Government Scams

Ah yes, I love when the government decides to scam the American people and this bank bailout thing is the next step in the progression of extremely expensive grabs for our cash. The Federal government has a long history of doing this schtik -and guess what its both Democrat and Republican- to increase the power and wealth of their profligate financiers. Ah yes these scams are very old, but today I thought I’d examine my three favorite scams of recent memory (namely global warming, the Iraq War, and the Bank Bailout)

First off there is global warming, now do not get me wrong this phenomenon is occurring but if anything it is more cyclical than anything else and carbon credits are nothing but an attempt to make money and really the beauty of this scam -as evidenced by Kyoto’s loopholes that let China, India and other developing nations (where it just so happens the multinationals have outsourced most of their manufacturing facilities) out of carbon emission regulation- is that the corporatists get to force smaller firms out of business with costly regulation while they move overseas. The glorious nuance of this deal is that they look like good citizens who care about the environment, and even better they get the card of there is excessive government regulation which forces us to move abroad to stay competitive so they can dupe government and the populace to think these guys aren’t absolute pondscum when they outsource good American Jobs.

Then there’s the money to be made off the naive who will spend hundreds or thousands of dollars ensuring they use low flow toilets, squiggly bulbs, and all manner of biodegradable and/or other green products which are more expensive than other products. You also have folks like Albert J. Gore and Leo Dicaprio who can sell you their books and movies and make a fortune. Closely related to money is power and influence. Think about it the government is growing increasingly supportive about carbon emission control not because its environmentally friendly, but because it means they can enact laws which support their corporate backers and further subjegate the citizenry.

Scam Two is the War in Iraq. Lets see no WMDs, no military infrastructure, no Al Qaeda Links (prior to our invasion), no nukes, no real threat to our national interest, but a s### load of oil that we wanted to control. See the real reason we went in to Iraq -and if you thought it was to prevent American women from having to wear burkhas or to bring freedom to Iraqis you are out of your mind- was because

1) Saddam Hussein nationalized his nation’s oil production and kicked BP, Shale, Exxon, etc out
2) Even worse he was dealing in Petro Euros and not trading with us
3) We wanted to control his oil production, heck a couple years ago Reichmarschal Rumsfeld decided to stop the lying and admit that the purpose of war in Iraq was to “keep the oil safe from the terrorists.”

Now you want to tie in something even more sinister lets talk 9/11 and our government’s seeming inability to prevent it. 9/11 was not planned by Washington, but from the 8/5/01 memo and lots of stuff dating back even into the Clinton Administration there was an ample amount of evidence that the government knew it was going to go down and really all the guys who got on those planes were on pre 9/11 watch lists. So what does the government get after staying idle in the days leading up to 9/11? Easy Bush declares war on terror, very vague and loosely defined, and instead of saying we are going after Al Qaeda and their allies he says you are either with us or you are for the enemy. This gave him a license to start wars with anyone he wanted at any time of his choosing. Oh and he got to get rid of those pesky constitutional rights that some old white dudes set up in the late eighteenth century. You don’t think you’ve lost anything? Did you see what they did to Jose Padilla? With Padilla are you aware that our justice system is a common law system is based on stare decises (precedent)? No, well let me put it to you this way the legal system approves of taking away one person’s rights then civil liberties are taken away from everyone else. Oh and do you know who is the final say in who is and who is not a terrorist? That’s right the federal government. Ultimately 9/11 led to the right to increase government power and intrusion into the private life and it led to the government’s ability to have perpetual war. The money factor comes in as Bush and his buddies get to bomb stuff oblivion and after deposing the government of the nation we are fighting then the BA makes sure their buds get no bid contracts. While I support our troops in Iraq and I want Osama to be brought to justice I want the government to tell the truth regarding 9/11 and the war in Iraq.

