**This post will be updated throughout the show**
From CNN in 2002: Obama’s Attorney General: Terrorists Not Protected by Geneva Convention While good news, this is from 7 years ago. This is exactly the sort of question that will come up during the confirmation hearing, so let’s hope he still thinks this. When it comes to Barky, I expect him to be a Marxist failure, but I prefer to be pleasantly surprised and wrong than to be proven right.
And Michael Vick thinks he’s going to be welcomed back into football by some team. With news like this (content warning, so please be careful if you click thru, the headline is ok but the content is heartbreaking) confirming he’s the depraved beast we know him to be, I think he’s gonna need to find another line of work.
Noise violators in Fort Lupton sentenced to listen to Barry Manilow
So Michael Steele finally has a way to reach him. Via texting. He also has a website promoting himself for the chair of the RNC. I need to take a closer look but after his pandering to religious fundies in the last couple of weeks, I think Steele needs to realize that a return to the optimism of the Reagan Legacy is the answer, not pandering to various fringe groups who think kicking the gays and obsessing about abortion is the way back into power. I’m not saying we abandon moral issues, but they belong in the social sphere, not in government.
Obamas Pick Sidwell Friends School for Daughters
“Mrs. Obama is the product of public education on the South Side of Chicago and she believes strongly in the importance of good public schools for all kids. The Obama Administration intends to work closely with the school systems in the years to come to ensure quality public education is available to all kids…Three of Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s grandkids – Naomi, Finnegan and Maisy – also attend Sidwell Friends.
All for thee but not for me. I don;t begrudge them this choice by any means, but why the obsession about public schools? Could it be they’re more worried about the teacher’s unions than to kids? Is it possible?! Why not embrace the voucher system so all families have a chance to “choose” the best school for their kids? The Obamas aren’t hypocrites, are they?
TV Newser: Alan Colmes Leaving “Hannity & Colmes” (HT Hot Air)
Just a reminder that the Clintons fiddled while al-Qaida planned 9/11. We’re reminded about that as this piece about one of the 9/11 hijackers notes the tape you see of him laughing during his martyrdom tape was made 1 1/2 years before 9/11/2001. This, of course, as Obama reinstalls virtually the entire Clinton admin, probably because an unrepentant terrorist would have trouble getting confirmed by the senate. So, better to confirm people who fiddled while unrepentant terrorists plotted.
HOORAY for Justice Thomas!
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
I wonder if the new AG will consider terrorism a crime or an act of war; or either. I can only project how many cases will be folded or closed because of budgetary restraints.
This weekend’s events of serving CAIR offices with ‘papers’ comes to mind. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81863
I guess one could say it wasn’t a kosher thing to do.
Peep 8 What did Justice Thomas do? I don’t understand that legal talk on your link.
Anyway, that Michael Vick story is heartbreaking. I have seen a victim of his in an animal shelter. One of the lucky ones that got away. The poor thing was ripped to shreds and sewn back up again. It was heartwrenching to see. What a beautiful little sweetheart and the look on her face was so sad and she looked so broken. She wasn’t ready to be adopted out, I was told by the shelter officer that worked there or I would have taken her home in a second.
PS. I forgot to add that when I followed up on the pitbull that I saw in the animal shelter, they told me she had been taken in by a pitbull rescue that specialized in the rehab of these dogs so it was a happy ending.
“I need to take a closer look but after his pandering to religious fundies in the last couple of weeks, I think Steele needs to realize that a return to the optimism of the Reagan Legacy is the answer, not pandering to various fringe groups who think kicking the gays and obsessing about abortion is the way back into power. I’m not saying we abandon moral issues, but they belong in the social sphere, not in government.”
With all due respect to fellow conservatives who are concerned about these issues, I have to agree with Tammy on this one ^^^. While conservatives should continue to try and protect unborn life in their own way and while I do not think that anyone should be forced to say homosexuality is okay, I still think these are the LEAST of our worries right now.
I’m more worried about the economy and our national security than anything else.
Besides, I seriously doubt Roe v. Wade will EVER be overturned. And I still believe that the more “moderate” people in this country should be the ones to stand forth and come up with a compromise on these issues so that we can just MOVE ON!
The compromise will basically be an “agree to disagree” and a respect for people’s “freedom of conscience” ON BOTH SIDES.
I’m so tired of hearing the debates about these issues because they are nothing but CIRCULAR and get us NOWHERE! Specifically: (1) neither side really addresses, honestly and with numbers that actually say it’s working, the reason why people get abortions – UNWANTED PREGNANCIES. That’s the part I think reasonable people on both sides would agree and that’s where the compromise comes in. Being rigid on either side gets us NOWHERE near the resolution of the problem which is UNWANTED PREGNANCIES and (2) No amount of kvetching and pointing at the Bible will get rid of homosexuals. They are “among us” (I kid!). Seriously, I feel that science will back this up – they are born this way and there’s NOTHING you can do about it. If they were around 5,000 years ago, they were around 100,000 years ago. GET OVER IT! You don’t have to agree with it, you don’t have to like it, your church shouldn’t have to marry them if it doesn’t want to. But, honestly, most of these people are fine upstanding citizens and many actually don’t agree with the radical views of their brothers and sisters. You can’t legislate homosexuality away. They are, after all, human as well. Allow the “moderates” to come out of the darkness and you will see that they are just as AMERICAN as the heterosexuals.
