Bad Blogger

I am a bad blogger. It seems to me that a good blogger can come up with a topic even when the news appears to be slow. Maybe soon, I will find my voice again.

Open Thread

Open Thread

The Impact of Silence

-----
There is something fundamentally wrong when the President of the United States condemns the murder of an abortion doctor (an ordinary citizen whose livelihood was the destruction of unborn children) and offers his condolences to doctor's family, but fails to condemn the murder of a soldier (a citizen that had dedicated himself to the protection of all Americans) murdered by an Muslim convert on American soil.

Obama's public comment regarding Mr. Tiller's Murder.

"I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

Obama's public comment regarding Private William Long's Murder.

"..."

Open Thread

Not much of interest to discuss.

Death of Mr. Tiller

-----
Everyone seems to be believe that Mr. Tiller was murdered because he was an abortion doctor. If true, it is a shame that any man can hold themselves above the law to deal justice as they see fit.

However, has anyone verified that this man was to avenge the death of unborn children? It appears to me that everyone has simply jumped to that conclusion because it makes a better story. This is a simple example of the Mass Media creating the news rather than reporting.

Court Determined Policy

And what about her remark a while back that “the court of appeals is where policy is made” (see clip here)? She makes an unconvincing little disclaimer after she says that by jokingly adding “I know this is on tape and I should never say that…I’m not promoting it and I’m not advocating it…”, but the rest of the tape makes it clear that she believes the law is something that “develops,” and that appeals court justices help that “development” along. - neo-neocon

It took a lecture on the Rule of Law for me to grasp the difference between a judge that develops the law an activist judge that changes the law. Our system is built on the basis of common law causing the Rule of Law to be soft and malleable. It shifts and changes and "develops" with each decision made by a court, whether it be a district or appellate court.

So is Judge Sotomayor wrong for believing that the law is something that develops? NO. That would be an outrageous claim if you think about it. It is an activist judge, that goes beyond developing the law to changing the law to fit their personal depiction of the way the law should be, ignoring the pretense of established law, the will of the people, that is the problem and endangers the Rule of Law.

While the Rule of Law changes with the progression of time, they must change as a reaction to the change of the people. It is improper to force a change in the Rule of Law in order to force a change in the people.

Open Thread

Interenet access is sparse at the moment, so no real post.

Has Obama officially named the self-proclaimed "Newyorkican" as Souter's replacement?

Generation Y is entitled, lazy, selfish, tech savvy, and incompetent.

-----
This remark by Scott Greenfield, author of Simple Justice and New York criminal defense attorney, appears to be the generalized feeling the Boomer Generation feels for the new Gen Y attorneys entering the workforce.

I have worked hard my entire life and continually struggle to do my best at all times, including at work and in my personal life. "Generation Y uses this term life-balance as an excuse for their incompetence." - Scott Greenfield. To have that shoved in my face, because I also desire to balance work with my family life is quite upsetting.

I definitely want to make a good deal of money, but I refuse to sell my family's happiness. Here is a good take on the issue.

Adding insult to injury, from the fingers of Mr. Greenfield himself, I am apparently also a dolt. (see comments)

Question of Preemption

-----
Obama appears to have made a surprising move to the benefit of Federalism. The question I have is "why?"

Does Obama have a healthy respect for state sovereignty? Or as the law blog suggests, is Obama simply bending to the will of trial attorneys? I'm not one to route for trial attorneys and their agenda, but I must also respect the fact that Obama has put some power back into the hands of the states, where a lot of it belongs.

Location of VP Bunker

-----
VP Biden continues his legacy as the gaffe machine.

The Warming Trend Has Slowed

-----
...to a reverse?

According to The Vancouver Sun, scientists are not collecting the data they expected.

"In fact, 'there has been a very slight cooling,' according to a U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interview with Josh Willis at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a scientist who keeps close watch on the Argo findings." -The Vancouver Sun.

Apparently, some scientists are now turning their backs on the data collectors, which include some very sophisticated machinery, specifically, the Argos. However, my concern lies not in their refusal to accept the data, but rather, the problem lies in their inability to learn from the data. Refusing to retool their hypothesis or their climate change models as new data comes in, the scientists deem it necessary to put a spin on the data.

"Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. "It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming," Willis told NPR." - The Vancouver Sun

A Sad Sight

-----
Below is a video of an 80 year old Catholic priest, Father Norman Weslin, being arrested at Notre Dame for carrying a cross for the unborn. It is a sad day when a "Catholic University" turns its back on one of the principal beliefs of its own faith and has a Catholic priest arrested for peacefully voicing his protest.

Obama's Roast

-----
Sensitive Eyes/Ears Beware: Crude Language and Sexual References Ahead.

Looking for some jokes about Obama? Look no further than the comedic genius of the Rat Pack of Evil Roast.

The Barak Obama Celebrity Roast.

The Wall: Open Thread

-----
It appears that I have hit the wall. I can't seem to find anything that interests me enough to write about or discuss. And I just can't bring myself to write a right-wing political rant just for the hell of it. I'm just not that kind of blogger.

Any suggestions?

A Little Off Topic

-----
Ira Matetsky, a regular contributor to Wikipedia, has begun a series on The Volokh Conspiracy concerning different issues related to Wikipedia.

I am looking forward to reading his posts about the impact Wikipedia is having on the internet, in scholarly circles, and in the lives of living subjects. However, there is another aspect of Wikipedia that I find very enjoyable and useful.

Wikipedia is a great resource for Game Masters, Narrators, and Dungeon Masters.

No matter how much one enjoys a movie, a book series, or comics, they very rarely know everything there is to know about the "universe" at the center of each. This lack of knowledge sometimes impedes the creativity of a narrator when creating a story line for a game. For example, I am a fan of firefly and will be narrating a Serenity campaign soon, but sometimes I have a hard time remember how the firefly system is organized. One of the sites I can refer to when creating the proper role playing atmosphere is Wikipedia, because there is always someone out there that has enjoyed an universe, such as firefly, so much that they have researched, and at times created the information needed to understand the inner-workings of that universe.

I apologize for being so far off topic, but I just felt like sharing.

Sykes and Biden

-----
Well, I'm back and I have some time, but it appears to be a slow news day. Most everyone seems to be pretty focused on Wanda Sykes and her "performance" at the Correspondent's Dinner. Take a look for yourself:



All I have to say is, "What did you expect?"

Though I must say I did enjoy the jab at Biden's inability to control his mouth. Oh, that reminds me. Apparently President Obama is not perfect, and he is looking to Biden for guidance on his judicial nomination.

“The president is basically taking advantage of my experiences by asking me nuanced questions about both individuals and timing,” Biden said in an interview Friday. “We’ve gone through specific nominees, which we’re burrowing in on.” -Law Blog

God help us all.

Brilliant!

