Blogs

The Republican War on the Justice Department

First, the Bush Administration stuffed the Justice Department with 150 graduates of the Regent Law School - a 4th (i.e. bottom) tier law school.

Second, Republicans politicized the US Attorney's office, firing those who weren't deemed "loyal Bushies".

Third, 53 Republican Senators stood by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, even after he disgraced himself and his office by claiming "I don't recall" to avoid answering questions 64 times when testifying before a Senate committee.

Fourth, the current crop of Republicans are simply stalling the confirmation of Obama's judicial nominees, using anonymous holds to prevent the up or down vote that they used to think was so important.

Fifth, major Republicans are denigrating the good men and women who work in the Justice Department by insisting they cannot possibly handle the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial - this despite the fact that there have already been over 100 successful terror trials in our courts (compared to less than 10 military tribunals).

And now this: Rep Louie Gohmert (R-TX) is drafting legislation to prohibit the Justice Department from trying KSM.

Since 9/11 there have been 119 U.S. court cases against 289 people accused of terrorism-related crimes and associated with al Qaeda or other Islamist extremist groups.

Of the 214 defendants whose cases were resolved, 195 -- 91 percent -- were convicted. Many of the acquitted still did not walk free because the government subsequently brought new charges against them or detained them for immigration violations.

Federal prisons on American soil already hold 216 international 139 domestic terrorists. All of them were tried. All of them were convicted. None of them have escaped.

This military tribunal system that is proposed as an alternative? Basically, it doesn't exist. The Bush administration got 3 convictions in 8 years.

We have the greatest justice system in the world. Why are the Republicans intent on tearing it down?

PS: Mayor Bloomberg - please seriously consider running for President.

Patrick ‘Leaky’ Leahy Attempts To Stack Federal Courts Again.

Here we go again. Obama and his cohorts in the Senate are hell bent on accomplishing the destruction of our civil society before the 2010 elections and are attacking us through the judicial appointments route.

Knowing full well that the cat is out of the bag, several cats as a matter of fact, on the true nature of the DeMarxist socialist agenda for America. Knowing that they face an increasingly uphill road to continue to buffalo the American people into believing the lies and obfuscations they’ve been delivering and having to face a hostile electorate.

Democrats, watching support for them and their agenda melting away in the polls, having  to face the  possibility that they face a real waxing in the 2010 elections and possibly beyond, are reverting to their most favored  tactic, which is to suborn the election process and the will of the people  through the judiciary. Nothing new there. Super kudos to Mark Levin for being all over this thing today, while everyone else seems oblivious to the real dangers this issue holds.

Judicial activism is nothing new to our federal courts. Neither is it new to the Democratic party. Franklin Roosevelt, with the  “Judiciary Reorganization Plan” of 1937, also known as the ‘court packing plan’, kicked the whole thing off. He was responsible for the appointment of no less than eight members of the Supreme Court during his twelve years in office…replacing justices hostile to his socialist agenda with those more friendly to his ‘New Deal’ policies.

Enter Patrick ‘Leaky’ Leahy, the man who couldn’t keep a classified secret to save his life, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. How the HELL do we allow such men and women into positions of power and influence? Leahy is moving forward legislation to increase federal judgeships AGAIN, after having tried it WITH some Republican co-sponsors last year. He is asking for 12 new judgeships in six courts of appeal and 51 judgeships in 25 district courts. He has 17 Democrat co-sponsors and no Republicans on this one.

The implications for the people’s voice to stand, if Obama and his Marxists are able to stack the courts with Maoist ACLU types, are grim. Yet we keep seeing where certain RINO moderate Republicans would make an accommodation with their Democratic counterparts, at the expense of the constituency they purportedly serve.