And concentrating on such issues will definitely NOT help the Republicans in the future.
Some things are not meant to be dealt with by the gov’t. Some things are. We should separate out those things accordingly and get to business.
Sorry for the rant. I mean no disrespect to anyone or their opinions. Honestly. I just think, as a Nation, we need to focus on other more pressing problems like the economy and national security. Because if we don’t, it ain’t gonna matter much if people want an abortion. They either won’t be able to afford it or they won’t have time to think about one in between terrorist attacks on our soil. And the terrorists will happily attack heterosexual and homosexual alike – remember they just hate EVERYONE, not just one group or another.
Priorities, that’s all I’m saying.
Cheers.
Here’s the thing. I think other than about 10% of the Conservative population,most are happy with a “culture of life” meaning, no over turning Roe V Wade, but we also need to have limitations. The problem is ONCE again the Media. They like to characterize anyone who is not for Abortion on Demand with No Restrictions as Staunchly Pro-Life and in favor of overturning Roe V. Wade. The Media plays up the Roe card as a scare tactic.
Liberals use this argument every election cycle.
Roe is quite simply, a garbage opinion. Get the right justices on the Court and it properly should and can be overruled. I go back and forth from ambivalently pro-choice to ambivalently pro-life, but as a federalist I’m deeply anti-Roe: this is an issue for each state to address on its own.
You got it, Lady K!
Going back over old arguments won’t do a damn bit of good. Frankly, the greater the prohibitions; the greater the burden to deal with them. A secure and thriving country can resolve a lot of imbalances.
“Provide for the common defense and ensure the general welfare”; That theme sound familiar?
(And don’t go messing with the term “welfare” – it means the general economics. Not “gimme”.)
(At my age, you might think I was outside the door as it was being discussed…At my age…I can’t remember.)
SNOWCLOUD… After Justice Souter rejected the appeal of the lower courts dismissal of a suit challenging BHO’s lack of a birth certificate (only a certificate by Hawaii acknowledging the parents’ declaration of the circumstances of Barky’s alleged delivery in a Hawaii hospital), the case was refiled directly to Justice Thomas. He then asked the Chief Justice to place the matter on the December 5th docket. The Solicitor General waived appearance to oppose the Writ of Certiorri {sic} allowing the challenge to proceed. The primary evidence is an affidavit by Obama’s paternal grandmother that she had witnessed BHO’s birth in Kenya. This was translated & attested by an Episcopal bishop fluent in Swahilli {sic, again}. Before Dec 5th, all nine Justices will meet in closed conference to discuss the petition. If the Supremes grant the petition, Obama would be Constitutionally ineligible to become President + all Electors would then be uncommitted.
Biden would not be the automatic choice, as he released his delegates before the Convention. The logical second choice is the Honorable Senator Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (NY-D)…
{now I’m really sic}
“I need to take a closer look but after his pandering to religious fundies in the last couple of weeks, I think Steele needs to realize that a return to the optimism of the Reagan Legacy is the answer, not pandering to various fringe groups who think kicking the gays and obsessing about abortion is the way back into power.”
I’ve nothing but respect for you, Tammy, but I disagree with this premise that the social conservatives are what is wrong with the Republican party, or are in any way related to our losses the past two elections. (I know you didn’t go that far with the idea, but many have.)
The traditional marriage ballot initiatives passed, with overwhelming support from black Obama supporters out here in CA. They also passed in Arizona and Florida, bringing the total now to 30 states that have enacted such laws via the ballot.
Pro-life measures on the ballot did not pass. But if anyone can explain to me, credibly and with facts, how the party’s pro-life stance cost it in 2006 and 2008, when Ronald Reagan was unashamedly pro-life, I will buy you a Coke. In 2006, it was the party’s corruption and Iraq. In 2008, it was the economy, and the age old electoral solution of “dump the party in power.” (Many voters didn’t even realize that Republicans no longer control Congress.)
We ran the moderate Republican that the David Brooks and Peggy Noonans of the world wanted, and look what happened. Why vote Democrat-lite when you can just have the whole thing? As I just wrote, the economy probably would have torpedoed anybody we ran, but McCain’s support for amnesty did no favors at all for him among Hispanics, and trying to out-populist Obama sure didn’t work, either.
“(2) No amount of kvetching and pointing at the Bible will get rid of homosexuals”
Snowcloud, this is the type of generalization that annoys me so.
The opposition to gay marriage is about a lot of things, but getting rid of homosexuals is not one of them.
Yes, many Christians do view homosexuality as a sin, and that should not be the party’s official platform. But just because Michael Steele talks to religious conservatives, who happen to be loyal Republican voters, doesn’t mean that he or the party wants to do away with gays. And frankly, I’d bet that most supporters of the traditional marriage amendment feel the same way. We don’t want to do away with gays at all. We’re just tired of having their agenda shoved down our throats, with no regard to the effect on society (and blatantly against democracy). (And we’re getting a bit tired of being called bigots and threatened for how we believe.)
