Durbin willing to talk to Kyl and McCain who are showing how false Obambi's comments were in El Paso about further security at the border. GAO says only 40 % secure.
You folks seem to think a Police State designed by Dems is on the horizon. Well, look again. It seems all is not well, just in Wisconsin, but Indiana, as well.
Indiana Supreme Court rules Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful entry of their homes by police.
No, you read it right. That’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasn’t so serious:
Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry. [emphasis mine]
Or said another way, your home is no longer your castle.
Remember the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution?
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Bzzzzzt.
Wrong – in Indiana
“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”
David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.
One has to wonder what part of “unlawful” Justice David doesn’t get. What part of the right of the people to “be secure… shall not be violated” wasn’t taught to him in law school.
How secure is anyone in their “persons, houses, papers and effects” if, per David, a police officer can waltz into any home he wants to “for any reason or no reason at all?”
"“In a “strange twist,” according to the Kaneshiros’ complaint, BOA had filed a foreclosure action against Kim in 2007, but “he was never personally served with the complaint notwithstanding that he worked in defendant BoA’s office at the time. It also appears that defendant BoA was aware of the foreclosure action against its own employee.”
Why would anyone have any faith in Bank of America?
I would dearly love to know the precise whereabouts of the IMF guy. I would also like to know the current state of his morale.
It is gratifying to know that if the Frogs or the IMF want to cut some kind of deal, it will have to be done with New York authorities, not the administration.
TK, is that the docket of the CA or US supreme court?
My local McClatchy fishwrap has a decent set of reviews of Grietens and Waisdin's memoir
of their experiences with the Seals, although
they have to throw in the obligatory jabs at
'enhanced interrogations' somewhat like genuflecting to be in good standing.
I'm about to go out for a bit but DoT I am astonished that the IMF officials do not have special status.
I suppose they have something called an"official passport", less than "diplomatic" and, therefore, liable for arrest on felony charges. (I use to have to travel that way in the USSR which I frankly found scary.)
Christine Fair, a Georgetown University terrorism expert, wrote on her Facebook page, “Of course they found porn! Every damned jihadi loves porn.” Indeed, the “USG,” or U.S. government has become so accustomed to finding porn, she said, it has “media analysts” designated to analyze the porn looking for “messages.” They work on “document exploitation.”
It's called steganography, that Weissman novel I've referred before, Direct Action,
has it as a partial explanation to the December 2003 Air France flight alerts
Dominique Strauss-Kahn was told he does not have diplomatic immunity from prosecution against charges including alleged rape
How do you say "oops" in French?
It also appears that Nicolas Sarkozy's government is not making any attempt to protect Mr Strauss-Kahn.
Well, considering DSK was thought likely to be the leading candidate against Sarkozy in the 2012 election, I wouldn't put high odds on his getting too much help from that source.
Had a heck of a time catching up on the last thread, but I wanted to extend congratulations to all the JOMers celebrating something special yesterday.
Thanks to AB for that David Mamet link, too. Very enjoyable. I especially liked the part about his conservative rabbi turning him on to the good stuff. Imagine discovering the genius of Hayek, Friedman, Sowell etc. after that long in the lefty cave. It must have been like uncovering a new and beautifully ordered universe. I look forward to his book.
Can that Indiana SC ruling be taken to SCOTUS? It seems like a 4th amendment issue.
I still remember Alan Dershowitz many years ago twisting like a pretzel, after extolling the wonders and beauty of the jury system for its ability to produce just outcomes (meaning let criminals off on technical violations by police), argue (in defense of the exclusionary rule) that juries would never convict a cop for violating correct procedure. That seems like a problem with the Indiana court's reasoning.
Dershowitz was my criminal law prof 38 years ago, and I well remember the second argument (it's a pretty standard one) but never heard him make the first one, although it doesn't surprise me.
It does seem to me to be a federal constitutional issue, though it may very well be covered by the state constitution as well. My recollection of the law on this is that federal courts must defer to a state supreme court's interpretation of its own state's laws, but that doctrine does not apply if the state's interpretation violates the US constitution. If that's correct, I think it could be appealed to the feds, presumably straight to the Supremes. Somebody must be more current on this than I am.
I have been wondering if the proposed merger between the London Stock Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange will be another advance for Sharia Finance, seeing as the majority shareholders of the LSE are Qatar and Dubai.
The LSE-TSX merger deal is supported by the Bank of Montreal and the Royal Bank. Three other Canadian banks -- Toronto-Dominion, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and National Bank want to keep the TSX under Canadian control and are vehemently opposed to the merger with the LSE. They have formed a group called the Maple Group and are making a counter offer.
In 2002 he was accused of attempted rape by French journalist and writer, Tristane Banon.[19][20][21]
In 2008 Strauss-Kahn was involved in a scandal at the IMF over his affair during the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008 with a subordinate, Hungarian economist Piroska Nagy, who was married at the time of the affair.[22] He later publicly apologised to his wife.
He's a socialist and married to an american journalist:Strauss-Kahn has four daughters,[29] and is presently married to his third wife, the American-born French journalist Anne Sinclair.
pagar:
I continue to be hopeful that the defunding of Obamacare will proceed on schedule. With over 3,200 waivers who the heck is going to have to obtain it? By the time 2012 rolls around it will be declared unconsitutional.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Two public school teachers I know claim Billnumber 5 passed in Columbus has somewhat forced them to retire. Both are close to 60 and just cost too darn much. I also learned a state senator was reamed when he was ambushed by our own RR teachers in a Q and A to which he was invited.Kasich has become the public unions whipping boy.
"the full Christie." Now there's a thought. Draft him. He's so much more appealing to everyone than, say, Newt, Mitt, or pretty much anyone. And, Palin is not going to run. In your heart you know I'm right.
It's time for the reincarnation of one of your fellow Clevelanders, Mark Hanna. He would ferret out the right candidate and get him/her nominated and elected.
The third colonia included a high school and community center for the estimated 15,000 residents, of whom it was estimated that approximately 50% are undocumented. While this site does have water and electricity, a group of approximately 60 community members meets weekly with a local organization to discuss human rights and to monitor the activities of the CBP and ICE.
I guess it helps the percentages that Canebrake, a community of San Diego County, gets in on HUD monies.
Canebrake is a hippie retirement community. They stuck it to the feds so they could get their wells dug for free. “Migrants” are not even welcome to live in Canebrake, so their residents must make up the U.S. Citizens in HUD’s stats.