As we have seen government scams involve making money, grabbing power, and making us -the tax payers and consumers- pay for it. This is seen in the bank bailout deal. The government in the 1990s deregulated the banking industry at the behest of their buddies -many thanks to Phil “in a mental recession” Gramm- and as a result predatory practices were set up which screwed over the working poor and the lower middle class, but made the bankers a ton of money. Eventually, however, greed and profligacy failed and the bankers ended up getting shafted by their own criminal profligacy. So they made a little call to their buddies and minions (the thought of how much money these guys spend to rent our servants in DC causes me great alarm) which reminded them who paid for their campaigns. So Barack Obama, McCain, and Bush stood united to fix the problem. However, it seems that at long last the American people have awakened to the fact that the government is running yet another scam and they’ve had enough and so -and this is proof that our democracy does indeed work- people called their servants in the House of Representatives and Democrats and Republicans came together and said no to the latest scam. However, the dark forces of corporatism are firmly entrenched in Washington (and they will stay there regardless of who you vote for in November, just look at who finances the two campaigns) and they will eventually pull of yet another costly scam.

Change is needed in DC, and sadly I don’t that McCain or Obama have any interest in really changing the status quo.

The Good Old Boy System Strikes Again

Gag, I love Missouri’s political bosses, and by that I mean I thoroughly despise them. Barack Obama recently said his campaign would go after anyone who made false statements about him. This is not gestapo tactics as the conservatives would have you believe, but is actually something well within Obama’s rights. If one makes a libelous statement against someone -even a political candidate- then that person has opened himself open for civil lawsuits. That is just the law of the land. I say all of this because of the recent abuse of power of Missouri governor Matt Blunt. Blunt recently used my tax money to publish an anti Obama statement on a state owned website.

Now I am not against free speech, but it reeks of abuse of power for the governor to use tax payer funded websites to make political statements aimed to misrepresent the truth in order to swing the election in favor of his party. Now Blunt’s actions are nothing new as this state has been controlled by good old boy networks for generations and the only places where the good old boys don’t have influence are where the machines have held the day. In Missouri you have three families that control state politics. On the left you have the Carnahans and on the right you have the Blunts. In St. Louis City and Kansas City you have Democrat dominated political machines. To get anywhere in this state you have to have the endorsement of the city machines or the good old boy networks. I am quite tired of it.

Matt Blunt is abusing his power and he is spending my tax dollars to do so. If you live in Missouri you should be outraged and people should call for his head. The governor has no right to use his office to advance the agenda of his political party. Because I believe in being fair and impartial I will let you read the governor’s website http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

Mr. Blunt you are a Republican hack and I thank God that in November we get to vote in somebody new. Quite frankly sir, you make me ashamed to be a Missourian and that is quite a feat as I am Missouri born and raised and I love my homestate, but you have hijacked it and you and your DNC counterparts in the good old boy system are continuing to drive this state into the ground. The GOP and DNC talk about having “Missouri Values”, but they really need to know that as long as our elected officials are controlled by the political machines in St. Louis and Kansas City and the Good Old Boys in the Rural areas that those values will remain permanently corrupted. Mr. Blunt I urge you to apologize and if not then I urge you to resign because you have abused your power and the public trust in you.

Thoughts About Debate One

For the purposes of this debate and the next two as well, I will be breaking down the debate into substance, style, and likeability.

Substance: You cannot have a debate without having substance even though Bush and Kerry certainly tried last time out. That being said I thought both candidates did a superb job staying on point and on topic. Obama clearly won the points on the bank bailout topic as he pointed out that deregulating Wall Street, a move made by Phil Gramm (a guy you can read about in an earlier post here), caused the current meltdown and that we need to regulate the banking industry even when there is not a crisis and Obama did an excellent job pointing out that McCain only came to the rescue when the banks were in trouble and did far too little when it was just average Americans suffering. On the issue of energy McCain did mount a comeback winning huge points on offshore drilling, but being smacked down when Obama revealed he was for nuclear energy with responsible storage. On the issue of defense and foreign relations McCain really should have ran away, foreign policy has always been his strong suit, but his object failure to run circles around Obama made Obama the clear winner on substance

Style: Many said stylistically this was the best debate in a while. I did not see that as both were making mistakes, misques, and gaffes that would even be unacceptable in a high school speech class. McCain looked like he was gasping for air and looking like he was fighting back a primal rage whilst Obama was stuttering, umming, and uhing. However, Obama did manage to look a lot calmer, cooler, and collected than McCain. McCain looked like he wanted to decapitate Obama and really he needed a better makeup artist because he was in full Richard Nixon affect (circa 1960) while Obama looked presidential McCain looked like a stressed out, bitter, grumpy, and senile old man. Obama wins a slight edge over McCain in this category.