We have to put the word out NOW that any Republican who supports any of  these appointments, or who fails to fight every one of these appointments, may as well start packing now. This is an area we cannot afford to lose. We have to fight these people at every turn. There can be NO accommodation. There can be NO deal making. There can be NO more RINO Republican turncoats.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2009

 

California is broke, 2010 budget edition

Last month Californians were shocked to find that the state stealthily jacked up payroll taxes by 10%.  Republicans in the legislature voted overwhelmingly against it, but of course, there were like 2 of them left.  Sly accounting tricks couldn't save the state again for a $21 billion budget deficit projected for 2010.  The Democrat in charge of the budget in the Assembly has given up,

"I can't think of any good solutions," said Assemblywoman Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa), who chairs the lower house budget committee. 

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-budget-deficit18-2009nov18,0,7647152.story

She's a lot more honest than the Dems in every level of government have been so far .  

Maine Gov. (D) tanking ratings

Another Democrat statehouse in trouble as Baldacci (D) sinks in Maine with only a 38 percent approval rating.  In contrast, the Maine ladies (you know which ones) have stratospheric approval ratings.  Baldacci is term-limited.  Polling in October shows the Republican, State Senator Peter Mills is leading the Democrats best candidate, State Senator Libby Mitchell, 34-31 (Public Policy Polling

 

Maine

Favorable / UnfavorableBarack Obama: 56 / 29

Job Approval / DisapprovalSen. Collins: 68 / 22Sen. Snowe: 70 / 21

 

Gov. Baldacci: 38 / 52 

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/me_ratings_critical_insights_1.php

Deer Issue Catches Liberalism In Headlights

Early in American history, one was pretty much free to do as one saw fit on one's property so long as it was moral especially if one lived in a rural area where one's actions were not likely to encroach upon the sensibilities of one's neighbors. However, now it seems the landholdings of the United States in general and private property in specific are for everyone else to decide what to do with except the one to which it is titled.

As of September 1, 2009, the Virginia Department of Game and Fisheries has announced that it is illegal to artificially feed the deer through the first Saturday in January. This regulation is part of a program to keep the number of deer in check.

In other words, it is hoped that a number of them will starve to death during the winter months. If pristine, untouched nature is to be the standard by which our actions and decisions are to be judged, then shouldn't we speak plainly as to the policy's goals and intentions?

While the government has every right to set policy as to what it wants done on public lands and in state parks, private property holders should be able to do in regards to this issue on their own lots and in their own yards what they themselves believe best. Not everyone is going to feed the deer to begin with.

It should be noted that this bureaucratic mandate will go beyond regulating one single activity. According to a story posted at Harrisonburg Daily News Record titled "Deer Feeding Now Illegal", those with deer eating the seed spilled from birdfeeders will be ordered to temporarily take their feeders down.

Seems unwanted deer aren't the only extraneous animals authorities hope will die off and I am not talking about the birds. Obama's healthcare plan hopes that the aged demographic will simply throw in the towel with little resistance so that resources might be directed towards preferred groups such as illegal aliens.

Seems other public policy proposals may be furthering this agenda in a roundabout way. For you see, feeding the birds is often the highlight of the day of an elderly person who might not have anything else to look forward to in terms of entertainment now that television has pretty much been taken away from them unless they have a PH.D in electronics now that one has to have a digital converter box.

And speaking of illegal aliens and the like, it baffles the mind how environmentalists (who are usually some variety of liberal) that view human beings as being no better than animals and often of lower regard when it comes to the unborn as you can hack apart all the fetus you want so long as you don't smash open a bald eagle's egg or even touch a discarded feather for all that matter, fail to grasp a number of lessons that transcend the species barrier.

In an interview regarding the rational behind the prohibition, a wildlife official pointed out that once the deer get use to finding food in a certain place, they can become disgruntled and testy if nutritional allotments are discontinued. In other words, these ungulates loose their sense of self-sufficiency and develop an entitlement mentality.

Does any of this somehow seem familiar? During the speakership of Newt Gingrich, the Republican Congress thought they would get a handle on spending not really by cutting back certain programs such as school lunches but rather by slowing the rate of increase.

