U.S. military teaches ‘protesters’ are ‘low-level terrorists’

But Thompson noted that the report also targeted as “potential terrorists” Americans who:

* Oppose abortion

* Oppose same-sex marriage

* Oppose restrictions on firearms

* Oppose lax immigration laws

* Oppose the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs

* Oppose continuation of free trade agreements

* Are suspect of foreign regimes

* Fear Communist regimes

* Oppose a “one world” government

* Bemoan the decline of U.S. stature in the world

* Are upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India, and more

And Thompson told WND no apology has been offered to the members of any of those classes of citizens.

via U.S. military teaches ‘protesters’ are ‘low-level terrorists’.

Expansion of Assisted Suicide to Washington Targets Elderly, Disabled With Death

Last week in Washington state a 66-year-old woman with terminal cancer made history as the first person to undergo physician-assisted suicide since that state legalized the practice in November of 2008.

Proponents of legalized suicide celebrated Washington’s approval of this policy as a victory for the “death with dignity” movement. These suicide advocates, in keeping with the rhetorical tactic of their ideological cousins in the pro-abortion movement, equate “dignity” with “choice.” Unfortunately, as with the abortion debate, the “choice” rhetoric of the right-to-die movement eclipses critical moral and ethical questions which ought to be at the forefront of the debate.

Is suicide really a way to honor life and preserve dignity? What are the social and cultural implications of normalizing the “right to die?” Will voluntary physician-assisted suicide give way to involuntary physician-assisted suicide where doctors decide whether their patients would be better off dead? Will the “right” to suicide be transmogrified into a “duty” to commit suicide? Will the elderly who consume more than they produce be deemed “resource hogs” that have a duty to die and get out of the way?

In an age of scarce economic resources, will the critically ill or the handicapped or the demented be viewed as expendable by their younger, healthier counterparts? How will the medical profession be transformed if those who are trained to cure are given a license to kill? These and many other questions should be asked and answered before we decide it’s okay to encourage terminally-ill persons to choose self-destruction in the name of dignity.

via Expansion of Assisted Suicide to Washington Targets Elderly, Disabled With Death.

Leahy, Sessions Release Sotomayor Questionnaire

(Wednesday, May 27, 2009) — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) Wednesday released the bipartisan questionnaire the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Judge Sonia Sotomayor to complete in connection with her nomination to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Once the questionnaire is completed and returned to the Committee, copies will be made available online and in print.

A PDF of the questionnaire is available online.

via Leahy, Sessions Release Sotomayor Questionnaire.

Obama Urges Senate Again to Swiftly Confirm Sotomayor – Political News – FOXNews.com

The vitriol in this debate moves me deeply. Instead of advice and consent on the part of Congresss we are reduced (myself included) to a state of continuous anger and ill-feeling. I do not think most are acting in malice, although it sure sounds like it. Most have legitimate concerns – Okay, Congress, present the concerns and vote on it. She has plenty of time on the bench – plenty of cases to review. Personally, I don’t care what she said when she was in college (No offense to her) – just I remember my college days (when I knew all the answers!) and I would prefer not to act of some things that I said.

What is relevant today is her current method of applying the law (I prefer this term to interpretation – courts interpret and then apply the interpretation to a particular case or circumstance) to cases before her. I also am interested in her personal views, but not to the degree as some seem to be – I myself believe strongly that abortion is morally wrong – but because the law of the land is choice, I think the court should interpret and apply that precedent until the Congress, who participate in policy, decides to actually address the issue. In the interest of fairness for other articles I have posted about SCOTUS, here is the presidents request for a quick treament.

President Obama pressed the Senate anew Saturday to swiftly confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, expressing confidence that efforts to scuttle her nomination will fail despite intensified scrutiny.

“I am certain that she is the right choice,” the president said in his weekly radio and Internet address in which he scolded critics who he said were trying to distort her record and past statements. Those include her 2001 comment that a female Hispanic judge would often reach a better decision than a white male judge.

With the Senate returning next week from recess, Obama said he hopes it begins the confirmation process without delay and he expects his nominee to be on the bench when the Supreme Court begins its new term in October.

via Obama Urges Senate Again to Swiftly Confirm Sotomayor – Political News – FOXNews.com.

American Daily Review – articles blog – Why Does Republican Mark Kirk Approve of Criminalizing Blogs?