A top military intelligence official has said the discredited dossier on Iraq's weapons programme was drawn up "to make the case for war", flatly contradicting persistent claims to the contrary by the Blair government, and in particular by Alastair Campbell, the former prime minister's chief spin doctor.
In hitherto secret evidence to the Chilcot inquiry, Major General Michael Laurie said: "We knew at the time that the purpose of the dossier was precisely to make a case for war, rather than setting out the available intelligence, and that to make the best out of sparse and inconclusive intelligence the wording was developed with care."
His evidence is devastating, as it is the first time such a senior intelligence officer has directly contradicted the then government's claims about the dossier – and, perhaps more significantly, what Tony Blair and Campbell said when it was released seven months before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Laurie, who was director general in the Defence Intelligence Staff, responsible for commanding and delivering raw and analysed intelligence, said: "I am writing to comment on the position taken by Alastair Campbell during his evidence to you … when he stated that the purpose of the dossier was not to make a case for war; I and those involved in its production saw it exactly as that, and that was the direction we were given."
He continued: "Alastair Campbell said to the inquiry that the purpose of the dossier was not 'to make a case for war'. I had no doubt at that time this was exactly its purpose and these very words were used."
Laurie said he recalled that the chief of defence intelligence, Air Marshal Sir Joe French, was "frequently inquiring whether we were missing something" and was under pressure. "We could find no evidence of planes, missiles or equipment that related to WMD [weapons of mass destruction], generally concluding that they must have been dismantled, buried or taken abroad. There has probably never been a greater detailed scrutiny of every piece of ground in any country."
The document is one of a number released by the Chilcot inquiry. They include top secret MI6 reports warning of the damage to British interests and the likelihood of terrorist attacks in the UK if it joined the US-led invasion of Iraq.
However, a newly declassified document reveals that Sir Kevin Tebbit, then a top official at the Ministry of Defence, warned the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, in January 2003 that the US would "feel betrayed by their partner of choice" if Britain did not go along with the invasion.
Despite its concerns, MI6 told ministers before the invasion that toppling Saddam Hussein "remains a prize because it could give new security to oil supplies".
Laurie's memo raises questions about the role of Sir John Scarlett, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, who later became head of MI6."
Obama doesn't have the nuts to pursue the War Cheerleaders.
I agree with MarkO
It's going to be Christie/Rubio or West especially if Ryan decides to run for the Senate. I don't think Feingold will run. If he does and wins he's in the minority in the Senate. He's been there ,done that.
LOL @ no heart. You don't survive as the northernmost team in the legacy All Carolina Conference with no heart. Turgeon was an outstanding hire. You want to laugh about a joke of a hiring process, look at Raleigh. Not that you don't laugh at them already. Within a year the Wuffies will claim God took the wrong Yow sister.
Jim Rhoads, Hanna would be a godsend instead of the garbage Duke and Duke has in place.
McClintock would be my choice for a strong candidate, since we being hopeful. If it comes to Rubio, I will hold my natural born nose, as I did with McCain.
IMF and World Bank do not have diplomatic immunity as far as i know. I used to play golf at Bretton Woods and, of course, that is their club. None of the members I played with (all execs at IMF and World Bank) had no immunity or special passports. Those guys get enough of perks anyway.
Ron Paul Calls Social Security and Medicare Unconstitutional, Compares Them to ‘Slavery’
Appearing on Fox News Sunday this morning, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) defended his longstanding view that Medicare, Social Security (and pretty much everything else) violate the Constitution. At one point, Paul even claimed that letting Social Security and similar programs to move forward is just like permitting slavery:
WALLACE: You talk a lot about the Constitution. You say Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all unconstitutional.
PAUL: Technically, they are. . . . there’s no authority [in the Constitution]. Article I, Section 8 doesn’t say I can set up an insurance program for people. What part of the Constitution are you getting it from? The liberals are the ones who use this General Welfare Clause. . . . That is such an extreme liberal viewpoint that has been mistaught in our schools for so long and that’s what we have to reverse—that very notion that you’re presenting.
WALLACE: Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937 when they said that Social Security was constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
PAUL: And the Constitution and the courts said slavery was legal to, and we had to reverse that.
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
The full court press by the MSM to make him the godfather of the tea party movement proves to me that the tea party scares the hell out of the Dems and O's administration.
I guess it helps the percentages that Canebrake, a community of San Diego County, gets in on HUD monies.
I've never even heard of it. The article says it is 2 hours East of downtown San Diego. Sounds like you would be in Imperial County, so I'm going to have to find it on the map. Believe me, though, if it is 2 hours East, it can't be a very pleasant environment to live in.
Lake Moreno, OTOH, is right up the road. It always seemed like the average bedroom community of track houses and some older old farm houses and hovels. What is a colonia anyway?
I recommend the article Clarice linked to on the subject of immunity. It appears that it may come down to his purpose for being in NYC, viz., if he was there on official business he may walk. I really, really want that guy to be imprisoned.
"Washington -The fierce combat in Libya has unleashed a once-hidden arsenal of portable anti-aircraft missiles that the government fears could easily be siphoned off to terrorist groups, giving rise to a potential threat to commercial aviation that the U.S. is only beginning to confront, government officials and arms experts said. The fears are compounded by suspicions that Libyan government and opposition forces are both deploying fighters with ties to terrorists and mercenaries."
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
Fanatical may be true, but ignorant is not. I know a few Paulians and they are among the most politically informed individuals I've ever met, and people who read and think about government and politics constantly. We may disagree with their libertarian conclusions but we would be wrong to believe they lack knowledge and awareness.
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
The other day a someone called the Howie Carr show and said, no matter how nuts we think Paul is, he's gotten a lot of things right, and sounds better all the time. Howie balked, she gave examples and Howie came around.
Me too. What I disagree with is that Paul is the founder of the tea party. I also don't think he is a viable candidate. But he sure as heck is an adherent to the constitution and that's not all bad by a long shot.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Just when Bill Richardson appeared to be in the clear on corruption charges in New Mexico, new allegations of pay-for-play during his administration may envelop the former Governor again. A grand jury indicted a sitting district judge on charges of corruption for buying his appointment from Richardson in 2006, and a whistleblowing judge believes the rot went all the way to the top:
It just never stops. I am so sick of reading stories like this, with so many turning a blind eye while the corruption is allowed to continue.
I think Palin will run. Surely it's obvious to her that no one in the present field has the potential to excite a large number of Republicans that she does.
