tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-228186022024-03-14T01:35:44.365-04:00Repeal the 17th AmendmentThis web-log calls for the repeal of the 17th Amendment and addresses the hegemony committed by the US Senate. The first significant step to remove the domination and unmistakable corruption deriving from the National Government and the restoration of the Federal is to repeal the 17th Amendment. Americans should fear the steady hegemonic growth by the Senate oligarchy because the US Constitution cannot be spoiled by bombs, the courts, or the President, but only through malevolent legislation.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.comBlogger1930125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-28461279044437668322012-03-16T12:41:00.000-04:002012-03-16T12:41:38.027-04:00Podcast: Duffy on Moving the 17th into HibernationHost Brian Duffy will discuss the hibernation of the weblog, <i>Repeal the 17th Amendment</i>, and the future of repeal effort.<br />
<br />
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.adobe.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" height="105" id="171469" name="171469" width="210"><param name="movie" value="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/btrplayer.swf?file=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Frepealtheseventeenth%2F2012%2F03%2F16%2Fduffy-on-moving-the-17th-into-hibernation%2Fplaylist.xml&autostart=false&bufferlength=5&volume=80&corner=rounded&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/flashplayercallback.aspx" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="menu" value="false" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/btrplayer.swf" flashvars="file=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Frepealtheseventeenth%2F2012%2F03%2F16%2Fduffy-on-moving-the-17th-into-hibernation%2fplaylist.xml&autostart=false&shuffle=false&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=210&height=105&volume=80&corner=rounded" width="210" height="105" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" wmode="transparent" menu="false" name="171469" id="171469" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br />
<div style="font-size: 10px; text-align: center; width: 220px;">Listen to <a href="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/">internet radio</a> with <a href="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/repealtheseventeenth">repealtheseventeenth</a> on Blog Talk Radio</div>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-45587650402062374662012-02-03T10:03:00.000-05:002012-02-03T10:03:41.711-05:00Beyond SOPA: The Past, Present and Future of Internet Censorship<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/U8uO9bw1TNw" width="560"></iframe>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-35557889894504680942011-12-27T08:26:00.000-05:002011-12-27T08:26:14.674-05:00Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, US Senate<a href="http://www.salem-news.com/articles/december252011/ndaa-recall.php">Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention. Merry Christmas, US Senate; Salem News</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86 - 14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans have announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.<br />
<br />
Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses.<br />
<br />
Section 2 of Montana Code 2-16-603 reads:<br />
<br />
"(2) A public officer holding an elective office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the elective officer's successor."<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.salem-news.com/articles/december252011/ndaa-recall.php">Read the rest here</a>.</blockquote></i>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-33698068581429413212011-12-12T14:02:00.000-05:002011-12-12T14:02:57.861-05:00BATTLEFIELD AMERICA<a href="http://www.newswithviews.com/Emord/jonathan222.htm">BATTLEFIELD AMERICA; Jonathan Emord; NewsWithViews.com</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>Senate Bill 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich) and John McCain (R-AZ), contains a provision that authorizes the armed forces to arrest and imprison without charge or trial those suspected of involvement in or support of terrorist organizations, including American citizens resident in the United States. Not since the summary detention of Asian Americans during the Second World War on suspicion of potential complicity with the Axis enemies of the United States has a law promised to violate in a more direct and profound manner the rights of the American people.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>An amendment offered to eliminate this provision by Senator Rand Paul was defeated. The bill, containing this provision, passed the Senate on December 1 by a vote of 93 to 7. The bill and a comparable defense bill in the House, H.R. 1540, are in a House-Senate conference committee. If the provision survives negotiations between the House and the Senate, it will appear in a final bill headed for the President’s signature.