in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000.
| Heritage | 0 | |
| Reuters | 2012 Watch: Mitt Romney’s message from GOP: Step it up |
0 |
| Fox News | Hmm: Obama to give 10 states a pass on No Child Left Behind deadline |
0 |
| CBS LA | Wha? LA County OKs $1,000 Fine For Throwing Football, Frisbee On Beaches |
0 |
| Ballot Box | AZ: Aide injured in Giffords shooting will run to replace her in House |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Gaffetastic:
Vice President Joe Biden had his “oops” moment Wednesday speaking in a 49er-crazed SF when he told a crowd at a city political fundraiser that “the Giants are on their way to the Super Bowl.” - SF Chronicle, 1-18-12
John Doe provision passes Congress – plus the Democrats’ latest attempt to undermine the President
Audrey Hudson reports the awesome news:
Congress yesterday sent President Bush legislation that heightens airport and seaport security and includes a “John Doe” provision to protect airline passengers from retaliatory lawsuits for reporting potential terror activity.
The measure that implements the remaining major September 11 commission recommendations passed the House yesterday 371-40. It had cleared the Senate 85-8 late Thursday night.
[...]
The Republican-drafted John Doe protections “are a huge win for our conference and, more importantly, for the safety and security of the American people,” said House Republican Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio.
“I’m pleased Democratic leaders have finally agreed with us.”
The John Doe provision is the first Republican-backed amendment to become law since Democrats claimed the majority this year.
Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, led the effort, along with Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent, and Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican, to include the language after it was blocked by Democrats last week.
Oh the not-so-awesome news front, take a look at the stunt Sen. Chuck Schumer is trying to pull:
New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”
“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”
Schumer’s assertion comes as Democrats and liberal advocacy groups are increasingly complaining that the Supreme Court with Bush’s nominees – Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito – has moved quicker than expected to overturn legal precedents.
Senators were too quick to accept the nominees’ word that they would respect legal precedents, and “too easily impressed with the charm of Roberts and the erudition of Alito” Schumer said.
“There is no doubt that we were hoodwinked” said Schumer, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Jules Crittenden calls this a “Severation of powers.” John Hinderaker asks: “Is this a coup? If not, what is it?”
I’d say if you consider how Democrats have routinely questioned the President’s right to claim executive privilege, the President’s right to commute sentences and pardon people, the President’s right to make recess appointments, the President’s right to fight back against political smear campaigns (think Joe Wilson), the President’s right and obligation under the Constitution to protect the American people at home and abroad in a time of war, and now this threat over the nomination of USSC justices? That certainly sounds like an attempted coup to me.
The Democrats have declared war on this President. Republicans, especially the ones in Congress – even wishy washy Senators like Arlen Specter – need to fight back and fight back strong against this blatant abuse of power on the part of Bush-hating Democrats, who are not pulling any of these stunts because they really think the President has actually engaged in misconduct. They’re doing it because in December of 2000, George W. Bush “stole” the election from their man Al Gore, and they’ve absolutely despised him for it ever since, and done everything they can to weaken him.
It’s one thing for the opposition to do things like this in peacetime. It’s another to do it in a time of war. But as the Democrats have shown us far too often the last six years, nothing is off the table when it comes to political revenge, even if it means trumping up charges of the President doing something “illegal” in order for them to gain traction, and worse, even if it means sacrificing the security of this country on the alter of playing politics. They don’t care whether or not it’s really true, because they know that accusations alone are all it takes to put doubt in the minds of the American people.
Simply put, the Democrats are out of control, and it’s high time that Republicans stand firm against the antics of the party that can’t wait until January 2009 in order to celebrate the ‘full’ Democrat control they think they’ll have. I just hope that those Representatives and Senators who are thinking about distancing themselves from the President the closer it comes to next year’s election remember that these presidential rights are worth fighting for, no matter what their personal feelings are about the president, and no matter their political ambitions.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
19 Responses to “John Doe provision passes Congress – plus the Democrats’ latest attempt to undermine the President”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Island of Misfit Bloggers
Stats
I guess Chuckie and company really want a coup, don’t they? I feel sorry for my son in Syracuse. This is one of his senators going off for his own vanity.
Ah. Hah. ST provides us with a portmanteau blog this time.
As for the John Doe provision. Fine. What took them so long?
The charm of Roberts and the erudition of Alito are bad things? Whatever.
The Democrats are not out of control; they are in control.
Quite frankly, it is next to impossible, should there be another vacancy, for Bush to successfully put another justice on the court. It WILL be tied up.
The Senate will not be asked for advice; and it will not consent.
You have to wonder how this could happen.
For more than seven years we’ve been hearing how George Bush is the dumbest creature ever to wander onto the White House grounds. They think they’re being charitable when they call him a chimp. Kerry is on record in 2004 fuming about how he could be losing to “that idiot”.
So if he’s such a dunce, how come he’s constantly outsmarting the Dems? For years they’ve been whining about how the President fooled them all about Iraq – Hillary’s been especially vocal on that point.
So which is it? Is he a dullard who’s too dim to tie his own shoelaces, or is he the evil genius who tricks them constantly?
Which leads to two questions:
If the Democrats are right and President Bush is a moron, how slow do they have to be to be duped by him so often?
And if they can be fooled by so easily by such an inferior intellect, how much easier will it be for Chavez, Achmadinejad, and Kim Jong Il to pull the wool over their eyes?
You’re being a paranoid when you talk about coups. You’re one step away from black helicopters, in fact. At any rate, this isn’t a coup; it’s how our government was designed to function. Disputes between the branches aren’t a bug, they’re a feature.
Notably, the John Doe provision won’t do anything to change current law, as far as I can tell. It doesn’t provide immunity, it provides a defense (which already was available), which enables a claim to get to the jury thereby imposing onerous costs on the defendants.
Seeing as you all aren’t in the reality based world, I suppose its real world effects aren’t especially important. The right doesn’t act; it manipulates symbols. So congrats on your impotent symbol. It seems like an important one, judging from all the blogging about it lately.
jpe
American Heritage Dictionary:
coup
1. A brilliantly executed stratagem; a triumph.
2. A sudden appropriation of leadership or power; a takeover: a boardroom coup.
If your argument is just an attack against us for a meaning to the word coup that John Hinderaker wasn’t using then you would be the fool.
P.S. Why are you worked up about our “symbol”? Instead of attacking tell us why you are against it. Your posts are a bunch of empty arguments. Nothing to respond to except your viciousness.
I’m not fo’ it or agin’ it. It’s a silly symbol that doesn’t achieve what you all think it does. The point of the law was to prevent harassing lawsuits, right? So to do that, we’d want a law that creates a blanket immunity. Does this law do that? No. It only provides a defense to the defendant – if the defendant can prove good faith, she’s off the hook. That is a question of fact that the jury gets to decide. By the time you get to a jury, you’re already looking at thousands and thousands in legal fees.
If the point was to prevent people from being scared of shelling out thousands to lawyers, the law fails badly.
Re: coup: Hinderaker is just being shrill and hysterical. This is the US government acting as the government was designed to.
jpe states:
And in the very next sentence states:
LOL!! So now who’s being paranoid?! I’m sure you can back up that statement with some facts though, right?
“If You See Something, Say Something”. That sign is all over the place in NYC, so if we see suspicious Muslims and report them, we are acting in good faith as good citizens. If we did nothing, and survived an attack, should we be charged with dereliction of duty?
Sure, and people certainly should report their suspicions. The problem with the current bill is that, because of the right to a trial, it’s really easy for a plaintiff to meet their evidentiary burden in the pleading stage. There will be a trial so long as there’s a genuine issue of material fact.
In the CAIR case, there’s no question that the flying imams could meet that standard and get to a jury trial. And even if the imams lose, the defendants are going to have to pay through the nose. (even if they win attorney’s fees, they have to front a lot of money)
The house amendment was better, since it didn’t have the good faith clause, although it’s still not perfect. What I would have liked to have seen is a law compelling the government to pick up the legal costs of a good faith defendant. Our reports of suspicions redound to the good of the nation as a whole, so it makes sense that the nation as a whole would pick up the tab.
Well gee, I hope all those Republicans who stayed home in 2006 and let the Democrats and people like jpe here win the election are proud of themselves.
jpe, if it makes you feel better we can call it a bloodless coup.
Or we can just call it disgraceful.
And btw the government was not designed to act like this.
Terrye, Republicans didn’t stay home. It was Independents we lost.
I do not buy that the insane hatred the democrats have towards President Bush is reserved for him because he outsmarted them in their attempt to steal the 2000 election. The democrats hate Republicans period. They would be just as frantic over any Republican president, especially since this next election will seal their fate as a party. They have aligned themselves with every leftist political fringe group in the country in the desperate hope that they can regain the treasury purse power which is their party’s life blood. Their stratergy to keep themselves in the news with their daily assaults on the president has worked well for them. The MSM is supplied with an excuse to hype the democrat or their party and simultaneously present Bush in a questionable position. The media then moves on to the next democrat generated accusation without an in depth report on any previous charge. The public has been manipulated, Bush poll numbers pushed down, and it hasn’t cost the democrats a cent This situation is not insurmontable but from now until Nov 2008 Republicans literally have the fight of their lives to secure this country from the inevitable socialism that any democrat administration will impose.
ST, one of your best posts ever!
What is it with these guys?? If they are this easily “hoodwinked”, how can we trust them when dealing with our enemies, as in the North Korean reactor deal. Yet somehow these idiots want us to think they are inteligent enough to run the country, but everyother week they are being “Lied too”, and they believe the liars, incredible.
It just seems to me that these blowhards run around and make the same excuses. If they aren’t wrapping themselves up in patriotism when they are committing sedition, it is about how the other person lied to them and they were dumb enough to believe.
Also, if precedent is always right, then this counrty would have never over turned the stupidity of Dread Scott. Women would never had the “right” to choice. And segregation would never have been struck down. So Schumer, like usual, is wrong and just stupid. – Lorica
Gotta love the Dems. Why, how dare they not keep to precedent. Hmmm…If I recall correctly, that’s exactly the same problem the Democrats had with eliminating slavery, how dare the Republicans and the Union try and overturn Dredd-Scott!!! Precedent says they are only worth half a person and are to stay slaves!
Idiots.
jpe tries a smokescreen:
Your assumption is faulty. A law granting blanket immunity is a license for malevolent lawsuits. I can see our leftists using it, in conjunction with the ACLU, to file harrassing lawsuits against anyone who dared disagree with them on any issue.
Past experience has shown that the left loves few things more than interfering with the smooth and sensibile workings of the republic. And jpe proves it in the next paragraph:
This is not the proper function of the government. The intent was to assure qualified appointments, not to prevent any appointments at all. Schumer’s message is this: I don’t care how stellar the nominee’s judicial record is. I don’t care how brilliant a legal mind he or she has. We’re not confirming anyone at all, and it’s for purely partisan reasons. And jpe thinks that’s how the government was designed? Wrong…but a leftist who wants to keep it from working properly would love the idea.
Next, jpe sheds tears for the poor abused imams:
Again, wrong. The facts in this case are not in dispute. The imams were belligerent toward the other passengers before the flight, deliberately mis-seated themselves in key terrorist attack positions, and asked for unneccessary seat belt extenders which have the potential to be used as weapons – or be linked across an aisle to prevent a Flight 93-style counterattack with food or beverage carts. The only thing that is not in dispute, to a reasonable mind, is that this was a conscious attempt to provoke a response, get people like jpe teary-eyed about their plight, and make it easier for a future hijacking to succeed.
Looking for a new way to soak taxpayers, jpe comes up with this gem:
You’re almost right on this one – almost. It isn’t the government that should have to pick up the costs. It’s the plaintiff. I’ve always like the idea of loser pays in a lawsuit. If the ACLU or other leftist organizations had to shell out a couple of million dollars more in legal fees to defendants every time they file a suit for frivolous or political reasons, and then lose as they often do, there would be a lot less nonsense clogging up the courts.
Even if these clowns had voted to make it so the terrorists could sue me, I’d still report anything that I saw that looked outta place.
I’d love to go to court and face em and I’d give em one hell of a fight for MY RIGHT TO PROTECT MY COUNTRY AND MY FELLOW CITIZENS — so THERE !!!!