There has been an ongoing argument as to whether or not detainees held at GITMO have constitutional rights, as ludicrous as that idea is and as ridiculous as it is that we actually have to have this argument there is another issue that is even more concerningthan this on the issue of terrorism. It is the precedent that is being set by granting GITMO detainees constitutional rights and it is a perfect illustration of the mindset of this administration. It is what the administration plans to do moving forward with regards to those caught on the battlefield that I am concerned about.
As if it wasn’t bad enough that all of the prisoners at GITMO will probably be afforded constitutional rights the assistant attorney general is saying that all terrorists that are caught on the battlefield fighting against out troops have constitutionalrights. We can argue all day long about whether all of the detainees being held at GITMO are enemy combatants but those that were actually caught fighting against America and those that are caught in the future fighting against the United States should NEVER have the same rights as the troops who are trying to protect the constitution.
Here is part of the exchange between John McCain and David Kris:
“What are those constitutional rights of people who are not citizens of the United States of America, who were captured on a battlefield committing acts of war against the United States?” McCain asked.
“Our analysis, Senator, is that the due process clause applies to military commissions and imposes a constitutional floor on the procedures that the government sets on such commissions …” Kris said.“So you are saying that these people who are at Guantanamo, who were part of 9/11, who committed acts of war against the United States, have constitutional rights under the Constitution of the United States of America?” McCain asked.
“Within the framework I just described, the answer is yes, the due process clause guarantees and imposes some requirements on the conduct of (military) commissions,” Kris said.
“The fact is they are entitled to protections under the Geneva Convention, which apply to the rules of war,” McCain said. “I do not know of a time in American history where enemy combatants were given rights under the United States Constitution.”
The way that I see it, moving forward, all of the people who are caught on the battlefield waging war against the United States will have rights under the United States constitution. This is incredible.
Joe Lieberman is not impressed:
“Why would anyone prefer to try people apprehended for violations of the law of war?” Lieberman asked. “The fact is that from the beginning of our country, from the Revolutionary War, we’ve used military tribunals to try war criminals, or people we have apprehended, captured for violations of the law of war.
“Again, I think the unique circumstances of this war on terrorists, against the people who attacked us on 9/11, have taken us down, including the Supreme Court, some roads that are not only to me ultimately unjust but inconsistent with the long history of military commissions,” Lieberman said
What is the administration’s excuse for trying enemy combatants in civilian courts?
“When you’re dealing with terrorists whose, and I’m going to say this on behalf of the administration, one of their fundamental aims is to kill innocent civilians, and so it is the administration’s view that direct violence on innocent civilians, let’s say in the continental United States, it might be appropriate that that person be brought to justice in a civilian public forum in the continental United States,” Johnson said.
Because the goal of the terrorists is to kill civilians they should be tried in civilian courts. Isn’t that just brilliant?
I think that is it safe to say that this shows us what President Obama’s policies are going to be with all terrorists and enemies caught in the future, and I find it incredibly disturbing that anyone would think that those who are fighting against our country deserve the rights that the citizens of the country they are fighting against enjoy.
Governor Lynch’s newest approval rating is out and it shows a modest drop in support. While he still holds a 63% approval rating, a rating that right now even President Obama must be envious of, (the Rasmussen tracking poll has Obama at 52%, while the Gallop tracking poll has him at 58%, only the ABC poll shows him higher than my governor.), it shows a drop in his approval rating of 7% since April.
Governor Lynch had an approval rating of 63% among Republicans in April, that has dropped to below 50% at 48%. It has become evident recently that Governor Lynch is being ruled by the far left of the party and that has caused this huge drop off with his approval rating with Republicans He has come out of the closet so to speak and is not the moderate that he claimed to be. He is not the moderate that so many Republican voters thought they were getting when they voted for him.
Another poll shows his approval rating dropping by 12% and his disapproval rating rising by 11%.
The tide is finally beginning to turn and while Governor Lynch’s ratings are still high they have fallen quite a bit in the last three months. The election is just over a year away and when Lynch’s latest budget begins to hit cash-strapped New Hampshire residents with the 38 tax increases that were incorporated in the budget I expect his numbers to keep on falling.
Two conservatives have won special elections since the last election and I expect that trend to continue.
Obama Adviser Pushes For a Second Stimulus Bill
Last weekend on “Face the Nation” Joe Biden admitted that the administration screwed up and that President Obama “misread the economy.”
This was the second time that he has claimed that the Obama administration screwed up in regards to the economy and the failed stimulus package. Previously, while on “Meet the Press,” Biden claimed that “everyone guessed wrong” on the economy. (It is nice to know that the administration was guessing on something as important as the nation’s economy, isn’t it?)
But others in the administration are making excuses for the failed stimulus bill, claiming that the effects of the stimulus bill will be felt any day now and that they always knew there would be no results for several months.