Notre Dame shames itself

"If we stand for nothing, we fall for everything."

Open Thread

Finally done with finals, but now it is time to just right back into work.

Disbarment for an Opinion?

-----
No time to discuss this in depth as I have my Civ Pro II death sentence in less than an hour and a half, but I wanted to voice my concern over the DOJ report in the works.

The report by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal ethics unit within the Justice Department, is also likely to ask state bar associations to consider possible disciplinary action, which could include reprimands or even disbarment, for some of the lawyers involved in writing the legal opinions, the officials said.

We are now going to consider disbarring attorneys for writing OPINIONS that the current political powerhouse dislikes? OLC attorneys are asked some of the most difficult questions, because the Supreme Court refuses to provide advisory opinions without an actual controversy. If I were a current DOJ attorney, I would be worrying about what the next round of DOJ attorneys will think of my opinions, and whether I will be risk of prosecution or disbarment, because they don't like what I wrote.

This is insanity.

Open Thread

Still Studying.

Open Thread

Studying for Finals. Don't expect to be able to post most of this week.

I'm not a prop!

Well said, Mr. McCarthy.

Unconscionable

----
Additional proof that sometimes lawyers do earn their reputation as sleazebags.

Justice Souter

-----
Justice Souter has decided it is time to retire and return to his farm house in New Hampshire. I hadn't known until today that Justice Souter was nominated by George H. Bush. (Seems like something I should have known).

Now knowing where his position as Justice of the Supreme Court originated, I will agree that Justice Souter has been quite the let down. He has regularly voted with the liberal/progessive side of the court and has been a part of some cases that will have lasting damage, including the Kelo decision and its ridiculous broadening of eminent domain and Casey which upheld most of Roe v. Wade.

Unfortunately, the short list of replacements is not only more of the same, but appears to be much more dangerous.

CNN is Slobbering Again

-----
CNN needs to find some self-control. Soon everyone, including the obamaid drinkers, will see how epically inane their coverage of the President (and his swagga) truly is.

Defection

-----
Arlen Specter's defection to the Democrats seems to have the Republicans throwing a fit over the Democrats having too much control in the Senate.

But I really don't understand why anyone really cares. The Republican's haven't lost a vote? Specter was a RINO (Republican in Name Only). He already supported the President's agenda and would have joined the Democrats against a filibuster anyway.

I figure we are finally getting some honesty from Washington as Specter finally removes the thin mask.

Open Thread

With the way work and school have been going (it is finals time after all), I won't be making any new posts for about 2 weeks. Sorry guys.


-XKCD

Open Thread

Keeping me busy at work.

Open Thread

Work and Finals have interrupted any ability to update. Sorry Folks.

How about you tell me what's going on out there?

Janeane the Fool

-----

Not only am I a suspected terrorist, I am also a racist suffering from a neurological disorder caused by the size of my limbic brain. Oh my!

If you think I'm kidding, Janeane "the fool" Garofalo, expert on the limbic brain, mentions me by name!

"The Republican, Hyphen, [and] the Conservative movement [have] crystallized into the white power movement." ;P

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Btw, I checked out Garofalo's academic history and I seem to have missed her degree in psychology/anatomy. hmmmm...

Protesting the Protest 2

Chicago had its own protester protesting the Tea Party. Unfortunately, she was a CNN journalist.



I've not been schooled in the almighty arts of journalism, but she seems to be doing something wrong...

Btw, this same "journalist" referred to this



as a Bush "lookalike," when she was reporting on an Anti-Bush rally in New Orleans.

A sad state of affairs.

Protesting the Protest

The Tax Day Tea Party, here in Tulsa, went pretty well. It was encouraging to see so many other Tulsans taking time out of their day to speak out against the uncontrolled spending in Congress.

There was only one protester to our protest that I noticed. He held up a sign which displayed a chart of the President's 2009 budget. The point he was trying to make, I think, is that Obama is still spending 58% of the national budget on the military, while much lower percentages of the budget are going to various other areas (which he felt were more improtant), such as health care, education, etc.

I wish I could have taken the time to inform him that the problem with the budget isn't the amount he is spending on the military, it is the amount he spending on all of the other pieces that are unnecessary (but he was heckling and there was a Sheriff standing near him and I didn't want to upset him and cause problems). The primary purpose of the federal government is national security. Our Military spending should be at least 50% of our budget at all times. It is the social projects and educational system that need to be removed from the budget all together, as these are better handled by local government and individuals.

Oh, there I go again, talking like a rightwing extremist.

Rightwing Extremism

-----
The new threat.

The Department of Homeland Security recently released a report "to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States." This sounds like a good idea until you read the content of the report.

The first line of the report provides the basis upon which the rest of the report should be read.

The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

Without specific information, the DHS, under its new leadership, Janet Napolitano, has released a report which points to Conservatives and says, "Terrorists! Racists!" I wouldn't have believed it myself if I hadn't read the report in its entirety. Also, I found some great analysis of the "facts" presented in the report at Powerline.

*Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

But the insults don't stop with the average conservative, they continue by belittling our military and outright declaring that returning military men are susceptible to extremist beliefs and are joining hate organizations such as the KKK. See the powerline post to see how this has been stretched and manipulated.

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

Is there any doubt that this was purposefully released and publicly leaked just before the Tax Day Tea Parties? It is beyond insulting to be linked to extremism and terrorism for my political beliefs. The report is 9 pages of unsupported libel. The lack of specificity leaves the pages purposefully open to interpretation, mongering fear of the political right. The report is filth and Janet Napolitano should seriously consider stepping down if this is what she has to provide as head of Homeland Security.

Open Thread

You would think I would learn to do my reading prior to the day of class, but I don't.

Life Tenure [Corrected]

-----
Paul D. Carrington, a professor at Duke University Law School, contributed to the New York Times Op-Ed yesterday a suggestion that we "remind our mortal [Supreme Court Justices] that they have a right to serve during good behavior, not for life."

While that may sound reasonable, Carrington appears to equate old age with bad behavior.

"Article III of the Constitution says only that federal judges, both of the Supreme Court and of lower courts, can retain their offices as long as they maintain “good behavior.” This seems to imply that the justices have a duty to retire when they are no longer fit to work full time. That duty is a rule in some countries: Britain, for instance, forces judges to retire at 70."

Carrington then continues his Op-Ed by criticizing Thurgood Marshall and William Rehnquist as "seriously unfit, hav[ing] held on to their awesome power and status long beyond what was reasonable."

Is it appropriate to equate old age with bad behavior? Doesn't our society frown upon age discrimination in employment? Should the federal courts be allowed to discriminate against judges based upon their age?

I find Carrington's solution to this supposed problem scarier than the problem he has described. Carrington suggests we remove the political freedom, created by life tenure, from the Justices by having them answerable to a council embedded in politics.

