Constitution

Party Time

This entry was posted in Constitution Democrats Federal Government Government Libertarianism on by

That is Tea Party Time!
Don’t like the way the gov’mnt is spending your money? Will write a real letter to a congress critter (senate and house) letting them know your thoughts and include a tea bag (I’m thinking used tea bags will be most appropriate).
While it is unlikely that any of these folks will listen to you instead of their k street or texas masters it will be a bit of fun to jab away at the republocrats.
Oh, and no reason to exclude your state and local folks.
Via Carnival of Liberty.

Would You Volunteer for This Group?

This entry was posted in bush Conscription Constitution Federal Government Law Military Politics US Foreign Policy on by

If even a fraction of this is true then why would one volunteer for the US military?

The most appealing explanation lies in the motives of those driving this ostensibly schizophrenic conduct. Plainly, they view sexual morals as something to be manipulated for the accomplishment of political objectives. Hence, lewd and offensive sexual conduct can be deliberately used as a tactic against detainees. On the other hand, officers who earn the leadership’s ire will be humiliated and disgraced using innuendo of sexual misconduct as a tactic.
The cynicism and immorality of this mindset is staggering. It reflects a wholesale repudiation of traditional military values.
One can well question the efficacy of sexual humiliation practices as tools for interrogation and intelligence gathering. However, no one can question their highly inflammatory effect in the War on Terror: they tarnish America’s reputation and put our soldiers at risk. And they may well claim another victim. Experts are already noting that at Rumsfeld’s current burn rate, the volunteer army cannot be sustained much longer. Rumsfeld’s cynical sexual policies are destroying military morale and discipline and hastening the volunteer army’s demise.

Yep, why would anyone volunteer for this environment? Unless, well, they think they might like it….
Read all of Scott Horton’s post: Sexual Perversion in Rumsfeld’s Pentagon.

It’s A Revenue Generator

This entry was posted in Constitution Drug Laws Federal Government Law Enforcement Libertarianism Sex on by

I’d like to think that the us senate respects the people and the constitution enough to toss out crap like the house recently passed on to it but, heck, it is the us senate so we will probably get to see this go all the way to the supreme court before we hopefully are rid of at least some of the more noxious provisions.
Radley in discussing some of representative pence’s (r-ind) additons to the Child Safety Act of 2005 also notes the following:

It gets worse. The bill’s enforcement provisions empower law enforcement with the power to seize the assets of violators, proving that there really is a graveyard of stupid ideas deep in the bowels of the U.S. Capitol Building that Congressmen return to when they’re out of stuff to legislate. Because asset forfeiture has worked so well with the drug war. Idiots.

Actually asset forfeiture has worked very well in the drug wars. See, assest forfeiture is not about stopping some type of alleged criminal activity. Rather, it is about adding another revenue source for government agencies. And they don’t have to call it extortion taxation.
Via Brian Doss at Catallarchy.

Bow Down to Leo?

This entry was posted in Constitution Economics Libertarianism Supreme Court (US) on by

Feddie at Southern Appeal argues that this endorsement by Leonard Leo should resolve the issue:

Dear Ann Coulter and all other Roberts doubters: If the following statements by Leonard Leo don’t make you feel extremely secure with President Bush’s nomination of John Roberts to the SCOTUS, then nothing will:

Well, I’m a cipher roberts doubter and this surely doesn’t make me reconsider. Amongst other things Leo argues that:

Even though Roberts has never ruled on an abortion issue, Leo says Roberts opinions on other hot political topics show “a respect for the text and original meaning and a presumption of deference to the political branches of government.”

Seems a bit oxymoronic and certainly the last thing I want to see from the court is a presumption of deference to the political branches of government. An independent judiciary that properly recognizes the restrictions that must be put on government action if life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and, yes, our economic well being are to survive is just fine, thank you!