Samuel Alito became the fifth non-liberal member of the Supreme Court when he was sworn in as an Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court at 12:40 pm today, replacing the retired Sandra Day O'Connor. This appointment should shift the balance of the court from the often far-left, with as many as 6 of 9 votes going in a liberal direction on recent cases.
With Alito replacing the schizophrenically-opinioned O'Connor's "swing vote," the pivotal Justice on the court becomes onetime conservative Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee whose opinions have drifted farther to the left in recent years. If the four conservatives on the court can pull Kennedy with them, then the higher court should swing from a left-leaning, law-writing mindset toward one of objective judicial review and constitutional analysis and interpretation--a mindset more in line with the intent of the framers of the Constitution and founders of our country.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-01-31T214637Z_01_N31400081_RTRUKOC_0_US-COURT-ALITO.xml&rpc=22
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/biographiescurrent.pdf
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Abortion ban on the table in several states
As the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito helps bring the Supreme Court closer to the founding fathers' ideal of Constitutional interpreters rather than rogue lawmakers, several states have decided that the time is ripe for a challenge of Roe v. Wade and abortion-on-demand as the law of the land.
Lawmakers in Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, South Dakota and Tennesse have proposed legislation that would make all abortion (except those performed to save the life of the mother) illegal. The thought is that, with the expected tilt back from the left of the high court, at least one state's legislation could make it that far on appeal and possibly effect the overturning of Roe, giving the power to legalize or outlaw abortion back to the states, as is instructed in the enumerated powers clause of the Constitution.
Opponents of the sweeping legislation support less broad measures which "can be enforced and that can protect women and minors from the physical and psychological risks of abortion,” such as requirements for parental notification and fetal pain warnings, said Clarke Forsythe, director of Americans United for Life. Stateline.com reports that others "doubt the high court will rush to overturn Roe v. Wade and warn that preemptive state bans could backfire -- provoking judicial retrenchment behind the legal precedent and hindering future state efforts to limit or outlaw abortion."
Regardless the outcome, we will keep you posted here as each case develops--particularly on the status of the legislation proposed in Georgia.
http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=83875
http://www.washtimes.com/upi/20060131-090347-1251r.htm
Lawmakers in Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, South Dakota and Tennesse have proposed legislation that would make all abortion (except those performed to save the life of the mother) illegal. The thought is that, with the expected tilt back from the left of the high court, at least one state's legislation could make it that far on appeal and possibly effect the overturning of Roe, giving the power to legalize or outlaw abortion back to the states, as is instructed in the enumerated powers clause of the Constitution.
Opponents of the sweeping legislation support less broad measures which "can be enforced and that can protect women and minors from the physical and psychological risks of abortion,” such as requirements for parental notification and fetal pain warnings, said Clarke Forsythe, director of Americans United for Life. Stateline.com reports that others "doubt the high court will rush to overturn Roe v. Wade and warn that preemptive state bans could backfire -- provoking judicial retrenchment behind the legal precedent and hindering future state efforts to limit or outlaw abortion."
Regardless the outcome, we will keep you posted here as each case develops--particularly on the status of the legislation proposed in Georgia.
http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=83875
http://www.washtimes.com/upi/20060131-090347-1251r.htm
58-42: Alito confirmed!
Samuel Alito was confirmed to the US Supreme Court Tuesday morning by a sharply divided 58-42 vote. He is expected to be sworn in later today, and to attend President Bush's State of the Union address tonight.
The eloquence of Ted Kennedy
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) made a landmark speech today before the Senate test vote on Judge Samuel Alito's supreme court confirmation, accusing him of trying to kill American children with a greater risk of asthma. In a speech only he could deliver, Senator Kennedy said:
"This is the issue, this is the time, this is the nominee! And we find out how we've been treated, Mr. President, and-- this body deserves better the American people deserve better. That's what it's about, let's really find out. Let's have a chance-- to go through-- uh-- this, uh-- these cases-- this, uh-- this nominee. We have, uh, know Mr. President that the right wing is-- now, in-- has its campaign, in-- uh, full, full gear-- uh, their mission is cover up uh, the truth. So we do need a full debate! Bring out the truth on Judge Alito's record. What's wrong with debate? [unintelligible] what Americans would do if they-- if they found out-- if they heard, uh, the full record? That's what, uh, the issue is, uh, Mr. President, and that's why-- uh, people are entitled-- uh, to-- uh, the time.
"We have doubled the number of deaths from ab-- asthma this year than we had five years ago! Doubled the deaths! For children. I wonder why that is? I don't know what you tell the mother when they see the children having that-- having that intensities. We pass laws, the President sign them, they go to the court in terms for interpretation, and where will this nominee come out? Will he come on out for that mother, who has a child? That's got asthma? Or that parent who's seen the pollution that's taken place in a pond-- in a lake-- and whose child has been affected by-- by them-- those kinds of poison."
As always, we are awed by the truly dizzying intellect of Senator Kennedy. However, we do wonder just what any of this has to do with Sam Alito.
**transcript taken by J.P. Emanuel from original audio**
"This is the issue, this is the time, this is the nominee! And we find out how we've been treated, Mr. President, and-- this body deserves better the American people deserve better. That's what it's about, let's really find out. Let's have a chance-- to go through-- uh-- this, uh-- these cases-- this, uh-- this nominee. We have, uh, know Mr. President that the right wing is-- now, in-- has its campaign, in-- uh, full, full gear-- uh, their mission is cover up uh, the truth. So we do need a full debate! Bring out the truth on Judge Alito's record. What's wrong with debate? [unintelligible] what Americans would do if they-- if they found out-- if they heard, uh, the full record? That's what, uh, the issue is, uh, Mr. President, and that's why-- uh, people are entitled-- uh, to-- uh, the time.
"We have doubled the number of deaths from ab-- asthma this year than we had five years ago! Doubled the deaths! For children. I wonder why that is? I don't know what you tell the mother when they see the children having that-- having that intensities. We pass laws, the President sign them, they go to the court in terms for interpretation, and where will this nominee come out? Will he come on out for that mother, who has a child? That's got asthma? Or that parent who's seen the pollution that's taken place in a pond-- in a lake-- and whose child has been affected by-- by them-- those kinds of poison."
As always, we are awed by the truly dizzying intellect of Senator Kennedy. However, we do wonder just what any of this has to do with Sam Alito.
**transcript taken by J.P. Emanuel from original audio**
Reid to step down?
Rumors are running rampant on capitol hill that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) could be planning to step down from his leadership position, possibly as early as next month. Reid has been tarnished recently by the revelation that the Abramoff scandal, which he attempted to paint as a "Republican" problem, reached his office as well, with $60,000 from Indian tribes linked to Abramoff being accepted by his Political Action Committee.
Reid has a long history with both gambling and scandal, being investigated by the Justice Department for taking bribes from attorneys for mafia members while serving as the head of the Nevada Gaming Commission. As recently as last month, Reid endorsed current Las Vegas mayor and former mob lawyer Oscas Goodman as a "very strong candidate" to challenge incumbent Republican John ensign for the other Nevada senate seat.
Reid is also the subject of animosity from the left side of the congressional aisle for "capitulating" to President Bush on the Alito nomination, originially refusing to support a potential filibuster because there clearly were not enough votes for it to succeed. He eventually signed on to the effort, even though it was obviously doomed from the beginning, as a response to mounting pressure from left-wing groups. He characterized his ultimate support for the filibuster as taking the opportunity to "express [his] opinion as to what a bad choice [Alito] was."
http://www.redstate.com/print/2006/1/28/225229/236
Reid has a long history with both gambling and scandal, being investigated by the Justice Department for taking bribes from attorneys for mafia members while serving as the head of the Nevada Gaming Commission. As recently as last month, Reid endorsed current Las Vegas mayor and former mob lawyer Oscas Goodman as a "very strong candidate" to challenge incumbent Republican John ensign for the other Nevada senate seat.
Reid is also the subject of animosity from the left side of the congressional aisle for "capitulating" to President Bush on the Alito nomination, originially refusing to support a potential filibuster because there clearly were not enough votes for it to succeed. He eventually signed on to the effort, even though it was obviously doomed from the beginning, as a response to mounting pressure from left-wing groups. He characterized his ultimate support for the filibuster as taking the opportunity to "express [his] opinion as to what a bad choice [Alito] was."
http://www.redstate.com/print/2006/1/28/225229/236
Iran called before the Security Council
In an all-night meeting Monday night at the home of British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice managed to convince UN Security Council members Russia and China to sign on to the plan to call Iran before the UN to explain its nuclear program.
The meeting also produced a statement calling on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to "report to the Security Council its decision on the steps required of Iran, and [to] also report to the Security Council all IAEA reports as resolutions as adopted relating to this issue" at the group's meeting in Vienna this Thursday." The nations agreed to wait until March to summon Iran itself to the UN, allowing the IAEA time to complete its current report on Iran's violations of international policy.