Aside from a strong, pro-American foreign policy, she could easily run on an ambitious domestic energy platform. Drill, mine, build nukes, and throw in the right nods to private-sector alternative sources, this would instantly put a lot of people to work in the process, in non-government jobs. Surely a full-throated push like that could have a major, lasting impact on the economy.
I doubt that West or Rubio would be the pick if she runs. It would more likely be someone with significant experience, such as another governor. Or, as I'm betting, Giuliani, who'd be a serious attack dog against her enemies, both external and internal to the Republican party.
Of course I'll buy the life-sized cardboard Sarah if she runs.
Whoops! Looks as if I posted on a previous thread about Mamet dissing academia to the academics, and didn't notice that (Another) Barbara had beaten me to it. Sorry about that, AB. If you ever make it cross country to the Boston area, let me know and it will be nachos and spirits on me to atone!
".Kasich has become the public unions whipping boy."
American public unions are going to destroy every single person who stands against them unless we all stand against them together.
I'm not seeing near as much activity in Washington DC and else where against Obamacare and other issues that are destroying America.
--------------------------------------------
Here's the next big thing according to the www.4closurefraud.com site which brings such great info on foreclosure fraud, a much more important topic for millions of Americans IMO, than most other topics.
"We need to get millions of people to watch ‘College Conspiracy’ if we are going to expose what we believe is the largest scam in U.S. history! NIA is the most pro-education organization in the world, but the college bubble we have today is destroying the lives of millions of Americans who deserve to be receiving a much higher quality of education for only a fraction of the cost."
Ignorant might be overstated, but IMO the following discussion will appeal to only a small sliver of the voting public:
WALLACE: You talk a lot about the Constitution. You say Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all unconstitutional.
PAUL: Technically, they are. . . . there’s no authority [in the Constitution]. Article I, Section 8 doesn’t say I can set up an insurance program for people. What part of the Constitution are you getting it from? The liberals are the ones who use this General Welfare Clause. . . . That is such an extreme liberal viewpoint that has been mistaught in our schools for so long and that’s what we have to reverse—that very notion that you’re presenting.
WALLACE: Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937 when they said that Social Security was constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
PAUL: And the Constitution and the courts said slavery was legal to, and we had to reverse that.
At least from this example, I believe he is an adherent to his idea of what the constitution is or should be. I don't think even Thomas or Scalia would buy his view.
Greeting from a bleary eyed traveler finally home. Been to China twice in the last six weeks interspersed with two different delegations of bosses coming over here to rubberneck their way around the western hemisphere.
A few observations:
Generally, the visitors get quiet after a while as they absorb the full impact of our world. Not quite like the story of Khrushchev thinking we shipped cars around so he would believe we were richer and more advanced than the Soviets, but still...
This last week, I personally escorted a big boss and his wife back from Beijing and to my home along with some day trips around Seattle and Las Vegas. He is seriously thinking of bailing out and coming over here before 'the meltdown' over there. He thinks it will be six years or less. Between friends running them around in a small helo and my taking them to Vegas in my bird, they will have some great bragging rights when they get back home.
With a final push acting as a US Consul (dry run interview), I managed to help the Mongolian Princess's daughter get her student visa to come over here for school. As I've said before, I think these young Chinese women are going to be the salvation of that country and be a real contribution to the world as they get into their productive years.
Managed to get about eight of the visitors hooked on Grey Goose and Tonics. Anything I can do to avoid consuming any more Moutai than necessary.
Unlucky 4 -- I never paid much attention before, but the Chinese are really hung up about the number 4. Their high rise buildings often are missing the 4th, 14th, and 24th floors (along with the 13th, in some cases). Something to do with the sound of the word being similar to "die" or "dead", I guess. Anyway, I figure it is an excuse for 'building inflation' Maybe the Bamster can tie that in with jobs saved or created.
Then, after months of cumulative riding around on the roads in China I finally notice that there are almost NO 4s on license plates. Really bizarre.
That's the way I think, Ext, but it's a wonder how the press was for Daniels today,
I disregard the whole marriage contratempt, because she walked out on him. But he's willing to compare us to 'suicide bombers', he doesn't have a ready critique of foreign
policy, he did the truce thing, but in the end, he signed the parental authorization bill,
If you ever make it cross country to the Boston area, let me know and it will be nachos and spirits on me to atone!
Absolutely no atonement called for, TC. But I'd love to have the nachos and spirits, so please insult or be mean to me sometime in the future, so I can collect. Thanks.
JiB, I also belong to Bretton Woods. A few years ago they were desperate for money and opened upp memberships to outsiders (for a song) and I talked my husband into joining as a backup. (Nothing like having a sobbing golfer around the house on a nice weekend.)
I've debated whether to post his or not, but what the heck.
One of the joys of living in a rural area is that we can have many gardens. Our vegetable area is about 1000 sq ft, and all winter we get garden porn catalogs.
In any event, we choose all sorts of wonderful seeds, bury them in dirt, and nurture them until they can be planted. A half dozen or so varieties or tomatoes, eggplants, melons, peppers and many more.
Yesterday the last of the seedlings went into the ground, as my step-daughter's wedding is three weeks away, and the reception is in our back yard.
Today we had hail that accumulated to a half inch in a half hour.
I believe he is an adherent to his idea of what the constitution is or should be
What is the alternative?
Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937
A consensus across the entire political spectrum from modern progressives to the FDR-era Supreme Court, in the immediate wake of his court packing plan. That's like getting Al Sharpton to agree with a statement by Malcolm X.
I know a few Paulians and they are among the most politically informed individuals I've ever met,
Same for me. I admire Paul for not caring what the MFM think.
Maybe you've run into some "polite" ones but I find them to be some of the most irritating people to ever discuss politics with; actually it's usually not a "discussion" per se but a dogmatic recitation of selected parts of the Constitution that they insist are being violated and that their hero will set straight. Dr. Ron may not care what the MFM think but he never passes up a chance to appear on them as a way to directly appeal to the swarm.
He and his minions have no powers of persuasion. His quixotic quest for being President is imo a perversion of the democratic process in that it takes attention away from serious candidates, whoever they might be. If I was a Texan in his district I'd be outraged that he spends more time on a vanity project than he does representing me.
Some new approach is needed, and Obama did little to point the way. One idea, advanced by a bipartisan Brookings Institution panel, is a bill that would strengthen enforcement and would shift the U.S. away from low-skill and toward high-skill immigration.