"Councils may then investigate and conduct hearings in confidence, and then perhaps order that at least temporarily no further cases be assigned to the judge whose conduct is in question. A council may censure a judge either privately or by a public pronouncement, or request his retirement. If a judge rejects a council’s advice, it could issue a statement to be considered by the House of Representatives that might initiate an impeachment proceeding."

Would it be any surprise that during years of a Democrat presidency, conservative Justices would find themselves faced with complaints about their "behavior"? Oh, and don't think I'm not suggesting the same will happen to progressive Justices during years of a Republican presidency. If the Supreme Court is not politicized enough for you already, just wait.

This is one can of worms, we should avoid at all costs, especially when age is the measurement of good behavior.

Tea Party

It appears that Tulsa is putting on a properly organized Tea Party on April 15th. I'm excited to see individuals (especially conservatives) getting involved at the grassroots level, but is a "Tea Party" the proper event?

Most know that the original tea party was a strong statement against taxation without representation in England. Currently, the only people in the United States that can claim taxation without representation are the residents of the District of Columbia, which I've discussed before.

If we aren't upset about taxation without representation, what are we upset about? How does the symbolism of the Tea Party carry over to our current predicament?

There are some that say that say we are standing against tyranny. Really? We, the people, choose who works in Congress and the White House. It is no one's fault but our own that the federal government has become the powerful money printer it is today. If we are so upset about our current representation, then why haven't we done something to clean it up?

We don't need a revolt against the government, we need the informed involvement of the people in the government process. We need to elect representatives willing and able to stand up against the machine of politics. We need to educate everyone, including our current representation, about the choices that have been made and the direction each new choice takes our Nation.

As far as this "Tea Party" may be an opportunity to educate individuals, I will support it; and, I will attend, but I'm still not sure the imagery of revolution depicted by a tea party is proper.

Open Thread

Just not up for it today... sad, I know.

"Grounded in Law, not Politics"

-----
Claims Eric Holder in defense of his opinion find the D.C. Voting Rights bill Constitutional.

The proponent's argument appears to be a "history provides a gloss" argument:
"Supporters note that courts have often treated the District as if it were a state, addressing, for example, questions of whether D.C. residents are subject to laws governing federal taxation, interstate commerce and the right to a jury trial." -Washington Post

I find this argument extremely weak. This is an argument that admits that this bill is unconstitutional, but because the District has been treated like a State in these circumstances, it is a State and the bill can not be found unconstitutional. Past treatment of the District as a State is not a strong argument, because it does not erase the fact that the district is a federal territory. Treating it as a State does not make it a State. This seems pretty clear cut.

If they do hold that the District is equal to a State in this arena, will the NRA be able to use Heller as holding applicable to States? That may be the only good that would come of it.

Open Thread

Work is keeping me busy, no time to post today.

Disgrace

-----
As a future lawyer, it is disheartening to see how the profession has become a mockery. Here and here are some recent examples from Wall Street Journal's Law Blog.

Did these attorney's start law school with the thought that could easily swindle new clients? Did these attorney's begin their law school education with great morals and ethics, only to worn down by the cynicism of law professors and older, more experienced attorneys? Is it the education, or the practice of this profession that corrupts so many? Or are the corrupt simply drawn to the money and power that can come with being an attorney?

Am I simply bringing disgrace to my name by adopting this profession as my own?

I am only one man, but I certainly hope and pray that I will be provided the opportunity and the God-given strength to bring to this profession the honor and respect it deserves.

To Bow, or Not To Bow

-----
That is the question of the morning.

The attacks on Barak Obama's bow to the King of Saudi Arabia appears to be quite out of proportion. When I first heard the story, and before I saw the video, I was thinking he bent a knee - Now that would be a sign of submission.

I do agree that Barak Obama's bow was inappropriate as a slight bow of the head is enough to show respect, but I'm not going to say that Obama was plainly out of place to bow in greeting. It is not simply a sign of submission. In many cultures it is also a sign of respect. Whether or not President Obama should be showing such deferential respect to the King of Saudi Arabia is a completely separate issue.

As for those distinguishing this bow from his greeting of the Queen of England: The Queen of England is a symbolic monarch with little to no power in the game of politics, whereas the King of Saudi Arabia has real political power and is an equal to the President's international stature.

Plus, can you even imagine any American bowing to a monarch of England?

A Broken Campaign Promise

-----
that the blind masses might notice?

Obama's failure to bring change we can believe in is only quite apparent to those who refused to drink the Obamaid. Is there some hope that the masses of blind followers will begin to wake up, now that Obama has directly affected their daily lives in a way that is financially harmful?

"I can make a firm pledge," [Obama] said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." -AP (emphasis added)

"No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised," Joe Biden said, "whether it's their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax." -AP (emphasis added)

Unfortunately for President Obama, a tax on cigarettes will disproportionately affect the "poor"; you know, the ones making less than $250,000.

"A Gallup survey of 75,000 people last year fleshed out that conclusion. It found that 34 percent of respondents earning $6,000 to $12,000 were smokers, and the smoking rate consistently declined among people of higher income. Only 13 percent of people earning $90,000 or more were smokers." -AP

However, the Obamaid is powerful stuff. It may take several more attacks before the masses wake up from their drunken stupor.

Negotiations

-----
The most important aspect of negotiations is the balance of rights and power. For example, if one party has all of the legal rights to enforce their claim and they have all the money, the other party will find it in their best interest to settle the during negotiations.

"In the case of Chrysler, Obama said the company must have a partner to stay in business. He gave Chrysler 30 days to reach a merger agreement with Fiat, which has agreed to build fuel-efficient cars in the United States and repay U.S. taxpayers for new investments made before Fiat assumes majority ownership, he said." -npr

This shotgun merger is not helping Chrysler is any way. Fiat now has every reason to hold out for exactly what they want. President Obama has handed the Italian company all the power they need to eliminate any legal rights Chrysler may have had. Yay globalization!

My recommendation: Chrysler management needs to suck it up and make the hard decision is file a chapter 11 bankruptcy. It is understandable that they fear for their jobs, but if they have any sense of loyalty to the company itself, they should buck up and make the hard decisions.

I can only imagine how satisfied Ford must be with themselves for turning down the TARP money. It may have been the best decision they ever made.

Oy - Open Thread

I haven't quit, I promise.

Open Thread

Like the title says.

Deficit Spending? No Thank You.

-----

I think this graph speaks for itself.



Obama claims he will cut the deficit. According to this graph, even the White House estimate shows a cut in the deficit by 2012 whose remaining deficit is still higher than the deficit Bush left us with. Increased spending combined with cutting your own addition to the deficit is not lowering our current deficit.

Thank you, but no thank you President Obama

Open Thread

Let me here what thoughts are going on in your head these days. Soon I'll start blogging again, I promise.

