Politics Blog

{REMINDER: JOIN US TONIGHT AND SPEAK WITH DIANA IREY}

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Michael B. Illions

Wednesday, July 26th, 2006
732-692-6448 Office

MEDIA ADVISORY

Diana Irey will be the next guest on GOPUSA Spotlight on America Tele-Conference call. Diana is the Republican challenger to Congressman Jack Murtha from Pennsylvania’s 12 District.

WHO: Diana Irey

WHAT: GOPUSA Spotlight on America Live Teleconference PODCAST discussing Diana’s congressional race against Jack Murtha.

WHEN: Thursday, August 3rd, 2006 - 8:00 p.m. EDT

WHERE: GOPUSA Teleconference Center @ 319-256-0500 *

* PLEASE EMAIL michael.illions@gopusa.com OR CALL 732-692-6448 FOR PASSCODE

— ‘The Commish’ A.J. Sparxx

Today the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services will hear from Alberto R. Gonzales (Attorney General of the United States) and Gordon R. England (Deputy Secretary of Defense). The purpose is “to continue to receive testimony on the future of military commissions in light of the Supreme Court decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld.”

Last week, I wrote the “Internal Battle On Tribunals” where I described the conflict that was taking place between the Uniformed JAG Officers against the Uniformed Combat Arms Officers allied with the Administration.

Also last week, I was able to provide a link to the draft Administration proposal that was for “internal use only.” You may download it here.

Known openly hostile members of the Committee, towards the Tribunal Plan, include Senators McCain, Grahem, Warner, Levin, Kennedy,

At 2:00 PM, we shall see if we won the initial battle and the Administration presents the Plan that I provided the download for.

— Oak Leaf

{Crossposted from Jay atStop the ACLU}

When the ACLU wins a case against the Boy Scouts, the public display of the Ten Commandments, veterans memorials, and other symbols of American history and heritage guess who pays them? You do! However, there is current legislation going before the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, as well as a companion bill going before the House that is designed to put a stop to this.

Read

Former ACLU attorney, Rees Lloyd, whom I had the pleasure of interviewing, is stepping up to the plate.Record Gazette:

Rees Lloyd, Banning-based attorney and Commander of American Legion District 21 (Riverside County), has been selected to testify on behalf of The American Legion before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution in support of passage of Senate Bill 3696, Veterans Memorials, Boy Scouts, Public Seals and Other Public Expressions of Religion Act of 2006 (“PERA).

S 3696 (PERA), sponsored by Sen. Brownback (R-Kan), a companion bill to H.R. 2979 (PERA), sponsored by Rep. Hostetter (R-Ind.), would amend all relevant federal laws to eliminate the authority of judges to award taxpayer-paid attorneyfees to the ACLU, or anyone else, in lawsuits under the Establishment of Religion Clause of the First Amendment against veterans memorials, the Boy Scouts, or the public display of the Ten Commandments of other symbols of America’s history with a religious aspect.

The following is from an email sent out by Mr. Rees Lloyd:

While most Americans remain unaware of it, the ACLU has been reaping millions of dollars in taxpayer-paid profits in lawsuits against veterans memorials, the Boy Scouts, or against the public display of the Ten Commandments or other symbol of our American heritage with a religious aspect.

For but three examples, the ACLU received some $950,000 in attorney fees in a settlement with the City of San Diego in the ACLU’s lawsuit to drive the Boy Scouts out of Balboa Park. In the famous Judge Roy Moore Ten Commandments Case, the ACLU, and cohort so-called “public interest” law firms, received $500,000. In the recent “Intelligent Design” case against the Dover school board, the ACLU received $2,000,000 in attorneys by order of a judge — although the law firm which represented the ACLU informed the court and public that it had acted pro bono and waived any attorney fees. Thus, it was pure profit to the ACLU.

Further, the ACLU has used the threat of impositionof taxpayer-paid attorney fees to extort local elected bodies, city or county councils, school boards, into surrender to the ACLU’s demands to secularly cleanse the public sphere of any evidence of our American religious heritage.

Moreover, the threat of imposition of orders to pay ACLU’s attorney fees in such cases has caused third parties, like The American Legion and other non-profit organizations, to suffer a chilling effect on their First Amendment rights to participate in such lawsuits to protect veterans’ memorials.