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>The history of modern government is rife with examples of the innocent accused. While none of us would favor a state that was less than vigilant in arresting and prosecuting American citizens for whom evidence reveals involvement in terrorist activities, no freedom loving American should accept on the pretext of the war on terror the wholesale and indefinite suspension of all Americans basic rights to Habeas Corpus, to Due Process under the Fifth Amendment, and to notice of the precise charges brought, to a speedy trial on the merits before an impartial judge, to a trial by jury, and to counsel--all guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>Under Section 1031 of Senate Bill 1867, if your next door neighbor is merely accused of involvement in or support of some terrorist organization or suspected terrorist organization, military police are free to show up at his door, break it in, place him under arrest, and escort him to a military installation for indefinite incarceration without affording him the right of habeas corpus or a speedy trial on the merits before a jury in the federal judicial system. The power is not unlike that of the Gestapo. The law invites abuse beyond the obvious invasion of protected rights, because it can—like the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798—be used to eliminate political dissidents of one kind or another.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>Consider this example. Let us assume that a person holds the loathsome view that al-Qaeda’s agenda for America is laudable and posts on a web site and in various other public fora that odious message. Let us also assume that this person while advocating destruction of our nation has kept his advocacy as an academic concept and has taken no step toward procuring weapons or other means to bring about that destruction. Under Section 1031(b)(2) of this bill, that person would be definable as one who supports al-Qaeda and would be eligible for summary military arrest and indefinite detention. There are no procedural safeguards in the bill to prevent that result.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>We would all do well to remember the words of Thomas Jefferson in his First Inaugural Address, immediately following his successful efforts to secure the non-renewal of yet another great rights violating law, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. That law forbad seditious libel, i.e., any statement critical of federal government officers or measures—a rank offense to the First Amendment. Jefferson gave us these words which apparently have no resonance in the ears of Carl Levin or John McCain: “If there be any among us who wish to dissolve this Union, or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it.” </i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i><a href="http://www.newswithviews.com/Emord/jonathan222.htm">Read the rest here</a>.</i></blockquote>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-81059310606504101642011-12-07T09:05:00.000-05:002011-12-07T09:05:16.333-05:00Former Senator Simpson says U.S. military spending outpaces totals from the next 14 largest nations, combined<a href="http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/12/alan_simpson_says_us_military.html">Alan Simpson says U.S. military spending outpaces totals from the next 14 largest nations, combined: PolitiFact Ohio; The Cleveland Plain Dealer</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>Simpson wasn’t questioning the need for a strong military. His point was that the military budget had become so immense that it operated without restraint. To put it into perspective, he offered this remark:<br />
<br />
"Our defense budget is larger than (the combined totals of the next) 14 major countries of the world -- and if you think all of it is there for national security purposes, you're terribly wrong."</blockquote></i><br />
<br />
<b>Comment</b>: This is happening because the puppet masters outside of our government deem that the US will be the policemen of the world and our Congress acquiesces. But have no fears, it will soon end. It will end when all our wealth as a nation is exhausted. Then our armed forces will come home to police us during the epoch of "austerity." You know austerity has done wonders for the Chinese.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-20731474913294482212011-12-06T18:11:00.000-05:002011-12-06T18:11:57.373-05:00Podcast: Quintiliani on SOPA and S. 1867Host Brian Duffy interviewed long time <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeal_the_17th_Amendment/" target="_blank"><i>Repeal the 17th Discussion Board </i></a>contributor Dan Quintiliani concerning the current legislation being pushed in the US Senate, SOPA and S.1867, both of which have far reaching effects on civil liberties.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.adobe.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" height="105" id="171469" name="171469" width="210"><param name="movie" value="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/btrplayer.swf?file=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Frepealtheseventeenth%2F2011%2F12%2F06%2Fquintiliani-on-sopa-and-s-1867%2Fplaylist.xml&autostart=false&bufferlength=5&volume=80&corner=rounded&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/flashplayercallback.aspx" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="menu" value="false" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/btrplayer.swf" flashvars="file=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Frepealtheseventeenth%2F2011%2F12%2F06%2Fquintiliani-on-sopa-and-s-1867%2fplaylist.xml&autostart=false&shuffle=false&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=210&height=105&volume=80&corner=rounded" width="210" height="105" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" wmode="transparent" menu="false" name="171469" id="171469" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br />
<div style="font-size: 10px; text-align: center; width: 220px;">Listen to <a href="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/">internet radio</a> with <a href="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/repealtheseventeenth">repealtheseventeenth</a> on Blog Talk Radio</div><br />
<br />
<b>Readings and Links related to this podcast:</b><br />
<br />