From the response to the policy at the time, one would have thought conservatives were smashing babies’ heads against concrete buildings, something a number of Obama’s closest advisors might not have all that much problem with. Likewise, one of the reasons elected officials are reluctant to do away with or eliminate many assorted handouts are the massive riots that would erupt across the country if the chronically dependent were suddenly expected to provide for themselves. Thus, one of the greatest bribes or ransom schemes in human history is basically continued for now to forestall what will one day result in history’s greatest bloodshed.

The issue of deer also provides an excellent study into other aspects of the immigration debate as well. The article says, “An overabundance of deer can lead...to increased human-deer conflicts, including vehicle collisions and disease transmission such as tuberculosis and other deer ailments.”

Illegal aliens and immigrants of dubious loyalties cannot be dealt with in the same manner as deer as one has a soul made in the image of God. However, the results are quite similar when the ratio of native born to foreign born becomes imbalanced in a similar manner.

Increased conflicts do result. Just ask Americans that have had their homes violated on the West coast.

I recall reading of incidents in California where Black families have come home only to find that illegals have moved in and staked a claim to a dwelling while the legitimate residents were out for the day. It is not uncommon for Arizonans to be awakened in the middle of the night to the sound of migrants rummaging through their refrigerators.

Secondly, though few want to talk about it since, in the eyes of the hypertolerant, being accused of racism is a fate worse than one's lungs filling with blood and festering puss, deer aren't the only ones spreading tuberculosis these days. Thanks primarily to deviants with compromised immune systems and diseased foreigners bringing in any number of previously conquered or even unknown diseases, America now faces an assortment of drug resistant pestilences.

Environmentalists are fond of pointing out that ecosystems are delicate things to balance. What they fail to realize is that one of the greatest threats to such harmony is government control.

by Frederick Meekins

Deer Issue Catches Liberalism In Headlights

Early in American history, one was pretty much free to do as one saw fit on one's property so long as it was moral especially if one lived in a rural area where one's actions were not likely to encroach upon the sensibilities of one's neighbors. However, now it seems the landholdings of the United States in general and private property in specific are for everyone else to decide what to do with except the one to which it is titled.

As of September 1, 2009, the Virginia Department of Game and Fisheries has announced that it is illegal to artificially feed the deer through the first Saturday in January. This regulation is part of a program to keep the number of deer in check.

In other words, it is hoped that a number of them will starve to death during the winter months. If pristine, untouched nature is to be the standard by which our actions and decisions are to be judged, then shouldn't we speak plainly as to the policy's goals and intentions?

While the government has every right to set policy as to what it wants done on public lands and in state parks, private property holders should be able to do in regards to this issue on their own lots and in their own yards what they themselves believe best. Not everyone is going to feed the deer to begin with.

It should be noted that this bureaucratic mandate will go beyond regulating one single activity. According to a story posted at Harrisonburg Daily News Record titled "Deer Feeding Now Illegal", those with deer eating the seed spilled from birdfeeders will be ordered to temporarily take their feeders down.

Seems unwanted deer aren't the only extraneous animals authorities hope will die off and I am not talking about the birds. Obama's healthcare plan hopes that the aged demographic will simply throw in the towel with little resistance so that resources might be directed towards preferred groups such as illegal aliens.

Seems other public policy proposals may be furthering this agenda in a roundabout way. For you see, feeding the birds is often the highlight of the day of an elderly person who might not have anything else to look forward to in terms of entertainment now that television has pretty much been taken away from them unless they have a PH.D in electronics now that one has to have a digital converter box.

And speaking of illegal aliens and the like, it baffles the mind how environmentalists (who are usually some variety of liberal) that view human beings as being no better than animals and often of lower regard when it comes to the unborn as you can hack apart all the fetus you want so long as you don't smash open a bald eagle's egg or even touch a discarded feather for all that matter, fail to grasp a number of lessons that transcend the species barrier.

