Archive | 2012 Elections RSS feed for this section

Bush, Obama, and Presidential War Powers

1 Apr

Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com wrote an excellent article about the expanding war powers of the President. I highly recommend this piece to anyone that is interested in the interplay of federalism, the national executive, and the political process. For my Tea Party compatriots that have a tendency to see Constitutional issues in black and white, I think this will give you a better idea of how complicated things really are.  

Just a quick summation of points:

  • Greenwald begins by discussing President W. Bush’s disregard for FISA (Nixon-inspired federal law that makes certain kinds of domestic eavesdropping a felony). In essence, the Bush’s DOJ team made the argument that Article II’s necessary and proper clause allows the President to ignore Congressional power at his discretion i.e. Statutes apply unless the President, upon his unchecked discretion, deems that it doesn’t
  • In wake of US military action in Libya, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated the same message to the House of Representatives
  • Greenwald discusses a 1987 report by then Congressman Cheney’s justifying President Reagan’s involvement in Iran Contra. In particular, he gives us an excerpt of the report… “it was unconstitutional for Congress to pass laws intruding” on the “commander in chief”… Needless to say, Cheney does a good job an exception job of making people dislike him with everything he does
  • How Senator Obama and Senator Clinton were adamantly opposed to President Bush’s exercise of power
  • The unlikely pairing of Justice Scalia and Justice Stevens in the dissent of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
  • How President Obama is doing what all Presidents before him have done: preserve and expand the power of the President

Congress Showing signs of a *gasp* Compromise?

31 Mar

You jerk my chain and I'll jerk yours... But that chain looks like it has syphilis!

Though I think compromise has it’s time, it is disheartening to hear that the Republicans aren’t taking the stand that they promised to take. It looks like the whusses are scared of a shutdown… click here to read more

Though I appreciate the activism and the rallying cry, I think it would be unwise to focus too much on a balanced budget amendment. The goal is to bring the federal government out of the red… we can only do that with a clear strategy of fiscal responsibility and restraint.

As for the cuts for the current year, we can’t play games. We must cut as much as we can, and if the liberals threaten a shut down, so be it. Politically, these representatives know that the Tea Party Patriots will back them if they make a righteous budgetary stand. The sooner we get the $61 billion off the budget, the faster Washington has to learn to live without $61 billion dollars. Forget all the rhetoric about free loaders and lazy people etc. that kind of talk is unproductive nonsense. The goal is to shrink the size of the federal government so individuals, the private sector, and States can make the best decisions possible.

People think Tea Party Patriots are completely against raising taxes… that is not the case. In the situation we’re in now, taxing a public that is struggling to make ends meet and growing the federal government would be a very short-lived temporary fix that will only dig us deeper. But when we get back to fiscal responsibility, it is the individual and the State that should have more leeway; when we reach the equilibrium again, if States like CA and IL keep playing the same ol’ tax and spend game, the individuals of that state will be able to spend the way they want and raise/decrease the STATE income tax as they please (so long as they know the Federal government wont be there to bail them out every step of the way AND that they’ll have to compete with fiscally responsible States)… Competition is the end game

NJ Governor: True Tea Party Patriot Without All the Fat

30 Mar
Okay… maybe not!

Unlike the calls of certain Islamaphobes who are tarnishing the Tea Party’s good name,  Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey clearly governs with his conscience and doesn’t buy into all the libera media-constructed hype. The man means business. Gov. Christie recently nominated Sohail Mohammed to the Superior Court of NJ. In a time where politicians (like Presidential hopeful Herman Cain) are making a stand against hiring Muslim-Americans (government jobs for now… but what’s next? First responders? Doctors? Attorneys?), Gov. Christie continues to stand by his decision to nominate Mr. Mohammed (even though he is a Muslim-AMERICAN).

This isn’t an affirmative action issue. Just like Christians, Muslims believe that one should only reap what he sows. Generally, Muslims do not support the idea of hiring someone just because of the race, gender, or religious beliefs. Here, it just so happened that a Muslim-American was the best person for the job. As we start getting to a point where it is commonplace for there to be 2nd and 3rd generation Muslim-Americans, expect there to be more of us that are competing for high profile positions.

To read more, please click here to see the NJ.com article.

%d bloggers like this: