Opinion at large
Once in a while, I am faced with important decisions. Last night, I was faced with watching something interesting or watching the Reid-Angle, Nevada Senatorial debate on C-Span? Normally, I would rather stick a pointed stick in my eye than watch C-Span. I must admit that this debate was almost interesting. Sharon Angle did a great job manhandling Harry (Dr. Smith) Reid. Reid came off as a Washington insider. Reid kept calling Angle an extremist. She came off as a regular person with a outside-the-beltway mentality. I think the deciding moment was when Angle told Reid to "Man Up." You will see that in sound bytes for the next two and one half weeks. Harry Reid said a few mis-truths. He said he was a very successful lawyer before politics. He was a lawyer for only two years. In that two years, he spent a lot of that time campaigning for political office. How do you become very successful and rich in less than two years? He also mentioned that he put his five children through 100 semesters of college. Do the math, 2 semesters per year, times 4 years is eight semesters times five children equals 40 semesters. Even if all five children went through graduate school (another 20 semesters) is only 60 total semesters. A bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? Also, he called the Department of Education, the Department of Energy. Clearly, anyone can make a mistake, however, Angle had him off his "A" game. She dominated the whole debate. Is it a wonder why she raised 14 million in the last quarter? Nevadians are tired of this Washington insider who has governed against the will of the people. Angle brought up he has voted to raise taxes over 300 times in his career. He said in a press conference that the war in Iraq was lost? Then he said he was mis-quoted. He really got perplexed when Angle brought up how he made $1.1million on a land deal when he hadn't owned this land for three years? Things that make you go, HUH! I want that kind of deal. I would not want to be a incumbent, long time, inside-the-beltway, democrat politician in this midterm election. I belong to many conservative organizations and they all have the same narrative. Get rid of incumbents that do not follow the Constitution. I see a massive shift in leadership in the House. Nancy (SanFranGranNan) Pelosi is going to lose her leadership position. I question whether she will stay on or just retire? She won't be able to spend 2.1 million of the taxpayer's money on military air transportation. Nancy, can you say Southwest or JetBlue? Another part of the group's narrative is simply, stop spending, dangnabbit! I heard today that we are borrowing 37 cents of every dollar we are
Harry Reid-Iraq war is lost:
November 2, 2010 Take out the trash!
Dutch prosecutors move to drop charges against Geert Wilders for criticizing
by Allahpundit
Earlier, in Headlines, I wrote that he’d been acquitted on all counts, but that’s not quite true. Presumably all charges will now be dismissed — Radio Netherlands says the case is as good as over — but it’s not the prosecutors who have been Wilders’s chief tormentors in all this. It’s the courts, who actually forced them to press charges against him for “sowing hatred” early last year. So in theory, they could refuse the prosecutors’ motion and demand that the case proceed. Which, of course, will only succeed in making him even more popular in the Netherlands by turning him into a free-speech martyr.
The ostensible charges here are group defamation and inciting hatred, but really it’s just a blasphemy trial by the back door. And that’s why prosecutors want him released. If denouncing a religion is a hate crime against its adherents, then not only is blasphemy back in full force but you’re way, way down the slippery slope of placing certain subjects beyond criticism.
The prosecutors consistently came to the same conclusion. What Wilders said may be ‘hurtful to Muslims, and may be met with emotional responses’, but he did not break the law…
Ms van Roessel and Mr Velleman said Wilders’ statements were not directed toward Muslims as people, but towards Islam. “Stop the tsunami of Islamisation” , or “the Qur’an is the Muslim Mein Kampf” are clearly directed at Islam. Wilders’ film Fitna falls into the same category…
Another qualifying factor is that Wilders’ comments were part of a broader social debate, and were part of a political programme that would get implemented in a democratic manner. The nature of the programme itself is irrelevant, as are his motivations for saying or writing what he did.
Said Wilders afterwards, “I don’t insult, I don’t incite to hate and I don’t discriminate. The only thing I do and will continue doing is speak the truth.” I’m reasonably confident that any similar trial in the U.S. would have been dismissed quickly. Not totally confident — who the hell knows what goes on in the mind of Stephen Breyer or likeminded leftist jurists — but the First Amendment’s exception for incitement is presently limited to cases where violence is imminent. I.e. you can’t say “burn that building!” to a crowd that’s ready to riot, but you’re pretty much covered in all other cases. Or at least, you are at the moment.
3 things about Islam: Wake up America!
White Roses is headquartered in Sweden. This first version is in English. The name "White Roses" is based on a student resistance group "Die weiße Rose" in Nazi Germany. The group became known for an anonymous leaflet campaign, from June 1942 until February 1943, which called for active opposition to Adolf Hitler's regime.
Obama seeks youth vote:
Barack Obama sees rise of 'tribal attitude'
The president answers questions at Thursday's youth town hall.
AP Photo
By GLENN THRUSH
President Barack Obama thinks that the recession has caused a temporary increase in racial tension by stoking “tribal attitude” among people in economic distress.
During an hour-long town hall with young people simulcast on MTV, BET and CMT Thursday afternoon, Kishor Nagula, a graduate student at Johns Hopkins University, asked Obama about race relations, saying he was disappointed the president hadn’t ushered in a post-racial era, as some of his supporters had once suggested he would.
“Often times misunderstandings and antagonisms surface most strongly when economic times are tough and that’s not surprising,” said Obama, citing some “slippage” in racial understanding.
“When you’re out of work and you can’t buy a home or you lost your home and you can’t pay your bills… sometimes that organizes [people] around kind of a tribal attitude and issues of race become more prominent.”
But Obama pushed back against the idea that race relations have gotten worse over the long-term, adding that the “trend lines” were moving in the right direction, anointing young people as “the messengers” to their less enlightened elders.