In an interview regarding the rational behind the prohibition, a wildlife official pointed out that once the deer get use to finding food in a certain place, they can become disgruntled and testy if nutritional allotments are discontinued. In other words, these ungulates loose their sense of self-sufficiency and develop an entitlement mentality.

Does any of this somehow seem familiar? During the speakership of Newt Gingrich, the Republican Congress thought they would get a handle on spending not really by cutting back certain programs such as school lunches but rather by slowing the rate of increase.

From the response to the policy at the time, one would have thought conservatives were smashing babies’ heads against concrete buildings, something a number of Obama’s closest advisors might not have all that much problem with. Likewise, one of the reasons elected officials are reluctant to do away with or eliminate many assorted handouts are the massive riots that would erupt across the country if the chronically dependent were suddenly expected to provide for themselves. Thus, one of the greatest bribes or ransom schemes in human history is basically continued for now to forestall what will one day result in history’s greatest bloodshed.

The issue of deer also provides an excellent study into other aspects of the immigration debate as well. The article says, “An overabundance of deer can lead...to increased human-deer conflicts, including vehicle collisions and disease transmission such as tuberculosis and other deer ailments.”

Illegal aliens and immigrants of dubious loyalties cannot be dealt with in the same manner as deer as one has a soul made in the image of God. However, the results are quite similar when the ratio of native born to foreign born becomes imbalanced in a similar manner.

Increased conflicts do result. Just ask Americans that have had their homes violated on the West coast.

I recall reading of incidents in California where Black families have come home only to find that illegals have moved in and staked a claim to a dwelling while the legitimate residents were out for the day. It is not uncommon for Arizonans to be awakened in the middle of the night to the sound of migrants rummaging through their refrigerators.

Secondly, though few want to talk about it since, in the eyes of the hypertolerant, being accused of racism is a fate worse than one's lungs filling with blood and festering puss, deer aren't the only ones spreading tuberculosis these days. Thanks primarily to deviants with compromised immune systems and diseased foreigners bringing in any number of previously conquered or even unknown diseases, America now faces an assortment of drug resistant pestilences.

Environmentalists are fond of pointing out that ecosystems are delicate things to balance. What they fail to realize is that one of the greatest threats to such harmony is government control.

by Frederick Meekins

Five Days On The Right - Is This Any Way to Attract Voters?

Here are a few items from the right from just the last 5 days:

  • Bill Kristol called for Nidal Hasan to be put to death without trial.
  • Mike Huckabee said of the 9/11 trials in NYC that the Obama administration will be as much on trail as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
  • The Danville Tea Party group in Virginia announced it was going to burn Rep. Tom Perriellio and Nancy Pelosi in effigy.
  • Glenn Beck says the government is raping the American people just like Roman Polanski
  • Bill O'Reilly predicts that Nancy Pelosi will be murdered by an angry mob.
  • Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs have a non-ironic dicussion of whether or not Barack Obama is the devil.
  • Rep. John Shedegg taunts NYC mayor Bloomberg with the prospect of his daughter being kidnapped by al Qaeda.

I don't see this as a successful strategy for attracting voters. Do you?

If It Quacks, It Must Be A Marxist

by  Rose Pedenko and Tanya Simon 

In American politics, the fringe groups of the left, right and center sooner or later end up accusing the sitting President of the United States of being a Nazi, a Marxist or a Communist.  Such references are usually punctuated by cartoons of the luckless leader sporting a Hitlerian moustache, a fuzzy beard and wild smoky hair, or perhaps even a handlebar moustache below a leering look.  By way of example, if you Google “Bush and Hitler” you get well over nine million hits. 

Until now, it was semi-amusing to blow off steam with this kind of partisan ram-rodding.  It seemed harmless because “everyone does it.”  And we would laugh it off because we knew in our hearts that all the jabbing was no more than satire run amok.  That was then. 