Why is Representative Kirk signing onto a bill constructed with such overbroad language that it could criminalize bloggers?

Perhaps he doesn’t realize he’s doing so? The bill is supposed to stop “cyberbullying” and does not seem to be intentionally aimed at political blogs. The title refers to Megan Meier, the 13-year-old Missouri girl that committed suicide in 2006 over scurrilous messages that she found about herself posted on the Internet by Lori Drew, the mother of one of her classmates.

However, the language is overbroad and unclear. Because of the unclear language in the bill, this thing could easily be applied in all sorts of areas for which it is not intended, as lawyers and activists judges are prone to do.

via American Daily Review – articles blog – Why Does Republican Mark Kirk Approve of Criminalizing Blogs?.

Oath of Office (for reference)

Here is the Oath of Office administered to Supreme Court Justices:

“I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

Crooks and Liars » Gen. Petraeus: US violated Geneva Convention, the court of law could try terrorists: we made mistakes after 9/11: Close Gitmo

Gen. Petraeus joined FOX News and Martha MacCallum today and gave a blockbuster interview, but not one Fox expected. Once again, he called for the responsible closing of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay. He also said that mistakes were made after 9/11 and that the Army Field Manual is all that we need to use to interrogate prisoners. In addition, he said that we have to have faith in our judicial system and we should try the Khalid Sheikh Muhammads in a court of law. Martha tried to give him the ticking time bomb scenario to justify torture and he really didn’t bite. He did say maybe an Executive Order could be appropriate, but that it really wasn’t necessary. Petraeus repudiated pretty much most of what Limbaugh Republicans and the Rove/Newt/Cheney Party have been saying.

(rush transcript)

via Crooks and Liars » Gen. Petraeus: US violated Geneva Convention, the court of law could try terrorists: we made mistakes after 9/11: Close Gitmo.

Couple Ordered to Stop Holding Bible Study at Home Without Permit – Local News | News Articles | National News | US News – FOXNews.com

“The government may not prohibit the free exercise of religion,” Broyles told FOX News. “I believe that our Founding Fathers would roll over in their grave if they saw that here in the year 2009, a pastor and his wife are being told that they cannot hold a simple bible study in their own home.”

“The implications are great because it’s not only us that’s involved,” Mary Jones said. “There are thousands and thousands of bible studies that are held all across the country. What we’re interested in is setting a precedent here — before it goes any further — and that we have it settled for the future.”

via Couple Ordered to Stop Holding Bible Study at Home Without Permit – Local News | News Articles | National News | US News – FOXNews.com.

UPDATE: Deadline set in banned Bible study case

Demand letter warns of ‘irreparable’ harm from First Amendment violation

Shopfloor » Blog Archive » CPSIA Update: Back to Crayons for You, Boys and Girls

Sometimes Congress needs a better look at the affect of  laws and regulations.

Bobby, what are you doing? What’s that?!

I’m writing a letter to Gramma, Mom, thanking her for the pen she sent me for my birthday. Here, listen: “Thanks, Gram, for the really nice pen. I’m even using it to write this letter to you. It’s neat.”

Bobby, NO! You’re only 10 years old! I put that pen away for a reason: Don’t you know you’re not allowed to use a pen until you’re 13? It’s illegal.

What? I can’t use a pen? That’s STUPID.

Well, maybe it is. But Congress passed something called the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, and it makes it against the law to manufacture and sell pens that might have even the littlest, tiny bit of lead in some of the metals. It looks like your ballpoint pen — and it is a nice one — has a metal tip that probably wouldn’t meet the law’s limits.

But it’s not dangerous, is it? I’m not going to stab anybody or eat it or anything. I haven’t written on myself since I was a little kid!

No, it’s not dangerous. But Congress passed the law and we have to respect the law. Here. Now give me the pen. I’ll put it away until you’re older. Use these crayons instead.

via Shopfloor » Blog Archive » CPSIA Update: Back to Crayons for You, Boys and Girls.

Commentary: Sotomayor pick not based on merit – CNN.com

In picking Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama has confirmed that identity politics matter to him more than merit. While Judge Sotomayor exemplifies the American Dream, she would not have even been on the short list if she were not Hispanic.

She is not one of the leading lights of the federal judiciary, and far less qualified for a seat on the Supreme Court than Judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland or Solicitor General Elena Kagan.

via Commentary: Sotomayor pick not based on merit – CNN.com.