"I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees. And Churchill said, 'We don't torture,' when the entire British -- all of the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat."
President Barack Obama
April, 2009
"The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than 1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948."
The Guardian
November, 2005
*sarcasm alert
4/29/2009
No More Warm Weather For Me
As a life long Mid-Westerner, I have always been envious of those who live in the South. This is mostly because of the weather. As an avid golfer, it’s difficult to play a regulation 18 hole round of golf in Chicago in January. I’ve often told my wife that I’m a warm weather person caught in a cold weather person’s life. However, thanks to the Obama Administration, I no longer feel this way because I don’t want to live among the racists in our society. According to the Obama Justice Department, the South is still run by a bunch of white supremacists.
Earlier today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act which requires many Southern states and their political sub-divisions to get approval from the Justice Department before making any changes in their election rules. Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal referred to Section 5 as “a landmark achievement” that deters schemes to violate the rights of minorities.
Evidently, Mr. Katyal believes that there are gangs of politicians south of the Mason-Dixon Line, meeting in secret rooms, looking for ways to disenfranchise minority voters. But, he doesn’t think that this could be happening anywhere else in the country. If you’re a white politician from Wisconsin, no problem, you’re not a racist. But, if you’re a white politician from Florida, watch out, you have nothing better to do than to prevent black voters from reaching the polls on election day. If you will recall, this was exactly the baseless claim made by Democrats in the aftermath of the 2000 Presidential election. After extensive investigation by the Justice Department, not a single such incident was shown to have occurred.
Chief Justice Roberts asked today if Southerners are more likely to discriminate than Northerners. He then noted that Massachusetts had a lower rate of registering Latino voters than Texas. Surprisingly, Justice Kennedy asked if the sovereignty of Georgia is entitled to less respect than the sovereign dignity of Ohio. So little time these days is spent discussing one of the founding principals of our republic - states' rights. If you look at the 10th amendment, it's clear that this issue is not just for "rightwing" militia members.
Earlier today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act which requires many Southern states and their political sub-divisions to get approval from the Justice Department before making any changes in their election rules. Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal referred to Section 5 as “a landmark achievement” that deters schemes to violate the rights of minorities.
Evidently, Mr. Katyal believes that there are gangs of politicians south of the Mason-Dixon Line, meeting in secret rooms, looking for ways to disenfranchise minority voters. But, he doesn’t think that this could be happening anywhere else in the country. If you’re a white politician from Wisconsin, no problem, you’re not a racist. But, if you’re a white politician from Florida, watch out, you have nothing better to do than to prevent black voters from reaching the polls on election day. If you will recall, this was exactly the baseless claim made by Democrats in the aftermath of the 2000 Presidential election. After extensive investigation by the Justice Department, not a single such incident was shown to have occurred.
Chief Justice Roberts asked today if Southerners are more likely to discriminate than Northerners. He then noted that Massachusetts had a lower rate of registering Latino voters than Texas. Surprisingly, Justice Kennedy asked if the sovereignty of Georgia is entitled to less respect than the sovereign dignity of Ohio. So little time these days is spent discussing one of the founding principals of our republic - states' rights. If you look at the 10th amendment, it's clear that this issue is not just for "rightwing" militia members.
Alabama Gov. Bob Riley filed a brief in which he noted that 73% of both blacks and whites are registered to vote in Alabama. Gov. Riley then stated that the make up of the state’s legislature was 25% black, the same as the population of the state.
Since the evidence no longer shows that the South is anymore racist than the North, the questions becomes why are the Administration and its allies fighting so hard to retain a law that is a vestige of a long ago unfortunate past? The answer is that those on the left gain for fostering a sense of victimhood and identity politics.
If the government can get people to believe that they are members of an aggrieved group, only government can provide a remedy for their grievance. Look no further than the bill passed today by the House of Representatives expanding the federal hate crimes law. Do Members of Congress really believe that the states are incapable of prosecuting violent crimes that happen inside their borders? Only the wisdom and piety of the Federal Government is capable of handling such a job? (I’ve always wondered about “hate crimes”. If I were to kill someone because I didn’t like the color of his tie, isn’t he just as dead as if I killed him because he was from a foreign country?)
With the increased need for government intervention in order to redress those who are among the aggrieved classes, the power and the size of the federal government will increase. The government will use its power to intervene in private businesses that are allegedly perpetuating these ills. It will use its power to inject itself into schools to teach children to be “sensitive” and politically correct. It will manipulate local governments in order shape their policies to match those of the federal government.
Also, there is a huge industry centered around the business of grievances and racial/ethnic politics. If the government were to admit that things really are better today than they were in 1955, we would have a lot of people unemployed who had previously worked for the Anti-Defamation League, National Action Network, ACORN, CAIR, Operation PUSH and the NAACP, just to name a few.