Likeability: Obama looked aloof and McCain looked like he was going to start shouting KILL! KILL! KILL! by the time it was over. Both lost points here.

Overall Winner: Obama, he came across as competent, sure of himself, and like he belonged. McCain didn’t lose the debate, but really this was a draw and that is what Obama needed. He had a slight lead in the polls before the debate and he did not lose anyone. Because of the nature of the debate I don’t think anybody thought differently about either candidate after hearing the debate.

Its time For The Friday Funnies

Our first clip is an instructional video about the ten types of Republicans (I really hope this group makes one about the Democrats)

Our next clip is of the meeting of two of the greatest British Comedians of our Time, Rowan Atkinson and John Cleese.

Our next clip is of someone who got quite a surprise when he went to flying school

The next clip is what could go wrong if we ever got socialized medicine

Moving on to Sports its the Silly Olympiad

And now as its football season a video highlight of the Bills next Opponents, those pitiful St. Louis Lambs.

McCain Cancels Campaign by Continuing Campaign

This week John McCain showed that he really loved America by canceling his campaign and the debates so that he could focus on the bank bailout. However it would seem that McCain’s definition of cancel and suspend are somewhat different than Webster’s dictionary although this should not be a surprise, what with him being a maverick and all. I mean according to Merriam Webster’s dictionary the definition of cancel is as follows:

Pronunciation:
\ˈkan(t)-səl\
Function:
verb
Inflected Form(s):
can·celed or can·celled; can·cel·ing or can·cel·ling Listen to the pronunciation of cancelling \-s(ə-)liŋ\
Etymology:
Middle English cancellen, from Anglo-French canceller, chanceller, from Late Latin cancellare, from Latin, to make like a lattice, from cancelli (plural), diminutive of cancer lattice, probably alteration of carcer prison
Date:
14th century

transitive verb1 a: to destroy the force, effectiveness, or validity of : annul b: to bring to nothingness : destroy c: to match in force or effect : offset —often used with out d: to call off usually without expectation of conducting or performing at a later time 2 a: to mark or strike out for deletion b: omit , delete3 a: to remove (a common divisor) from numerator and denominator b: to remove (equivalents) on opposite sides of an equation or account4: to deface (a postage or revenue stamp) especially with a set of ink lines so as to invalidate for reuseintransitive verb.

Suspend, according to Webster’s Dictionary means:
Pronunciation:
\sə-ˈspend\
Function:
verb
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French suspendre, from Latin suspendere, from sub-, sus- up + pendere to cause to hang, weigh
Date:
14th century

transitive verb1: to debar temporarily especially from a privilege, office, or function 2 a: to cause to stop temporarily b: to set aside or make temporarily inoperative 3: to defer to a later time on specified conditions 4: to hold in an undetermined or undecided state awaiting further information 5 a: hang ; especially : to hang so as to be free on all sides except at the point of support b: to keep from falling or sinking by some invisible support (as buoyancy) c: to put or hold in suspension 6 a: to keep fixed or lost (as in wonder or contemplation) b: to keep waiting in suspense or indecision7: to hold (a musical note) over into the following chordintransitive verb1: to cease operation temporarily2: to stop payment or fail to meet obligations3: hang

John McCain’s definitions of Cancel and suspend, on the other hand, most literally mean to continue, to connive and to lie.

Yup that’s right right after McCain promised to cancel his campaign to focus on the current financial crisis and calling on Obama to do the same he promptly set about continuing it. According to the Toronto Globe and Mail (a fairly moderate paper out of Toronto, Ontario)

John McCain cancelled on David Letterman, but sat down with Katie Couric. He called off campaign appearances, but allowed his surrogates to appear on news shows.

