**This post will be updated throughout the show. Refresh the page for additional links.**
Mortgage Delinquencies, Foreclosures, Rates Increase
Presidential Fundraising Trips Leave Taxpayers With Hefty Tab
Krauthammer explains how the spineless Repubs, if they had a spine, could actually thwart the Sotomayor nomination.
Pelosi thinks godless, genocidal murderers really, really care about ‘climate change.’ Next, she appeals to Charles Manson for help in dealing with violence against women.
I think Susan Boyle, now dubbed SuBo (!) has been set up by the British press in efforts to make her look bad.
Dresden gets U.S. security for Obama visit
U.S. Will Pay $2.6 Million to Train Chinese Prostitutes to Drink Responsibly on the Job
Tammy, regarding Sotomayor’s Second Amendment decision, doesn’t the Tenth Amendment state that any rights not delineated by the Constitution are up to the states to decide? So if the Second Amendment states you have the right to bear arms, then it’s not up to the states to interpret it differently, correct?
John, you are correct.
No state, county or municipality has the authority to circumvent the constitution.
Dr. Li AKA Dr. Detroit?!
As a WWII baby (1941), I find it an absolute outrage that Elizabeth Windsor has been excluded from the commemoration of D-DAY. (I’m really confused in Sarkozy’s part and wonder if the protocols were left to the current British government.) (If it’s Brown’s gaff – Labour can kiss England good-by.)
On the other hand, this type of contempt I actually expect from Obama who never saw a uniform or veteran he didn’t hate. I think it’s jealosy for those who have what he doesn’t, commitment with humility. QRII certainly has that class he lacks.
We, veterans (of 60’s-70’s) have felt deeply, the contempt of his kind.
Queen Elizabeth and Princess Margaret could have been safe in Canada as children of monarchs.
Young Princess Elizabeth served not only in uniform, but made frequent appearances and even had a schedule on radio to address the children of the Realm.
Sure, royalty has it’s perks and is duly criticized at times, but she knows war and conflict; has seen the rubble and gore, and smelled the cordite of recently exploded bombs. Cetainly, she’s experienced the dangers of appeasement. She has been, reigning with determination as allowed by the Parliament. And even among the anti-monarchists she is greatly repected. She knows humility, too.
Krauthammer makes everyone around him seem feeble-minded.
If the one whose name I will not speak apologizes to Dresden my head will explode.
I agree Tammy, about Boyle— and there’s a special place for those people who are picking on Susan Boyle…provoking her.
A Presidential visit to both Buchenwald and Dresden on the same trip cannot be construed in any other way than establishing moral equivalence.
Obama is constructing a psychological/mental bridge from the pre-Obama America to the Obama remade America. The purpose of the bridge is to eventually burn it.
Everything that made us proud—our patriotism, our bravery, our individualism—will be cast as dark, misguided and a lie. What we thought was our glory is infected with shame.
The more we doubt our past, the easier it is for Obama to substitute his mythology of a new day of redemption.
He believes he is the vanguard of a revolution and so do many of his followers. Whether 2009 was a revolution or just another election depends very much on what happens in the next two years.
“No state, county or municipality has the authority to circumvent the constitution.”
Correct, but with the caveat that this is true only WHEN the federal constitution applies to the states at all (local governments being extensions/instrumentalities of the states). There are a few prohibitions on actions by states in the original text of the constitution–declaring war, coining money, etc.–but the Bill of Rights when adopted was regarded as imposing restrictions only on the federal government, a view the courts upheld. The Framers would’ve seen no need to have the federal Bill of Rights bind the states: each state constitution contained (and still contains) a declaration or bill of rights to do that.
The 14th Amendment has been deemed to change all that. Whether one thinks the selective incorporation doctrine is correct or not, it is the law: SOME provisions of the federal Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, but only provisions dealing with matters that are “fundamental,” not purely procedural. Thus, for example, in Gitlow v. New York in 1925, SCOTUS held that the First Amendment binds the states, but in some other case, the Court has held that the 5th Amendment requirement of grand-jury indictment for every felony does NOT bind the states as it is merely procedural: all states allow for indictment by grand jury, but most only require it in capital cases.
DC v. Heller made clear the Second Amendment protects an individual rather than a “collective” right; however, it did not address the incorporation issue. This is because the District of Columbia is not a state, but a local government entity created by Congress and thus bound by the Second Amendment regardless of whether the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states or not.
Dave J, sharp analysis indeed!
I suppose my fault is in trying to view it with less ambiguity.
That’s just the clear cut, black and white Jeffersonian influence in me.
A friend of mine runs a blog that might interest you.
http://totherepublic.wordpress.com/