This is now: 

In the frenetic months leading up to the 2008 presidential election, conservative pundits railed against Barack Obama’s questionable alliances, specifically Bill Ayers, Tony Rezco, George Soros, and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.  Sean Hannity of FoxNews initiated an unrelenting and unyielding charge against the candidate’s suspicious leftist associations, tracing the dubious connections as far back as Obama’s childhood.  But the powerful and fawning mainstream media were able to block, distort, distract, and disengage from what Hannity and others tried to present as nothing more than a smear campaign against their chosen one.  They were blinded by Obama’s shining smile and the opportunity to make politically correct history.  History has been made, but it’s been extraordinarily incorrect. 

Try as they might, the conservative talking heads barely put a chink in the armor the MSM had dressed Obama in since his rousing 2004 speech at the DNC.  That was the day, nigh, the moment, when the lights went on in the heads of the leftist power elite -- that here was the malleable shining star who could and would make the changes they so desperately tried to effect since the last Great Depression.  “Last” you say?  Yes, because creating the second Great Depression is the aim of this administration: to crush the hearts and minds of the citizenry until we accept their brand of redistributive change. 

Conservatives in both public and private life who speak on behalf of our Constitutional rights and against this maelstrom have been ruthlessly branded by lefties, liberal journalists, RINOs, and the press with just about every hostile and threatening moniker.  It’s not unlike the way the Nazis slapped the yellow cut-out Star of David on Jews throughout Germany and in countries overrun by the Third Reich.  The Jews of Europe had no one to speak freely on their behalf without fear of retribution, and that silence contributed to the destruction of European Jews. 

Today, an American – a white knight – has charged forth to expose the brutish attempts to wreck our country.  He is working hard to help with the recovery of conservatism and lead the counterattack to save the former “United” States of America.  That knight is Glenn Beck. 

Practically from his debut he has been the object of extreme ridicule (the usual thread-worn defense mechanism of liberals).  He’s been called a circus clown, a raging alcoholic, a moron, or, as Stephen King referred to him, “Satan’s mentally challenged younger brother.”  But this time the sticks and stones are bouncing off his proud chest like the proverbial shit hitting the fan -- and it’s landing square on the smug faces of Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and David Letterman.  And the sludge is coming in the form of stratospheric ratings for Glenn Beck and Fox News. 

Beck has repeatedly pointed out that Obama’s message has been unambiguous with respect to his revolutionary intentions.  Beck’s exhortations were not innuendo or speculation but direct, factual quotes and video footage of then candidate Obama which would hold up in any court of law.  But Americans, largely shielded by the utopian fantasies of the leftist media, did not, or wished not, to hear or see the truth. 

Even David Von Drehle has proffered in Time Magazine, albeit in a backhanded way, “…Whom do you trust?  Either the corrupt, communist-loving traitors on the left are causing this, or it's the racist, greedy warmongers on the right, or maybe the dishonest, incompetent, conniving media, which refuse to tell the truth about whomever you personally happen to despise.” 

At the Huffington Post, Camille Paglia recently wrote, “The mainstream media's failure to honestly cover last month's mass demonstration in Washington, D.C. was a disgrace. The focus on anti-Obama placards (which were no worse than the rabid anti-LBJ, anti-Reagan or anti-Bush placards of leftist protests), combined with the grotesque attempt to equate criticism of Obama with racism, simply illustrated why the old guard TV networks and major urban daily newspapers are slowly dying. Only a simpleton would believe what they say.” 

Green jobs adviser, Van “Republicans are a bunch of assholes” Jones, resigned purportedly so as not to distract from Obama’s agenda.  Gosh, we wonder why.  And then this past week, Obama’s Mao-worshipping Communications Director, Anita Dunn, has also resigned.  Two down, and several Marxists (dots that Beck has already connected) to go, are waiting in the wings, eager to sacrifice themselves for their greater god, uh, good. 