<ul><li><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/congress_endorsing_military_detention_a_new_aumf/singleton/">Congress endorsing military detention, a new AUMF</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s1867/show">S.1867 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act">Stop Online Piracy Act</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_IP_Act">PROTECT IP Act</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://xcopfly.com/">X-Cop Fly Company</a></li>
</ul>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-13913085471085692242011-12-03T06:53:00.000-05:002011-12-03T06:53:38.237-05:00All But Seven Voted For This: S. 1867: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012This<a href="http://current.com/1uds2kc"> S 1867</a> passed in the Senate by roll call vote. The totals were 93 Ayes, 7 Nays.<br />
<br />
Anyone out there that thinks there is such a thing as opposition parties is a fool. It is one party, one agenda, one endstate. We have made our prison and now we'll all live in it.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-62964601922363305232011-12-01T10:47:00.004-05:002011-12-07T09:32:33.770-05:00Indefinite Detention and the National Defense Authorization Act<object align="middle" classid="clsid:d27cdb6eae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" height="500" id="cspan-video-player" width="410"><param name='allowScriptAccess' value='true'/><param name='movie' value='http://www.c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/assets/swf/CSPANPlayer.swf?pid=302754-1&start=16984&end=17074'/><param name='quality' value='high'/><param name='bgcolor' value='#ffffff'/><param name='allowFullScreen' value='true'/><param name='flashvars' value='system=http://www.c-spanvideo.org/common/services/flashXml.php?programid=265337&style=full&start=16984&end=17074'/><embed name='cspan-video-player' src='http://www.c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/assets/swf/CSPANPlayer.swf?pid=302754-1&start=16984&end=17074' allowScriptAccess='always' bgcolor='#ffffff' quality='high' allowFullScreen='true' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' flashvars='system=http://www.c-spanvideo.org/common/services/flashXml.php?programid=265337&style=full&start=16984&end=17074' align='middle' height='500' width='410'></embed></object><br />
<br />
Why aren't our Senators standing up [to] the President when he writes stuff like <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/112/saps1867s_20111117.pdf">this</a>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>The Administration objects to and has serious legal and policy concerns about many of the detainee provisions in the bill. In their current form, some of these provisions disrupt the Executive branch's ability to enforce the law and impose unwise and unwarranted restrictions on the U.S. Government's ability to aggressively combat international terrorism; other provisions inject legal uncertainty and ambiguity that may only complicate the military's operations and detention practices.<br />
Section 1031 attempts to expressly codify the detention authority that exists under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) (the “AUMF”). The authorities granted by the AUMF, including the detention authority, are essential to our ability to protect the American people from the threat posed by al-Qa'ida and its associated forces, and have enabled us to confront the full range of threats this country faces from those organizations and individuals. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Because the authorities codified in this section already exist, the Administration does not believe codification is necessary and poses some risk.</span> After a decade of settled jurisprudence on detention authority, Congress must be careful not to open a whole new series of legal questions that will distract from our efforts to protect the country. While the current language minimizes many of those risks, future legislative action must ensure that the codification in statute of express military detention authority does not carry unintended consequences that could compromise our ability to protect the American people.</blockquote><br />
<br />
Repeal the 17th Amendment and our Senators will once again stand up for decentralized power, and they will enforce limits on the president and the rest of the federal government.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-47137734045787691232011-11-29T08:31:00.000-05:002011-11-29T08:31:49.409-05:00How did your US House Rep Vote for National Defense Authorization Act (HR 1540)?To be clear, Sen Levins and McCain have added in the secret provision to allow for the "indefinite imprisonment without trial or charge" of any American citizen in the Senate version of the NDAA, however it was the House that allowed for the US Armed Forces to operate in the US effectively killing <i>posse commitus</i> in Section 1034 of House version of the bill (HR 1540) passed in <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322573415_0">June 2011</span>, which is in the Senate version as well. However, I think it's fair to say that <i>posse commitus</i> was killed long before in the Patriot Act, but is now only becoming open law.<br />
<br />
Here's how the House voted on this bill this summer:<br />
<br />
<<a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll375.xml" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322573415_1">http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll375.xml</span></a>><br />
<br />
And here is the link to the bill, HR 1540, passed this summer.<br />
<br />
<<a href="http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1540/text" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322573415_2">http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1540/text</span></a>><br />
