Thursday, February 24, 2011

We Need to Get a Little Bloody; Space Launch Rules Go International; $150 Million of Our Money to go to Egypt; Elena Kagen's Possible Need to Recuse Herself; Intrastate Commerce Act in AZ; Texas Might Take Illegals to U.S. Senator or Representatives

Sunset in America......
New Hampshire Journal writes: A Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts is raising the stakes in the nation’s fight over the future of public employee unions, saying emails aren’t enough to show support and that it is time to “get a little bloody.”
“I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary,” Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a crowd in Boston on Tuesday rallying in solidarity for Wisconsin union members.
Capuano’s comments come at a time when there is heightened sensitivity to violent rhetoric in the wake of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ (D-Az.) shooting in January.
Capuano is considered a leading contender to take on Sen. Scott Brown in 2012.
Expose Obama reveals: This video from the National Education Association’s top lawyer, Bob Chanin, shows how surprisingly open the nation’s leftists are when they no longer have to pose for the cameras and get to speak to one another. Addressing the 2009 NEA Convention, Chanin admits, “It is not because we care about children and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power.” The union-led protests across the country are to assure these left-wingers maintain their power and their access to your tax dollars. Watch the admission below.
Floyd Reports opines: By agreeing to international rules concerning space launches and operations, this president will limit the use of space for military and intelligence purposes. Such policies will forbid the U.S. from protecting space assets from anti-space weapons being developed by China and Russia.
When asked by The Washington Times, former National Security Council Director of Space Policy, Peter Marquez stated the agreement will allow other countries to set limits on U.S. assets in space. “It leaves open the door also for the United States to be forced to disclose the nature of its intelligence collection activities and capabilities from orbit.”
Courtesy of WikiLeaks’ State Department leaks, the Bush administration threatened military action over the shooting down of the satellite in 2007. As a show of force the U.S. Navy shot down a crippled satellite USA 193 in 2008. This action outraged Beijing, but they respected “the cowboy.”
Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, told The Washington Times, “One gets the impression from this document that the Obama administration simply wants to ignore the Chinese threat in hopes it will just go away.” He said,“There is apparently no consideration of developing U.S. active defenses for space that would more effectively deter China.”
According to leaked documents, the Chinese shot down another satellite in 2010. The fact is China does not fear “The One.” They are happily militarizing while the rest of the world is rioting and leaders are retreating. The community-organizer-in-chief is surrendering our edge in space.

From AFP:
“I am pleased to announce today that we will be reprogramming $150 million for Egypt to put ourselves in a position to support the transition there and assist with their economic recovery,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said.
CNS News writes: The U.S. Justice Department is contesting in federal court a Freedom of Information Act request filed by that seeks department records that could shed light on the question of whether Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan needs to recuse herself from legal challenges to the health-care reform law President Barack Obama signed last March.The FOIA asked for three categories of records. These included records of any meetings or communications Kagan might have participated in as solicitor general that involved President Obama’s health-care reform plan, records of any meetings or communications Kagan might have participated in in which legal challenges to the health-care legislation signed by President Obama were discussed, and records of any meetings or communications Kagan might have participated in in which there was discussion of whether Kagan ought to recuse herself from involvement in any particular case in her role as solicitor general due to the prospect that case might later come before her were she confirmed to a seat on a federal court.
On Dec. 30, the Justice Department filed an answer to the MRC’s complaint, asking the court to dismiss the complaint, but not citing any specific exemption in the Freedom of Information Act that would justify such a dismissal.
The Justice Department now has until March 1 to present the court with a brief asking for summary judgment in its favor.
The Tenth Amendment Center writes: Late last week, the Arizona Senate passed Senate Bill 1178 (SB1178), the Intrastate Commerce Act. The bill provides that all services performed in the state, and all goods grown or made here for consumption within Arizona “are not subject to the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the several states.”
WOAI speaks:
A measure filed by State Rep. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham) would allow any law enforcement agency that has custody of an illegal immigrant to take the illegal to 'the office of a U.S. Senator or Representative' and leave them there.

Several thousand people are expected to descend on the [Texas] state capitol today to denounce the measures, and to call on the federal government, not the states, to handle matters related to immigration.

Illegal immigration has emerged as a top priority of the Republican super-majority in the Texas Legislature, and this is just one of several dozen bills introduced in Austin to deny jobs, housing, and government benefits to illegals.
Az Republic writes: The Senate Appropriations Committee became the first state legislative committee in the nation to pass a package of bills intended to challenge the practice of granting citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants.  It also approved an "omnibus" bill that would prevent undocumented children from attending school, prohibit illegal immigrants from driving or buying a vehicle and deny illegal immigrants the ability to obtain a marriage license in Arizona.
Yahoo News/Finance writes: The Indiana senate passed a sweeping immigration bill that echoes Arizona's tougher measures on illegal immigrants and despite opposition from some of the largest employers and business groups in the state.
The Atlantic writes about the Obama Administration's decision to not defend a law passed by Congress, while at the same time defending the Obamacare law which has been declared unconstitutional, null and void! They wrote: By taking that position, the Obama Administration has moved the goalposts of the usual role of the Executive branch in defending statutes. Instead of requiring DOJ to defend the constitutionality of all federal statutes if it has a reasonable basis to do so, the new approach invests within DOJ a power to conduct an independent constitutional review of the issues, to decide the main issues in the case -- in this case, the degree of scrutiny for gay rights issues -- and then, upon deciding the main issue, to decide if there is a reasonable basis for arguing the other side. If you take that view, the Executive Branch essentially has the power to decide what legislation it will defend based on whatever views of the Constitution are popular or associated with that Administration. It changes the role of the Executive branch in defending litigation from the traditional dutiful servant of Congress to major institutional player with a great deal of discretion.
If that approach becomes widely adopted, then it would seem to bring a considerable power shift to the Executive Branch. Here's what I fear will happen. If Congress passes legislation on a largely party-line vote, the losing side just has to fashion some constitutional theories for why the legislation is unconstitutional and then wait for its side to win the Presidency.  [Indeed, Obama is fundamentally changing America once again.]

1 comment:

  1. old grizzled veteranFebruary 24, 2011 at 4:04 PM

    AMAZING COLLECTION OF RELEVANT NEWS (MOSTLY NOT REPORTED ANYWHERE ELSE !). Thanks for all your Research and verification work ! It is really depressing to realize what a bunch of losers we have in our Federal Government !!