Iran still maintains that it possesses a nuclear program for the sole purpose of creating energy.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/30/D8FFCNMO0.html
The meeting also produced a statement calling on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to "report to the Security Council its decision on the steps required of Iran, and [to] also report to the Security Council all IAEA reports as resolutions as adopted relating to this issue" at the group's meeting in Vienna this Thursday." The nations agreed to wait until March to summon Iran itself to the UN, allowing the IAEA time to complete its current report on Iran's violations of international policy.
Iran still maintains that it possesses a nuclear program for the sole purpose of creating energy.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/30/D8FFCNMO0.html
Monday, January 30, 2006
Hamas, continued
As the fallout from last week's Palestinian elections continues with 24-hour gunfire in the Gaza strip and growing unrest in the world community, it seems odd that anyone would pose the idea that the election of Hamas as the official government of Palestine is a "blessing in disguise" for Israel and, by extension, the US. However, columnists Max Borders and Jeff Jacoby think that it may be just that.
Borders, writing in TCS Daily on January 27, says that "it will now be easier politically for Israel to do what it must to protect itself. Now that Hamas is “legitimate,” Israel can simply defend itself against Palestine instead of a murky Palestinian faction – and such would be justified even under international law. Israel is no longer dealing with a terror group hiding behind an enfeebled Fatah. "
Jacoby, in a column posted on Townhall.com, writes that "the sweeping Hamas victory is by far the best result that could have been hoped for." He holds this opinion, he says, "not because Hamas is anything other than a blood-drenched terrorist group responsible for killing or maiming thousands of innocent victims, but because its lopsided win is an unambiguous reality check into the nature of Palestinian society. And if there is one thing that the West badly needs, it is more realism and less delusion about the Palestinians."
Jacoby closed his column observing the little-articulated yet seemingly evident case that "Palestinian society is deeply dysfunctional, steeped in hatred and violence. All but the willfully blind can now see that the Palestinian Authority is no "partner in peace" [with Israel]. Until it is decisively defeated and thoroughly detoxified, the Palestinian people will never enjoy the blessings of liberty and decent governance. Ironically, the ascendancy of Hamas may have brought that eventual outcome a little closer."
In a speech Tuesday, President Bush said he did not understand "how you can be a partner in peace if you advocate the destruction of a country as part of your platform." This, he said, makes Hamas "a party with which we will not deal."
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=012706F
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/jeffjacoby/2006/01/30/184239.html
Borders, writing in TCS Daily on January 27, says that "it will now be easier politically for Israel to do what it must to protect itself. Now that Hamas is “legitimate,” Israel can simply defend itself against Palestine instead of a murky Palestinian faction – and such would be justified even under international law. Israel is no longer dealing with a terror group hiding behind an enfeebled Fatah. "
Jacoby, in a column posted on Townhall.com, writes that "the sweeping Hamas victory is by far the best result that could have been hoped for." He holds this opinion, he says, "not because Hamas is anything other than a blood-drenched terrorist group responsible for killing or maiming thousands of innocent victims, but because its lopsided win is an unambiguous reality check into the nature of Palestinian society. And if there is one thing that the West badly needs, it is more realism and less delusion about the Palestinians."
Jacoby closed his column observing the little-articulated yet seemingly evident case that "Palestinian society is deeply dysfunctional, steeped in hatred and violence. All but the willfully blind can now see that the Palestinian Authority is no "partner in peace" [with Israel]. Until it is decisively defeated and thoroughly detoxified, the Palestinian people will never enjoy the blessings of liberty and decent governance. Ironically, the ascendancy of Hamas may have brought that eventual outcome a little closer."
In a speech Tuesday, President Bush said he did not understand "how you can be a partner in peace if you advocate the destruction of a country as part of your platform." This, he said, makes Hamas "a party with which we will not deal."
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=012706F
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/jeffjacoby/2006/01/30/184239.html
Filibustering Alito, part 3
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), preparing for a Senate re-election fight against "Gold Star Moms for Peace" leader Cindy Sheehan, has announced that she will join the proposed filibuster of Samuel Alito's nomination. Meanwhile, Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee announced today that he will be voting against Judge Alito. However, he has committed to voting for cloture when it comes up on the Senate floor at 4:30 today, citing the need to "work together." 53 of the 55 Republicans are expected to vote to confirm Alito, along with Democrats Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
The cloture vote took place at 4:35pm, and at 5:30 the verdict was read: 72 votes for cloture (ending floor debate), and 25 against. The test vote for confirmation held earlier in the day resulted in a 57-38 Alito victory, and the actual confirmation vote is scheduled for 11am tomorrow.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/30/AR2006013000392_pf.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/gov/supreme-court/D8F80BIG0.html
The cloture vote took place at 4:35pm, and at 5:30 the verdict was read: 72 votes for cloture (ending floor debate), and 25 against. The test vote for confirmation held earlier in the day resulted in a 57-38 Alito victory, and the actual confirmation vote is scheduled for 11am tomorrow.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/30/AR2006013000392_pf.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/gov/supreme-court/D8F80BIG0.html
L.A. Radio Host vs. Islamic Terror
Los Angeles radio host Bill Handel (KFI-AM) has come under fire for "insensitivity to Muslims" for a January 12 segment of his radio show in which he poked fun at the stampede of pilgrims on their annual Hajj, which killed over 300 people and injured hundreds more. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has demanded an apology from both him and his radio station .
"KFI needs to distance itself from Mr. Handel's unbelievable insensitivity by issuing a formal apology and a reprimand," said CAIR spokeswoman Sabiha Khan. The "formal call for apology and reprimand" accused Handel of making "Islamophobic remarks," among other things. Interestingly, Handel announced on his show yesterday that he and the station have received "literally hundreds" of these letters, from all over the world (Bahrain, China, Afghanistan, etc.) and all over the US--and that every one of them is identical.
Handel addressed this, saying that the obvious source of the form letter was a mass email sent out by CAIR, who, he said, "is an organization who was started by the folks who ran Hamas...and is the same organization who, today on the news, asked the world to keep sending aid to Palestine but refused to acknowledge that Israel has a right to exist."
Handel responded to the call for apology, reading on the air from a written statement:
Number two: Recognize that Israel as a sovereign nation, as recognized by the world community, has a right to exist with defensible borders.
Three: CAIR and its associates has no ties, nor have they ever had any ties to known terrorist organizations or individuals whatsoever, financially or otherwise, including but not limited to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Al Quaeda."
Handel continued, challenging local and national news outlets who "carry the water for CAIR when they call themselves a civil-rights organization" to ask CAIR how they respond to his request for their acknowledgement of his three statements.
KFI issued a statement as well, saying "KFI-AM does not condone making light of the deaths of people engaged in religious observances. We regret that listeners found the comments of one of our on-air hosts to be insensitive. KFI does not censor its hosts, nor does it tell them what to say or not to say. KFI is a strong and passionate believer in 1st amendment rights and that is at the very core of this radio station. "
http://www.kfi640.com/main.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6DDB2BD0-0C01-4E11-AE63-93AF20811614.htm
http://www.billhandel.com/news_details.aspx?News=2123
"KFI needs to distance itself from Mr. Handel's unbelievable insensitivity by issuing a formal apology and a reprimand," said CAIR spokeswoman Sabiha Khan. The "formal call for apology and reprimand" accused Handel of making "Islamophobic remarks," among other things. Interestingly, Handel announced on his show yesterday that he and the station have received "literally hundreds" of these letters, from all over the world (Bahrain, China, Afghanistan, etc.) and all over the US--and that every one of them is identical.
Handel addressed this, saying that the obvious source of the form letter was a mass email sent out by CAIR, who, he said, "is an organization who was started by the folks who ran Hamas...and is the same organization who, today on the news, asked the world to keep sending aid to Palestine but refused to acknowledge that Israel has a right to exist."
Handel responded to the call for apology, reading on the air from a written statement:
"I am willing to issue a formal apology, live on the air, provided that CAIR clarifies its positions on several issues. As has been widely reported, CAIR has been the subject of a number of investigations for its ties to terrorism. If CAIR will publicly acknowledge the following three statements, I will recognize it as an organization that truly represents law-abiding, peace-loving American Muslim citizens, not merely a front for people who advocate terrorism.
Number one: CAIR denounces all bombing attacks where the victims are innocent civilians, such as all bus, market, restaurant bombings in Israel, the 2004 train bombing in Madrid, and the 2005 subway and bus bombings in London. Denounce those as terrorism.Number two: Recognize that Israel as a sovereign nation, as recognized by the world community, has a right to exist with defensible borders.
Three: CAIR and its associates has no ties, nor have they ever had any ties to known terrorist organizations or individuals whatsoever, financially or otherwise, including but not limited to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Al Quaeda."
Handel continued, challenging local and national news outlets who "carry the water for CAIR when they call themselves a civil-rights organization" to ask CAIR how they respond to his request for their acknowledgement of his three statements.
