Saturday, July 10, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Obama: Israelis Do Not Like Me Because My Middle Name Is Hussein
Ha'aretz reports that during an interview Wednesday with Israel's Channel 2, "when confronted with the anxiety that some Israelis feel toward him, Obama said that 'some of it may just be the fact that my middle name is Hussein, and that creates suspicion.'"
This is insulting to all Israelis, and to intelligent people everywhere. There is plenty in the White House's actual policies toward Israel, which have nothing to do with the President's middle name, that are cause for concern. The treatment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visited the last time, the support for a UN Resolution that specifically targets Israel in calling for a nuclear free Middle East, clashing with Israel over building in East Jerusalem, the weak and inexcusable response to the Iranian uprising last year where Obama refused to lend at least rhetorical support to those standing for freedom and immediately condemn the Iranian government, placing continued pressure on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians rather than the other way around, not taking the Iranian nuclear threat seriously enough, and generally kowtowing to the Muslim world are only some of the things that come to mind besides for the Obama's middle name that are a cause for concern.
Tweet
DOJ Says They Are Going To Review The Oscar Grant BART Shooting Case
ABC reports that "the U.S. Department of Justice will conduct an independent review of the Johannes Mehserle case in order to determine whether or not the shooting merits federal prosecution, according the department."
"The Justice Department has been closely monitoring the state's investigation and prosecution," the department said in a statement. "The Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and the FBI have an open investigation into the fatal shooting and, at the conclusion of the state's prosecution, will conduct an independent review of the facts and circumstances to determine whether the evidence warrants federal prosecution."
To be honest, I am not quite sure why the federal government feels the need to get involved at all. The police officer has a had a full trial and been convicted of voluntary manslaughter by the jury. It seems like a complete waste of resources to be spending time investigating a case that the State of California has already prosecuted. The BART cop's actions in shooting and killing Oscar Grant were already on trial, and it seems to me the federal government should not have this case high on their priorities list.
Tweet
Looting In Oakland After Cop Found Guilty Of Involuntary Manslaughter, Rather Than Murder, In Oscar Grant Case
Reuters reports that the verdict in the Oscar Grant murder trial sparked "a wave of looting and destruction in the city" of Oakland on Thursday. Reuters explains that a "Los Angeles jury deliberated for about six hours over two days before reaching their decision about the shooting on a train platform in Oakland, indicating they deemed it a tragic accident rather than the intentional act of a rogue cop. The defendant in the racially charged trial, Johannes Mehserle, 28, testified that he mistakenly drew his gun instead of his electric Taser and shot Oscar Grant, 22, while trying to subdue him during a confrontation on New Year's Day 2009. But prosecutors, who sought a conviction for second-degree murder, said Mehserle had 'lost all control' and shot Grant on purpose because he thought Grant was resisting arrest. Jurors can render an involuntary manslaughter conviction if they believe the defendant lacked an intent to kill but engaged in conduct so grossly negligent that it amounts to a crime. It generally carries a sentence of two to four years in prison, but the jury also accepted a sentencing 'enhancement' for Mehserle's use of a handgun... Looters targeted stores selling jewelry and beauty supplies and grabbed shoes from a Foot Locker store in downtown Oakland, while the phrase 'Riot for Oscar' was spray-painted on a bank building, according to a Reuters eyewitness."
The San Francisco Gate reports that police "arrested 78 people during Thursday night's protests in downtown Oakland over the involuntary manslaughter conviction of former BART police Officer Johannes Mehserle for the shooting death of train rider Oscar Grant, authorities said" Friday.
Tweet
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Boston Federal District Court Wrongly Rules "Defense Of Marriage Act" Unconstitutional
The Boston Globe reports that a "federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman. Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws."
"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state." The Justice Department had argued that Congress and President Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), had a legitimate interest in preserving marriage as a heterosexual institution in relation to relevant federal laws. However, the Judge attempted to paint his ruling as both a Tenth Amendment ruling protecting the State's power to create its own marriage laws, and a matter of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause which says States must provide "equal protection of the laws."
Kris Mineau, president of Massachusetts Family Institute correctly called it “another blatant example of a judge playing legislator.” Mineau said in a statement that “same-sex marriage activists have tried time and time again to win public approval of their agenda, and they have failed each time. This is why their strategy is to force same-sex ‘marriage’ through judicial fiat, as they did here in Massachusetts and other states.” This is a troubling but not entirely new trend as the federal judiciary refuses to faithfully apply the Constitution and instead substitutes its own will for that of the legislature and the original meaning of the Constitution itself.