He attended the Clinton Global Initiative, but said he was suspending his campaign and asked that the first presidential debate be delayed so he could turn his attention to the financial crisis. . . .

The Commission on Presidential Debates refused to reschedule the debate, but the McCain campaign said last night that there was still no decision on whether he would attend.

Critics, meanwhile, pounced on the fact that not all aspects of the McCain campaign had ground to a halt.

“The whole campaign, as far as I can tell, is not completely suspended, just McCain himself,” Prof. Levine said.

Mr. McCain’s running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, visited memorials to the victims of Sept. 11 in Lower Manhattan yesterday.

Contributions were still being collected on the McCain-Palin website, local campaign offices remained open and attack ads continued to air throughout the United States by midday yesterday.

The seeming disconnect between the word “suspended” and the Republican campaign’s continued action led some to wonder whether the move was a crass political ploy to avoid the debate and resuscitate Mr. McCain’s floundering reputation on economic issues.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080926.wcampaign26/BNStory/usElection2008/home

Now I gotta give McCain credit for his attempt to pull off a brilliant political coup until his party undermined his gallant attempt to appear as the messiah of the moment by walking out of debates on the bank bailout, details can be found by clicking the link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/26/politics./main4479673.shtml However, he has been fully exposed and his attempt to delay the debates, a move which backfired as it looks like he will now be headed to the debates, have come out as a desperate attempt to appear relevant in this election. I just wish McCain could make up his mind about what he wanted to do with his campaign. I mean if you are going to suspend your campaign then good for you, but don’t say one thing and do another because that makes you a hypocrite.

Behold the End of the Monroe Doctrine

Do you remember when we were powerful enough to tell every other state in the Western Hemisphere what they could and could not do? Do you remember when we deposed and drop kicked those who dared to set out on a competing or non aligned foreign policy? Well those days are now gone. Most of this blame actually rests on the Bush administration because, other than Cuba, we pretty much controlled the foreign policy strategy of the respective nations of Central and South America. Because of the current failed regime of the failed Dictator in Washington we are now weak in our foreign policy. If someone wants to hammer out a peace deal they look to France, Great Britain, the European Union, or gasp even Russia.

Now we talk a lot of game, but we no longer have it. During the recent Georgia fiasco -whether you feel Saakashvilli is a slimeball stooge (he is by the way) is immaterial- Russia proved to the rest of the world that we are no longer credible as a world power and that outside Iraq, we are winning that war as much because the Sunni want to have a say in the aftermath when we finally leave town and so they are cracking down on the foreign terrorists as we are because of our troops. We have learned this decade that America is still able to project its power, but has done so more and more ineptly. In Afghanistan we only control the northern territory, Khandahar, and Kabul (actually the various tribes own the northern territory and those tribes still shift their alliegence when they feel they can get a better deal elsewhere. In Pakistan we risk going to war against a nation that is nuclear tipped and increasingly at odds with our government due to our incursions into their territory and their reluctance to hand over Bin Laden reveals that we cannot even bring those who have caused so much devastation to justice. In Iraq we learned that we cannot even defeat an enemy in a nation whose infrastructure we spent ten years obliterating. While it is quite shameful that we can no longer conduct wars of empire, dictate peace terms, or isolate those whom we consider hostile it is even more alarming that we can no longer even enforce the Monroe Doctrine. This failure is evidenced by the fact that Bolivia and Venezuela are currently taking a pro Havana, Beijing, and Moscow line and we are essentially powerless to stop them from pursuing their own course.

Venezuela signals above anything else that DC no longer is capable of projecting its influence even as far as the Caribbean. From Russia today we learn quite a bit about the details of Chavez’s recent alliance and partnership with Putin and Medvedev.

This article details how Russia is loaning Chavez one billion dollars to buy Russian weaponry:
http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/30963

This article talks about the Russian Flotilla in the Carribean and how the Pentagon grossly underestimated the threat:

http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/30959

They have also landed TU-160s in Venezuela and in the most ominous step taken by Caracas and Moscow yet Russia is preparing to help Chavez build nuclear reactors:

Putin: Nuclear energy deal possible with Venezuela
Russia is ready to consider making an nuclear energy deal with Venezuela, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said at a meeting with President Hugo Chavez in Moscow. He says there is also space for co-operation in hi-tech, engineering and petro-chemistry fields.