While all of this is going on we have the administration saying that only a fraction of the stimulus money has been spent and that we need to be patient as all of this takes time, yet during Biden’s “Face the Nation” interview he refused to rule out a second stimulus bill. He refused to rule it out even as he was saying that it was to early to judge the effect of this stimulus bill.
And now we have an adviser to President Obama urging the administration to consider a second stimulus bill, claiming that the first stimulus bill was too small. How Laura Tyson can make that call is confounding when the first stimulus bill hasn’t even been spent yet. If indeed the first stimulus bill would take months to show signs of improvement in the economy this statement seems premature.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The stimulus bill is failed policy, the administration must be forecasting continued failure or there would be no second stimulus talk, and we are beginning to hear talk about repeating the failed $700 trillion mistake. It would seem that some in the Obama administration have not learned from the very recent history of the failed stimulus bill. Or they just want to spend more money.
If at first you don’t succeed…
Report: Tax Individuals to Stop Global Warming
If there was any doubt left in your mind about the true goal of the global warming alarmists being to implement their socialist agenda one look at this article should convince you.
A new study and report has found that it isn’t good enough to follow the Kyoto Protocol and just tax the rich nations to give to the poor nations; this study has determined that all rich individuals should be followed and taxed so that they can give their “fair share” to the general population. Global warming is nothing but the tool to implement a global socialist network and people are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.
This report suggests putting a cap on how much carbon dioxide every single individual person can emit. Targeting the rich of course.
Since about half the planet’s climate-warming emissions come from less than a billion of its people, it makes sense to follow these rich folks when setting national targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions, the authors wrote on Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The study suggests setting a uniform international cap on how much carbon dioxide each person could emit in order to limit global emissions; since rich people emit more, they are the ones likely to reach or exceed this cap, whether they live in a rich country or a poor one.
Considering President Obama’s penchant for overstepping his authority in order to gain control of the economy, Wall Street, the mortgage industry, the automobile industry, and soon, the healthcare industry I am positive that he will take these suggestions to heart.
The debate IS over; the true goal of global warming has been exposed. The true goal of this “issue” is government control of the people through restrictions and taxes while implementing a socialist agenda by giving to the poor the taxes taken from the rich. END OF STORY.
With the process well underway to implement Obama’s radical climate agenda with the recently passed climate change bill in the House we cannot afford to let this bill see the light of day. Our liberties are at stake here.
The only reason I see that this radical idea of taxing individuals for their personal “carbon footprint” may not be adopted by this administration is the fact that politicians must have the largest footprint of all. Of course I am sure they will pass legislation that exempts them from the tax because they feel their “work” is just too damn important to be restricted with these types of taxes.
Once again the president will ask us to sacrifice while they will be free from these same sacrifices.
The true goal of the global warming hoax has now been exposed. We need to hope that this legislation will be stopped in its tracks before the administration decides that this report needs to be implemented also and every individual will be taxed by the size of their carbon footprint. The last thing that we need is the government monitoring everything that we do that emits carbon dioxide, including breathing, so that their goal of total control will be realized.
What’s next? Euthanizing old people because they do not produce enough for society in proportion to the carbon dioxide they emit simply be breathing?
Yesterday on “Face the Nation” Chuck Schumer guaranteed that there would be a “public option” included in the healthcare reform bill. That is no surprise, as the whole intent of the healthcare reform bill is to eventually have the government running the healthcare industry as they slowly begin to strange the life out of private insurance companies but I found Chuck Schumer’s comment a frank admission of how this Democrat majority sees private industry.
We want it to be a fair level playing field, but you need something to keep the big boys honest. And the only thing that really is out there is a public option. We don’t trust the private insurance companies left to their own devices, and neither do the American people
“We don’t trust the private insurance companies left to their own devices.” That sentence right there shows us exactly how the big government politicians feel about private businesses, they don’t trust them.
Finally one of them came out and admitted it.
Pelosi and Reid Will Not Commit to Giving the Public a Week to Review the Healthcare Reform Bill
As a candidate Barack Obama promised to have the most open and transparent administration in history. As part of that pledge he made a promise that all bills would be posted on the internet for a week in order to give the American people time to read the bills and comment on them before he either signed them into law or vetoed them. This was also supposed to give the bill a “cooling off” period.
As president he has totally ignored that pledge to the American people on every single bill that he has signed. The most glaring example of this, but not the only example, was in the case of the stimulus bill. That bill was not posted on the internet for the American people to read, and with good reason for the administration. The bill never would have been accepted by the American people if they had had the chance to see all of the pork that was in it. The excuse given in that case was that any delay would have been disastrous. We are now about 120 days into the stimulus plan and nothing has improved. Joe Biden and the other Obama apologists are claiming that we should start to see the effects of the stimulus bill any day now and that the stimulus was a long term solution, not a short term solution. If this was the case than giving the people one week to read the bill would not have had a negative effect.