But even more, the ruling is ridiculous because DOMA was meant to protect the State ability to determine its own policy on marriage, to allow for different States to maintain their own traditional marriage laws without having to change their own rules to accommodate a marriage from a State that allows gay marriage. It was meant to stop one State from having to apply another State's law which defines marriage as including homosexual couples. This is a longstanding principle regarding conflicts of law between States when there is a conflict in regards to a matter of legitimate public policy. This is further permitted despite the Full Faith and Credit Clause because Congress is permitted under that Clause to prescribe "the Effect" to be accorded to the laws of a sister State.
Furthermore, DOMA does not even deal with the right to marry itself, but rather the right to receive federal benefits. DOMA simply stated that in relation to federal laws such as those regarding federal benefits, marriage was to be accorded its traditional meaning. However, States are still completely free to redefine marriage if they so choose, and to use their own funds as they wish. Federal law not recognizing a certain subset of marriages that appear in a certain subset of the States for the purposes of federal funds is not a violation of the Fourteenth or the Tenth Amendments. It is not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment because DOMA applies the longstanding definition of marriage, which in fact predates American law itself, equally to all applicable in matters of federal benefits. It cannot possibly be a Tenth Amendment issue because it is not State funds that are even at play and DOMA is in no way interfering with the State ability to define marriage for purposes of State law. The Tenth Amendment is too rarely cited by the federal courts in cases even though it should be cited often, but on the rare occasion like this one that it is cited it is done in a way that simply makes no sense at all.
Tweet
5th Circuit Court Of Appeals Rejects Obama's Request To Stay Lower Court Decision LIfting Six Month Bank On Deepwater Drilling
Reuters reports that a "U.S. appeals court on Thursday rejected the Obama administration's request to stay a lower court decision to lift a six-month moratorium on deepwater oil drilling in the wake of the BP Plc oil spill. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, based in New Orleans, ruled about an hour after hearing arguments. Its decision will likely prompt the Interior Department to quickly issue a revised moratorium order on deepwater drilling below 500 feet to address concerns raised by the federal courts." Tweet
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
UAE Ambassador To US Says "We Cannot Live With A Nuclear Iran" And Military Strikes Would Be Preferable To Iran Going Nuclear
The Washington Times reports that the "United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that the benefits of bombing Iran's nuclear program outweigh the short-term costs such an attack would impose. In unusually blunt remarks, Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba publicly endorsed the use of the military option for countering Iran's nuclear program, if sanctions fail to stop the country's quest for nuclear weapons."
"I think it's a cost-benefit analysis," Mr. al-Otaiba said. "I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion … there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what."
"If you are asking me, 'Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?,' my answer is still the same: 'We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.' I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E."
Tweet
Senior CNN News Editor Leaving Network After Tweeting Praise Of A Hezbollah Terrorist Leader
Mediaite reports: "In the latest case of new media (or oversharing) gone wrong, CNN’s Senior Editor of Mideast Affairs Octavia Nasr is leaving the company following the controversy caused by her tweet in praise of Hezbollah leader Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah. Mediaite has the internal memo, which says 'we believe that her credibility in her position as senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs has been compromised.'"
Nasr tweeted this weekend: “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.”
Tweet
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Former NASA Director Says Muslim Outreach Push "Deeply Flawed"
Fox News reports that the "former head of NASA on Tuesday described as 'deeply flawed' the idea that the space exploration agency's priority should be outreach to Muslim countries, after current Administrator Charles Bolden made that assertion in an interview last month... Bolden created a firestorm after telling Al Jazeera last month that President Obama told him before he took the job that he wanted him to do three things: inspire children to learn math and science, expand international relationships and 'perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering.'"
"NASA ... represents the best of America. Its purpose is not to inspire Muslims or any other cultural entity," Michael Griffin, who served as NASA administrator during the latter half of the Bush administration, told FoxNews.com.
Tweet
Monday, July 5, 2010
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Schoolhouse Rock Independence Day And American Revolution Music Videos
This one’s called “Fireworks,” and it’s about the Declaration of Independence:
This song is "No More Kings" which gives a very basic background to the American Revolution:
This song is about the "Shot Heard 'Round The World" about the battles of the American Revolution:
Skipping to 1787 with the birth of the United States Constitution is the "Preamble" song:
Tweet
America's Founding Document And Principles: The Declaration Of Independence
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, 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.
Tweet
RSS Feed (xml)