Hugo Chavez has arrived in Moscow with a two-day visit.

The relations between the countries are at their best in years. Moscow has recently sent warships to South America to take part in joint military exercises with Venezuela.

The Venezuelan leader’s invitation to host both Russian bombers and the Russian Navy came a month before the U.S. ordered its warships to enter the Black Sea.

Moscow and Caracas say they had an earlier agreement to conduct military exercises and deny any connection between the presence of the U.S. Navy near Russian borders and the Russian fleet heading to America’s backyard.

The nuclear-powered Peter the Great cruiser, an anti-submarine ship and 2 support vessels are now preparing to cross the Atlantic, but Russian Navy officials say the trip has no political implications.

“We are not going to demonstrate any aggressive intentions. The fleet has always been and will remain a deterrent,” insists Russian Navy spokesperson Igor Dygalo.

The ships started off just days after two Russian TU-160 strategic long-range bombers, carrying no nuclear weapons, returned to their home base in Russia after a week of maneuvers in Venezuela. Hugo Chavez said he was satisfied with the flight.

“Russian planes flew across the Atlantic and Caribbean. I do not know when they will return, but any time they want to return – they can do that. Venezuela is their home. Russia plays a role of a true friend and ally,” said Venezuelan president.

To read more about Russia’s Navy in Venezuela, please follow the link

During his current visit, Hugo Chavez is going to discuss energy, scientific and technological cooperation.

Previous such meetings have already brought tangible results and today leading Russian companies are now building their presence in the Venezuelan market.

In turn, Venezuela has already purchased billions of dollars worth of arms from Russia, including military helicopters and Kalashnikov rifles.

http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/30977

If something is not done soon it is we who will be isolated, surrounded, and ostracized from the international community.

McCain and Palin, Banking on Your Stupidity.

McCain and Palin are talking about how they want to suspend their campaign so that McCain can go back to Washington and deal with the bank bailout (probably looking to get a cut of the looming kickback for himself). Now McCain says he wants to suspend the campaign and postpone the debate, but lets be real for a minute and call this what it is (meretricious and transparent political theatre). McCain will now try to look like the leader and take credit for the bail out and attempt to show how he worked in a bipartisan fashion with the DNC and GOP leaders and how he drew both sides together. However I will give McCain credit where its due as this is so stupid its brilliant and many people will hail him as the maverick, except that the bailout and his support of it would be amongst the biggest flip flops of his campaign.

Now when McCain suspends the campaign suspends his activities its one thing, but why has Mrs. Palin suspended her campaign? Oh wait its because unleashing her on TV and showing her to be the inexperienced naive clown that she is would spell doom for the McCain campaign. McCain does not want and can little afford to have Palin make a fool of herself because McCain is already down in the polls and if Palin did something really stupid it would be curtains for his campaign aspirations. Her cancellation of her campaign activities goes to show you that McCain views her as a trinket that is just designed to get the dumb women vote -the whole idea behind his selection of Palin was because he wanted to say “look I care about women see I have a woman as my VP candidate and Obama beat Hillary, sure someone asked me how would I beat the Bitch [Hillary], but the bottom line is that I have a female running mate and thats all women obviously care about.” – and really he does not trust her to stand alone when being asked about policy which is the reason that McCain/Palin so desperately wish to cancel the VP debate and replace it with the first McCain/Obama debate.

The other reason that McCain wants so desperately to suspend the debates and pretend to take action on the bail out is because according to RealClearPolitics.com Obama leads in the vast majority of the current polls (current is defined as taken in the past week) http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

In other words the campaign has reverted to its pre convention form where Obama was running away with the election. The bank bailout has eclipsed the empty headed googly eyes that people had for Sarah Palin. McCain is not really helped by his adviser Phil Gramm who said of the American people, many of whom are going through financial difficulty and not receiving a dime of federal money or bankruptcy protection, “”You’ve heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession,” he said, noting that growth has held up at about 1 percent despite all the publicity over losing jobs to India, China, illegal immigration, housing and credit problems and record oil prices. “We may have a recession; we haven’t had one yet.”