S. 3696 (PERA), and H.R. 2679 (PERA), would put an end to that abuse of benevolently intended laws by the ACLU, or anyone else following the ACLU’s precedents, for instance, Islamist terrorists or their sympathizers in our midst.

This reform of the law should be supported by all Americans across all party, ideological, philosophical, or religious lines.

Simply put, the ACLU’s profiteering at taxpayer-expense by exploitation of benevolently intended civil rights laws intended to benefit poor people is a disgrace.

The ACLU have turned the intention of this Act, just like they do the Constitution, on its head. A huge portion of Establishment Clause cases are settled outside of court because of threatening and intimidation from the ACLU. Most of these small schools and towns can not afford to defend themselves from the well funded ACLU and give in to their demands and threatening letters. They know they can not afford to lose. If they do they will be paying for the ACLU’s attorney fees which in many cases reach the millions. Despite all of this some people are trying to claim, like the ACLU, that this law would prevent people who were actually injured by an arm of the state forcing religious views on people such as a school forcing children to pray from being able to afford to defend themselves.

Rees Lloyd dismisses this claim in a selected excerpt from a preview I recieved of his speech this Wednessday:

PERA is narrowly drawn to impact only on Establishment Clause cases, and no other civil rights claims. Arguments have been raised that this, somehow, creates an Equal Protection violation. It is respectfully suggested that this is an argument without merit; the law makes distinctions in myriad
instances, including as to what kind of civil wrongs can result in attorney fee transfers by court orders.

Further, Establishment Clause cases are the only claims of which I am aware that are allowed to proceed without any showing that the plaintiff has suffered any economic, physical, or mental damage, or been deprived of the exercise of any right, butis merely offended at the sight of a symbol which has a religious aspect. In all other categories of claims of which I am aware, mere “taking offense” is not even cognizable for a claim or cause or action. Thus, the distinction made in PERA is a rational one, and preserves attorney fee transfers in cases in which an actual economic, physical, or mental injury, or deprivation of right, other than mere offense, is suffered.

Concisely stated: The American Legion believes that passage of the S. 3696, PERA, is essential for the protection of civil rights for all Americans and not limited to special interests, and for the preservation of the purpose and integrity of the attorney fee provisions of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S. Code Section 1988, the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), and all other Federal statutes which were benevolently intended to benefit the poor and advance civil rights, but are now resulting in the opposite; are resulting in unintended financial enrichment; and are trammeling and throttling the exercise of First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, to petition for redress of grievances to the judicial and legislative branches.

PERA is aimed at cases involving the “offended observer” with “eggshell sensitivities” not cases where actual injury has occured. This should probably be made more clear if the legislation is to pass.

Not only does the ACLU use this provision to fund their agenda of secular cleansing and threaten small schools and towns, they also use it as a tool of punishment for those that resist their agenda. They have accumulated literally millions of taxpayer funded attorney fees when in fact they have no actual attorney fees.

Rees will also reveal this truth in Wednessday’s speech:

As a former ACLU attorney, I know to a certainty that the ACLU’s litigation is carried out by staff attorneys, or by pro bono attorneys who are in fact precluded from receiving fees under the ACLU’s own policies. Notwithstanding, the ACLU regularly seeks, and receives, attorney fees in Establishment Clause cases at market rate, usually $350 an hour in California. Although the courts know that ACLU clients in fact incur no attorney fee obligation, and that ACLU incurs no fee obligation to volunteer cooperating attorneys, as far as is known, no judge has simply said “no” to ACLU attorney fee requests, even though there is no evidence that any attorney fees were incurred. Thus, benevolently intended fee provisions are being used as a bludgeon against public entities to surrender to ACLU’s demands, and being used to obtain profits in the millions.

Take a look at this longlist where the ACLU were payed by you for the secularization of our nation. Are you happy to be paying for this? The passing of this legislation can put a stop to it. If someone moves into town and decides he doesn’t like the memorial cross on the hill, he can sue, but his lawyers won’t get rich if they win. This is what the ACLU has done — they work “pro bono,” but not really. Their clients are not normally indigent, have not suffered any injury and don’t pay any attorneys fees anyway in these cases! It’s all pure gravy for the ACLU and does nothing to advance liberty. Besides, if the ACLU is doing this for some higher principle, attorneys’ fees should be nothing but a peripheral afterthought. They use the threat of huge legal fees to intimidate defenseless towns, not to vindicate rights.