<br />
You'll note that almost the entire <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322573415_3">House</span> voted for this.<br />
<br />
There is one final conclusion I've understood for quite a while now and I think it's time America woke up to, and this is the clear and undeniable fact that both parties are systematically forcing us into a manufactured police state.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-36776227847195306172011-11-27T22:13:00.002-05:002011-11-27T22:13:43.245-05:00S.1867 -- National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012Scary stuff folks...<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>"The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor <span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322449751_0">on Monday</span>. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing."</i></blockquote><br />
The text of the bill:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322449751_1">http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867</span></a>:<br />
<br />
Some articles going into the police state aspects:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2011/11/26/s-1867-the-department-of-defense-authorization-act-its-more-convoluted-than-you-think/" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322449751_2">http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2011/11/26/s-1867-the-department-of-defense-authorization-act-its-more-convoluted-than-you-think/</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.infowars.com/congress-to-vote-next-week-on-explicitly-creating-a-police-state/" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322449751_3">http://www.infowars.com/congress-to-vote-next-week-on-explicitly-creating-a-police-state/</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being" target="_blank"><span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1322449751_4">http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being</span></a><br />
<br />
I would recommend that you get this information out to the widest number of contacts you have.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-10760471831585938522011-11-14T16:23:00.000-05:002011-11-14T16:23:50.445-05:00Star Wars’ Carrie Fisher: Ted Kennedy asked if I would have sex with Chris Dodd<a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/10/star-wars-carrie-fisher-ted-kennedy-asked-if-i-would-have-sex-with-chris-dodd/">Star Wars’ Carrie Fisher: Ted Kennedy asked if I would have sex with Chris Dodd: The Daily Caller</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>Not so long ago, in a District of Columbia not so far away, Sen. Ted Kennedy was more than a little perverted to Star Wars actress Carrie Fisher.<br />
<br />
According to her latest book, “Shockaholic,” Fisher was on a date in 1985 with former Sen. Chris Dodd in Washington, D.C. The two were joined for dinner by the late Kennedy, who proceeded to ask some rather frank questions.<br />
<br />
“Suddenly,” Fisher writes, “Senator Kennedy, seated directly across from me, looked at me with his alert, aristocratic eyes and asked me a most surprising question. ‘So,’ he said, clearly amused, ‘do you think you’ll be having sex with Chris at the end of your date?’”<br />
<br />
According to Fisher, “Chris Dodd looked at me with an unusual grin hanging on his very flushed face.”<br />
<br />
Fisher, being the trained actress she was, responded coolly: “Funnily enough, I won’t be having sex with Chris tonight. … No that probably won’t happen. … Thanks for asking, though.”<br />
<br />
But the “Lion of the Senate” didn’t stop there.<br />
<br />
“’Would you have sex with Chris in a hot tub?’ Senator Kennedy asked me, ‘Perhaps as a way to say good night?”<br />
<br />
“’I'm no good in water,’ I told him.”</blockquote></i>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-10748649628835294702011-11-11T07:23:00.000-05:002011-11-11T07:23:35.188-05:00Senate Republicans Introduce Bill Pushing Internet Sales Taxes<a href="http://thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/computers/9637-republicans-introduce-bill-pushing-internet-sales-taxes">Republicans Introduce Bill Pushing Internet Sales Taxes: The New American</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>The days of tax-free Internet shopping may soon be coming to an abrupt end, if two Republican senators have their way. </i><br />
<i>Sens. Mike Enzi of Wyoming and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee are currently preparing to introduce new legislation that would allow states to force Amazon.com and other out-of-state online retailers to collect sales taxes. Their bill has the backing of several key corporate retailers, including Wal-Mart Stores, Best Buy, Home Depot, and other companies that are currently required to collect sales taxes. At issue is whether online retailers should have to collect sales taxes in states where they’re making sales. Currently, online shoppers are supposed to report purchases for tax purposes but usually don’t. </i><br />
<i>"It's time to close the online sales tax loophole," says Jason Brewer, a vice president at the Retail Industry Leaders Association in Arlington, Va., which represents big box stores. "Amazon and companies like it are no longer fledgling startups."</i><br />