The Obama Administration, just like the Clinton Administration before it, believes that it needs to bring a new consciousness to the nation, one where no one feels “marginalized” and “diversity” reigns supreme. This is not the role of the federal government. The Justice Department’s time would be better spent on real threats to the American people, like thinking about what to do with the Islamists that they plan to release from Guantanamo Bay.
HCSI: America
Get ready for a new tide of "hate crime" victims across America.
(REUTERS) The current law, enacted four decades ago, limits federal jurisdiction over hate crimes to assaults based on race, color, religion or national origin. The (2009) bill would lift a requirement that a victim had to be attacked while engaged in a federally protected activity, like attending school, for it to be a federal hate crime.
If the bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives today actually becomes law (as B. Hussein Obama intends), playground banter between kids at school, for example, could become subject to closer "scrutiny", shall we say. Do not send your child to summer camp without trailing legal counsel.
Or, let's imagine you are a passenger on a commercial flight and become frustrated by the demeanor and attitude of a flight attendant (a scenario requiring no imagination, whatsoever). You let her know about it. Today, they call it air rage. Tomorrow, it's a hate crime, Mister!
Your waiter drops dinner all over your lap and you, the customer, suggest he is an idiot. Hate crime.
You attend a school board meeting and publicly challenge the competence of a board member. Hate crime.
Any hint by an employer that an extremely obese person is incapable of performing his job. Hate crime.
Bloggers, in fact, likely will face accusations of being hate criminals each time a new post appears.
The expanding Victim Class will be lining up around the block to file its claims. Where will it end?
It won't.
(REUTERS) The current law, enacted four decades ago, limits federal jurisdiction over hate crimes to assaults based on race, color, religion or national origin. The (2009) bill would lift a requirement that a victim had to be attacked while engaged in a federally protected activity, like attending school, for it to be a federal hate crime.
If the bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives today actually becomes law (as B. Hussein Obama intends), playground banter between kids at school, for example, could become subject to closer "scrutiny", shall we say. Do not send your child to summer camp without trailing legal counsel.
Or, let's imagine you are a passenger on a commercial flight and become frustrated by the demeanor and attitude of a flight attendant (a scenario requiring no imagination, whatsoever). You let her know about it. Today, they call it air rage. Tomorrow, it's a hate crime, Mister!
Your waiter drops dinner all over your lap and you, the customer, suggest he is an idiot. Hate crime.
You attend a school board meeting and publicly challenge the competence of a board member. Hate crime.
Any hint by an employer that an extremely obese person is incapable of performing his job. Hate crime.
Bloggers, in fact, likely will face accusations of being hate criminals each time a new post appears.
The expanding Victim Class will be lining up around the block to file its claims. Where will it end?
It won't.
Tough Day for Egyptian Pigs
Earlier this week I posted about Howard Dean's proposals for curing a fake controversy he personally stoked. In addition, the good Dr. proposed federal expenditures on a detection and prevention regime. Of course the main benefit to the then-Presidential aspirant was that those who heard his proposals thought him wise and civic-minded, with no knowledge that his ideas were more or less already in place and had caught the non-problem. Oh well, politics as usual. No harm, no foul.But at least he didn't recommend this!
4/28/2009
RINO No More
Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania has spent 28 years in the United States Senate as a Republican, until today. As of today, he has decided to switch and become a Democrat.
During his time in office, in an effort to keep his seat, Mr. Specter has accepted help and money from Republicans across the country. Most notably in 2004 when President Bush and his political apparatus helped Sen. Specter defeat a strong primary challenger, Pat Toomey. This was despite the fact that Mr. Toomey was more philosophically in line with President Bush than Sen. Specter. Evidently, Arlen's feelings on this type of thing is what have you done for me lately.
It is clear that Mr. Specter has switched parties solely to remain in the Senate. Pat Toomey has already announced that he is running for the Senate and the polls out of Pennsylvania show that he would defeat Sen. Specter in the primary. In order to avoid losing his seat, Arlen has done what politicians do best, take care of himself.
At this point, the honorable thing to do is what Sen. Phil Graham of Texas had done. Upon announcing his switch to the Republican Party, Sen. Graham resigned his seat and ran for election as a Republican. If Mr. Specter is so sure of his success as a Democrat, he should face the electorate and let them judge.
Sen. Specter was never a reliable vote for the Republicans, as evidenced by his vote for the so called stimulus package earlier this year. It was one of a long line of votes that got him the RINO (Republican in name only) label.
Sen. Specter's switch at this time is critical because it will give the Democrats 60 votes in the Senate (assuming that Al Franken defeats Norm Coleman, which appears to be the case). With the magical 60 votes, the Democrats can now stop any attempted Republican filibuster. There will not be any check on Capitol Hill of the Democratic agenda. In speaking with a close friend who is a Democrat, he agreed that this is not good for the country. He pointed out that one party rule, by either party, is not in the best interests of the republic. The political pendulum often swings too far and that certainly seems to be the case today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