KFI issued a statement as well, saying "KFI-AM does not condone making light of the deaths of people engaged in religious observances. We regret that listeners found the comments of one of our on-air hosts to be insensitive. KFI does not censor its hosts, nor does it tell them what to say or not to say. KFI is a strong and passionate believer in 1st amendment rights and that is at the very core of this radio station. "
http://www.kfi640.com/main.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6DDB2BD0-0C01-4E11-AE63-93AF20811614.htm
http://www.billhandel.com/news_details.aspx?News=2123
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Filibustering Alito, part 2
The call by Democrats John Kerry and Edward Kennedy for a filibuster of President Bush's nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court grew on Friday, as several more senators signed on to the effort, including Hillary Clinton and Joseph Biden. However, a contingent of Democrats led by Barack Obama (D-IL), and including Harry Reid and Charles Schumer, has publicly criticized the idea of filibustering Judge Alito, saying that Democrats need to oppose judicial nominees by convincing Americans that "their values are at stake" if Republican-nominated judges are confirmed, rather than trying to stop nominees through "stalling tactics."
The potential filibuster would require 60 votes for cloture (ending the move and bringing the issue to a floor vote), and the Associated Press reports that, including the recently announced anti-filibuster Democrats, there are 62 potential votes in the body. Should the nomination come to an up-or-down vote, President Bush appears to have 56 votes (53 Republican and 3 Democrat) in support of Alito's confirmation.
The floor vote on Judge Alito has been scheduled for 11 a.m. on Tuesday, January 31, as Senator Frist is attempting to have Judge Alito confirmed in time for the President's State of the Union address that night.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183130,00.html
The potential filibuster would require 60 votes for cloture (ending the move and bringing the issue to a floor vote), and the Associated Press reports that, including the recently announced anti-filibuster Democrats, there are 62 potential votes in the body. Should the nomination come to an up-or-down vote, President Bush appears to have 56 votes (53 Republican and 3 Democrat) in support of Alito's confirmation.
The floor vote on Judge Alito has been scheduled for 11 a.m. on Tuesday, January 31, as Senator Frist is attempting to have Judge Alito confirmed in time for the President's State of the Union address that night.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183130,00.html
Frist done after '06; can Democrats capitalize?
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) is not seeking re-election to Congress in 2006 due to a term-limit promise, although there is great speculation that he may throw his hat into the ring for the 2008 Presidential race. The frontrunners for the Republican nomination to replace Frist are former congressmen Ed Bryant and Van Hilleary, who are both competing for votes from the same conservative base. Bryant has been endorsed by several state representatives, as well as Tennessee Right To Life. Hilleary is receiving pressure from conservatives in some quarters to drop out of the race and challenge incumbent Democrat Governor Phil Bredsden instead, which would set up a rematch of the 2002 gubernatorial meeting, in which Bredsden won a close victory. The third Republican candidate is Bob Corker.
The anointed Democrat candidate to replace Frist is Representative Harold Ford, Jr., who hopes to be the first Democrat to win a senate seat from Tennessee since Al Gore, who later failed to carry his home state in the 2000 Presidential election--after Ford gave the keynote address at that year's Democrat Convention. After Dick Gephardt (D-MO) left the House to run for President in 2004, Ford challenged Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for the open position of House Minority Leader, but dropped out of the race before the official vote.
Ford faces two major difficulties in his quest for election to the Senate. First, Tennessee is a Republican state, and Ford is a liberal Democrat; second, his family (beginning with uncle and Tennessee state Senator John Ford) has been coming under increasing scrutiny for various improprieties, including acceptance of bribes and involvement in massive voting irregularities in recent elections. Even if Representative Ford does manage to distance himself from his family's legal and ethical issues, he may not be able to overcome his Republican opponent, as he is currently trailing both Bryant and Hilleary.
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/DustinHawkins/2006/01/27/183906.html
The anointed Democrat candidate to replace Frist is Representative Harold Ford, Jr., who hopes to be the first Democrat to win a senate seat from Tennessee since Al Gore, who later failed to carry his home state in the 2000 Presidential election--after Ford gave the keynote address at that year's Democrat Convention. After Dick Gephardt (D-MO) left the House to run for President in 2004, Ford challenged Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for the open position of House Minority Leader, but dropped out of the race before the official vote.
Ford faces two major difficulties in his quest for election to the Senate. First, Tennessee is a Republican state, and Ford is a liberal Democrat; second, his family (beginning with uncle and Tennessee state Senator John Ford) has been coming under increasing scrutiny for various improprieties, including acceptance of bribes and involvement in massive voting irregularities in recent elections. Even if Representative Ford does manage to distance himself from his family's legal and ethical issues, he may not be able to overcome his Republican opponent, as he is currently trailing both Bryant and Hilleary.
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/DustinHawkins/2006/01/27/183906.html
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Kerry calls for filibuster on Alito
CNN has reported that Senator John Kerry, failed Democrat presidential nominee, has decided to attempt a filibuster to block the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. Kerry was on the phone all day from Davos, Switzerland, where he was attending the World Economic Forum, "martialing support" for the move, which he proposed to a handful of Democrat senators in a meeting yesterday. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) has reportedly already signed on to the effort.
Alito is still expected to be confirmed, as Republicans currently have enough votes in the Senate to overcome any filibuster effort. The move could further backfire on the Democrats, as a concerted attempt at a filibuster could cause Senate Republicans to trigger the "nuclear (or "constitutional") option," making it even easier to confirm future nominees.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/26/alito/index.html
Alito is still expected to be confirmed, as Republicans currently have enough votes in the Senate to overcome any filibuster effort. The move could further backfire on the Democrats, as a concerted attempt at a filibuster could cause Senate Republicans to trigger the "nuclear (or "constitutional") option," making it even easier to confirm future nominees.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/26/alito/index.html
Hamas immediately brings violence to Palestinian capitol
3,000 Hamas supporters rushed the Palestinian parliament building Thursday, raising their green flag over the capitol and exchanging in verbal and physical clashes, including rock throwing, with supporters of the formerly ruling Fatah party, in what the Associated Press called the "first confrontation between Hamas and Fatah since the Islamic militant group won parliamentary elections." We applaud Hamas on the admirable restraint they showed in waiting a until whole day after the elections to begin demonstrating their idea of diplomacy and transfer of power in a democratic society.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/26/D8FCE9EO7.html
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/26/D8FCE9EO7.html
Hamas wins sweeping victory in Palestinian elections; current government resigns
In a disturbing development in the Palestinian Authority elections yesterday, the Islamist terror group Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinial Legislative Council, ousting the Fatah party of the late Yasser Arafat. Before the official election results were even in, Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Quorie announced that he and the rest of the Palestinian Government would resign, making way for Hamas to "form a new government."
"It's the choice of the people and it should be respected," said Qorie. The official results are expected to be released at noon E.T. today, and different exit polls have had conflicting results, showing anything from a 5-seat minority for Hamas in the legislature to an outright victory, in which they alone would control the house with a majority.
Interim Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has stated that Israel "cannot accept" a situation in which Hamas, a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of Israel, is represented as an official part of the Palestinian Authority. In a statement released by his office, he vowed to "not negotiate with a government that does not meet its most basic obligations -- to fight terrorism." He said that Israel is "prepared to assist the Palestinians and [President] Abu Mazen...but they must meet their commitments."
The European Union, on the other hand, said that it was "prepared to work with any government."
CNN reports that Hamas has "called for the destruction of Israel and carried out numerous terrorists attacks that have killed scores of Israelis over the years," and the State Department lists Hamas as a terrorist group on their official Terror Watch List. We will keep a close eye on this development, as it can mean nothing good for Israel or, by extension, America.
UN Secretary General congratulated the Palestinian people on peaceful elections, which were observed by international representatives, including former President Jimmy Carter.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PALESTINIANS_ELECTION?SITE=MOSPL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&SECTION=HOME
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/26/palestinian.election/index.html
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/26/D8FCEI209.html
"It's the choice of the people and it should be respected," said Qorie. The official results are expected to be released at noon E.T. today, and different exit polls have had conflicting results, showing anything from a 5-seat minority for Hamas in the legislature to an outright victory, in which they alone would control the house with a majority.
Interim Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has stated that Israel "cannot accept" a situation in which Hamas, a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of Israel, is represented as an official part of the Palestinian Authority. In a statement released by his office, he vowed to "not negotiate with a government that does not meet its most basic obligations -- to fight terrorism." He said that Israel is "prepared to assist the Palestinians and [President] Abu Mazen...but they must meet their commitments."
The European Union, on the other hand, said that it was "prepared to work with any government."
CNN reports that Hamas has "called for the destruction of Israel and carried out numerous terrorists attacks that have killed scores of Israelis over the years," and the State Department lists Hamas as a terrorist group on their official Terror Watch List. We will keep a close eye on this development, as it can mean nothing good for Israel or, by extension, America.
UN Secretary General congratulated the Palestinian people on peaceful elections, which were observed by international representatives, including former President Jimmy Carter.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PALESTINIANS_ELECTION?SITE=MOSPL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&SECTION=HOME
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/26/palestinian.election/index.html
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/26/D8FCEI209.html
51% say No President Hillary
A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll revealed that 51% of Americans would "definitely vote against" Hillary Clinton should she run for President in 2008. Only 16% of Americans responded that they would "definitely support" the junior Senator from New York.
CNN reports that Ms. Clinton "insists she is focused on her 2006 re-election to the Senate, and is not entertaining the idea of running for the White House in 2008."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/24/sr.tues/index.html
CNN reports that Ms. Clinton "insists she is focused on her 2006 re-election to the Senate, and is not entertaining the idea of running for the White House in 2008."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/24/sr.tues/index.html
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Alito makes it out of committee
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito made it out of the Senate Judicial Committee on Tuesday, being approved with a 10-8 party-line vote. He is expected to be confirmed when the full Senate votes in a few weeks.
Some quotes from committee members:
"His personal background is exemplary. His professional qualifications are outstanding." -Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa.
"Think how much better it would have been if...President Bush had sought any one of dozens upon dozens of highly qualified people...men and women, various ethnic backgrounds - all of whom would have gotten an overwhelmingly, overwhelmingly, if not unanimous, vote from the Senate." Pat Leahy (D-VT)
"If one is pro-choice, in this day and age...one can't vote for Judge Alito. It is simply that simple. I am very concerned about the impact he would have on women's rights, including a woman's right to make certain reproductive choices." Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
"He's committed to showing restraint. He will follow the law day after day. And some days conservatives will win and some days liberals will win. And that's what we want in a judge." Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
We will continue to keep you updated on the status of Judge Alito's nomination.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ALITO_EXCERPTS?SITE=TXBRY&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Some quotes from committee members:
"His personal background is exemplary. His professional qualifications are outstanding." -Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa.
"Think how much better it would have been if...President Bush had sought any one of dozens upon dozens of highly qualified people...men and women, various ethnic backgrounds - all of whom would have gotten an overwhelmingly, overwhelmingly, if not unanimous, vote from the Senate." Pat Leahy (D-VT)
"If one is pro-choice, in this day and age...one can't vote for Judge Alito. It is simply that simple. I am very concerned about the impact he would have on women's rights, including a woman's right to make certain reproductive choices." Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
"He's committed to showing restraint. He will follow the law day after day. And some days conservatives will win and some days liberals will win. And that's what we want in a judge." Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
We will continue to keep you updated on the status of Judge Alito's nomination.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ALITO_EXCERPTS?SITE=TXBRY&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Saddam sues Bush, Blair in International Criminal Court
Lawyers on deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's defense team distributed copies on Wednesday of a lawsuit they plan to file with the International Criminal Court in the Hague, Netherlands. In this suit, brought against President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair for "destroying Iraq," the lawyers allege that Bush and Blair committed "war crimes" by "using weapons of mass destruction and internationally-banned weapons...against unarmed Iraqi civilians."
The lawsuit also accuses President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of "torturing Iraqi prisoners, destroying Iraq's cultural heritage with the aim of eliminating an ancient civilization, and inciting internal strife," along with "polluting Iraq's air, waters and environment."
The lawsuit demanded that the two leaders appear before the ICC and face the harshest measures available under Dutch legislation and international law.
The acceptance of cases such as this is a major reason the US is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court, and it is unlikely that any decision they make on this case would be enforceable against President Bush or America.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060125-111155-3468r.htm
The lawsuit also accuses President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of "torturing Iraqi prisoners, destroying Iraq's cultural heritage with the aim of eliminating an ancient civilization, and inciting internal strife," along with "polluting Iraq's air, waters and environment."
The lawsuit demanded that the two leaders appear before the ICC and face the harshest measures available under Dutch legislation and international law.
The acceptance of cases such as this is a major reason the US is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court, and it is unlikely that any decision they make on this case would be enforceable against President Bush or America.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060125-111155-3468r.htm
"Why I Don't Support the Troops" author defends column
Joel Stein, author of the LA Times column mentioned here previously (http://ugacr.blogspot.com/2006/01/la-times-column-why-i-dont-support.html) "said he has been "bombarded" by hate mail over the incendiary article -- which was headlined "Warriors and Wusses" and held that U.S. soldiers in Iraq were "ignoring their morality" -- but does not regret writing it and stands by the premise."
"I don't think [soldiers] are necessarily bad people," said Stein in an interview with Reuters Wednesday. "But I don't agree with what they are doing so I don't see the logic of supporting it." He defended calling those who claim to support the troops but not their cause "wusses," saying "I just always think [politicians who do so] are covering their ass."
Stein said that he has been "bombarded" with "hate e-mails" since his column appeared on the Opinions page of Tuesday's Times, crediting the internet and a vast network of conservative websites, as well as blogs like this one, for the broad and almost instantaneous response to his words.
While we at UGACR wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Stein's view that American soldiers are immoral for fighting to defend their nation and to help bring freedom to tens of millions of other people around the world, we do respect his honesty and refusal to engage in double-talk about his feelings toward America, its troops, and their mission oversaeas. He at least is one critic whose statements can be taken at face value--a virtue not shared by the overwhelming majority of war opponents.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-01-25T222721Z_01_N24212064_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-MEDIA.xml&rpc=22
"I don't think [soldiers] are necessarily bad people," said Stein in an interview with Reuters Wednesday. "But I don't agree with what they are doing so I don't see the logic of supporting it." He defended calling those who claim to support the troops but not their cause "wusses," saying "I just always think [politicians who do so] are covering their ass."
Stein said that he has been "bombarded" with "hate e-mails" since his column appeared on the Opinions page of Tuesday's Times, crediting the internet and a vast network of conservative websites, as well as blogs like this one, for the broad and almost instantaneous response to his words.
While we at UGACR wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Stein's view that American soldiers are immoral for fighting to defend their nation and to help bring freedom to tens of millions of other people around the world, we do respect his honesty and refusal to engage in double-talk about his feelings toward America, its troops, and their mission oversaeas. He at least is one critic whose statements can be taken at face value--a virtue not shared by the overwhelming majority of war opponents.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-01-25T222721Z_01_N24212064_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-MEDIA.xml&rpc=22
Is Reid the new Rove?
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) appeared to be auditioning for a position as Karl Rove's replacement Tuesday, as he delivered a speech to the liberal Center for American Progress in which he gave advice--or more accurately, listed demands--on the content and attitude of President Bush's upcoming State of the Union Address. The President, Reid said, "must unite the nation," saying "we need to hear honesty and humility from the commander in chief, not swagger from the campaigner-in-chief." He further maligned Bush and his party's commitment to national security, saying "Republicans run good campaigns, but when it comes to actually governing and protecting Americans, they have a record of incompetence."
Senator Reid's speech also included a little-known nugget about President Bush's Medicare prescription drug program. "The state of our union today," he said, "is that we have seniors begging in the streets for the medicine they need." Apparently he is the only one who has noticed this phenomenon, as nobody we have spoken to has seen our elders taking to the streets to beg for their drugs.
Reid also demanded that the President "come clean" on the "costs of Republican corruption." Speaking of the 2000 campaign against Al Gore, Reid said "George Bush promised to bring dignity to the White House but we've since found that he brought Jack Abramoff instead. President Bush needs to quit stonewalling about his White House's connection to corruption, and finally tell us how he's going to reform Washington."
The Senate Minority Leader continues in the same vein on his website, saying "Republicans today control the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House. They have absolute power, and it has corrupted their Party and led to the culture of corruption that we see now in Washington."
No word yet from Reid on the $66,000 he took from Abramoff clients between 2001 and 2004; however, based on this part of his financial history, as well as his disturbing trend of projecting blame for personal wrongdoing onto others, it would appear that the "culture of corruption" in Washington could be solved in large part by Nevada voters, who can remove Reid from office in 2010.
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-01-24T194745Z_01_N24172993_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-DEMOCRATS.XML
http://boortz.com/nuze/200601/01252006.html
http://www.giveemhellharry.com/
Senator Reid's speech also included a little-known nugget about President Bush's Medicare prescription drug program. "The state of our union today," he said, "is that we have seniors begging in the streets for the medicine they need." Apparently he is the only one who has noticed this phenomenon, as nobody we have spoken to has seen our elders taking to the streets to beg for their drugs.
Reid also demanded that the President "come clean" on the "costs of Republican corruption." Speaking of the 2000 campaign against Al Gore, Reid said "George Bush promised to bring dignity to the White House but we've since found that he brought Jack Abramoff instead. President Bush needs to quit stonewalling about his White House's connection to corruption, and finally tell us how he's going to reform Washington."