The Distraction of Life: Open Thread

Life (school and work) has become such a distraction, I haven't been able to keep up with my blog roll. So what is going on out there in the land of politics and law?

Hopefully, one day soon I will be able to write up some new entries.

Open Thread

-----
Due to the fact that I will be having oral surgery in very short order, I will not be likely to make any posts today. Please feel free to have a laugh:



And leave a comment or two.

Seriously?

-----
This is a really bad idea.

The 2010 census is right around the corner and Obama wants ACORN help out with count.

"It's a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it's not just the lawmakers' concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country," Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. "We want an enumeration. We don't want to have any false numbers."

The blatant power play by Obama in allowing ACORN to "help" with the census is dumbfounding.

ACORN, which claims to be a non-partisan grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, came under fire in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 phony voter registration forms. The group's activities were frequently questioned in the 2008 presidential election.

Just in case you weren't aware, the census is what is used to apportion the House of Representative's 435 seats. If Obama follows through, don't be surprised if future representation is lacking in current republican districts.

War of the Windmills

xkcd

Thank you for your service...

-----
Now, Pay up!

Obama has presented a new health care plan for soldiers and veterans wounded during active duty. Pay for it yourself. Rather than the government bearing the weight of its wounded soldiers, Obama is proposing that the VA look to a soldier's private insurance for reimbursement.

In the process of attempting to recoup $540 million dollars, Obama is quickly losing what little face he had with the military.

The LA Times has an article that is quite critical of Obama's plan and quotes two Democrat Senators that have vowed that any such proposal will be dead on arrival.


Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a senior member of the Veterans Affairs and Budget committees, warned Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki last week that the idea would be "dead on arrival," and she vowed Tuesday that any budget containing the VA provision was "not going to pass."

"The VA has an obligation to pay for service-related care, and they should not be nickel-and-diming vets in the process," she said in an interview. "This proposal means that family members will be hurt because, if a vet meets the maximum [benefit amount] for their insurance, their wife and kids would not be able to get insurance [benefits] any more. . . . God forbid a wounded vet from Iraq has a wife who gets breast cancer."

In addition, Veteran groups are not taking this without a fight, and Obama would show some semblance of intelligence if he took the time to actually listen to our men and women in uniform.

Veterans groups said the change would abrogate the government's responsibility to care for the war-wounded. And they expressed concern that the new policy would make employers less willing to hire veterans for fear of the cost of insuring them, and that insurance benefits for veterans' families would also be jeopardized.

What in the world is Obama thinking? I've heard numerous theories, ranging from, "He is an idiot," to, "He is attempting to disassemble our current military in order to replace it with a military loyal to him alone (The 'he is the next Hitler' theory)."

I tend to think reality lies somewhere between these theories. One of Obama's plans is to create socialized medicine. The only way he is going to make this happen is if private insurance becomes so unaffordable, that there is nowhere for the middle class to turn, but to the federal government. By throwing a $540 million debit on the private insurance companies, Obama is ensuring the rise in premiums. In addition, private insurance companies may refuse to cover the pre-existing conditions received during active duty. In this case, military men and women (and their families) may be the first group forced to accept coverage under Obama's health care system to be.
-----

Stem Cells

Obama made it clear that he was lifting the ban on the use of federal funds for stem cell research, well, Clear as Mud.

Maybe this will act as a wake-up call to Obama. Try reading the bills before signing them. Congress, take note, Obama will sign anything you send to him.

Rule of Law

-----
Professor Nicholas Capaldi visited the University of Tulsa last Wednesday and presented a lecture on the Rule of Law. In law school, the Rule of Law is ingrained in each and every student as one of the most important aspects of practicing law. However, there is overwhelming failure to actually define Rule of Law. Professor Capaldi offered an interesting and very succinct definition.

Rule of Law is defined as "categorical (non-instrumental) procedural norms in a civil association."

If this makes absolutely no sense to you, no worries. As Professor Capaldi pointed out, most succinct definitions don't make sense, unless you understand the research that went into determining this definition. Each portion of this definition refers to the work of well known legal thinkers. (Problem is, law school doesn't teach about the works of legal thinkers anymore, so they may not be as well known as they should be.)

Categorical

It is believed that Dicey was the first utilize the term, Rule of Law. His understanding of the Rule of Law was a system of rules created by people to limit themselves. There is no overall power that dictates what must be done. The people dictate the system and live by the system.

(Non-Instrumental)

Hayek is associated with the explanation that the Rule of Law is not and may not be an instrument of social reform. If it becomes a tool for social reform, it is no longer the Rule of Law.

Procedural Norms

In order for a Rule of Law to exist, there must be set forth procedural norms. These norms, according to Fuller, guide individuals in their decision making and it is required that these norms be general, clear, publicly promulgated, and they may not be retroactive. There are other necessary aspects of these procedural norms, but I failed to write fast enough to get them all written down, but you should get the idea. It is also very important to note that procedural norms change with the progression of time. But, these procedural norms must change as a reaction to the change of the people. It is improper to force a change in the procedural norms in order to force a change in the people.

Civil Association

This may be the most important aspect of this definition. Generally speaking there are two types of associations: Enterprise Associations and Civil Associations. According to Oakshott, a Civil Association is a grouping of individuals with no overall collective goal. Individuals are allowed to have and attain their own goals. The interesting aspect of Civil Associations, is the allowance of Enterprise Associations within them. An Enterprise association is group created with a collective goal. Within the group there is no room for individual goals, only the goals of the group. (Examples include the military, religion, and corporations.)

-----

In an attempt at clarity over succinctness, the Rule of Law is a system of norms created publicly by the people to govern themselves in their never-ending attempts to attain their individual and enterprise goals.

The United States is about as close as civilization has come to having a society based upon the Rule of Law. It is the mixture of a representative government with checks and balances and a legal system ruled by legislation and common law that has created and defined our Civil Association.

However, based upon this understanding of the Rule of Law, our civil association may be in peril. It is interesting and scary to see how the Supreme Court has become a tool to achieving enterprise goals (both from the left and the right), rather than a branch of protection for our procedural norms. Rather than dictating the Rule of Law based upon the principles set forth by the people, the Supreme Court has generally become a tool of politics, an attempt to force "alien norms" on the people. The Supreme Court was meant to be the non-political checks and balance of our government, and yet, it appears to have become uncontrollable.


What is the difference between God and a Supreme Court Justice?

God knows he is not a Supreme Court Justice.


-----

Quick Question

I attended a lecture yesterday regarding the definition of the rule of law. I look forward to making a post about it, but I need to finish up some homework before blogging.

What are you thoughts as to what the Rule of Law is?

Excuses, Excuses.

-----
Obama denies being a socialist, claiming that the actions being described as socialist started under someone else's watch!