<i>The Republican-led legislative effort has a clear precedent in legislation introduced by Senate Democrats last year. The so-called <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20052999-281.html" target="_blank">Main Street Fairness Act of 2010</a> was introduced by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and called for taxes on online purchases, under the presumption that local retail outfits are placed at a comparative disadvantage to online retailers due to discrepancies in taxation. The justification for these measures is a reprise of arguments that state tax collectors have made for at least a decade: they claim that Amazon.com, Overstock.com, Blue Nile, and other online retailers that don't always collect taxes are unreasonably depriving states of revenue, and that they enjoy an unfair competitive advantage over local retailers that must collect taxes,<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20128803-281/republican-senators-push-for-internet-sales-taxes/?tag=mncol;editorPicks" target="_blank"> according to </a>CNET’s Declan McCullagh. (The latter argument ignores added shipping and handling charges added to online purchases that often exceed the amount of sales tax levied on purchases at local stores, making the online goods more expensive, albeit more convenient, for the consumer.)</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i><a href="http://thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/computers/9637-republicans-introduce-bill-pushing-internet-sales-taxes">Read the rest here</a>.</i></blockquote>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-42024947570085109772011-11-11T07:08:00.000-05:002011-11-11T07:08:15.852-05:00Veterans Day 11.11.11<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://l.yimg.com/ck/image/A1372/1372470/300_1372470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://l.yimg.com/ck/image/A1372/1372470/300_1372470.jpg" /></a></div>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-75141185445245094892011-11-11T07:00:00.001-05:002011-11-11T07:00:41.507-05:00Robert Taft: Count Him Conservative<a href="http://thenewamerican.com/history/american/9478-robert-taft-count-him-conservative">Robert Taft: Count Him Conservative; The New American</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>If Robert Taft had been a baseball player instead of a United States Senator, he might have led the league in left-handed compliments. As it was, he was often “damned with faint praise” by people who, while paying tribute to the power of his intellect, quite often suggested both the man and the mind had come of age in the wrong century. The Ohio lawmaker would hear himself praised as one possessing “the best eighteenth-century mind in America” by people who obviously considered an 18th-century mind ill-suited to mid-20th-century politics. Others, frustrated by the Senator’s stubborn insistence on examining the facts of any controversy before deciding whether to go with or against the prevailing political winds, were fond of saying, “Taft has the best mind in the Senate — until he makes it up.”</i></blockquote><br />
<a href="http://thenewamerican.com/history/american/9478-robert-taft-count-him-conservative">Read the rest here</a>.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-82033595492085853552011-11-10T07:09:00.002-05:002011-11-10T07:09:44.603-05:00Sen. Rand Paul On Lou Dobbs Tonight - 10/12/11<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KKSgLi4srGU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-90300249090458833262011-11-04T08:10:00.000-04:002011-11-04T08:10:37.918-04:00Have Senate Cloture Votes Contributed to the Growth of Government?<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/senate-cloture-government-growth_b_1073449.html">Have Senate Cloture Votes Contributed to the Growth of Government? Huffington Post</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>The statement at issue:</i><br />
<br />
<blockquote>"This month, Majority Leader Harry Reid and his Democrat colleagues voted to change the Senate rules with a simple majority vote of 51 to 48. Most people would simply shrug and think, "So? Isn't that the way democracy is supposed to work?" For the past 222 years in the U.S. Senate, the answer to that question has been no....The Senate, in particular, was designed to limit the growth of government....The cloture vote made it easier for government to grow, and, guess what, government grew...The introduction of the cloture vote has certainly proved effective at hampering the Senate's ability to limit the size and influence of the government."</blockquote><i>Comments by Sen. Ron Johnson, a freshman Republican from Wisconsin, who was elected with strong Tea Party support, in an op-ed column in the Washington Post on October 23, "Why the Senate Needs to Return to Requiring Supermajorities."</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>We checked the Constitution, and...</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>The freshman Senator's comments follow in a sturdy tradition in that chamber, equating the long history of unlimited debate with a supposed design of those who wrote the Constitution to ensure the rights of the Senate's minority by assuring unlimited debate. By referring to a 222-year history, Sen. Johnson obviously was making a claim that that tradition traces back to the founding in 1789. It is true that for decades after the founding the Senate had no limits on debate. The Constitution, however, says nothing about Senate debates, leaving that entirely to the Senate's power to write its own rules, under Article I, Section 5, Clause 3. And, under those rules, the Senate has been limiting debate since 1917, when it adopted its first anti-filibuster rule. Such a rule shuts down debate, and thus is called a "cloture" rule. ...<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/senate-cloture-government-growth_b_1073449.html">Read the rest here</a>.<br />