The town hall was expected to be an anything-goes affair – a perception stoked by reports organizers had solicited “lighter questions” like the what-underwear-do-you-wear asked of Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
But the under-30 participants were almost defiantly grave, with tough questions flung at the president on issues ranging from race, genocide in Sudan, immigration, domestic violence, youth unemployment and his decision to appeal a court decision invalidating the military’s policy on gays.
The most heated exchange came when Bridget Todd, a faculty member at Howard University, asked Obama about his “alleged commitment” to gay rights – challenging him to use an executive order to kill “don’t ask don’t tell” immediately, as Harry Truman ended segregation in the military.
"The difference between my position and Harry Truman’s was [that] Congress explicitly passed a law that took away [my] policy power,” said a clearly agitated Obama, moments after Justice Department lawyers announced they would try to delay implementation of a court decision declaring the policy unconstitutional.
“This is not a situation with the stroke of a pen where I can end this policy,” said Obama, who wants to secure Senate support for the repeal. The House has already acted.
Young people, especially college students, played a central role in Obama’s 2008 victory – creating an energetic army of supporters who swept into places like Iowa to organize support door-to-door. Exit polls showed 55 percent of new voters in 2008 were 18-24, with most backing Democrats.
But two years later, that support is sagging.
Just 44 percent of college students approve of the job Obama is doing, while 27 percent disapprove of his job performance, according to a new Associated Press-mtvU poll – down from a 60 percent approval rating in May 2009.
“Look, I don’t think young people are immune to the frustrations of our economy any more than voters my age or others,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, adding that “the pain of our economic devastation has been spread wide; it’s deep. It affects those who are coming out of college and looking for jobs in a job market for the first time.”
But few of the questions were about the economy. Most were about social issues or politics, including one from April Woodard of BET, who asked Obama what he thought of the tea party movement.
“This is a democracy. I want people to get involved,” he said. “I think there are a lot of people who are involved in the tea party who have very real concerns… and they have every right and an obligation as critics to be involved.”
He added: “I do think layered on top of them… is an awful lot of corporate money that is pouring into these elections right now.”
Republicans argued that the event – billed as an official presidential town hall – was in, effect, an Obama political rally and should have been billed as such.
Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.), mocked a Twitter promotion for show asking viewers to Tweet their greatest hopes and fears.
“Dear MTV, my greatest hope is for you to ask President Obama whether he believes GOP should have an hour of free time on MTV.”
Quote du jour:
Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong.
Calvin Coolidge
Writings of Our Founding Fathers
Federalist Papers
The Mode of Electing the President
From the New York Packet
Friday, March 14, 1788.
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
THE mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system, of any consequence, which has escaped without severe censure, or which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents. The most plausible of these, who has appeared in print, has even deigned to admit that the election of the President is pretty well guarded. [1] I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm, that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent. It unites in an eminent degree all the advantages, the union of which was to be wished for.
It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.
It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.
It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief. The choice of SEVERAL, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of ONE who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes. And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place.
Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention. They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment. And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors. Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias. Their transient existence, and their detached situation, already taken notice of, afford a satisfactory prospect of their continuing so, to the conclusion of it. The business of corruption, when it is to embrace so considerable a number of men, requires time as well as means. Nor would it be found easy suddenly to embark them, dispersed as they would be over thirteen States, in any combinations founded upon motives, which though they could not properly be denominated corrupt, might yet be of a nature to mislead them from their duty.
Another and no less important desideratum was, that the Executive should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves. He might otherwise be tempted to sacrifice his duty to his complaisance for those whose favor was necessary to the duration of his official consequence. This advantage will also be secured, by making his re-election to depend on a special body of representatives, deputed by the society for the single purpose of making the important choice.
All these advantages will happily combine in the plan devised by the convention; which is, that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some fit person as President. Their votes, thus given, are to be transmitted to the seat of the national government, and the person who may happen to have a majority of the whole number of votes will be the President. But as a majority of the votes might not always happen to centre in one man, and as it might be unsafe to permit less than a majority to be conclusive, it is provided that, in such a contingency, the House of Representatives shall select out of the candidates who shall have the five highest number of votes, the man who in their opinion may be best qualified for the office.
The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: "For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best," yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.
The Vice-President is to be chosen in the same manner with the President; with this difference, that the Senate is to do, in respect to the former, what is to be done by the House of Representatives, in respect to the latter.
The appointment of an extraordinary person, as Vice-President, has been objected to as superfluous, if not mischievous. It has been alleged, that it would have been preferable to have authorized the Senate to elect out of their own body an officer answering that description. But two considerations seem to justify the ideas of the convention in this respect. One is, that to secure at all times the possibility of a definite resolution of the body, it is necessary that the President should have only a casting vote. And to take the senator of any State from his seat as senator, to place him in that of President of the Senate, would be to exchange, in regard to the State from which he came, a constant for a contingent vote. The other consideration is, that as the Vice-President may occasionally become a substitute for the President, in the supreme executive magistracy, all the reasons which recommend the mode of election prescribed for the one, apply with great if not with equal force to the manner of appointing the other. It is remarkable that in this, as in most other instances, the objection which is made would lie against the constitution of this State. We have a Lieutenant-Governor, chosen by the people at large, who presides in the Senate, and is the constitutional substitute for the Governor, in casualties similar to those which would authorize the Vice-President to exercise the authorities and discharge the duties of the President.
PUBLIUS.
References:
http://www.hotair.com/
http://www.wnd.com/
http://www.weeklystandard.com/
http://www.theblaze.com/
http://www.dailycaller.com/
http://www.nronline.com/
http://www.thehill.com/
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.quotationspage.com/
http://www.americanthinker.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
Allahpundit
Glenn Thrush
Library of Congress/Federalist Papers
C-Span
No comments:
Post a Comment