“We have sort of become a nation of whiners,” he said. “You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline” despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said.

“We’ve never been more dominant; we’ve never had more natural advantages than we have today,” he said. “We have benefited greatly” from the globalization of the economy in the last 30 years.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/09/mccain-adviser-addresses-mental-recession/

Now some of you are going to say Mr. Gramm has stepped down from the McCain campaign, but no so fast friends. Gramm is still being retained by McCain as his chief financial advisor. So what makes Phil Gramm important here? Well that’s simple, first his deregulation acts made in favor of UBS (where he was a high ranking corporate officer) are the reason why so much accounting irregularity and bad business practices occurred on Wall Street which led directly to the current financial imbroglio. According to the San Fransisco Chronicle:

Texas Republican Phil Gramm, who presided over the committee in the years when the American economy, long the envy of the world, was viciously sabotaged by radical deregulation legislation.

Gramm, whom Sen. John McCain backed for president in 1996, pushed through the financial market deregulation that has brought the American economy to its knees. Maybe this time Congress won’t give the financial moguls everything they want, including the bailout for foreign-owned banks such as Swiss-based UBS, where Gramm now hangs out as a very well-paid executive when he is not advising the presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain, his old buddy and partner in crime. Oops, sorry, no crimes were committed because the deregulation laws Gramm pursued and McCain faithfully supported decriminalized the financial scams that have proved so costly.

Just check out the language of Gramm’s pet projects, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. The former reversed the basic Depression-era legislation to prevent the sort of meltdown we are now experiencing that prevented mergers between the various branches of Wall Street, and the latter legitimized the “swap agreements” and other “hybrid instruments” that are at the core of the meltdown.

Referred to in the 2000 legislation as the “Legal Certainty for Bank Products Act of 2000,” Title IV of the new law that Gramm snuck into legislation without hearings hours before the Christmas recess provided Wall Street with an unbridled license to steal. It made certain financiers could legally get away with a whole new arsenal of financial rip-off schemes.

One of those provisions, summarized by the headline of Title III, ensured the “Legal Certainty for Swap Agreements,” which successfully divorced the granters of subprime mortgage loans from any obligation to ever collect on them. That provision of Gramm’s law is at the very heart of the problem. But the new law went further to prohibit regulation of any of the new financial instruments permitted after the financial industry mergers: “No provision of the Commodity Exchange Act shall apply to, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission shall not exercise regulatory authority with respect to, an identified banking product which had not been commonly offered, entered into, or provided in the United States by any bank on or before December 5, 2000...”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/25/EDV1134AG2.DTL

Considering that they are thieves already it is little suprise that McCain and Gramm are as thick as thieves.

To sum it all up the real reason that McCain wishes to suspend his campaign is not some sense of leadership or bipartisanship, but the fear and realization that Obama -if that man is worth anything at all- would expose him as a supporter of the very Wall-Street deregulation that is currently causing so much harm to so many. Palin is suspending her campaign because McCain is terrified of gaffes that she might make which shows just how little he values her, and really he should value her because she is the only real chance (and its not much of a chance) that his campaign has of beating Obama. McCain needs to be held accountable for his role in the current financial meltdown.

Which is more Important, Saying you love your Country or Actually Loving Your Country?

Today we will explore what is more important, saying you love your country or actually loving your country. For the past seven years -ever since that terrible tuesday of 9/11/01 – the Republican party has wrapped itself in the flag, talked about how they support the troops, placed flag pins and ribbon bumper stickers on their cars and shrilly shouted “We love America.” Now this is all fine and good and I do respect patriotism and revere what our flag represents historically. However, there is something wrong when your patriotism stops at bumper stickers and lapel pins. Again, I am not against flag pins and patriotic bumper stickers as I have plenty and I love my country. No, the question is what is more important saying you love your country or actually loving your country?