Canada and Australia have done this to their great benefit. And with a sluggish economy it makes little sense, as current law does, to give preference to low-skill siblings of minimum-wage workers rather than to engineering and science Ph.D.s. We need more job creators, not more job seekers.
The problem here is that the lobbying forces backing comprehensive legislation don't favor such an approach. Latino groups and lobbies representing employers of low-skill workers are interested in legalizing the low-skill Latinos who make up the majority of the 11 million illegal immigrants.
The administration has been attacking state laws requiring employers to use E-Verify. If Obama were serious about enforcement he would be calling for mandatory E-Verify. That would be a more effective tool against illegal immigration than even the strongest border enforcement.
Golly, I feel rather left out. I know lots of conservatives (they run the gamut from lukewarm to redhot) and, alas, a few semi-sane liberals, but I haven't ever encountered even one Paulian.
Must be a central California thing. (Thank you God for small blessings!)
No bigger nutjob. His understanding of economics exposes his training as a medico. To me, he's the right's equivalent of an "honest" Chicago politician. What he says is the exact opposite of what he's going to do.
On the Supreme Court's Docket (unrelated to the appeal before the Ninth circuit)
Alan Keyes, et al., Petitioners
v.
Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, et al.
Docketed: May 4, 2011
Lower Ct: Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 01:05 PM
Durbin willing to talk to Kyl and McCain who are showing how false Obambi's comments were in El Paso about further security at the border. GAO says only 40 % secure.
Posted by: maryrose | May 15, 2011 at 01:07 PM
The Times willng to undermine any instrument of US policy, private or public:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/world/middleeast/15prince.html?_r=2&hp
Posted by: narciso | May 15, 2011 at 01:08 PM
From HotAir;
You folks seem to think a Police State designed by Dems is on the horizon. Well, look again. It seems all is not well, just in Wisconsin, but Indiana, as well.
Indiana Supreme Court rules Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful entry of their homes by police.
No, you read it right. That’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasn’t so serious:
Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry. [emphasis mine]
Or said another way, your home is no longer your castle.
Remember the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution?
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Bzzzzzt.
Wrong – in Indiana
“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”
David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.
One has to wonder what part of “unlawful” Justice David doesn’t get. What part of the right of the people to “be secure… shall not be violated” wasn’t taught to him in law school.
How secure is anyone in their “persons, houses, papers and effects” if, per David, a police officer can waltz into any home he wants to “for any reason or no reason at all?”
Posted by: Indentured Servants are Employed | May 15, 2011 at 01:10 PM
Well as with Kelo, something that would make even King John blanch, context is important,
clearly Daniels didn't do enough vetting:
http://dailypundit.com/?p=41322
Posted by: narciso | May 15, 2011 at 01:14 PM
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/05/15/facing-foreclosure-vice-president-of-bank-of-america-home-loans-michael-kim-allegedly-stole-1-million-from-customers-before-disappearing/
"“In a “strange twist,” according to the Kaneshiros’ complaint, BOA had filed a foreclosure action against Kim in 2007, but “he was never personally served with the complaint notwithstanding that he worked in defendant BoA’s office at the time. It also appears that defendant BoA was aware of the foreclosure action against its own employee.”
Why would anyone have any faith in Bank of America?
Posted by: pagar | May 15, 2011 at 01:15 PM
Wasn't James Johnson, one of those who vetted Biden, part of this enterprise?
Posted by: Giannini wept | May 15, 2011 at 01:17 PM
"as with Kelo"
I predict 7-5 affirmation by SCOTUS promulgated by the usual suspects
Posted by: Indentured Servants are Employed | May 15, 2011 at 01:21 PM
I would dearly love to know the precise whereabouts of the IMF guy. I would also like to know the current state of his morale.
It is gratifying to know that if the Frogs or the IMF want to cut some kind of deal, it will have to be done with New York authorities, not the administration.
TK, is that the docket of the CA or US supreme court?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 01:25 PM
My local McClatchy fishwrap has a decent set of reviews of Grietens and Waisdin's memoir
of their experiences with the Seals, although
they have to throw in the obligatory jabs at
'enhanced interrogations' somewhat like genuflecting to be in good standing.
Posted by: Giannini wept | May 15, 2011 at 01:27 PM
I'm about to go out for a bit but DoT I am astonished that the IMF officials do not have special status.
I suppose they have something called an"official passport", less than "diplomatic" and, therefore, liable for arrest on felony charges. (I use to have to travel that way in the USSR which I frankly found scary.)
Posted by: clarice | May 15, 2011 at 01:31 PM
This pretty much speaks for itself:
Christine Fair, a Georgetown University terrorism expert, wrote on her Facebook page, “Of course they found porn! Every damned jihadi loves porn.” Indeed, the “USG,” or U.S. government has become so accustomed to finding porn, she said, it has “media analysts” designated to analyze the porn looking for “messages.” They work on “document exploitation.”
Posted by: Gmax | May 15, 2011 at 01:34 PM
That would seem to the case, clarice:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/8515090/Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-does-not-have-diplomatic-immunity.html
Posted by: Giannini wept | May 15, 2011 at 01:35 PM
I was wondering the same thing, Clarice, about his "status" as an IMF official.
Posted by: centralcal | May 15, 2011 at 01:37 PM
US Supreme Court, DoT.
BTW, did you watch the Ninth Circuit trainwreck I posted for you?
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 01:39 PM
Interesting link, Giannini. What does "His Frenchness is not at stake" mean, pray tell?
Posted by: centralcal | May 15, 2011 at 01:39 PM
OnT,
9 or 10 Guinnessess, couple shots of Black Bush (neat) but the F/O was doing Jamieson as the chaser.
Posted by: daddy | May 15, 2011 at 01:41 PM
It's called steganography, that Weissman novel I've referred before, Direct Action,
has it as a partial explanation to the December 2003 Air France flight alerts
Meanwhile back at the Ranch:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/267273/gingrich-tacks-left-slams-ryans-medicare-plan-andrew-stiles
Posted by: Giannini wept | May 15, 2011 at 01:41 PM
From that linked Telegraph article:
Dominique Strauss-Kahn was told he does not have diplomatic immunity from prosecution against charges including alleged rape
How do you say "oops" in French?
It also appears that Nicolas Sarkozy's government is not making any attempt to protect Mr Strauss-Kahn.