The Senate Minority Leader continues in the same vein on his website, saying "Republicans today control the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House. They have absolute power, and it has corrupted their Party and led to the culture of corruption that we see now in Washington."
No word yet from Reid on the $66,000 he took from Abramoff clients between 2001 and 2004; however, based on this part of his financial history, as well as his disturbing trend of projecting blame for personal wrongdoing onto others, it would appear that the "culture of corruption" in Washington could be solved in large part by Nevada voters, who can remove Reid from office in 2010.
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-01-24T194745Z_01_N24172993_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-DEMOCRATS.XML
http://boortz.com/nuze/200601/01252006.html
http://www.giveemhellharry.com/
L.A. Times Column: "Why I don't support the troops"
That is the subject of the column headlined "Warriors and Wusses," written by LA Times columnist Joel Stein, which appeared in Tuesday's Times. "I'm sure I'd like the troops," writes Stein, likening them to gutsy gamblers he would "want to hang with ... in Vegas." "I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops," he says, telling them to continue to "load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of."
"Blindly lending support to our soldiers ...will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there," Stein continues. "Besides, those little yellow ribbons aren't really for the troops." The real reason for them "is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices."
He says that the blame for the situation in Iraq should not fall on the shoulders of the American people who "failed to object to a war we barely understood"; nor should anyone blame the representatives who voted for the war, for they were "deceived by false intelligence." Stein even calls blaming the president "a little too easy." "The truth is," he says, "that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying."
"When you volunteer for the U.S. military," he says, "you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein24jan24,0,4137172.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
"Blindly lending support to our soldiers ...will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there," Stein continues. "Besides, those little yellow ribbons aren't really for the troops." The real reason for them "is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices."
He says that the blame for the situation in Iraq should not fall on the shoulders of the American people who "failed to object to a war we barely understood"; nor should anyone blame the representatives who voted for the war, for they were "deceived by false intelligence." Stein even calls blaming the president "a little too easy." "The truth is," he says, "that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying."
"When you volunteer for the U.S. military," he says, "you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein24jan24,0,4137172.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
The Facts about Wiretapping and the Patriot Act
President George Washington once stated, “"The necessity of procuring good intelligence is apparent and need not be further urged."
He could not have been more correct. In October 2001, the United States Congress passed the Patriot Act by an overwhelming Senate vote of 98-1-1. “Urging” congressmen to pass a bill that would protect the lives of all Americans was unnecessary as it was almost unanimous that such an Act was vital for ensuring the safety of Americans, and over past four and a half years this legislation has allowed the CIA and the FBI to partner together to target and stop terrorism within our nation.
In response to those who claim that this Act is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, I would like to state the following: wiretapping suspected terrorists does not qualify as “unreasonable search and seizure.” I find it to be in the interest of every American to avoid events such as September 11 from ever taking place again.
Why don’t we look at the facts? The Patriot Act states that our government has the authority “to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism, to have emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb, to delay notice of the execution of a warrant, and finally to grant the President such authority to act,” which he did.
I would also like to point out that mocking CIA agents not only demonstrates a lack of appreciation for men and women who have committed their lives to protecting this great nation, but it also implies simple ignorance. In order to become a CIA agent one must hold a bachelor's degree or its equivalent from an accredited college-level institution, complete 24 months of internal auditing experience or its equivalent, agree to abide by the Code of Ethics established by The IIA, maintain their knowledge and skills and to stay abreast of improvements and current developments in internal auditing standards, procedures, and techniques and finally, practicing agents must complete and report 80 hours of Continuing Professional Education (CPE) credits every two years. Very few professions require such dedication and ongoing commitment.
Finally, in the article “Wire-taps put liberties at stake,” it was requested that the College Republicans meet to “figure out the definition of a link.” Such a meeting was unnecessary because the definition is elementary. As the Chairman of that great organization I would like to refer you to the dictionary which defines a link as “a connection, relation, or tie between two or more things.” I think it is evident by the lack of terrorist activity in this country since the establishment of the Patriot Act that the CIA has been very effective in identifying and addressing such “links” to terrorism.
Original Article:
Response as printed: http://www.redandblack.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/01/23/43d436af5f29d?in_archive=1
He could not have been more correct. In October 2001, the United States Congress passed the Patriot Act by an overwhelming Senate vote of 98-1-1. “Urging” congressmen to pass a bill that would protect the lives of all Americans was unnecessary as it was almost unanimous that such an Act was vital for ensuring the safety of Americans, and over past four and a half years this legislation has allowed the CIA and the FBI to partner together to target and stop terrorism within our nation.
In response to those who claim that this Act is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, I would like to state the following: wiretapping suspected terrorists does not qualify as “unreasonable search and seizure.” I find it to be in the interest of every American to avoid events such as September 11 from ever taking place again.
Why don’t we look at the facts? The Patriot Act states that our government has the authority “to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism, to have emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb, to delay notice of the execution of a warrant, and finally to grant the President such authority to act,” which he did.
I would also like to point out that mocking CIA agents not only demonstrates a lack of appreciation for men and women who have committed their lives to protecting this great nation, but it also implies simple ignorance. In order to become a CIA agent one must hold a bachelor's degree or its equivalent from an accredited college-level institution, complete 24 months of internal auditing experience or its equivalent, agree to abide by the Code of Ethics established by The IIA, maintain their knowledge and skills and to stay abreast of improvements and current developments in internal auditing standards, procedures, and techniques and finally, practicing agents must complete and report 80 hours of Continuing Professional Education (CPE) credits every two years. Very few professions require such dedication and ongoing commitment.
Finally, in the article “Wire-taps put liberties at stake,” it was requested that the College Republicans meet to “figure out the definition of a link.” Such a meeting was unnecessary because the definition is elementary. As the Chairman of that great organization I would like to refer you to the dictionary which defines a link as “a connection, relation, or tie between two or more things.” I think it is evident by the lack of terrorist activity in this country since the establishment of the Patriot Act that the CIA has been very effective in identifying and addressing such “links” to terrorism.
Original Article:
Response as printed: http://www.redandblack.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/01/23/43d436af5f29d?in_archive=1
Roe v. Wade, from the Political Director
The 33rd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s controversial Roe v. Wade decision was Sunday January 22, and a few university students took to the streets to celebrate the almost 1,500,000 lives that are legally terminated every year as a result of this decision. On this past Tuesday, the Red and Black prominently displayed a photograph of some of these students who braved the elements to demonstrate their appreciation for the “right to choose.” In the picture stood a young lady with a scrappy, makeshift sign which read, “My Body, My Choice.” I would have to say she was only half right.
You see, the “body” of this young lady, or of anyone seeking an abortion, is not what is at issue in this debate. It is the body of the unborn child. The phrase “right to life” sometimes get taken for granted because we hear it so much. However, this is a real, inalienable right, granted to each one of us, along with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights only become limited when they infringe on the rights of others. An abortion, in my opinion, infringes quite heavily on an unborn child’s right to live, to live free, and to pursue his or her own personal happiness. The idea of choice is a noble one; clearly, choice is what drives every event of our day-to-day lives. However, we are not free to make choices concerning the lives of others, especially when those choices concern the time and circumstances of another’s death.
That being said, this young lady does have “choice” concerning her body, beginning with the decision whether or not to participate in sexual activities which may lead to her bringing a child into this world which she is not ready to raise. Clearly, the health and life of the mother, as well as the circumstances surrounding her becoming pregnant (i.e., race, incest, etc.), are legitimate concerns which should be addressed. However, nearly 95% of abortions occur as a result of the mother’s personal choice not to have a child—immediately after making a personal choice to engage in the activity which directly resulted in her becoming pregnant in the first place. Sex, as any middle school Biology student can explain, is meant for reproduction. If someone decides to partake in it irresponsibly, they should not be able to terminate the life of a living person because they do not want to live with the consequences.
Choices are important. The choices we make about our bodies are important. The young lady in the picture was right to an extent: she does have many choices about what to do with her body, one of which is the choice to be responsible in her sexual activities. Canceling the life of an unborn human being, however, is not.
J. Clint Long
UGACR Political Director
http://www.redandblack.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/01/24/43d5b43dcd0bd
You see, the “body” of this young lady, or of anyone seeking an abortion, is not what is at issue in this debate. It is the body of the unborn child. The phrase “right to life” sometimes get taken for granted because we hear it so much. However, this is a real, inalienable right, granted to each one of us, along with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights only become limited when they infringe on the rights of others. An abortion, in my opinion, infringes quite heavily on an unborn child’s right to live, to live free, and to pursue his or her own personal happiness. The idea of choice is a noble one; clearly, choice is what drives every event of our day-to-day lives. However, we are not free to make choices concerning the lives of others, especially when those choices concern the time and circumstances of another’s death.