</i></blockquote>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-33628611973944240472011-11-04T08:04:00.000-04:002011-11-04T08:04:14.213-04:00Senate panel advances gay judicial nominee<a href="http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/11/03/senate-panel-advances-gay-judicial-nominee-2/">Senate panel advances gay judicial nominee; Washington Blade</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>A Senate committee approved unanimously by voice vote on Thursday a judicial nominee who could become the fourth openly gay person to sit on the federal bench.<br />
<br />
Michael Walter Fitzgerald, whom President Obama nominated in July, was approved the Senate Judiciary Committee en banc as part of a group of nominees.<br />
<br />
Fitzgerald is the fourth out federal judicial nominee chosen by the White House. Upon confirmation, he would take a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and would be the first openly gay federal judge in that state.<br />
<i><br />
<a href="http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/11/03/senate-panel-advances-gay-judicial-nominee-2/">Read the rest here</a></i>.<br />
</blockquote></i>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-61256008593823116282011-11-04T07:56:00.000-04:002011-11-04T07:56:16.179-04:00Senator Lieberman Grades President Obama on His Foreign Policy<a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/03/senator-lieberman-grades-president-obama-on-his-foreign-policy/">Senator Lieberman Grades President Obama on His Foreign Policy; Heritage Foundation</a><br />
<br />
You can tell a lot about a group by who they associate with, and in this case <i>The Heritage Foundation's </i>chummy relationship with warmonger Joe Lieberman tells the same as both are nothing more than tools of the military defense industry. <br />
<br />
See Lieberman's <a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/03/senator-lieberman-grades-president-obama-on-his-foreign-policy/">interview here</a> and know that we will continue on the path of this endless war no matter which wing of the one party wins the next election.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-62178615076927804372011-11-03T06:18:00.000-04:002011-11-03T06:18:48.328-04:00Members Of Congress Grow Wealthier Despite Recession<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/congress-net-wealth-income-gap_n_1069377.html">Members Of Congress Grow Wealthier Despite Recession; Huffington Post</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>Despite the economic recession and declining household wealth, the net wealth of members of Congress continues to rise, according to a Roll Call analysis of financial disclosure forms.<br />
<br />
Members of the House and Senate have a collective net worth of $2.04 billion, up from $1.65 billion in 2008. The vast majority of the increase goes to the wealthiest members of Congress, who also account for most of Congress' net worth.<br />
<br />
Members' net wealth may be much higher, however, since Roll Call only used the minimum valuation of assets in the range required by disclosure forms, and disclosure forms do not include non-income-producing assets, such as a personal residence.<br />
<br />
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) reported that his assets were worth at least $295 million. Much of his wealth comes from the money he earned in the car alarm business. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) wealth also increased from 2009 to 2010, from $21.7 million to $35.2 million. Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio), Senate Majority Leader (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) all had multimillion-dollar net worths in 2010.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/congress-net-wealth-income-gap_n_1069377.html">Read the rest here</a>.</i></blockquote>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-1296039540663651852011-11-01T08:39:00.001-04:002011-11-04T07:44:05.375-04:00Portman: Super committee secrecy needed<a href="http://www.mansfieldnewsjournal.com/article/20111031/NEWS01/110310306/Portman-Super-committee-secrecy-needed">Portman: Super committee secrecy needed; Gannett News.com</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>...The day before, there was a more telling scene, as Portman, an Ohio Republican, and the committee's 11 other members met for nearly three hours behind closed doors, emerging tight-lipped about what they had discussed.<br />
<br />
"I'd like to tell you everything, but I'm not talking about the super committee stuff," Portman said in a brief interview after that session.<br />
<br />
The panel has held only three public hearings -- and at least eight private ones. In addition, the Republican and Democratic members of the super committee have also held separate, undisclosed partisan huddles to talk about substance and strategy.<br />
<br />
And while there have been a few leaks to the press here and there, the 12 lawmakers on the committee seem to have taken a sort of informal vow of secrecy, refusing to disclose even the broad outlines of their daily agenda or deliberations.<br />
<br />
"We treat it kind of like the ethics committee," said Portman, referring to the congressional panels that handle ethics complaints against members of Congress. "It's just confidential." ...<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.mansfieldnewsjournal.com/article/20111031/NEWS01/110310306/Portman-Super-committee-secrecy-needed">Read the rest here</a>.</blockquote></i><br />
<br />
