans to ignore if it makes similar decisions affecting state criminal laws.

"The president does not agree with the ICJ's interpretation of the Vienna Convention," the administration said in arguments filed with the court. This time, though, the U.S. agreed to abide by the international court's decision because ignoring it would harm American interests abroad, the government said.

I then came across High Court Case Pits Texas Against Bush and International Court of Justiceby Randy Hall of CNSNEWS.COM. There is a little more detail which helps illustrate why this latest action by "The Decider" is so disconcerting.

However, Ilya Shapiro, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Cybercast News Service on Monday that the case is intriguing for legal scholars, because it deals with the law on both international and federal levels.

Rulings from the ICJ "are not self-executing," he said, and depend on local and national governments to enforce them.

As a result, the case may turn on the "swing vote" often being cast by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy and whether he wants the U.S. and the Supreme Court to be thought of highly in other countries. "After all," Shapiro said, "his decision might only result in one more hearing" for Medellin and the other Mexicans facing a death sentence in the U.S.

Nevertheless, Shapiro said that "not only is this a case of federal leaders trying to commandeer state government," it is also an example of "the executive branch trying to tell the judicial branch what to do."

"Ultimately, the ruling should go against the president," he added.

Let us hope so. It is established fact that two teenage girls were kidnapped, repeatedly raped, and then murdered in the most brutal manner. The perpetrators were tried and convicted. Most were sentenced to death as per Texas law. Two had their sentences commuted to life because they were not yet 18 at the time of the crime. Jose Medillin, however, confessed; was convicted, and after 4 years on death row discovered how "Mexican" he was.

There are three avenues being traveled here.

One, exactly how sovereign is the United States if a state's criminal justice system, including its judiciary, is to be determined by a foreign court?

Two, what is an equal protection clause when a foreigner, upon illegally entering the United States commits a crime, and then is entitled to consular assistance IN ADDITION TO the constitutional process guaranteed everyone else?

Three, how intelligent, or dangerous is it for a president to hold the power of dictating to states?

This time, though, the U.S. agreed to abide by the international court's decision because ignoring it would harm American interests abroad, the government said.

"This time, though"..????? Just what the hell does THAT mean? I don't recall reading anything about the inmates at Guantanamo having consular officers assisting them. Nor do I remember anything about consular officers assisting anyone taken to the secret prisons. The Bush administrations reaction to any International Court of Justice condemnation of said programs can be condensed to a simple "kiss off."

The first two questions will be dealt with by lawyers. Their decisions will affect us all but there isn't much we can do, as our "representatives" oversee the installment of the judges who make the final call.

Yet what difference does it make if we have a president who has stuffed Congress into a closet, shredded the Constitution, and declared himself the ONLY one with true decision-making powers? George W. Bush is not concerned with any international court. Nor is he concerned with any domestic court, or state court, or state government. No, he is concerned with placating, once again, the mafiosi who call themselves the Mexican government.

Bear in mind that the Mexican government sued the United States over the treatment of Jose Medillin and 53 other (now, all of the sudden) Mexican citizens on death row.

I believe it was current Mexican President Felipe Calderon who said, “I have said that Mexico does not stop at its border, that wherever there is a Mexican, there is Mexico,” he said. “And, for this reason, the government action on behalf of our countrymen is guided by principles, for the defense and protection of their rights.”

And so also is Mexican justice. Yet what is forgotten in all this are the graves of two teenage girls who were brutally raped, brutally murdered, their bodies left like trash until discovered four days later.

What an inconsiderate inconvenience when the dead cry out for justice from their government. THEIR government, not someone else's.

Technorati Tags:
Supreme Court, SCOTUS, Illegal Immigration, Murder, Texas, Death Penalty, Electric Chair, Bush, Kennedy, Scalia, Breyer, Souter, Bader, Roberts, Efrain Perez, Raul Villarreal, Murdered Teenagers, Rape, Child Rape, Prisoners, Death Row, Mexico, Mexican Government, International Treaties

Census Bureau Cancels Deportation in 2010

Logo courtesy of U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Services

Counting of the people every ten years is one hell of a tough job and I can understand the dilemma of the Census Bureau when counting illegal immigrants to America. Their job is in fact to count all of the people regardless of citizenship or legality of that residency requirement.

As liberal and blue state blooded that I am I find it ridiculous for the Census Bureau to request that immigration enforcement agencies stop deportation of illegal aliens for any time period. Any person that works with numbers on a daily basis knows that if you deliberately take out any part of the equation it will skew the results that the experiment is looking to study. Stopping the legal government deportation of illegal aliens would make the next census useless.

That is where the hairs on the back of my neck go up and low and behold that same request would feed into the hands of the political philosophy that immigrants are a pox on America. Making illegal immigrants look like an invasion on our shores would feed into what political machine in 2012?