Congress is now in the process of repeating the same breech of Obama’s transparency pledge with the healthcare reform bill. Both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have either stated that they will not allow the American people the chance to read the bill for one week, or have refused to commit to Obama’s pledge to let the bill sit for one week in order for the people to digest what is in it.
Earlier, when Harry Reid was asked whether the bill would be available to the American people for a week he refused to commit to Obama’s transparency promise.
Reid was asked the following question: “When the stimulus came up earlier this year members and citizens had less than two days to review the final bill before it was voted on. Will you commit to give Americans at least a week to review the full conference version of the health-care bill before it’s voted on?”
The majority leader did not directly answer the question.
“That was a very hectic conference, we felt it was imperative that we move this bill forward to help the economy, and in hindsight we did that right thing,” he recalled.
Reid did not commit to more time. Instead, he promised the Senate would “follow the rules.”
“We are going to follow the rules and do the best we can so that the new rules we have for transparency will be effective,” the majority leader said at a news briefing on Thursday.
But according to Obama’s campaign promise those new rules included letting the public view ALL bills for one week. He must be forgetting that part.
His excuse?
“We have been putting things online. We’re doing so much more than we did just a year or two ago, so I think there’s no secrets, we try to be as upfront as we can, give everyone as much opportunity as we can to move forward,” he added.
They are putting the bills online, just not for Obama’s specified amount of time, that is Harry Reid’s justification. They are doing more than what was done before? That is not good enough. We are supposed to be able to read 1000+ pages of documents in 48 hours? Even those who vote on the bills do not have enough time to read them yet we are supposed to read them in 48 hours?
Nancy Pelosi was then asked the same question about whether the people would have Obama’s pledged week to read the healthcare reform bill, she also would not commit to keeping Obama’s pledge for transparency, only saying that the House “would follow the rules.” By her statement that the House would “follow the rules” she confirmed that Obama’s transparency pledge has been thrown out the window on this bill.
“Well, we will abide by the regular order. You heard the question,” she said. “It was about having the health care bill out there a week in advance. We will have the regular order in terms of the appropriate amount of time, 48 hours in advance for amendments before you file the bill, another day before you can take up the bill
Her excuse for scuttling Obama’s pledge?
“But this bill is something that has been unfolding before the American people for a long time now. The areas of controversy are well known,” said Pelosi.
“So it was in the public domain, but not as a bill,”
Because the bill is so prominent the American people already know what is in it. Therefore even though it isn’t officially a bill we already know everything that we need to know.
That excuse, much the same as Harry Reid’s excuse, just doesn’t cut it. When the climate change bill came up for a vote (after not being posted online for a week either) a three hundred page amendment was added to the bill at 3:00 in the morning before the vote was due. In this case the American people had no idea what was in the amendment, neither did those who were voting on the bill. Nobody could have ever guessed that there was language in that bill that would allow the government to demand that private homeowners would be mandated to make “green” improvements to their homes. Nobody knew that in order to win ONE Democrat vote $3.5 billion would be thrown at her state in a de facto bribe. That was not open and that was not transparent.
So while the American people may know some of what is in the healthcare reform bill we do not know everything that is in the bill, and we certainly do not know what may eventually be added to this bill. But according to Nancy Pelosi we already know enough.
We are just supposed to sit back and let the government tell us what is best for us. The bill isn’t even in its final form, it hasn’t even been completed, yet we know everything that we need to know?
One has to wonder what last minute amendments will be added to this bill that we will not find out about until it is too late.
Hidden in the cap and tax climate change legislation that the House passed last week is a MANDATE that all residential, commercial, and government buildings will have to meet certain “green” guidelines.
That means in order to sell your house you will have to meet these guidelines, you will be REQUIRED to make certain improvements to your house to make it more “green” before the government will allow you to sell it. (That sure is going to help the slumping housing market, isn’t it?)
But don’t be too worried, the government is going to let you keep one of your rights as a homeowner. The government is going to let you work on your house all be yourself if you want to. Just like if they thought you were a big boy or girl. They will probably even let you use sharp tools too! YIIPPPEEEE!!!!
individual homeowners are even allowed to retrofit buildings themselves. The bill gives specific protection to individual owners’ rights to choose who inspects and retrofits their property
So the government will still let you work on your house if you want to, but they can demand that you make certain changes to your home and this is supposed to make us feel better?
Once you have your house inspected for its “greendom” by the government and you make the required changes that the government imposes on you, you then have to let the government back into your house to see if it meets their approval. Then and only then will you be allowed to sell your house. Do you see the theme here? Government, more government. More government intrusion.
This bill just keeps on getting worse, the government keeps on growing and they keep on closing in on us. We have to defeat this bill.