"I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement -– the prescription drug plan -- without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks throw these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word 'socialist' around can’t say the same."
-President Obama

Just because Bush had socialisttendencies, does not mean that you do not.

"I readily concede I chucked aside my free-market principles when I was told ... the situation we were facing could be worse than the Great Depression"
-President Bush

I'm sorry President Obama, but blaming your continuation and expansion of Bush's socialist push at the end of his administration, does not expunge your socialist agenda of its socialism.

"But he acknowledged that, as he told Joe the Plumber, he plans to try to spread the wealth around." -The Washington Times

Change of Heart

-----
How quickly the mind races as new ideas are presented from all sides of an issue. I'm still struggling with the quandary of the Constitution's protection of persons versus citizens, but a very good point was made to me by hohotread.

The founding fathers made no distinction between "people" and "citizens" in regards to rights. The 14th amendment was the first to even make a distinction between "citizens" and "people." The ones before extended all rights and privileges to "the people." Only general practice made a distinction between "citizens" and "others" such as slaves, women, and children. I feel the need as a historian to point out that "democracy" means "rule by the citizen body," which in ancient Greece meant specific males. Even in ancient Greece, though, laws extended to everyone, it was "rule"--the right to vote--that was restricted. So it is in the U.S.

I think the distinction is pretty clear. Rights specifically granted to citizens (like voting) are for citizens, rights granted to "the people" are for everyone. While one could argue that some laws need to make a distinction, the thrust of the linked article seems to be an attempt to remove legal protection from non-citizens. If the protections in the Bill of Rights did NOT extend to non-citizens, any new immigrant would have been prey for the government and legal system to harass mercilessly. Since the U.S. was entirely dependent on immigrants to expand, this would have crippled the nation in its most vulnerable years.

This has provoked further thought on my part and I am still working to put those thoughts into a cohesive mass, but let it be known that I am a man willing to reason through conflicting ideas, in hopes of finding a reasonable answer.

I think this is a genuinely appropriate time to mention that I am not a fan of the word, "hypocrite". Reason: A man's paradigm shifts as he learns more, and I expect that every man should continually strive for knowledge and the paradigm shifts that accompany that information. Ignorance, rather than hypocrisy, is the problem. I define ignorance as a lack of knowledge combined with an unwillingness to learn.

Cup o' Tea?

-----
Mrs. Legal-Right has recently introduced me to the pleasure of drinking tea. I've never been a fan, but my tastes are expanding. And now I have a tea company I can be happy to support as they support the tax payers of America in their message to Congress.

Speaking of the recent rash of "Tea Parties", it had been suggested that I would be interested in the cause. Problem is, the current cause is the misuse and misappropriation of funds, not taxation without representation. Our current representation may not be fabulous or even good, but that is our fault for choosing them. Harking back to the days of the Boston Tea Party creates great imagery, but I'd prefer a coherent message and a new form of protest that voices that message clearly.

A Quandary

-----
The Constitution of the United States uses two words which are in dire need of concrete definitions: Person and Citizen.

There has been a strong move to push constitutional rights onto non-citizens of the United States, whether they be illegal aliens or unlawful combatants captured by the United States during a time of war. The basic argument for providing constitutional rights to these person is the Constitution's use of the word "person" rather than "citizen" when conferring its protection of individual and state rights.

Was this a purposeful intention of the founding fathers, to extend the protection of the United States Constitution to "citizens of the world" as "persons"? Were the founding fathers so concerned with the treatment of non-citizens by the federal government, that they purposefully extend the Constitution's protection?

It seems to me that if you are going to provide all persons the protection of your Constitution, there would be no need for immigration and naturalization. I was born a citizen of the United States and I am protected by the Constitution. Somewhere along the line my ancestors were immigrants to the United States and they were naturalized to become citizens of the United States because they wanted the protection offered by the Constitution and they wanted their children and their children's children to grow up in a society where citizens are allowed to live their lives free from the intervention of the federal government. Why would they desire naturalization if there is no difference between an alien within the borders of the United States and a natural born citizen of the United States?

I believe it is common sense to believe that the Founding Fathers wanted to protect Citizens and States from an over-reaching federal government. It appears beyond reason that the Constitution should be considered so "over-inclusive". By extending the protection of the United States Constitution to "citizens of the world", we are destroying the sovereignty of the United States and diminishing my status as a citizen.

But then we have the problem of the 14th Amendment which has been the crux of millions of law suits. Even if the Founding Fathers did not intend to extend the protection of the Constitution of the United States to protect everyone, did the 1968 Congress intend to do so? Is there a legitimate need to review the 14th Amendment and redefine the protections of the Constitution, yet again?

I'm beginning to think we have to, in order to protect the sovereignty of our nation.

What are your thoughts?

Do you see a difference?

-----



I sure do.

Why you may wake up tired...

-----

Cap 'n' Trade: Bringing Hopelessness

-----
Neo-Neocon discusses a scary proposition. Obama's plan to place a cap and trade tax on coal companies is meant to bankrupt those companies and until alternative sources of energy are available, we will all be paying the price (higher utility bills) for Obama's environmental pleasure. Well, everyone except those making less than $75,000.

Once I graduate from law school, I will begin paying off my massive student loan debt which will easily top $100,000. To even keep my head above water I have to make more than $75,000 a year. How does this make me rich? Am I automatically an evil individual, suppressing the working man because I dedicated my life to education in order to become the best damn attorney (which is work, btw) I can be?

I can't afford my utilities to skyrocket. Thanks for the hope Obama.

blarg...

Hope and Change

-----
Maybe there is some hope of avoiding Obama's change.

Open Thread

-----
Life and School are interfering with may ability to discuss politics today.

What do you have to say about recent events?

Leave a comment.

US Airways 1549

-----



That Pilot has quite the cool demeanor.

Paul Harvey

-----
RIP

His wonderful radio voice will be missed, and that, ladies and gentlemen, is "the rest of [his] story."

God's blessings on his family and friends.

Uh-Oh

-----
Let's hope this doesn't spread to medium-sized law firms in the Midwest.

-__-

Obama's Hyperboles

-----
CALVIN WOODWARD and JIM KUHNHENN seem to have proof that Obama either doesn't know what he is talking about, or just doesn't care.

Either way, we are in trouble.

Give me a break, Obama.

-----
Tuesday night I listened to most of Obama's speech and found myself wanting to yell at the radio and contradict the President's rhetorical slights at his dissenters. But I was only upsetting my wife, who suggested that I just turn off the radio, and I didn't have evidence to support my distrust of Obama's remarks (after all, I'm still new to this game). However, Karl Rove has produced an article that very simply put facts behind my distaste for Obama's rhetoric.

ht: neo-neocon

Amazing.