Immigrants are a constant in the American population whether you like it or not. Stopping the deportation process for any reason serves only one purpose and that is to make all immigrants, legal or illegal a political weapon for political parties to stand against.

Over at the Chicago Tribune they have this to say about the request to stop deportation in 2010...

Census Bureau Wants to Halt 2010 Raids
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
Associated Press Writer
6:45 PM CDT, August 16, 2007

WASHINGTON - The Census Bureau wants immigration agents to suspend enforcement raids during the 2010 census so the government can better count illegal immigrants.

Raids during the population count would make an already distrustful group even less likely to cooperate with government workers who are supposed to include them, the Census Bureau's second-ranking official said in an Associated Press interview.

Deputy Director Preston Jay Waite said immigration enforcement officials did not conduct raids for several months before and after the 2000 census. But today's political climate is even more volatile on the issue of illegal immigration.

Snip - A - Roooooo

Arturo Vargas, executive director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, said the intense debate over immigration has made immigrants even more suspicious of the government today.

"The Census Bureau has a job to do," said Vargas, who belongs to a committee that advises the bureau on the 2010 census. "They need to convince people that they need to report themselves to the federal government and that it's going to remain confidential. That's a hard sell."

Supporters of stricter immigration laws said the whole discussion of suspending raids shows that the immigration system is broken.

"If you don't enforce your laws, this is what you are going to get, one agency asking another agency to subvert the law," said Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates stricter enforcement of immigration laws. - Chicago Tribune

I’m guessing that this is just a political chess game that will play out a couple of years down the road in the race for president in 2012. You have to really think long term when it comes to issues like immigration. Both political parties are fighting the procedures and laws required to fix it so who is up to this latest strategy? That is an answer I don’t have. Just something for you to tuck away in the back of your mind to think about a few years from now.

Same paper and the same article…

One lawmaker said she thinks "it's nuts" for the Census Bureau to ask for a break in enforcement.

"I don't know what country the Census Bureau is living in," Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., said in a telephone interview from her district. "I can tell them the American people have grown sick and tired of their immigration laws not being enforced. They are not going to tolerate enforcement being suspended for any amount of time."

The Constitution requires the Census Bureau to count everyone, including illegal immigrants, in the census. The once-a-decade population count is then used to apportion seats in Congress and to appropriate billions of dollars in federal spending each year.

Miller has introduced a constitutional amendment that would apportion seats in Congress based only on the number of U.S. citizens in each state. - Chicago Tribune

One question regarding this latest point in the article and this Congressional Members outrage, isn’t the Census Bureau under the Bush administration? Could this be micro managing by President Cheney… I mean Bush on forwarding the agenda of promoting the party politic?

I for one do not trust any lawmakers that want a Constitutional Amendment change when we have a perfectly good Congress and Senate at our disposal. What the hell is she so afraid of?

Immigrants are coming to our shores from every single nation around the world and changing our Constitution is not the answer. Changing the laws regarding immigration so that it works is the only answer.

My wife forwarded me an email recently that talked about the trials in life in comparison to boiling water that is our daily lives and what is put into it. Carrots in boiling water become soft and change to suit the temperature of the water. Eggs become hard when boiled and loose the ability to change forever other than a solid. Coffee beans however change the boiling water around them to become something for all to enjoy. That my friends is the melting pot that is America. Those of us that fear change the most are the people and leaders to fear the most.

Papamoka

Feel free to link to this post...

Technorati Tags:
INS, Illegals, Illegal Aliens, Mexican Americans, Immigrants, Irish Americans, Italian Americans, Polish Americans, Lithuanian Americans, Armenian Americans, German Americans, Canadian Americans, English Americans, WASP, European Immigrants, African Americans, African Immigrants, Deportation, Senator Kennedy, Senator McCain, Bush, Immigration Politics, Mexico, Border Issues, Border, Border Patrol, Leaky Border, Weak Border, Cheney, Political Chess, 2012, Presidential Elections, Defend the Constitution, Realistic Immigration Laws

Bush Chucks Congress the Finger!

Picture courtesy of the White House

President Bush made it loud and clear that he does not work for the American people today by refusing to hand over any documents to the Congress regarding the investigation of the nine fired U.S. Attorneys. This pretty much proves that he is not a President of the people but a Monarch.

I’m laying odds for all the Las Vegas houses on how long the President can withhold the documentation the subpoenas were meant for. Two weeks and five to one odds he turns them over on a late Friday afternoon. Nobody in Washington reads the late news on Fridays.

One thing that this President is good at is timing and delaying tactics. While he entertains Putin from Russia in Maine and soaks up the sunshine at the family estate in Kennebunkport the press and all of us bloggers will move on to yet another topic. Ten to one odds that a diversion tactic comes out of the Putin summit!