Fourth of July
July 4th 1776:
The war against Great Britain has been raging on since April 19th 1775, when shots were fired in Lexington and Concord. This was not a war for independence, it was a war to restore the citizens of the American colonies rights as citizens of Great Britain.
But on this day in 1776 the Continental Congress held a vote on Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence and the idea that “these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
The motion was passed and this was now a war for independence.
Today we celebrate the birth of the greatest nation in the history of the world, but although the founders declared independence on this day in 1776 it still had to be fought for. It wasn’t until Lord Cornwallis surrendered in Yorktown in 1781 that independence was finally won and America was free from British rule.
Today we celebrate the beginning of our our march toward freedom.
I have included two videos from the great HBO miniseries John Adams, anybody who loves U.S. history and hasn’t seen this miniseries needs to see it.
The first video includes John Adams’ speech in favor of independence before the vote takes place, it is spliced with the scene where the Declaration is read.
The second video is the vote for independence followed by the reading of the Declaration. The second video is how the scene played out in the miniseries while the first video is two scenes from the miniseries spliced together. I would recommend stopping the first video after John Adams’ speech and then watching the second video.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY AMERICA!
Sarah Palin Resigns
As you have heard by now Sarah Palin announced that she will not run for re-election in Alaska, but she also announced that she will resign as governor of Alaska in a couple of weeks.
Before I give you my take on her announcement, let me make clear how I feel about Sarah Palin, and it probably won’t be popular with most conservatives. I like her. I think that she is a good strong conservative and that she holds many of the same political beliefs that I do. I think that she has shown that she truly believes her stated positions, and that she is a genuine conservative.
However, I do not think that her personna plays well on a national level. While I like the way she sounds non-political, if you will, I don’t think that the nation will buy into her in an election. While she was a breath of fresh air to John McCain’s stagnant, boring, and failing bid for president I am not sure that she would gain enough support to be a viable candidate for president.
Now back on to the subject at hand. Why did Sarah Palin choose not to run for re-election? Was it because she has presidential aspirations? That is entirely possible, but why did she resign? That is what I have a problem with.
Did she resign because she thought that she would be distracted from her state duties if she was running for president? This is entirely possible as well, but I just am not sure. I think there may be more here. She could have announced that she was not going to seek re-election and still carried on as governor of Alaska. Politicians do it all the time.
Did she resign because she didn’t want to cost the taxpayers any money to defend herself from the onslaught that she has been facing? She talked about how the national media and investigators have descended on her state in an effort to bring her down, and that is true. To me that shows that they are afraid of her, perhaps she does have some connection to mainstream America after all. They want to bring her down before she can do harm in 2012.
But is that reason enough to resign if the allegations are false? What does that say about her will to fight? If she has presidential aspirations this gives her opposition a line of attack. If she can’t handle the fire as governor, how will she be able to handle the scrutiny when she is running for the presidency of the United States of America? How would she handle the pressure if she were to become president? And I would agree with that line of questioning.
I think that there is more to this story than we know right now. I don’t know what it is but it seems to me that she would be better served to have remained on as governor and forfilled the obligation that she made to her state than to be be perceived as quiting when the going got tough.
I hate to think it, but is there something to the allegations that have been levied against her? Is she getting out before the shit hits the fan? Or has she just had enough? No matter which option is the truth, it doesn’t bode well for her on a national level.
White House Refuses to Release Some Sotomayor Papers
The White House is refusing to release some papers that may shed some light on Sonia Sotomayor’s positions while she was an adviser to the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. The White House is claiming that because she didn’t make any official decisions and was just an adviser that these papers are irrelevant.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, who asked for the papers disagrees:
During her time there, the organization took extreme positions on legal issues ranging from the death penalty to abortion to racial quotas,” Sessions said in a statement. He said it was “absurd” for the White House to call the documents irrelevant
The notion that Sotomayor had no role in what the organization did seems to be not quite the truth either as she did have a leadership role on the board.
Sessions noted, however, that Sotomayor held leadership posts on the group’s board
These papers are being withheld for a reason, and considering the fact that Sotomayor has been overturned by the very court that she will soon be appointed to over 60% of the time, the latest being just last week, the White House is looking to avoid further embarrassment.
Much like the administration did with the “torture” documents, the administration seems to be picking and choosing just the papers that they want to release and holding on to those they don’t want to be seen.
There must be something in these papers that they don’t want to be seen, if there is nothing condemning to Sotomayor in the papers why not release them, even if they turn out to be irrelevant?
They are not irrelevant, and they must be condemning or else the administration would release them. If they turned out to actually be irrelevant wouldn’t it be an embarrassment to the Republicans to have made such a big deal about this? The administration would lose nothing by releasing these documents, unless there is something in there. We will never know. Open and honest? Transparent? I think not.