-----
Obviously not a topic of political discussion, but "wow", what a cool fish.

Crisis of Credit

-----
Bob Krumm offers some insight into the political aspect of the credit crisis.

Refreshing

-----
Anybody know who this is? Excuse my lack of celebrity knowledge please.

Taxation Without Representation (a solution?)

-----
Just caught this on WSJ's law blog.

Apparently the Senate has been supportive of the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act, which gives Washington D.C. Representation in the House of Representatives. The Wall Street Journal is quite obviously against the act claiming that this will be a permanent seat and will most definitely be a solid seat for the democrats. They also mention that it may be unconstitutional.

According to the plain language of the Constitution, "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature." The Constitution further dictates that the Person must be an inhabitant of the State in which he shall be chosen.

For those of you who aren't aware, Washington D.C. is federal jurisdiction. It is not our 51st state. This act ignores the plain language of the Constitution and would provide representation to individuals living in a federal jurisdiction.

However, an argument may be made that refusing to provide citizens a voice through representation in the House of Representatives is against the purpose of the Constitutional provision of a House of Representatives. No one likes the idea of taxation without representation, and an argument can be made that the resident's of Washington D.C. are struggling with this very notion. The House is supposed to be the representation of individual rights, while the Senate is supposed to be the representation of state rights. Why then can't Washington D.C. residents have representation?

I dare say that an argument that this seat is simply a give away to the democrat party is not a reasonable argument and should be disqualified immediately. The question is whether the letter of the law rules or the intention of the law.

I tend to fall on the side of "letter of the law". I tend to view the Constitution as a purposefully simple document that has been distorted and compromised by the actions of the Supreme Court (and FDR). Though I see the importance of the argument made for the "intention of the law", there is no good test for true intentions. It is the belief in intentions that has created the mass of gibberish we call Constitutional Law, full of doctrines, bright line tests, and contradictions. If we want to change the Constitution, the founders provided both the opportunity to rewrite our Constitution and to amend our Constitution.

Only then can we provide representation to the citizens residing in Washington D.C.

*UPDATE* I just thought I might clarify that there may be times when arguments as to intention are necessary due to ambiguous language. Determining the ambiguity of language creates a new problem that is not established in this matter.*UPDATE*

Bad girl, bad girl, whatcha gonna do?

-----
It will be interesting to see if Donna Hanks gets what she deserves.

And of course ACORN will be paying for her representation.

What a "victim"!

Math = Downfall of Wall Street?

-----
This:



was the downfall of our economic system, according to Wired.

Better Late Than Never

-----
The Mark Sanford Amendment:

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR — Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: 1) the State request and use funds provided by this Act , and; 2) funds be used to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE — If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State.

I appear to be behind the times on this issue, but this is a very important piece of the stimulus bill to our brave governors standing up for state rights. Even if our even headed governors refuse the federal "strings attached" funding, their state legislature may be able to overrule them with a simple resolution.

I definitely need to do some research here, because it doesn't seem constitutional for Congress to dictate what a state legislature can do to overturn a decision by the Governor. Here the federal government is dictating how state governments will work, violating state sovereignty and affecting the balance of power between the State's branches of government.

It would appear that Sanford and any other governor who refuses these federal funds will have Supreme Court Litigation in their future. This Congress is out of control and needs to be reigned in.

Here's to 2010!

Way to Go!

-----
Louisiana Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal shares that concern about strings attached to stimulus dollars as well as the plan's overall approach to dealing with the economic crisis.

Kudos to Barbour, Jindal, Sanford and Palin! You already realize that Federal money always has strings attached.

Oklahoma Beware! We are the reddest state in the Union. It is time we had a Governor that acted like it.

SHAMWOW!

-----


ht: Barking Moonbat

Civil Disobedience or Burglary?

-----
Michelle Malkin provides a very different story about ACORN's Homesteading actions. It appears that the home was orignally purchased for less than $100,000, but in a fit of greed, Donna Hanks refinanced the home for almost $300,000. No wonder she couldn't afford to make payments as a bartender.



ACORN's actions are not just simple civil disobedience. In fact, Mr. Beverly appears to be in a bit of trouble for his actions.

I can only hope the book is thrown at him.

It is called, Federalism.

I'm a FEDERALIST.

I believe strongly that the federal government's activities in domestic issues is drastically limited by the Constitution and that these activities are left to the States by the tenth amendment.

Below you will find a list of the projects provided by the "stimulus" bill in Tulsa, OK. Wouldn't you agree that $944,612,008 for Tulsa is an absolute waste of tax payer money?

1-5. Roadway Improvements-Improve 74 roadway segments thru pavement rehabilitation and lane widening to reduce congestion, and improve public safety, Gilcrease West Arkansas River Bridge - Charles Page Blvd to West 21st Street, Gilcrease West - Phase 1 - 41st West Avenue to Tisdale, Port Road Extension - Yale Avenue to Sheridan Road, Boulder Avenue Bridge- Design & Construction

Unless these are interstate highways, it is up to the state and its municipalities to fix local streets. And if I'm not mistaken, we just passed a new road improvement plan in Tulsa that has already raised my property taxes. So why do I need the Federal Government to do the same thing?

6-10. Arkansas River Corridor - improve or construct three low water dams and associated sedimentation control, Deepening McClellan Kerr Navigation Channel to 12ft. from 9ft. and add additional barge parking and fleet areas to allow for safe and efficient freight and barge traffic movement, Water System Infrastructure-Construct 18 water distribution, supply, and treatment projects throughout the City of Tulsa to improve the delivery of safe drinking water,
Waste water System Improvements-Construct 4 waste water collection system projects to eliminate health and safety concerns associated with sewage overflows, Flood Control Infrastructure Improvements-Construct 8 storm sewer, channel, culvert, and bridge projects to improve public safety and reduce property damage associated with localized flood events.

You can make arguments till you are blue in the face that these are important to the health and safety of Tulsa and need to be done, but you are missing the point as to the Federal Government's role in these matters. Why am I paying taxes in Oklahoma anyway?

11-13. Airport Terminal Building Roadway Reconstruction - The project will repair and upgrade the Terminal Building Roadway at the Tulsa International Airport. Portions of the roadway system that provides access to the Terminal Building are in need of replacement, Extend Taxi lane November-Alpha -Project constructs approximately 940 feet of taxi lane into the North Development Area. It includes earthwork, concrete paving and minor drainage improvements. This project is currently advertising for bids, Rehabilitate Airfield Pavements - Jones Riverside - Project will rehabilitate a variety of taxiways and taxi lanes throughout the airport including Taxiway Zulu that serves Runway 1R/19L; Taxiway Bravo and Taxi lanes JJ, KK, LL, MM, and NN.