That being said, this young lady does have “choice” concerning her body, beginning with the decision whether or not to participate in sexual activities which may lead to her bringing a child into this world which she is not ready to raise. Clearly, the health and life of the mother, as well as the circumstances surrounding her becoming pregnant (i.e., race, incest, etc.), are legitimate concerns which should be addressed. However, nearly 95% of abortions occur as a result of the mother’s personal choice not to have a child—immediately after making a personal choice to engage in the activity which directly resulted in her becoming pregnant in the first place. Sex, as any middle school Biology student can explain, is meant for reproduction. If someone decides to partake in it irresponsibly, they should not be able to terminate the life of a living person because they do not want to live with the consequences.
Choices are important. The choices we make about our bodies are important. The young lady in the picture was right to an extent: she does have many choices about what to do with her body, one of which is the choice to be responsible in her sexual activities. Canceling the life of an unborn human being, however, is not.
J. Clint Long
UGACR Political Director
http://www.redandblack.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/01/24/43d5b43dcd0bd
Conservatives take Canada!!!
In a landark election victory Monday night, Canadian voters ended the 13-year reign of the Liberal party, installing in its place a Conservative minority government. Prime Minister-designate Stephen Harper, the Conservative leader whose platform was built largely around stemming governmental corruption and repairing Canada's relationship with the U.S., has said that his party will "take the lead in delivering that change" that the Canadian people have demanded.
While Harper has pledged to quickly fulfill his campaign promises, though, there will still be some opposition to his proposed policies. The newly elected government is still a minority party, holding under 50% of the legislature. This may make passing legislation difficult, as support from other parties will be needed to enact new law.
Regardless of this hurdle, he should be able to succeed in passing many of his proposed reforms. This is an outstanding development for the US, as a newly cooperative neighbor to the north, who is a major benificiary of US monetary and military aid (as the US Military is the de facto defender of Canada), should make a remarkable and visible difference in America's effort to secure her borders and to prosecute the Global War on Terror. Harper has said that he plans to increase peacekeeping troop levels in Afghanistan and Haiti, will tighten border security along the 2,000 mile border with the US in an effort to keep terrorists and weapons from crossing south into America, and will reconsider the missile defense system first proposed by President Reagan and resurrected by President Bush, but rejected out-of-hand by outgoing Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-na/2006/jan/24/012405452.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/regional/canada/D8DRVL3G3.html
http://www.warawa.ca/
**wire reports from the Associated Press were also used in this analysis
While Harper has pledged to quickly fulfill his campaign promises, though, there will still be some opposition to his proposed policies. The newly elected government is still a minority party, holding under 50% of the legislature. This may make passing legislation difficult, as support from other parties will be needed to enact new law.
Regardless of this hurdle, he should be able to succeed in passing many of his proposed reforms. This is an outstanding development for the US, as a newly cooperative neighbor to the north, who is a major benificiary of US monetary and military aid (as the US Military is the de facto defender of Canada), should make a remarkable and visible difference in America's effort to secure her borders and to prosecute the Global War on Terror. Harper has said that he plans to increase peacekeeping troop levels in Afghanistan and Haiti, will tighten border security along the 2,000 mile border with the US in an effort to keep terrorists and weapons from crossing south into America, and will reconsider the missile defense system first proposed by President Reagan and resurrected by President Bush, but rejected out-of-hand by outgoing Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-na/2006/jan/24/012405452.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/regional/canada/D8DRVL3G3.html
http://www.warawa.ca/
**wire reports from the Associated Press were also used in this analysis
Monday, January 23, 2006
the Flip-Flopper strikes again
John Kerry, junior senator from Massachusetts, has been in the public eye a great deal of late, possibly prepping himself for a run at the Democrat presidential nomination in 2008. Unsurprisingly, he has been sharply critical of the Bush administration on every issue from Iraq (his "timetable for victory" demand) to North Korea. However, as NewsMax points out in an article today, he has been all but silent on the Iran situation, allowing Senator Clinton, his possible opponent for the '08 nomination, to have the stage almost to herself.
The reason for this is interesting, and goes back to his run for president in 2004 against George W. Bush. In the first debate, when asked by moderator Jim Lehrer whether he believed "that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran," to which Kerry responded: "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel. Test them. See whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together."
As NewsMax points out, "with Iranian President Mahmoud Amhadinejad now threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" as he presses ahead with his country's nuclear program, it's clear Kerry's nuke fuel "test" would have been a staggering blunder. No wonder he's stopped giving advice on how to handle the Iranian nuclear crisis."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/22/142237.shtml?s=ic
The reason for this is interesting, and goes back to his run for president in 2004 against George W. Bush. In the first debate, when asked by moderator Jim Lehrer whether he believed "that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran," to which Kerry responded: "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel. Test them. See whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together."
As NewsMax points out, "with Iranian President Mahmoud Amhadinejad now threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" as he presses ahead with his country's nuclear program, it's clear Kerry's nuke fuel "test" would have been a staggering blunder. No wonder he's stopped giving advice on how to handle the Iranian nuclear crisis."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/22/142237.shtml?s=ic
O (Conservative?) Canada
Canadians are going to the polls today for the second time in 18 months, and for the first time since 1993 with Conservative candidates leading in the polls. "The era of Liberal arrogance is ending," said local candidate Michael Smith at a campaign stop in Winnipeg on Sunday the 22nd. He and other Conservative candidates are heartened by recent polls showing a steady 7 to 12 percent lead for their party over the incumbent Liberal party leaders.
Conservative party leader Stephen Harper is running on a platform featuring lower taxes, less autonomy for the federal government, tougher measures against crime, lower health care waiting times and, above all, a cleanup of government. The current government, led by Liberal party president Paul Martin, was brought down in November after an inquiry found that Liberals in the province of Quebec took kickbacks in exchange for government contracts.
Harper also wants to repair Canada's often tenuous relationship with Washington. Martin has accused Harper of taking his agenda from "extremist U.S. conservative movements," but his rhetoric appears to be falling on deaf ears, as the world is expected to wake up tomorrow to a new, Conservative government of Canada mandated by the Canadian people.
Almost as important as the election itself, of course, is the opinion of the American filmmaker Michael Moore, who has adopted Canada as his homeland in an effort to escape "Jesusland," as he derisively refers to the majority-conservative U.S. In a letter to Canadians posted on his website, he said, "Oh, Canada -- you're not really going to elect a Conservative majority on Monday, are you? That's a joke, right? I know you have a great sense of humor, and certainly a well-developed sense of irony, but this is no longer funny." He further demostrated his contempt for democracy and his lack of understanding of the definition of "imperialism" by calling the possibility of free Canadians popularly electing a conservative government "helping George Bush by turning Canada into his latest conquest." It will be interesting to see what his next adopted homeland will be should Canadians do the right thing and oust the corrupt Liberal government currently in place.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-01-22T204843Z_01_N19193346_RTRUKOC_0_US-POLITICS.xml&rpc=22
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060121/1/3y2rn.html
http://www.michaelmoore.com/
Conservative party leader Stephen Harper is running on a platform featuring lower taxes, less autonomy for the federal government, tougher measures against crime, lower health care waiting times and, above all, a cleanup of government. The current government, led by Liberal party president Paul Martin, was brought down in November after an inquiry found that Liberals in the province of Quebec took kickbacks in exchange for government contracts.
Harper also wants to repair Canada's often tenuous relationship with Washington. Martin has accused Harper of taking his agenda from "extremist U.S. conservative movements," but his rhetoric appears to be falling on deaf ears, as the world is expected to wake up tomorrow to a new, Conservative government of Canada mandated by the Canadian people.
Almost as important as the election itself, of course, is the opinion of the American filmmaker Michael Moore, who has adopted Canada as his homeland in an effort to escape "Jesusland," as he derisively refers to the majority-conservative U.S. In a letter to Canadians posted on his website, he said, "Oh, Canada -- you're not really going to elect a Conservative majority on Monday, are you? That's a joke, right? I know you have a great sense of humor, and certainly a well-developed sense of irony, but this is no longer funny." He further demostrated his contempt for democracy and his lack of understanding of the definition of "imperialism" by calling the possibility of free Canadians popularly electing a conservative government "helping George Bush by turning Canada into his latest conquest." It will be interesting to see what his next adopted homeland will be should Canadians do the right thing and oust the corrupt Liberal government currently in place.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-01-22T204843Z_01_N19193346_RTRUKOC_0_US-POLITICS.xml&rpc=22
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060121/1/3y2rn.html
http://www.michaelmoore.com/
Roe v. Wade, 33rd annum and "Woman's Health and Life Protection Act"
Sunday the 22nd of January represented the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the controversial Supreme Court decision on Jan. 22, 1973 which legalized abortion by judicial fiat due to a "privacy right" buried somewhere in the "context" of the U.S. Constitution. Since then, 34 states have passed laws requiring parental notification and/or consent for underage procedures; however, it is estimated that over 30 million babies have been aborted in the intervening decades.