Over the last few months, Beck has ingenuously presented facts and pointed questions about everyone surrounding Barack Obama and those within his inner sanctum.  You just can’t make this stuff up, and everyone knows it.  Beck is smart, but even he could not concoct the shocking pyramid of leftists with direct access to the most powerful man on earth.  The presidential minions have been given ample opportunity to refute possible misstatements of fact or opinion, but they have instead chosen to ignore the commentary in the mistaken belief that their silence would be interpreted as not lending credence to those facts and opinions.  

It is no secret – and no surprise to conservatives – that Obama & Co. (the duplicitous Democrat-controlled Congress) are forging the chains of socialistic enslavement of the American People, and pulling our country apart at the seams.  But Beck’s relentless search for the truth is growing exponentially, so much so that the upcoming American Revolt of 2010 already is being felt around the world. 

The freedom that we cherish, which was born from the precepts and principles of our sacred Constitution, is a “one size fits all” gift from our founding fathers – from those individuals who put their lives on the line and holding that line against oppression.  No one person or group is granted either more or less — everyone is equal in freedom. 

And so we conclude: “If it walks like a Marxist, quacks like a Marxist, looks like a Marxist, you can bet it’s not a duck.”

Oba-Trotsky Goes To Copenhagen But The Patient Is DOA.

Cap and Trade is a lot like what we used to call Search and Destroy, with the emphasis on destroy because that is exactly the effect it would have on our already staggering economy.

Americans, having had a severe gut check behind His Imminence Barack the First’s proposed fiscal nightmares, are telegraphing Congress that it better have as much chance of passing as the proverbial snowball in hell…or else.

Representatives, that hung it all in the wind for Obama, Pelosi and Reid on the House’s bare passage of the health care bill, are having  buyers regret now that the steaming mad public whiplash is being felt. Serious challenges are being mounted in all marginal Democratic districts as we speak and in many that are not.

The triumvirate of the the Obama administration’s dream list is the health care theft of 1/6 of the US economy; the cap and tax bone crusher of American jobs, American industry, American families; and the AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS bill, which is even now being worked on by both Democrats and Republicans who, by the way, should be targeted to be voted out of office as well. That’s another story.

The Health Care issue is on life support over in the Senate and unlikely to emerge any time soon, if at all. Harry Reid may try for the ‘nuclear’ option on it by sending it to budget reconciliation, which would require only 51 votes. Democrats rightly fear that this measure would create a political backlash that most are unwilling to face in 2010.

Cap and Trade, the second pillar of the Obama drive to force socialization upon the American people, is ‘on the back burner’ for now for much the same reason. Lawmakers are beginning to understand that the STAGGERING cost to the economy and the American people is a price that cannot be born…hence another potential tidal wave of political mayhem. The surest indication of this is the announcement from the Copenhagen committee that there ‘will be no legally binding treaty’ at the ‘climate’ summit.

What that means, by the way, is that without the co-operation of the United States of America the economics of the whole thing just won’t work. It’s the same reason KYOTO didn’t work…no US to bleed dry. Without India and China and with the EU faltering,  it turns the upcoming Copenhagen conference into so much hot air and the chief source of that hot gas will be Barack Obama.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2009

 

Reagan Would Define Conservatism Today

First Read asks: "Would Reagan have passed today’s conservative litmus test?" and goes on to cover the tired lefty Reagan-as-moderate list: raised taxes, increased deficit, picked G.W. Bush as running mate etc.

This is just another lame lefty attempt to try and paint the modern GOP as crazy wingers. The idea that Reagan was some sort of Charlie Christ-moderate is absurd. Watch Reagan's 1964 A Time for Choosing again and follow below for some highlighted quotes that could come out of any Tea Party rally today:

 

From A Time for Choosing:

No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We've raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we've just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.

 

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations.

For example, they have voices that say, "The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says, "The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."

Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"—this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize.

They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

 

Syndicate content