I can admit when I have been over inclusive. These projects appear to be important and need to be taken care. And a good argument can be made for federal intervention. However, is a stimulus bill really the best place for this type of action? $5,700,000 in order to create 34 jobs, and short term ones at that. Give me a break.

14. Amtrak Feasibility Study

Amtrak is a sham to begin with. It isn't even fiscally feasible in New England, why even try here?

15-22. Indigent care regional medical center facility expansion and renovation (providing enhanced services to under served and at risk populations), Regional Medical Informatics Network, Data Warehouse and Electronic Health Records , Electronic Health Record Development
North Tulsa Specialty Clinic, Phase II Cancer Center Satellite and Imaging Center, Martin Regional Library Expansion, Federally Qualified Primary Care Clinic, North Tulsa Regional Wellness Center

Unless these are federal hospitals to begin with, which I'm not sure I like the idea of having anyway, the federal government needs to keep their hands off. If the Hospital isn't competing well enough to create electronic records or expand their library, then maybe they should take a closer look at "why" they can't. Once again, most of these are local issues that can be handled best at the local level. Even If local government wants to get involved, I would need to know more information about each project and a balancing test would be called for.

23-25. Compressed natural Gas (CNG) Fleet Fueling Infrastructure Expansion-Expand the City`s CNG infrastructure to fuel the growing CNG fleet and provide for the conversion of 20 light duty vehicles, Energy Efficient Public Housing Infrastructure Improvements, Energy Efficient Facilities Improvements.

Can I just say I am getting sick of saying the same thing? This is a local matter and the Federal Government needs to stay out of it. Leave it to Oklahoma and its municipalities to decide if it is really worth it to spend tax payer money on "Energy Efficiency". Better yet, let the tax payers tell them whether or not they want their taxes spent on such frivolous projects, when our streets can't even be properly maintained.

26-29. Digital Infrastructure Conduit Expansion, Regional Training Center - A regional fire training center to provide fire and homeland security training for Tulsa and surrounding communities, Police Public Safety Facility Improvements, Railroad Crossings - At Grade Safety Improvements - Union Pacific rail line from 1st Street to Peoria Ave.

Local Government, not federal. Though railroad crossing improvements may fall into a necessary intervention by the fed. I would need more information on the Union Pacific rail line.

30. Early Childhood Education Centers - construct ten education centers to serve at risk population.

Using federal funds to construct education centers leads to further federal dictation on how parents must raise and teach their children. The fed has the power to attach mandates to funds received by a state or municipality. This is a slippery slope that has already cause such a detriment to the educational system in America.

31-33. Tulsa Regional Urban Rail Infrastructure, Transit System Improvements - ADA compliant passenger shelters, hybrid lift vans, and hybrid transit coaches for under served areas and population, Sidewalk Infrastructure Improvements-Construct 5 sidewalk projects that improve pedestrian access to transit connections.

LOCAL ISSUES!!! Urban rail in Tulsa is unsustainable to begin with, so why in the world are we building an infrastructure for it?

1984 anyone?

It is time to get in shape. Looks like I might have to start riding my bike in town just so I don't have to pay more taxes and tell the fed where I spend my time.

The system would require all cars and trucks be equipped with global satellite positioning technology, a transponder, a clock and other equipment to record how many miles a vehicle was driven, whether it was driven on highways or secondary roads, and even whether it was driven during peak traffic periods or off-peak hours.

The device would tally how much tax motorists owed depending upon their road use. Motorists would pay the amount owed when it was downloaded, probably at gas stations at first, but an alternative eventually would be needed.

*shakes head disapprovingly*

"You shouldn't have to succeed, though, despite Washington; you should be succeeding with a hand from Washington, and that's what you're going to get now."

-President Obama at his meeting with the Nation's mayors.

This is exactly what we don't need. We as individuals, We as cities, and We as states should be expected to take care of ourselves with limited interference from the federal government. Giving someone everything they need or want creates a dependency, which is the worst type of interference.

I want to succeed DESPITE the federal government, not because of it.

The framers designed a dual sovereignty system for a reason. I refuse to be dependent upon You or your government, Mr. President.

HVD!

Happy Valentines Day!

Thoughtful Consideration

It wasn't that long ago that the Supreme Court explained how the Framers' believed that every piece of legislation be carefully considered.

"By providing that no law could take effect without the concurrence of the prescribed majority of the Members of both Houses, the Framers reemphasized their belief, already remarked upon in connection with the Presentment Clause, that legislation should not be enacted unless it has been carefully and fully considered by the Nation's elected officials." Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha. 462 U.S. 919 (1983).

And what is the purpose of the President? He's the one who is supposed to push legislation through Congress, forcing his rule over the citizens of the United States, right?

"The President's role in the lawmaking process also reflects the Framers' careful efforts to check whatever propensity a particular Congress might have to enact oppressive, improvident, or ill-considered measures." Id.

Too bad, Obama doesn't care to consult the Constitution and consider the Framers' intent.

Why?

Why? Why are there American's who even consider wearing a shirt with Che Guevara on it? Who in their right mind idolizes such a psychopath? The same people comparing Bush to Hitler, wear Che Guevara with pride... What is wrong with these people?

The Real Che Guevara

Rape. A tool for recruitment?

This is absolutely sick and twisted.


RAPE is a Tool of Iraqi Insurgents

"Trolling society for likely candidates and then patiently converting the women from troubled souls into deadly attackers."

"The woman said she was part of a plot in which young women were raped and then sent to her for matronly advice. She said she would try to persuade the victims to become suicide bombers as their only escape from the shame and to reclaim their honor."

"The Mother of Believers" - my @$$!

Really? 12?

Like I said, plus some.

Obama appears to believe that more lobbyists in the White House means less lobbyists in Washington. Someone should tell him that the White House is in Washington.

500,000,000 per month?!

OMG- Notify the press!



Oh wait, she just did.

Obama's Administration *UPDATEDx2*

Obama's administration choices are absolutely laughable.

We now have three individuals *Killefer, Geithner, Daschle* who have failed to pay their taxes and *three* individuals who have withdrawn their nomination *Richardson, Killefer, Daschle*.

(I think its actually only 4 people: Nancy Killefer withdrew her name due to her failure to pay taxes *I was right*)

Wow.