During the past seven years the same Republicans who have talked about how much they love America have led the assault on the very documents and institutions that made America the great land that it is. We have a president who says God Bless America while writing FISA and the Patriot Act which undermind the civil liberties of Americans. The same Republican administration that says it loves America has taken away the constitutional rights of Americans from coast to coast and this is especially seen in the extraordinary case of Jose Padilla. Padilla, may or may not have been part of a criminal conspiracy to make dirty bombs, but whatever the case his constitutional rights were terminated which consequently undermines the constitution’s power to protect everyone else. His first amendment rights were squashed as he was busted primarily for being part of an Islamic organization (the clauses violated were the religious freedom clause and the freedom of assembly clause); his fourth amendment rights were also squashed as they searched him without warrant (a clear violation of Amendment four and the Miranda rights); his fifth amendment rights were violated as they attempted to hold him in a prison without trial until he confessed his guilt; his sixth amendment rights were violated as he was held for three years without trial or even the presentation of charges (habeas corpus); his eighth amendment rights were infringed as he was tortured during interrogation; and his fourteenth amendment rights were also violated. Please understand, even though he was found guilty of the charges against him that his constitutional rights were infringed upon. The government has also actively encouraged phone companies to track phone calls (warrantless wiretaps). Now we have a certain congressman from Pennsylvania who wants to

Sadly the DNC is no better than their GOP counterparts as they too have infringed upon civil liberties. In the District of Columbia (a strong bastion of DNC support) they have established curfews and checkpoints for their residents. The mayors of LA, Chicago, and Washington city have installed surveillance cameras to track their citizens, have essentially stomped out the second amendment (the constitution dictates that the right to bear arms is a right and not a privilege) by banning almost every type of firearm and making the registration of legal weapons compulsory and all of these cities are predominantly Democratic Party strongholds. Officially the gun bans/registrations are to curb criminal activity and the surveillance cameras in NYC, DC, and Chicago are to crack down on terrorism and violent crime, but it seems to me that these new tools of law enforcement are to control the movements and cow the general population. It was also under a Democrat president, Bill Clinton, that the federal government moved in to crack down on people who did not agree with the status quo (here I refer to Ruby Ridge and the Branch Dividian Compound in Waco, TX. I do not endorse the ideas that either of these groups stood for but their civil liberties were severely infringed upon).

Recently the state of Texas cracked down on a crazy polygamist Mormon sect without any substantial proof of actual child abuse. I say all of the above because these actions against civil liberties were made by those who say that they love America, but whose actions say something different. Some will be tempted to say that the recent violations of the constitution are justified because of national security in the post 9/11 world, but I argue that we must listen to the wise words of Benjamin Franklin that “those who surrender the essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty or security”.

The bottom line is that it is far more important to love your country than to say you do. Do not get me wrong, wear the flag pin, you see the flag and hear the national anthem take off your hat and place your hand over your heart, place the support the troops bumper sticker on your car, listen to Lee Greenwood, Randy Travis, and Toby Keith but ensure that your patriotism isn’t just something shallow. Do not get so caught up in symbolism that you forget the high ideas and honorable traditions that those symbols represent. Go out and support your country. Serve in the military, vote, serve on jury duty, pay taxes, but also know your constitution, be politically involved, keep in contact with your congressmen and your president. Write letters, join with your other citizens and make all your politicians know that they are your servants and are only there because you put them there. Pray for your leaders and hold them accountable.

Video Wednesday

This week’s theme is songs which make you proud to be an American.