There’s still that wild card of otherwise liberal voters having strong support for traditional values in marriage…
“I’m not saying we abandon moral issues, but they belong in the social sphere, not in government.”
I must disagree also.
The old line is “you can’t legislate morality.”
But that’s exactly what laws are: legislating morality.
I suspect that it will be many, many generations, if it ever happens, before this country abandons the murder of children in the womb (sorry, that’s how I view it) as a state sanctioned means of birth control.
But if we do not continue to fight for a culture of life in government, it will never happen.
I find it tragically ironic that the first black president wholeheartedly endorses a state policy that eradicates more black people than any other killer in existence (512 of every 1,000 black babies). It falls to the daughter of Martin Luther King Jr. to be one of the lone black voices against the wholesale infanticide of her race.
I echo the sentiment of this column by Jonah Goldberg.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjRlMDEyZDcyYTNlODliYmRhZWRkNjc2OGE2YjViOWI=&w=MQ==
“And that should serve as a warning to those, on the right and left, who would like to see the GOP defenestrate millions of actual, living, breathing members of the party — e.g., social conservatives — in order to woo millions of largely nonexistent jackalopes. The GOP would simply cease to exist as a viable party without the support of social and religious conservatives. But not so the other way around. We’ve seen what happens in this country when the passionately religious abandon love for limited government and instead embrace social liberalism and government activism. The results have been good, as in the abolition movement. And the results have been more mixed, like during Prohibition and the Progressive Movement.
The religious right is much more likely to stop being ‘right’ than stop being religious. And secular conservatives and libertarians who passionately believe in limited government should be very grateful indeed that most of today’s religious conservatives believe in it, too.”
While I agree that above all, Reaganesque optimism and striving for limited government are the keys to winning again, fighting for life and traditional values are not inconsistent with that at all. (The fascism of the militant homosexuals in CA has made it even easier for traditional marriage proponents to argue their case in defense of religious liberty, and of late, defense even of their person and right to work without being blacklisted. And this can be balanced with respect for civil unions, and keeping those rights equal, save the name. This can be FURTHER balanced with respect for democracy, arguing that if gay marriage is to come about, it should come about of and by the people, not through unelected judges.)
We should not tar and feather pro life and pro gay marriage politicians out of the Republican party if they agree with the principles of limited government, strong national defense, American excellence, and respect for democracy.
But as one of Obama’s bitter gun and bible clingers, I will gladly trade that for the end of finger pointing towards me and others like me in the party who stand for life and traditional values.
The left thinks we’re Brownshirts.
A little love from our own party and our own movement would be nice.
With all due respect, government inserted itself in the abortion argument through the relentless efforts of NARAL leading to judicial activism in 1973. Most states had bans on abortion until that time; those who did not had restrictions of some sort (though elastic). I have pointed this out in a previous post. The legislative process was completely bypassed in 1973 because most Americans would have voted against abortion on demand. This was even documented by one of NARAL’s founders, Bernard Nathanson, who came to his prolife views (as an atheist, btw) after many years of performing abortions and being one of the pioneers of its legalization.
The idea that we do not legislate morality in this country is false. Since when do we have the right to willfully kill another human being in our society? Those who violate law and inflict harm or death upon another individual are expected to be dealt with accordingly by law. We also have laws against prostitution, drug use and abuse of others – all of those being moral issues with government telling us we are not going to do certain things to or with ours (or any others’) bodies lest we reap the consequences.
Actually, government indeed legislated morality in Roe vs. Wade: the unborn child has no rights and is not a protected person – nor defined as a ‘person’ for that matter. Wow – sound familiar? Replace ‘unborn child’ with any other group of people who have been targeted, dehumanized and denied their right to life. It’s not hard to see a pattern forming: when we deny one their human worth, we no longer treat them as human beings. Seems we have more sympathy for the helpless animals Michael Vick tortured and killed than for the helpless unborn babies being forced to die a barbaric death in this country every single day.
I noticed that in one of the posts above the reasoning given for abortions is an “unwanted pregnancy†(shouldn’t we just say “unwanted childâ€?). So do we just dispose others on the basis of whether they are ‘wanted’ or not? There was, in fact, a time when a woman’s worth was based on whether a man “wanted” her or not; how very sad for women to transfer that oppressive judgement onto her innocent child.
Do not think for one moment abortion does not directly impact our economy. If FOCA (Freedom Of Choice Act), nationalized healthcare, & expansion of stem cell research are passed, taxpayers will pay for abortions – and so will society as a whole. FOCA will strike down every federal and state restriction on abortions currently in use, so expect to see partial birth abortion bans lifted & subsidized. The only “obsessing about abortion” I see is actually taking place on the left where there seems to be a rush to make sure as many abortions are performed as possible with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever. As long as this is the case, I will not shut up nor abandon my prolife activism & education efforts.
As an unapologetic prolife feminist and gay conservative, I hope the GOP will stand firm on keeping the prolife platform. Without the right to life, there is no liberty or the pursuit of happiness.