Over at the Washington Post they have this to say about the President using his first amendment right at flicking the bird at the spineless Congress…

Bush Won't Supply Subpoenaed Documents

By William Branigin and Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 28, 2007; 12:42 PM

The White House said today it would not comply with congressional subpoenas for documents and testimony relating to the firings of federal prosecutors last year, setting up a potential constitutional confrontation over its claim of executive privilege.

In a letter to the chairmen of the House and Senate judiciary committees, President Bush's counsel, Fred F. Fielding, said the White House refuses to turn over documents that were subpoenaed by the two committees on June 13. The deadline for handing over most of them was today.

"I write at the direction of the President to advise and inform you that the President has decided to assert executive privilege and therefore the White House will not be making any production in response to these subpoenas for documents," Fielding wrote in the letter to Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

"With respect, it is with much regret that we are forced down this unfortunate path which we sought to avoid by finding grounds for mutual accommodation," Fielding said. "We had hoped this matter could conclude with your committees receiving information in lieu of having to invoke executive privilege. Instead, we are at this conclusion."

The committees are seeking the documents to determine the extent of White House involvement in the firing of nine U.S. attorneys last year. That action by the Justice Department has caused an uproar in Congress and prompted many Democrats and some Republicans to call for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. - Washington Post

I get the feeling that no matter what laws are broken by this administration that there are a limited number of orange prison jump suits to go around. Our current Congress has no teeth or the desire to take a bite out of the Bush apple. No matter how much we all scream and shout about the iceberg dead ahead that is the crimes of this administration and demand it be corrected, the ship still steers full speed ahead with its collision course.

There is no shame in the Bush administration. As much as he holds his friends close he is not one that will ever let himself hang when someone closer to the gallows will take the rope for him. That is the key to the team of the Presidency that is driven by Cheney and propped up by the man supposedly elected to the highest office in the land.

Watch the news over the next couple of weekends to see the true hand of this President. Alberto will swing but it will be the President that will hand select the rope. Friends do that for friends I guess. At least that is what they do in our nations capitol. For now it will be shiny object over hear while something else is going on over there in the Bush camp.

Papamoka

An Indecisive American People

In America today there is a strong and growing movement of people that once thought their voices did not count when it came to the policies of our government. There is some truth to the message that if you do not vote then you do not count but it is not the entire truth. Being an American does not mean that you have to vote, it simply helps the process of putting like minds in the offices you vote for.

Even if you do not vote, your government is still your government as a citizen. Your voice is still very important. Your life and your opinions matter. You are in fact a very important person in the ongoing experiment that is the United States of America. There is only one downfall to our form of government and that is when people believe that our government is not about them. That is the beginning of the end to our democratically elected servants to our republic. Or dare I say the beginning of an elitist government and society led by the needs of the few at the cost of the many.

As Richard Nixon tore down the respect of the political office of the Presidency, so has George W. Bush. Past lessons have been forgotten and the future of being respected as an American President will be up to future office holders to defend. Deciding what laws apply to the President alone when signing laws into effect is wrong and elitist at best. No American is above the law and never should be. We are a land of laws and rules that apply to all. Without them, we have anarchy and that is not a part of the American experiment.

In my mind, the office of President is not just about the power that comes with it. Being the President is about all of the people and sometimes it is about what the people want that is not to your personal liking. Yet it is the people that own the office and not the individual sitting behind the desk. If that was not the case then the descendants of George Washington would be a living and ruling Monarchy today. Am I wrong?

Get off the damn cell phone, computer, email or whatever seems more important and write or email your Representative in Congress on issues you care about. Tell them how you feel about any given issue. Be heard and wash, rinse and repeat.

Not doing that, then yes, special interest will walk away with our nation of laws that only apply to you. They get a waiver and walk away clean as a new born baby.

As an American you need to decide what you want from your leaders and more importantly what you do not want.

Papamoka

Michael Linn Jones

My good friend and former co-writer over at the Gun Toting Liberal has more or less given birth to his own blog and web site. Michael is a great political writer and I highly recommend that you check his works out as often as you can. I've linked to his site here and I highly encourage you to do so as well.

Michael has allowed me the good graces to put a few of his pieces here on my site and let me tell ya his writing is phenomenal. If you have ever read his works in the past from the Gun Toting Liberal then you know his style and clever historical wit that seems to be very much relevant with anything going on political today.

On a scale of one to ten as far as true well written bloggers go I would give Michael Linn Jones a 9.5. My .5 deduction is a private religious debate that he and I love to joke around about. I'm still keeping my .5 till he changes his mind...lol!!!

Check his site out and you will never be disapointed...

Papamoka