Well, considering DSK was thought likely to be the leading candidate against Sarkozy in the 2012 election, I wouldn't put high odds on his getting too much help from that source.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 15, 2011 at 01:42 PM
With carte blanche, who needs diplomatic immunity? ... at least until the petite tête lands you in the slammer.
Posted by: Frau Ohrwurm | May 15, 2011 at 01:45 PM
Christine Fair, a Georgetown University terrorism expert, wrote on her Facebook page, “Of course they found porn! Every damned jihadi loves porn.”
Look for Ms. Fair to be summoned before the correct speech czars at Georgetown for a scolding.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 15, 2011 at 01:45 PM
I predict 7-5 affirmation by SCOTUS
I predict that Obama will have to pack the Court with three more Justices first.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 01:45 PM
No, TK, I didn't see any 9th circuit video, though I did read some reports about the argument.
I'm a little puzzled as to how a case goes from an appellate district in the CA system to the US SCt.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 01:46 PM
I think he's been watching too many episodes of the French version of 'Law and Order'
Posted by: narciso | May 15, 2011 at 01:48 PM
Had a heck of a time catching up on the last thread, but I wanted to extend congratulations to all the JOMers celebrating something special yesterday.
Thanks to AB for that David Mamet link, too. Very enjoyable. I especially liked the part about his conservative rabbi turning him on to the good stuff. Imagine discovering the genius of Hayek, Friedman, Sowell etc. after that long in the lefty cave. It must have been like uncovering a new and beautifully ordered universe. I look forward to his book.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 15, 2011 at 01:48 PM
This appears to solve my puzzle:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 01:48 PM
Can that Indiana SC ruling be taken to SCOTUS? It seems like a 4th amendment issue.
I still remember Alan Dershowitz many years ago twisting like a pretzel, after extolling the wonders and beauty of the jury system for its ability to produce just outcomes (meaning let criminals off on technical violations by police), argue (in defense of the exclusionary rule) that juries would never convict a cop for violating correct procedure. That seems like a problem with the Indiana court's reasoning.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 15, 2011 at 01:54 PM
As I understand it, DoT, it is a seperate case. Would you like me to repost the video of the appeal? Watching Orly in action is quite a sight.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 01:58 PM
Dershowitz was my criminal law prof 38 years ago, and I well remember the second argument (it's a pretty standard one) but never heard him make the first one, although it doesn't surprise me.
It does seem to me to be a federal constitutional issue, though it may very well be covered by the state constitution as well. My recollection of the law on this is that federal courts must defer to a state supreme court's interpretation of its own state's laws, but that doctrine does not apply if the state's interpretation violates the US constitution. If that's correct, I think it could be appealed to the feds, presumably straight to the Supremes. Somebody must be more current on this than I am.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 02:04 PM
I have been wondering if the proposed merger between the London Stock Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange will be another advance for Sharia Finance, seeing as the majority shareholders of the LSE are Qatar and Dubai.
The LSE-TSX merger deal is supported by the Bank of Montreal and the Royal Bank. Three other Canadian banks -- Toronto-Dominion, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and National Bank want to keep the TSX under Canadian control and are vehemently opposed to the merger with the LSE. They have formed a group called the Maple Group and are making a counter offer.
More about this story from Reuters LUN
Posted by: Chubby | May 15, 2011 at 02:20 PM
TK, yes please re the Orly video.
Posted by: Chubby | May 15, 2011 at 02:23 PM
A little more on Strauss-Kahn:
In 2002 he was accused of attempted rape by French journalist and writer, Tristane Banon.[19][20][21]
In 2008 Strauss-Kahn was involved in a scandal at the IMF over his affair during the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008 with a subordinate, Hungarian economist Piroska Nagy, who was married at the time of the affair.[22] He later publicly apologised to his wife.
He's a socialist and married to an american journalist:Strauss-Kahn has four daughters,[29] and is presently married to his third wife, the American-born French journalist Anne Sinclair.
From Wiki
What a guy!
Posted by: Jane | May 15, 2011 at 02:30 PM
Ninth Circuit Video
It is 50 minutes long. Orly comes in after about 17 minutes. It is worth watching the whole thing. The questions to the US attorneys are pretty good.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 02:33 PM
Ughh, here is the actual video
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 02:36 PM
Thanks TK.
Posted by: Chubby | May 15, 2011 at 02:40 PM
DoT, I agree with your analysis of the appealability of the stupid Indiana decision,
Here's a further discussion, Jane and DoT, of the immunity issue.
http://opiniojuris.org/2011/05/15/what-kind-of-immunity-does-the-imf-managing-director-have/
Posted by: clarice | May 15, 2011 at 02:49 PM
Herman Cain
The media may not want to take his candidacy seriously.
This Tea Party independent says they will have to.
Posted by: Army of Davids | May 15, 2011 at 02:57 PM
http://www.lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=615055
"A trail of stalled or
abandoned HUD projects".
People just like this will be running ObamaCare.
Posted by: pagar | May 15, 2011 at 03:06 PM
pagar:
I continue to be hopeful that the defunding of Obamacare will proceed on schedule. With over 3,200 waivers who the heck is going to have to obtain it? By the time 2012 rolls around it will be declared unconsitutional.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Two public school teachers I know claim Billnumber 5 passed in Columbus has somewhat forced them to retire. Both are close to 60 and just cost too darn much. I also learned a state senator was reamed when he was ambushed by our own RR teachers in a Q and A to which he was invited.Kasich has become the public unions whipping boy.
Posted by: maryrose | May 15, 2011 at 03:16 PM
If they do not defund it, I suggest we all pay GE to go on their payroll and be free of Obamacare forever. Imeldt can do it for us if Congress can't.
Posted by: clarice | May 15, 2011 at 03:17 PM
George Will: 2012 race down to Obama, Pawlenty and Daniels.
Doomed. I don't think Daniels will even run and while Pawlenty may have certain credentials, he leaves me as cold as the stare of an untipped waiter.
We need larger than life, not barely alive.
Posted by: MarkO | May 15, 2011 at 03:21 PM
Kasich has become the public unions whipping boy.
No surprise there. He seems too mild mannered to go the full Christie on them; but he's got the facts on his side if he so chooses.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 03:23 PM
We need larger than life, not barely alive.
I'm becoming more convinced by the day that the Repuke party is as much my enemy as the commiecrats.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 03:26 PM
"the full Christie." Now there's a thought. Draft him. He's so much more appealing to everyone than, say, Newt, Mitt, or pretty much anyone. And, Palin is not going to run. In your heart you know I'm right.