<b>Comment</b>: Welcome to the new Soviet, where oligarchs elect oligarchs to administer over the <strike>paroles</strike> proles and your life is decided upon behind closed doors.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-42402577969588447082011-11-01T08:33:00.000-04:002011-11-01T08:33:47.631-04:00PROTECT IP Renamed E-PARASITES Act; Would Create The Great Firewall Of America<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111026/12130616523/protect-ip-renamed-e-parasites-act-would-create-great-firewall-america.shtml">PROTECT IP Renamed E-PARASITES Act; Would Create The Great Firewall Of America; Techdirt.com</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>As was unfortunately expected, the House version of PROTECT IP has been released (embedded below) and it's ridiculously bad. Despite promises from Rep. Goodlatte, there has been no serious effort to fix the problems of the Senate bill, and it's clear that absolutely no attention was paid to the significant concerns of the tech industry, legal professionals, investors and entrepreneurs. There are no two ways around this simple fact: this is an attempt to build the Great Firewall of America. The bill would require service providers to block access to certain websites, very much contrary to US official positions on censorship and internet freedom, and almost certainly in violation of the First Amendment.<br />
<br />
Oh, and because PROTECT IP wasn't enough of a misleading and idiotic name, the House has upped the ante. The new bill is called: "the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act" or the E-PARASITE Act (though, they also say you can call it the "Stopping Online Piracy Act").<br />
<br />
The bill is big, and has a bunch of problems. First off, it massively expands the sites that will be covered by the law. The Senate version at least tried to limit the targets of the law (but not the impact of the law) on sites that were "dedicated to infringing activities" with no other significant purposes (already ridiculously broad), the new one just targets "foreign infringing sites" and "has only limited purpose or use other than" infringement. They're also including an "inducement" claim not found elsewhere in US regulations -- and which greatly expands what is meant by inducement. The bill effectively takes what the entertainment industry wanted the Supreme Court to say in Grokster (which it did not say) and puts it into US law. In other words, any foreign site declared by the Attorney General to be "inducing" infringement, with a very broad definition of inducing, can now be censored by the US. With no adversarial hearing. Hello, Great Firewall of America.<br />
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111026/12130616523/protect-ip-renamed-e-parasites-act-would-create-great-firewall-america.shtml"><br />
Read the rest here.</a></blockquote></i><br />
<br />
<b>Comment</b>: Who's their Daddy...well it's not you, it's Hollywood. Follow the money folks. If Hollywood is going to do the bidding for the government complex they expect mafia protection. This is what this potential law is all about. It's one big organized crime ring and America thinks all the while that we live in a Democracy.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-69164734003410268622011-10-26T21:31:00.001-04:002011-11-01T08:23:40.610-04:00Super Committee Holds Public Session on Budget Cuts<a href="http://nationaljournal.com/supercommittee/super-committee-holds-public-session-on-budget-cuts-20111026">Super Committee Holds Public Session on Budget Cuts; National Journal </a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>Just a day after a heated closed-door meeting that indicated there’s still a large gap between Democrats and Republicans on entitlement and tax reform, the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction convened for its third public policy hearing on Wednesday morning.<br />
<br />
And if the points members made during the two-hour hearing are any indication, the 12-member panel has a long way to go to reach a deal before its Nov. 23 deadline to present a package worth $1.2 trillion in deficit savings over 10 years to Congress.<br />
<br />
The hearing was scheduled to be a discussion of discretionary spending, which makes up about 40 percent of the budget. But the members only loosely stuck to those guidelines, instead making partisan points about income distribution, defense spending and savings, tax reform, and economic uncertainty.<br />
<br />
Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf, who testified during the group’s first public policy hearing on the drivers of the debt, carefully explained budgetary concepts, warned the committee that its decisions on discretionary spending could be voided by future Congresses, and highlighted the savings already wrung from discretionary outlays. He also noted that mandatory spending “dominates” the federal budget.<br />
<br />
The committee’s Democrats and Republicans alike agreed with him – at least in theory. But while Democrats pointed out that mandatory spending reforms would have to be paired with reduced defense spending and additional revenues, Republicans maintained that spending – not revenues – is the problem.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nationaljournal.com/supercommittee/super-committee-holds-public-session-on-budget-cuts-20111026">Read the rest here</a></i>.</blockquote><br />
<b>Comment</b>: While there are number of discussions that could be considered in this article, the one thought I have as I read it, is that the idea of repealing the 17th gets pushed back further in to time as each day passes and no Americans challenge the unconstitutionality of the super congress.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-49690820075856239152011-10-25T13:29:00.000-04:002011-10-25T13:29:29.234-04:00Senators flout own immigration law on worker verification<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/24/senators-fail-to-follow-law-on-using-e-verify/">Senators flout own immigration law on worker verification; The Washington Times</a><br />
<br />