First off is Lee Greenwood’s modern folk classic God Bless the USA

Ray Charles brilliant rendition of America the Beautiful

This clip is of our congress, Republican and Democrat, singing God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol building on that darkest of days when we all stood united as Americans. So here is the congress singing God Bless America (caution, it still brings a tear to the eye)

Up next is Yolanda Adams sweetly singing My Country ’tis of Thee

Now we shall see John Phillip Sousa’s Stars and Stripes Forever

Next we go back to yesteryear with When Johny Comes Marching Home

Our next song is the Battle Hymn of the Republic

Finally, no tribute to America would be complete without our National Anthem, Francis Scott Key’s Star Spangled Banner sung spectacularly here by Whitney Houston

Tom Tancredo Saves America From the Constitution Again

This evening lets discuss Sharia law. Now, I am firmly against Islamic extremism and all the things that it entails, but I am against Tancredo’s recent moves against civil liberties and constitutionally protected rights. I realize that some out there will say, but we are at war against Islamic extremists so we must do everything we can to bring the evil doers to justice and stymie terrorist groups attempts to organize and cause mayhem within the United States. I am inclined to agree with going after terrorists and bust up possible cells, but . . . . and its a rather big but . . . . we must make sure that we stay within the limits of law and reason. The constitution is the law of the land and it must be followed at all times. I say all this to segue into my rant.

Tom Tancredo and his GOP allies are attempting to get the following piece of legislation through congress and into the law books:

110th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 6975

To require aliens to attest that they will not advocate installing a Sharia law system in the United States as a condition for admission, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

September 18, 2008

Mr. TANCREDO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require aliens to attest that they will not advocate installing a Sharia law system in the United States as a condition for admission, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Jihad Prevention Act’.

SEC. 2. INELIGIBILITY FOR ADMISSION FOR ALIENS FAILING TO MAKE ATTESTATION.

Section 212(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(G) SHARIA LAW SYSTEM- Any alien who fails to attest, in accordance with procedures specified by the Secretary of Homeland Security, that the alien will not advocate installing a Sharia law system in the United States is inadmissible.’.

SEC. 3. REVOCATION OF VISAS.

Section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1201(i)) is amended by adding at the end the following: `The visa of any alien advocating the installation of a Sharia law system in the United States shall be revoked.’.

SEC. 4. REVOCATION OF NATURALIZATION.

Section 340(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1451(a)) is amended by inserting after the first sentence the following: `Advocating the installation of a Sharia law system in the United States shall constitute a ground for revocation of a person’s naturalization under this subsection.’.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6975:

In case you are not sure about the text of (8 U.S.C. 1451(a)) I have provided it for you below

Concealment of material evidence; refusal to testify
It shall be the duty of the United States attorneys for the
respective districts, upon affidavit showing good cause therefor,
to institute proceedings in any district court of the United States
in the judicial district in which the naturalized citizen may
reside at the time of bringing suit, for the purpose of revoking
and setting aside the order admitting such person to citizenship
and canceling the certificate of naturalization on the ground that
such order and certificate of naturalization were illegally
procured or were procured by concealment of a material fact or by
willful misrepresentation, and such revocation and setting aside of
the order admitting such person to citizenship and such canceling
of certificate of naturalization shall be effective as of the
original date of the order and certificate, respectively: Provided,
That refusal on the part of a naturalized citizen within a period
of ten years following his naturalization to testify as a witness
in any proceeding before a congressional committee concerning his
subversive activities, in a case where such person has been
convicted of contempt for such refusal, shall be held to constitute
a ground for revocation of such person’s naturalization under this
subsection as having been procured by concealment of a material
fact or by willful misrepresentation. If the naturalized citizen
does not reside in any judicial district in the United States at
the time of bringing such suit, the proceedings may be instituted
in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or
in the United States district court in the judicial district in
which such person last had his residence.

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/8/1451.html

While I can support revoking the visas of foreigners who adhere to Sharia law as there is no expressed constitutional protection to them, I rail against Section 4 of this bill because it would enable the government to strip naturalized citizens of their American citizenship on the basis of religion. “So whats the problem,” you ask. Well that one is simple this piece of legislation as it stands violates the first and the fourteenth amendment. For your reference here is the text of those two amendments

Amendment One:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment Fourteen:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No one shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

As it stands congress does not have the constitutional authority to enact legislation to strip someone of their citizenship because of their religion. Again I am for fighting and winning the war on terror, but we must protect the constitution and civil liberties. Tom Tancredo is violating the constitution and needs to be stopped.