Posted by: MarkO | May 15, 2011 at 03:30 PM
In my heart, I know you're a Dookie. Palin/West 2012.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 03:33 PM
As a Terp, you have no heart. And a brand new coach. Speaking of doom.
Christie/West.
Although Christie West sounds like the name of a pole dancer.
Posted by: MarkO | May 15, 2011 at 03:34 PM
CH:
It's time for the reincarnation of one of your fellow Clevelanders, Mark Hanna. He would ferret out the right candidate and get him/her nominated and elected.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | May 15, 2011 at 03:38 PM
Fear not! HUD is still funding Colonias.
From HUD’s site:
From a Dept of State source :
I guess it helps the percentages that Canebrake, a community of San Diego County, gets in on HUD monies.
Canebrake is a hippie retirement community. They stuck it to the feds so they could get their wells dug for free. “Migrants” are not even welcome to live in Canebrake, so their residents must make up the U.S. Citizens in HUD’s stats.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 03:44 PM
A top military intelligence official has said the discredited dossier on Iraq's weapons programme was drawn up "to make the case for war", flatly contradicting persistent claims to the contrary by the Blair government, and in particular by Alastair Campbell, the former prime minister's chief spin doctor.
In hitherto secret evidence to the Chilcot inquiry, Major General Michael Laurie said: "We knew at the time that the purpose of the dossier was precisely to make a case for war, rather than setting out the available intelligence, and that to make the best out of sparse and inconclusive intelligence the wording was developed with care."
His evidence is devastating, as it is the first time such a senior intelligence officer has directly contradicted the then government's claims about the dossier – and, perhaps more significantly, what Tony Blair and Campbell said when it was released seven months before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Laurie, who was director general in the Defence Intelligence Staff, responsible for commanding and delivering raw and analysed intelligence, said: "I am writing to comment on the position taken by Alastair Campbell during his evidence to you … when he stated that the purpose of the dossier was not to make a case for war; I and those involved in its production saw it exactly as that, and that was the direction we were given."
He continued: "Alastair Campbell said to the inquiry that the purpose of the dossier was not 'to make a case for war'. I had no doubt at that time this was exactly its purpose and these very words were used."
Laurie said he recalled that the chief of defence intelligence, Air Marshal Sir Joe French, was "frequently inquiring whether we were missing something" and was under pressure. "We could find no evidence of planes, missiles or equipment that related to WMD [weapons of mass destruction], generally concluding that they must have been dismantled, buried or taken abroad. There has probably never been a greater detailed scrutiny of every piece of ground in any country."
The document is one of a number released by the Chilcot inquiry. They include top secret MI6 reports warning of the damage to British interests and the likelihood of terrorist attacks in the UK if it joined the US-led invasion of Iraq.
However, a newly declassified document reveals that Sir Kevin Tebbit, then a top official at the Ministry of Defence, warned the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, in January 2003 that the US would "feel betrayed by their partner of choice" if Britain did not go along with the invasion.
Despite its concerns, MI6 told ministers before the invasion that toppling Saddam Hussein "remains a prize because it could give new security to oil supplies".
Laurie's memo raises questions about the role of Sir John Scarlett, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, who later became head of MI6."
Obama doesn't have the nuts to pursue the War Cheerleaders.
All war criminals must be accountable
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/12/iraq-dossier-case-for-war
Posted by: BUSH LEGACY | May 15, 2011 at 03:46 PM
I agree with MarkO
It's going to be Christie/Rubio or West especially if Ryan decides to run for the Senate. I don't think Feingold will run. If he does and wins he's in the minority in the Senate. He's been there ,done that.
Posted by: maryrose | May 15, 2011 at 03:46 PM
LOL @ no heart. You don't survive as the northernmost team in the legacy All Carolina Conference with no heart. Turgeon was an outstanding hire. You want to laugh about a joke of a hiring process, look at Raleigh. Not that you don't laugh at them already. Within a year the Wuffies will claim God took the wrong Yow sister.
Jim Rhoads, Hanna would be a godsend instead of the garbage Duke and Duke has in place.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 03:48 PM
Was this the Mamet piece that was brought up earlier?
After his Village Voice piece, I was sorta waiting for the follow through. Didn't know about the book, might have to get that one.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 15, 2011 at 03:53 PM
McClintock would be my choice for a strong candidate, since we being hopeful. If it comes to Rubio, I will hold my natural born nose, as I did with McCain.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 15, 2011 at 03:59 PM
Mel, that was the article.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 04:00 PM
CH-
Thanks.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 15, 2011 at 04:13 PM
Clarice,
IMF and World Bank do not have diplomatic immunity as far as i know. I used to play golf at Bretton Woods and, of course, that is their club. None of the members I played with (all execs at IMF and World Bank) had no immunity or special passports. Those guys get enough of perks anyway.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 15, 2011 at 04:20 PM
Ron Paul Calls Social Security and Medicare Unconstitutional, Compares Them to ‘Slavery’
Appearing on Fox News Sunday this morning, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) defended his longstanding view that Medicare, Social Security (and pretty much everything else) violate the Constitution. At one point, Paul even claimed that letting Social Security and similar programs to move forward is just like permitting slavery:
WALLACE: You talk a lot about the Constitution. You say Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all unconstitutional.
PAUL: Technically, they are. . . . there’s no authority [in the Constitution]. Article I, Section 8 doesn’t say I can set up an insurance program for people. What part of the Constitution are you getting it from? The liberals are the ones who use this General Welfare Clause. . . . That is such an extreme liberal viewpoint that has been mistaught in our schools for so long and that’s what we have to reverse—that very notion that you’re presenting.
WALLACE: Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937 when they said that Social Security was constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
PAUL: And the Constitution and the courts said slavery was legal to, and we had to reverse that.
Posted by: Ayn Rand is his Mommy | May 15, 2011 at 04:25 PM
Grizz and the Thunder are duking it out as we speak.Winner plays Sue's Mavs...
Posted by: maryrose | May 15, 2011 at 04:26 PM
And Phil the Thrill just had a tap in birdie on 17 while Toms still leads but the tough test is coming up. This Players is wide open.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 15, 2011 at 04:42 PM
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
The full court press by the MSM to make him the godfather of the tea party movement proves to me that the tea party scares the hell out of the Dems and O's administration.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | May 15, 2011 at 04:51 PM
I guess it helps the percentages that Canebrake, a community of San Diego County, gets in on HUD monies.