<i><blockquote>Sen. John Boozman is co-sponsoring a bill that would require every employer in the country to use the E-Verify program to screen for illegal workers — but until earlier this month, the senator himself wasn’t signed up for the system, thus violating a 1996 law that makes its use mandatory for all congressional offices.<br />
<br />
The Arkansas Republican wasn’t alone. As of the beginning of this month, seven Senate offices were not signed up to use the system, which lets employers check would-be workers’ Social Security numbers against a government database to determine whether they are in the country legally.<br />
<br />
After inquiries by The Washington Times, all seven offices said they are now properly signed up.<br />
<br />
“It was an oversight that is being corrected,” said Sara Lasure, a spokeswoman for Mr. Boozman. “As a supporter of E-Verify, Sen. Boozman wants to lead by example and is fully supportive of the program.”<br />
<br />
The hiccup, though, underscores the difficulty of devising a successful system for the rest of the country at a time when there is no general agreement on how to revamp the American immigration system and how to find the most cost-effective tools to weed out illegal workers.<br />
<br />
E-Verify, which is run by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a branch of the Homeland Security Department, could fit that bill — but the sides also disagree about how to expand it.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/24/senators-fail-to-follow-law-on-using-e-verify/">Read the rest here</a>.</blockquote><br />
</i><br />
<br />
<b>Comment</b>: While I am for immigration reform and finding a solution to resolve the problem with the large number of illegal aliens we have living in our country, I see right though this whole scheme. It has nothing to do with determining if the person being hired is illegal or not, but to control who works and who doesn't and when Americans wake up to this it will be too late.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-21699799554743813222011-10-24T17:49:00.003-04:002011-11-04T08:00:14.391-04:00McCain Raises Prospect of Surpassing Hitler's Invasion Record<a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.7a1f679ced5b40465c22d8e765ab2046.881&show_article=1">McCain raises prospect of military option in Syria; AFP</a><br />
<i><blockquote>US Senator John McCain raised the prospect Sunday of possible armed <b>intervention to protect civilians</b> in Syria where a crackdown on pro-democracy protests has killed more than 3,000 people. ...</blockquote><blockquote><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.7a1f679ced5b40465c22d8e765ab2046.881&show_article=1">Read the rest here</a>.</blockquote></i><br />
<br />
<i>Note: Bold font used by blogger. </i>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22818602.post-25406606047856678522011-10-24T17:38:00.000-04:002011-10-24T17:38:03.463-04:00Feds Close Probe into Senator Robert Menendez, Report Says<a href="http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2011/10/24/federal-investigation-into-senator-robert-menendez-over-report-says/">Feds Close Probe into Senator Robert Menendez, Report Says; Latino FOXNews</a> (<i>yes, FOX does pander to divisiveness.</i>)<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq"><i>A federal investigation into Robert Menendez's relationship with a non-profit organization in New Jersey has come to an end – though it remains unclear if the U.S. senator has been cleared of any wrongdoing, according to a report.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>The Star-Ledger of Newark said prosecutors concluded their five-year probe into Menendez's affiliation with the Hudson County non-profit agency. It reports that no charges will be brought in the matter, which became public during the Democrat's bid for his first full term in 2006.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>The newspaper cited a letter sent to Menendez's lawyer by Zane David Memeger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, whose office took over the probe in 2009 when Paul Fishman was appointed U.S. Attorney for New Jersey. Fishman recused himself to avoid a potential conflict of interest, because Menendez had supported him for the federal post.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>"After review and consideration of the matter transferred to me, I have decided to close the file," Memeger wrote in the Oct. 5 letter, co-signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard P. Barrett. </i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>It indicates that Menendez's lawyer, Marc Elias, had called Memeger to seek an update on the investigation, though prosecutors typically don't respond to such requests.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>The newspaper did not say how it obtained a copy of the letter, which does not explicitly say Menendez has been cleared of wrongdoing. But one expert told the newspaper that it amounts to a "de facto exoneration" because prosecutors rarely send out such letters to people being investigated.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<i>Menendez declined comment on the conclusion of the investigation, which focused on his relationship with the North Hudson Community Action Corp., an anti-poverty group that he helped secure millions of dollar in federal funding.</i><br />
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_2120501131"><i><br />
</i></a><br />
<i><a href="http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2011/10/24/federal-investigation-into-senator-robert-menendez-over-report-says/">Read the rest here</a>.</i></blockquote><b>Comment</b>: Menendez is one of hundred reasons to repeal the 17th Amendment.Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05043279868308825316noreply@blogger.com0