President Bush marked the anniversary by telling pro-life demonstrators in Washington that their cause was "noble."
"We're working to persuade more of our fellow Americans of the rightness of our cause," he said via telephone from Manhattan, KS, to the group demonstrating at the foot of the capitol steps. "This is a cause that appeals to the conscience of our citizens and is rooted in America's deepest principle," said Bush, "and history tells us that with such a cause we will prevail."
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/23/D8FAHMO80.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/regional/us/D8F9PC900.html
The legislature of South Dakota will be deciding in the next six weeks whether to make abortion illegal within the state. The "Woman's Health and Life Protection Act," which would ban abortion, will be introduced within the next two days, although it will contain specific language immunizing doctors from punishment if they perform the procedure for the purpose of saving the mother's life.
A similar bill was passed two years ago, but was vetoed by Governor Mike Rounds due to concerns over some technical language, which has reportedly been corrected. Representative Roger Hunt, the bill's sponsor, believes that the time has never been more right for this legislation, saying, "DNA testing now can establish the unborn child has a separate and distinct personality from the mother. We know a lot more about post-abortion harm to the mother."
"Sunday, Hunt and other anti-abortion advocates held an event promoting their legislation," reported South Dakota's Keloland news service. "They say now is the time to pass it, because other states are considering similar bills and because with new Chief Justice John Roberts, and possibly Samuel Alito, the US Supreme Court is changing." Rep. Hunt believes that the bill will pass, albeit in a close vote.
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail2817.cfm?Id=0,45410
President Bush marked the anniversary by telling pro-life demonstrators in Washington that their cause was "noble."
"We're working to persuade more of our fellow Americans of the rightness of our cause," he said via telephone from Manhattan, KS, to the group demonstrating at the foot of the capitol steps. "This is a cause that appeals to the conscience of our citizens and is rooted in America's deepest principle," said Bush, "and history tells us that with such a cause we will prevail."
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/23/D8FAHMO80.html
http://www.townhall.com/news/ap/online/regional/us/D8F9PC900.html
The legislature of South Dakota will be deciding in the next six weeks whether to make abortion illegal within the state. The "Woman's Health and Life Protection Act," which would ban abortion, will be introduced within the next two days, although it will contain specific language immunizing doctors from punishment if they perform the procedure for the purpose of saving the mother's life.
A similar bill was passed two years ago, but was vetoed by Governor Mike Rounds due to concerns over some technical language, which has reportedly been corrected. Representative Roger Hunt, the bill's sponsor, believes that the time has never been more right for this legislation, saying, "DNA testing now can establish the unborn child has a separate and distinct personality from the mother. We know a lot more about post-abortion harm to the mother."
"Sunday, Hunt and other anti-abortion advocates held an event promoting their legislation," reported South Dakota's Keloland news service. "They say now is the time to pass it, because other states are considering similar bills and because with new Chief Justice John Roberts, and possibly Samuel Alito, the US Supreme Court is changing." Rep. Hunt believes that the bill will pass, albeit in a close vote.
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail2817.cfm?Id=0,45410
Saturday, January 21, 2006
"World Can't Wait" and the Drive Out Bush movement
Is the Bush administration the "most dangerous force which has ever existed"? World Can't Wait, an openly communist organization based in the U.S., has made that claim, calling Bush's government "more dangerous than Nazi Germany because of the range and depth of its activities and of its intentions worldwide." The organization recently called for support in its quest to "drive out the Bush regime." Unsurprisingly, many of the great thinkers of our generation--at least if you ask them--have eagerly signed on. These exalted personalities include Jane Fonda, Carl Dix of the Revolutionary Communist Party, racist cop-killer and darling of the left Mumia Abu-Jamal (whose occupation is listed on the World Can't Wait website as "Political Prisoner/Journalist), Kurt Vonnegut, the Rev. Al Sharpton, Cindy Sheehan, "Vagina Monologues" author Eve Enzler, Nobel Prize winner and avowed communist Harold Pinter, singer Harry Belafante (last seen standing by Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and calling President Bush the "World's number one terrorist"), and such hollywood luminaries as Ed Asner, Jessica Lange, Sean Penn, and Susan Sarandon.
World Can't Wait is promoting their "Bring the Noise and Drown out Bush's lies" demonstration scheduled for January 31, where they hope to drown out the President's state of the union address.
http://www.worldcantwait.net/
http://www.michaelmedved.com
World Can't Wait is promoting their "Bring the Noise and Drown out Bush's lies" demonstration scheduled for January 31, where they hope to drown out the President's state of the union address.
http://www.worldcantwait.net/
http://www.michaelmedved.com
Treasury Secretary Snow
The economy of the United States has been on a roll for two solid years now, with growth steady at 4%, home ownership near an all-time high (and well beyond any previous numbers for African-Americans), taxes relatively low, and unemployment sitting at 4.9%--a very low number by historical standards (lower than the average rate of the 1970s, '80s, and '90s), and almost nonexistent in comparison to European titans France (over 15%) and Germany (12.9%). While appearing as a guest Friday on the Michael Medved radio show out of Seattle, Treasury Secretary John Snow cited lower individual income tax rates and lower capital gains taxes for the steady economic growth, and urged President Bush to keep America's economy strong by avoiding the call from Democrats for tax increases, saying that "that's ... the worst thing that I could imagine doing at this time." He reported that the administration would continue to fight tax increases, and to make the 2001 reductions a "permanent part of the economic landscape of this country."
Regarding the 2006 budget proposal about to be unveiled by President Bush, Secretary Snow said spending will be "tightly controlled," promising the "tightest constriction, restraint, and limit on spending in modern times." Snow also cited unforeseen events such as hurricane Katrina as factors in a growing deficit which had been "coming under control" in the past two years, and said that, while the deficit will grow slightly in 2006 as President Bush fulfills his financial commitment to the areas hit by the hurricane, it will soon be "back on a path to better the President's goal of cutting the deficit in half by the time he leaves office."
President Bush also said this week that he is not giving up on Social Security reform, and Secretary Snow hinted that this "third rail" of politics may be broached once again in the State of the Union address January 31.
http://www.michaelmedved.com
Regarding the 2006 budget proposal about to be unveiled by President Bush, Secretary Snow said spending will be "tightly controlled," promising the "tightest constriction, restraint, and limit on spending in modern times." Snow also cited unforeseen events such as hurricane Katrina as factors in a growing deficit which had been "coming under control" in the past two years, and said that, while the deficit will grow slightly in 2006 as President Bush fulfills his financial commitment to the areas hit by the hurricane, it will soon be "back on a path to better the President's goal of cutting the deficit in half by the time he leaves office."
President Bush also said this week that he is not giving up on Social Security reform, and Secretary Snow hinted that this "third rail" of politics may be broached once again in the State of the Union address January 31.
http://www.michaelmedved.com
Filibustering Alito?
The abject failure of the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to demonize Samuel Alito and to turn public opinion against him has once again raised the question of a possible filibuster. The "Gang of Fourteen" agreement struck in 2005 by seven "moderate" senators from each party does not allow for the filibustering of a candidate who is as firmly within the American mainstream as Judge Alito; however, as Robert Novak writes, the far-left organizations on which the modern Democrat party depends for funding and support may force them into a "filibuster that they do not want to wage."
http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2006/01/21/183314.html
http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2006/01/21/183314.html
Friday, January 20, 2006
Martin Luther King week and recent events
Salvete, vos omnes! I think that it is entirely appropriate to take a moment the week of Martin Luther King, Jr. day to reflect on the man, his achievements, and the different ways they are celebrated by various Americans. Dr. King was instrumental in helping blacks and other minorities gain legitimacy in the eyes of the US Government, effectively making the state live up to the guarantees in its Constitution. The magnitude of this achievement, and of Dr. King's role in it, can and must not be forgotten. It is due in large part to his efforts that racism has dissipated almost completely in this great nation. That is recognized by the majority of Americans; however, as with any hot-button issue, there are those who privately wish that racism were still alive and well in this nation, as publicly fighting it is their chief--and often lone--source of profit. Race hustlers such as the Rev. Al Sharpton (who has recently allied himself with World Can't Wait, a group which calls the Bush Administration the "most dangerous force which has ever existed" and "more dangerous than Nazi Germany"), Rev. Jesse Jackson, and others use this day above any other to step up their rhetoric about how awful America is for minorities. Sadly, there are still many who listen to them, as there are who listen to the likes of the Rev. Louis Farrakhan (who not only believes that the New Orleans levees were purposely blown up by Bush agents, and who still claims to have visited the alien "mother wheel" orbiting earth and to have met the prophet Elijah Muhammad) and others who encourage blacks to blame white people for all of their problems, rather than taking personal responsibility for their own lives. They ignore the rise of blacks to unprecedented levels of success both professionally--Supreme Court Justice, the past two Secretaries of State, and others--and privately--black home ownership is at an all-time high--in favor of playing the race card every time the opportunity presents itself to gain monetarily by doing so. Fortunately, the majority of Americans as a whole, and African-Americans specifically, do not follow these demagoguical "leaders," but rather think for themselves and make good, solid life decisions. Unfortunately, the black community more than any other behaves as a voting "bloc," not abandoning the Democrat party in greater than 8% or 9% numbers regardless of the fact that the Democrat party long ago left them and their best interests behind, in favor of keeping as much racism in daily life as possible, so as to be able to use that as a regular talking point to get votes.