I've never even heard of it. The article says it is 2 hours East of downtown San Diego. Sounds like you would be in Imperial County, so I'm going to have to find it on the map. Believe me, though, if it is 2 hours East, it can't be a very pleasant environment to live in.
Lake Moreno, OTOH, is right up the road. It always seemed like the average bedroom community of track houses and some older old farm houses and hovels. What is a colonia anyway?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 15, 2011 at 05:00 PM
I recommend the article Clarice linked to on the subject of immunity. It appears that it may come down to his purpose for being in NYC, viz., if he was there on official business he may walk. I really, really want that guy to be imprisoned.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 05:04 PM
Groan. Unintended consequences, per the AP;
"Washington -The fierce combat in Libya has unleashed a once-hidden arsenal of portable anti-aircraft missiles that the government fears could easily be siphoned off to terrorist groups, giving rise to a potential threat to commercial aviation that the U.S. is only beginning to confront, government officials and arms experts said. The fears are compounded by suspicions that Libyan government and opposition forces are both deploying fighters with ties to terrorists and mercenaries."
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 05:09 PM
DoT-
Gadfly's army is mostly mercenary, and that's bee known from the get go. The rebels are being reinforced by the Egyptian MusBros.
Nothing new there.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 15, 2011 at 05:18 PM
Kevin Durant in Game 7 beast mode.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 05:26 PM
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
Fanatical may be true, but ignorant is not. I know a few Paulians and they are among the most politically informed individuals I've ever met, and people who read and think about government and politics constantly. We may disagree with their libertarian conclusions but we would be wrong to believe they lack knowledge and awareness.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | May 15, 2011 at 05:30 PM
Ron Paul sounds like a doctor trying to play lawyer. He has an ignorant but fanatical following which fortunately is small.
The other day a someone called the Howie Carr show and said, no matter how nuts we think Paul is, he's gotten a lot of things right, and sounds better all the time. Howie balked, she gave examples and Howie came around.
Me too. What I disagree with is that Paul is the founder of the tea party. I also don't think he is a viable candidate. But he sure as heck is an adherent to the constitution and that's not all bad by a long shot.
Posted by: Jane | May 15, 2011 at 05:33 PM
I'm rooting for David Toms-taught his son when he was in 5th grade. Toms does a lot of good through his foundations.
Posted by: Cajunkate | May 15, 2011 at 05:37 PM
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Posted by: semenfilledcleo | May 15, 2011 at 05:39 PM
New corruption allegations in NM may involve Bill Richardson
It just never stops. I am so sick of reading stories like this, with so many turning a blind eye while the corruption is allowed to continue.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 15, 2011 at 05:40 PM
All these war criminals must be held accountable.
Posted by: semenfilledcleo | May 15, 2011 at 05:41 PM
PuD really has a way with words.
Of what language, value system and culture, will remain a mystery to all.
Try Protein Wisdom for an alternate Haunt. They seem to grovel at your level.
Posted by: PuD means 'Prick' in the nomenclature | May 15, 2011 at 05:48 PM
Those Democrats sure sound like warmongers, don't they?
Posted by: PD | May 15, 2011 at 05:50 PM
I think Palin will run. Surely it's obvious to her that no one in the present field has the potential to excite a large number of Republicans that she does.
Aside from a strong, pro-American foreign policy, she could easily run on an ambitious domestic energy platform. Drill, mine, build nukes, and throw in the right nods to private-sector alternative sources, this would instantly put a lot of people to work in the process, in non-government jobs. Surely a full-throated push like that could have a major, lasting impact on the economy.
I doubt that West or Rubio would be the pick if she runs. It would more likely be someone with significant experience, such as another governor. Or, as I'm betting, Giuliani, who'd be a serious attack dog against her enemies, both external and internal to the Republican party.
Of course I'll buy the life-sized cardboard Sarah if she runs.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 15, 2011 at 05:51 PM
Whoops! Looks as if I posted on a previous thread about Mamet dissing academia to the academics, and didn't notice that (Another) Barbara had beaten me to it. Sorry about that, AB. If you ever make it cross country to the Boston area, let me know and it will be nachos and spirits on me to atone!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 15, 2011 at 05:53 PM
".Kasich has become the public unions whipping boy."
American public unions are going to destroy every single person who stands against them unless we all stand against them together.
I'm not seeing near as much activity in Washington DC and else where against Obamacare and other issues that are destroying America.
--------------------------------------------
Here's the next big thing according to the www.4closurefraud.com site which brings such great info on foreclosure fraud, a much more important topic for millions of Americans IMO, than most other topics.
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/05/15/must-see-documentary-college-conspiracy-the-next-bubble-to-burst/
"We need to get millions of people to watch ‘College Conspiracy’ if we are going to expose what we believe is the largest scam in U.S. history! NIA is the most pro-education organization in the world, but the college bubble we have today is destroying the lives of millions of Americans who deserve to be receiving a much higher quality of education for only a fraction of the cost."
Posted by: pagar | May 15, 2011 at 05:55 PM
Ignorant might be overstated, but IMO the following discussion will appeal to only a small sliver of the voting public:
WALLACE: You talk a lot about the Constitution. You say Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all unconstitutional.
PAUL: Technically, they are. . . . there’s no authority [in the Constitution]. Article I, Section 8 doesn’t say I can set up an insurance program for people. What part of the Constitution are you getting it from? The liberals are the ones who use this General Welfare Clause. . . . That is such an extreme liberal viewpoint that has been mistaught in our schools for so long and that’s what we have to reverse—that very notion that you’re presenting.
WALLACE: Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937 when they said that Social Security was constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
PAUL: And the Constitution and the courts said slavery was legal to, and we had to reverse that.
At least from this example, I believe he is an adherent to his idea of what the constitution is or should be. I don't think even Thomas or Scalia would buy his view.
But YMMV.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | May 15, 2011 at 05:55 PM
"Nothing new there."
The shoulder-fired missiles are news to me, but I suppose they can't be a surprise to the intel people.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 05:56 PM
Full disclosure: I own palingiuliani2012.com.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 15, 2011 at 06:02 PM
Greeting from a bleary eyed traveler finally home. Been to China twice in the last six weeks interspersed with two different delegations of bosses coming over here to rubberneck their way around the western hemisphere.