Beautifully Stated

An Open Letter to A citizen Of Gaza: I Am the Soldier Who Slept In Your Home

An Open Letter to A citizen Of Gaza: I Am the Soldier Who Slept In Your Home: By: Yishai G (reserve soldier) ygoldflam@gmail.com [Originally published in Hebrew in Maariv] Hello, While the world watches the ruins in Gaza, you return to your home which remains standing. However, I am sure that it is clear to you that someone was in your home while you were away. I am that someone. I spent long hours imagining how you would react when you walked into your home. How you would feel when you understood that IDF soldiers had slept on your mattresses and used your blankets to keep warm. I knew that it would make you angry and sad and that you would feel this violation of the most intimate areas of your life by those defined as your enemies, with stinging humiliation. I am convinced that you hate me with unbridled hatred, and you do not have even the tiniest desire to hear what I have to say. At the same time, it is important for me to say the following in the hope that there is even the minutest chance that you will hear me. I spent many days in your home. You and your family's presence was felt in every corner. I saw your family portraits on the wall, and I thought of my family. I saw your wife's perfume bottles on the bureau, and I thought of my wife. I saw your children's toys and their English language schoolbooks. I saw your personal computer and how you set up the modem and wireless phone next to the screen, just as I do. I wanted you to know that despite the immense disorder you found in your house that was created during a search for explosives and tunnels (which were indeed found in other homes), we did our best to treat your possessions with respect. When I moved the computer table, I disconnected the cables and lay them down neatly on the floor, as I would do with my own computer. I even covered the computer from dust with a piece of cloth. I tried to put back the clothes that fell when we moved the closet although not the same as you would have done, but at least in such a way that nothing would get lost. I know that the devastation, the bullet holes in your walls and the destruction of those homes near you place my descriptions in a ridiculous light. Still, I need you to understand me, us, and hope that you will channel your anger and criticism to the right places. I decided to write you this letter specifically because I stayed in your home. I can surmise that you are intelligent and educated and there are those in your household that are university students. Your children learn English, and you are connected to the Internet. You are not ignorant; you know what is going on around you. Therefore, I am sure you know that Qassam rockets were launched from your neighborhood into Israeli towns and cities. How could you see these weekly launches and not think that one day we would say "enough"?! Did you ever consider that it is perhaps wrong to launch rockets at innocent civilians trying to lead a normal life, much like you? How long did you think we would sit back without reacting? I can hear you saying "it's not me, it's Hamas". My intuition tells me you are not their most avid supporter. If you look closely at the sad reality in which your people live, and you do not try to deceive yourself or make excuses about "occupation", you must certainly reach the conclusion that the Hamas is your real enemy. The reality is so simple, even a seven year old can understand: Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip, removing military bases and its citizens from Gush Katif. Nonetheless, we continued to provide you with electricity, water, and goods (and this I know very well as during my reserve duty I guarded the border crossings more than once, and witnessed hundreds of trucks full of goods entering a blockade-free Gaza every day). Despite all this, for reasons that cannot be understood and with a lack of any rational logic, Hamas launched missiles on Israeli towns. For three years we clenched our teeth and restrained ourselves. In the end, we could not take it anymore and entered the Gaza strip, into your neighborhood, in order to remove those who want to kill us. A reality that is painful but very easy to explain. As soon as you agree with me that Hamas is your enemy and because of them, your people are miserable, you will also understand that the change must come from within. I am acutely aware of the fact that what I say is easier to write than to do, but I do not see any other way. You, who are connected to the world and concerned about your children's education, must lead, together with your friends, a civil uprising against Hamas. I swear to you, that if the citizens of Gaza were busy paving roads, building schools, opening factories and cultural institutions instead of dwelling in self pity, arms smuggling and nurturing a hatred to your Israeli neighbors, your homes would not be in ruins right now. If your leaders were not corrupt and motivated by hatred, your home would not have been harmed. If someone would have stood up and shouted that there is no point in launching missiles on innocent civilians, I would not have to stand in your kitchen as a soldier. You don't have money, you tell me? You have more than you can imagine. Even before Hamas took control of Gaza, during the time of Yasser Arafat, millions if not billions of dollars donated by the world community to the Palestinians was used for purchasing arms or taken directly to your leaders bank accounts. Gulf States, the emirates - your brothers, your flesh and blood, are some of the richest nations in the world. If there was even a small feeling of solidarity between Arab nations, if these nations had but the smallest interest in reconstructing the Palestinian people - your situation would be very different. You must be familiar with Singapore. The land mass there is not much larger than the Gaza strip and it is considered to be the second most populated country in the world. Yet, Singapore is a successful, prospering, and well managed country. Why not the same for you? My friend, I would like to call you by name, but I will not do so publicly. I want you to know that I am 100% at peace with what my country did, what my army did, and what I did. However, I feel your pain. I am sorry for the destruction you are finding in your neighborhood at this moment. On a personal level, I did what I could to minimize the damage to your home as much as possible. In my opinion, we have a lot more in common than you might imagine. I am a civilian, not a soldier, and in my private life I have nothing to do with the military. However, I have an obligation to leave my home, put on a uniform, and protect my family every time we are attacked. I have no desire to be in your home wearing a uniform again and I would be more than happy to sit with you as a guest on your beautiful balcony, drinking sweet tea seasoned with the sage growing in your garden. The only person who could make that dream a reality is you. Take responsibility for yourself, your family, your people, and start to take control of your destiny. How? I do not know. Maybe there is something to be learned from the Jewish people who rose up from the most destructive human tragedy of the 20th century, and instead of sinking into self-pity, built a flourishing and prospering country. It is possible, and it is in your hands. I am ready to be there to provide a shoulder of support and help to you. But only you can move the wheels of history." Regards, Yishai, (Reserve Soldier) Thanks to: http://northernva.typepad.com/rubicon3/2009/01/i-am-the-soldier-who-slept-in-your-home-must-read.html

What a choice!

Well, isn't that interesting? Joe Biden had the option of being Secretary of State or Vice-President. Which would you have chosen?

Challenging Authority

J.R. Dunn provided an interesting article about how the Left has been much more affective in its use of the internet than conservatives in creating a "Net Feedback" system.

I respectively disagree with the idea that we can face this menace with brute strength, countering their misinformation with our own, or supplying false information in hopes that it will later be discovered that the MSM has been passing along the misinformation on purpose. A case may even be made that the war on the net has been lost and the Left has won.

However, this battle can be restructured and attacks can be made against the left on a much more controllable front: Education. We need a focused effort in revamping our educational system, teaching our children the importance of reason and thought. It is mandatory that we teach our children how to challenge their teachers and administrators to explain what they are teaching and why they are teaching it. These challenges must obviously be respectful.

As a law student, I have learned the benefits of challenging my teachers and forcing them to reconsider their blind regurgitation of leftist propaganda. I only wish I had learned how to challenge and what to challenge earlier in my career as a student.

Life v. Blog

It is almost a year since I posted last, indicating my desire to blog about the Supreme Court. Law School took control and I simply forgot I had created this blog. Law School will continue for an additional 2 1/2 years, but maybe then I will have the time I need to dedicate myself to this subject matter.

On the other hand, I may just change my mind about the focus of this blog. I realize that at this time I have no readers, and in reality I am only writing to myself, but maybe, just maybe I will be able to create something that others will find interesting. And one day one of them will look back on this post in my archive and laugh.