In other news, there have been some interesting doings the last few days. Here are a few highlights, including links to the sources:
Osama bin Laden has purportedly popped back up in an audio tape recorded in December and aired in part Wednesday on Al-Jazeera. He called on President Bush to follow the public opinion polls touted by the media which show public support for the Iraq war at under 50%. He also said that the security measures put in place since 9/11 aren't the reason we haven't been attacked since then--rather, the major operations he wants carried out here take time to plan and execute, and, "God willing," they will happen soon. Finally, he offered a "temporary truce" with the US Military, ostensibly so that Iraq and Afghanistan can be "reconstructed." The entire transcript can be found here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182192,00.html
French President Jacques Chirac has threatened retaliation with nuclear weapons against any state which sponsors terrorist attacks in France. Looks like global terrorism IS real...and apparently opposing the Iraq war doesn't render a country immune to the threat of Islamofascist terror.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10926059/
Hillary Clinton blasted the Bush administration, in a speech delivered Wednesday at Princeton University, for not taking unilateral action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear technology, saying that using diplomacy and garnering international consensus for a course of action vis-a-vis Iran and nuclear weapons amounted to "outsourcing negotiations." Interesting...apparently President Bush should have been MORE of a "cowboy" when it comes to Iran....
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/01/18/news/14290.shtml
IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei rejected the EU's request that he "condemn Iran's nuclear program." Mr. El-Baradei instead gave Iran one more month to give better access to his inspectors, and to comply with UN regulations. What is the consequence of noncompliance? My guess is....ANOTHER month to comply!
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/ca550f44-891d-11da-94a6-0000779e2340.html
New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, in an MLK day address, said that the hurricanes which devastated New Orleans were "God's judgment" for America's racism, and vowed that New Orleans would be a "chocolate city" again, declaring that the city would again be "majority African-American...because that's the way God wants it."
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/16/D8F65JUG5.html
He later apologized:
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20060118/2006-01-18T014402Z_01_N17385026_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-HURRICANES-MAYOR-DC.html
The first five congressional names are out in the Abramoff bribe scandal, and it doesn't appear to be the "Republican scandal" that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid claimed it to be. Two of the five accused of taking money and gifts in exchange for legislative support are Democrats, including...you guessed it...Harry Reid.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060110-115655-1555r.htm
Senator Ted Kennedy has made public his intention to vote against Samuel Alito for Supreme Court. The reason for his opposition is that he believes Alito is "itching to overturn Roe v. Wade."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
Of course, the Enquirer is now reporting that Ted Kennedy has a 21-year-old love child. Kennedy supposedly repeatedly pressured the mother, a Cape Cod woman half his age, to have an abortion. Looks like he may need Roe v. Wade to remain in place in case he gets himself in that kind of situation again.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/384077p-325944c.html
More to come in the next few days, including commentary on Dr. Ralph Reed's recent talk at the University of Georgia concerning the Alito nomination, the Senate, and advise-and-consent. Valete!
In other news, there have been some interesting doings the last few days. Here are a few highlights, including links to the sources:
Osama bin Laden has purportedly popped back up in an audio tape recorded in December and aired in part Wednesday on Al-Jazeera. He called on President Bush to follow the public opinion polls touted by the media which show public support for the Iraq war at under 50%. He also said that the security measures put in place since 9/11 aren't the reason we haven't been attacked since then--rather, the major operations he wants carried out here take time to plan and execute, and, "God willing," they will happen soon. Finally, he offered a "temporary truce" with the US Military, ostensibly so that Iraq and Afghanistan can be "reconstructed." The entire transcript can be found here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182192,00.html
French President Jacques Chirac has threatened retaliation with nuclear weapons against any state which sponsors terrorist attacks in France. Looks like global terrorism IS real...and apparently opposing the Iraq war doesn't render a country immune to the threat of Islamofascist terror.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10926059/
Hillary Clinton blasted the Bush administration, in a speech delivered Wednesday at Princeton University, for not taking unilateral action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear technology, saying that using diplomacy and garnering international consensus for a course of action vis-a-vis Iran and nuclear weapons amounted to "outsourcing negotiations." Interesting...apparently President Bush should have been MORE of a "cowboy" when it comes to Iran....
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/01/18/news/14290.shtml
IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei rejected the EU's request that he "condemn Iran's nuclear program." Mr. El-Baradei instead gave Iran one more month to give better access to his inspectors, and to comply with UN regulations. What is the consequence of noncompliance? My guess is....ANOTHER month to comply!
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/ca550f44-891d-11da-94a6-0000779e2340.html
New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, in an MLK day address, said that the hurricanes which devastated New Orleans were "God's judgment" for America's racism, and vowed that New Orleans would be a "chocolate city" again, declaring that the city would again be "majority African-American...because that's the way God wants it."
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/16/D8F65JUG5.html
He later apologized:
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20060118/2006-01-18T014402Z_01_N17385026_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-HURRICANES-MAYOR-DC.html
The first five congressional names are out in the Abramoff bribe scandal, and it doesn't appear to be the "Republican scandal" that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid claimed it to be. Two of the five accused of taking money and gifts in exchange for legislative support are Democrats, including...you guessed it...Harry Reid.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060110-115655-1555r.htm
Senator Ted Kennedy has made public his intention to vote against Samuel Alito for Supreme Court. The reason for his opposition is that he believes Alito is "itching to overturn Roe v. Wade."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
Of course, the Enquirer is now reporting that Ted Kennedy has a 21-year-old love child. Kennedy supposedly repeatedly pressured the mother, a Cape Cod woman half his age, to have an abortion. Looks like he may need Roe v. Wade to remain in place in case he gets himself in that kind of situation again.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/384077p-325944c.html
More to come in the next few days, including commentary on Dr. Ralph Reed's recent talk at the University of Georgia concerning the Alito nomination, the Senate, and advise-and-consent. Valete!
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Ralph Reed addresses UGACRs, students
Tuesday night, January 17, Dr. Ralph Reed spoke to a group of UGA students on the nomination of Judge Sam Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. Dr. Reed's talk covered the specifics of the Alito hearings, with emphasis on the Senate's advise-and-consent role and the significance of the recent growing issue of minority party activism. Dr. Reed cited historical precedent in the confirmation process, and warned of the impending dangers of further use of character assassination as a weapon to defeat nominees. His talk was sponsored by the Francis Shaeffer Society and the Guard Dawg conservative student newspaper.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Gettin' the Ball Rolling
The 2006 Election Year is officially underway for the UGA College Republicans, and I couldn't be more ecstatic to be a part of it all! We had our first Executive Board meeting of the year January 8th and covered a huge range of topics and potential projects for the year.
We are stepping up our involvement in the GACR (Georgia Association of College Republicans www.gacr.org), and will continue to maintain open and improving relationships with that organization. The outgoing Chairman and Vice-Chairman have done a great job with their team this past year, and have raised upwards of $20,000. Quite amazing.
Our first club meeting of the semester was this past Wednesday, January 11th in SLC 207 at 7:00 p.m. (a time and place which will remain the same throughout the entirety of the semester). Chris Herdener of Bill Cowsert's State Senate campaign spoke of their agenda and asked for volunteers.
We announced that several of us will be attending CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference www.cpac.org) this February 9th - 12th in Washington, D.C. It's gonna be a blast! Anyone desiring to go should contact our Team Leader Director Caitlyn Coooper (caitlyn@uga.edu).
Lots of stuff going on, and I just found out that George Bush, Sr. will be speaking at the UGA campus in April!
Peace!
We are stepping up our involvement in the GACR (Georgia Association of College Republicans www.gacr.org), and will continue to maintain open and improving relationships with that organization. The outgoing Chairman and Vice-Chairman have done a great job with their team this past year, and have raised upwards of $20,000. Quite amazing.
Our first club meeting of the semester was this past Wednesday, January 11th in SLC 207 at 7:00 p.m. (a time and place which will remain the same throughout the entirety of the semester). Chris Herdener of Bill Cowsert's State Senate campaign spoke of their agenda and asked for volunteers.
We announced that several of us will be attending CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference www.cpac.org) this February 9th - 12th in Washington, D.C. It's gonna be a blast! Anyone desiring to go should contact our Team Leader Director Caitlyn Coooper (caitlyn@uga.edu).
Lots of stuff going on, and I just found out that George Bush, Sr. will be speaking at the UGA campus in April!
Peace!