A few observations:
Generally, the visitors get quiet after a while as they absorb the full impact of our world. Not quite like the story of Khrushchev thinking we shipped cars around so he would believe we were richer and more advanced than the Soviets, but still...
This last week, I personally escorted a big boss and his wife back from Beijing and to my home along with some day trips around Seattle and Las Vegas. He is seriously thinking of bailing out and coming over here before 'the meltdown' over there. He thinks it will be six years or less. Between friends running them around in a small helo and my taking them to Vegas in my bird, they will have some great bragging rights when they get back home.
With a final push acting as a US Consul (dry run interview), I managed to help the Mongolian Princess's daughter get her student visa to come over here for school. As I've said before, I think these young Chinese women are going to be the salvation of that country and be a real contribution to the world as they get into their productive years.
Managed to get about eight of the visitors hooked on Grey Goose and Tonics. Anything I can do to avoid consuming any more Moutai than necessary.
Unlucky 4 -- I never paid much attention before, but the Chinese are really hung up about the number 4. Their high rise buildings often are missing the 4th, 14th, and 24th floors (along with the 13th, in some cases). Something to do with the sound of the word being similar to "die" or "dead", I guess. Anyway, I figure it is an excuse for 'building inflation' Maybe the Bamster can tie that in with jobs saved or created.
Then, after months of cumulative riding around on the roads in China I finally notice that there are almost NO 4s on license plates. Really bizarre.
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | May 15, 2011 at 06:04 PM
That's the way I think, Ext, but it's a wonder how the press was for Daniels today,
I disregard the whole marriage contratempt, because she walked out on him. But he's willing to compare us to 'suicide bombers', he doesn't have a ready critique of foreign
policy, he did the truce thing, but in the end, he signed the parental authorization bill,
Posted by: narciso | May 15, 2011 at 06:04 PM
I know a few Paulians and they are among the most politically informed individuals I've ever met,
Same for me. I admire Paul for not caring what the MFM think.
Posted by: Janet | May 15, 2011 at 06:09 PM
Greenspan and Bernanke, have made his case on the Fed, but his 'mother may I' play on
Pakistan, this week, is a BFD.
Posted by: narciso | May 15, 2011 at 06:11 PM
Welcome home, ManTran! Very interesting post.
Posted by: DrJ | May 15, 2011 at 06:12 PM
If you ever make it cross country to the Boston area, let me know and it will be nachos and spirits on me to atone!
Absolutely no atonement called for, TC. But I'd love to have the nachos and spirits, so please insult or be mean to me sometime in the future, so I can collect. Thanks.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | May 15, 2011 at 06:14 PM
I enjoyed that too MT.
I did not realize you flew as well.
It was a nice relief from chronicling bad ideas.
Posted by: rse | May 15, 2011 at 06:25 PM
OK, (Another) Barbara, let me know when you're in the area, and I'll rain insults upon you worthy of nachos and spirits atonement!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 15, 2011 at 06:28 PM
MT, How interesting!
Posted by: clarice | May 15, 2011 at 06:29 PM
JiB, I also belong to Bretton Woods. A few years ago they were desperate for money and opened upp memberships to outsiders (for a song) and I talked my husband into joining as a backup. (Nothing like having a sobbing golfer around the house on a nice weekend.)
Posted by: clarice | May 15, 2011 at 06:34 PM
I've debated whether to post his or not, but what the heck.
One of the joys of living in a rural area is that we can have many gardens. Our vegetable area is about 1000 sq ft, and all winter we get garden porn catalogs.
In any event, we choose all sorts of wonderful seeds, bury them in dirt, and nurture them until they can be planted. A half dozen or so varieties or tomatoes, eggplants, melons, peppers and many more.
Yesterday the last of the seedlings went into the ground, as my step-daughter's wedding is three weeks away, and the reception is in our back yard.
Today we had hail that accumulated to a half inch in a half hour.
My God, what destruction.
Posted by: DrJ | May 15, 2011 at 06:42 PM
Great report, MT. Fascinating.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 15, 2011 at 06:48 PM
I believe he is an adherent to his idea of what the constitution is or should be
What is the alternative?
Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937
A consensus across the entire political spectrum from modern progressives to the FDR-era Supreme Court, in the immediate wake of his court packing plan. That's like getting Al Sharpton to agree with a statement by Malcolm X.
Posted by: bgates | May 15, 2011 at 07:14 PM
Oh, DrJ, so sorry about that hail storm after all your work, but mostly, because I am sure you had lovely visions of the garden to be.
We got some rain . . . nothing as nasty as you seem to have gotten!
Posted by: centralcal | May 15, 2011 at 07:19 PM
I know a few Paulians and they are among the most politically informed individuals I've ever met,
Same for me. I admire Paul for not caring what the MFM think.
Maybe you've run into some "polite" ones but I find them to be some of the most irritating people to ever discuss politics with; actually it's usually not a "discussion" per se but a dogmatic recitation of selected parts of the Constitution that they insist are being violated and that their hero will set straight. Dr. Ron may not care what the MFM think but he never passes up a chance to appear on them as a way to directly appeal to the swarm.
He and his minions have no powers of persuasion. His quixotic quest for being President is imo a perversion of the democratic process in that it takes attention away from serious candidates, whoever they might be. If I was a Texan in his district I'd be outraged that he spends more time on a vanity project than he does representing me.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 15, 2011 at 07:20 PM
Michael Barone:
Obama's hypocritical rhetoric on immigration reform
Posted by: Extraneus | May 15, 2011 at 07:20 PM
Posted by: Extraneus | May 15, 2011 at 07:22 PM
Golly, I feel rather left out. I know lots of conservatives (they run the gamut from lukewarm to redhot) and, alas, a few semi-sane liberals, but I haven't ever encountered even one Paulian.
Must be a central California thing. (Thank you God for small blessings!)
Posted by: centralcal | May 15, 2011 at 07:26 PM
CH-
No bigger nutjob. His understanding of economics exposes his training as a medico. To me, he's the right's equivalent of an "honest" Chicago politician. What he says is the exact opposite of what he's going to do.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 15, 2011 at 07:28 PM
Wisconsin again-from the you can't make this stuff up file.
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com
"Miss Wisconsin Charged With Identity Theft"
"Somehow this will wind up being Scott Walker's fault"
Posted by: pagar | May 15, 2011 at 07:29 PM
I think Dr. Ron is the obverse side of Nader. They both wear tinfoil hats, but one wears the shiny side in.
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | May 15, 2011 at 07:37 PM