Stop The ACLU stands with the American Legion in supporting the passage of the “Public Expression of Religion Act”. Lets put things back on a fair playing field and stop paying for the ACLU’s agenda. Do your part!

The ACLU supports many radical causes, and while they may have every right to do so, it should not be at the expense of taxpayers that do not support such causes. Please contact your Congress critter, and representative, and tell them to support PERA. Find your Representative here. Find your Senator here.

Sign Our Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding of the ACLU

— Oak Leaf

I did not think it could get worse after I wrote “National Guard Border Numbers Are A Carnival ShellGame.”

According to GEN Blum we know that the “6,000″ National Guard Soldiers equates to 581 Border Agents:

“The number that we’d identified originally when we started planning this operation that would – the numbers of badges back to the border, if you will, was 581.”

After searching, I have found what Congress is anticipating on spending for Operation Jump Start:

“$708 million for the Defense Department for the costs of deploying National Guard personnel at the border.”

Now you get to do the math on how much each “badge” is costing.

— Oak Leaf

Turns out there is a simple explanation tothe myth that “global warming” is generating more intense hurricanes:

“The methodology is fine. There’s no problem with the way they analyzed the data,’’ said Landsea, who is science and operations officer at the hurricane center. “The problem is with the data itself.’’

The study claims historical storm data has been rendered out-of-date by new technology that better estimates the strength of hurricanes. He pointed to advancements in the quality of satellite imagery that is used to estimate a storm’s strength when it can’t be directly measured by aircraft or on land.

In short, Landsea said, there were far more Category 4 and 5 storms in decades past than previously thought, because satellite imagery has improved so greatly.

— Oak Leaf

Instead of preparing for eventual combat in Iraq and Afgahnistan, some National Guard Soldiers are being used to clean out stables:

“Authorities say troops near El Paso, Texas, are doing video surveillance and tending to horses.”

This is not funny, it is very sad. Some of the soldiers deployed to the border will be in Iraq and Afgahnistan in the next 24 months. Some of those soldiers will never return.

The worst thing you can do to any soldier is to “steal training.”

— Oak Leaf

Absolutely fascinating:

Millions of men like Mr. Beggerow — men in the prime of their lives, between 30 and 55 — have dropped out of regular work. They are turning down jobs they think beneath them or are unable to find work for which they are qualified, even as an expanding economy offers opportunities to work.
…
Many of these men could find work if they had to, but with lower pay and fewer benefits than they once earned, and they have decided they prefer the alternative. It is a significant cultural shift from three decades ago, when men almost invariably went back into the work force after losing a job and were more often able to find a new one that met their needs.

Somewhere, my grandfather is turning over in his grave. I simply can not imagine adopting this type of attitude toward working.

— The Ace

No, not Bush. Busch, as in Professor Andrew Busch:

For four decades, the Republican electoral realignment kept rolling due in part to the party’s substantial efforts to persuade the nation of conservative principles. Because Reagan made a persistent argument, today’s 30-44 year-olds who came of age during his presidency are some of America’s most Republican-leaning voters. There is no evidence that a similar “Bush cohort” will arise: in 2004, the youngest voters gave John Kerry his biggest margins. Reagan’s oft-repeated vision of limited constitutional government played an important role in putting Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito on their path to the Supreme Court. It is far from clear that Mr. Bush will inspire the next generation of conservative jurists to take their place.

Read the whole thing. It’s a conservative call to arms. Conservatives need to stand up for the principles that got them here in the first place!

Much of the current conservative malaise is the fault of the Republican Congress, which has become an institution of pork, incumbency, and big government. If Republicans lose either house of Congress this year, it will be entirely their own fault.

— W.C. Varones

This campaign is downright disgusting:

(CNSNews.com) - Ms. Magazine’s latest pro-abortion message invites women and girls who have undergone the procedure to submit their names for inclusion in the magazine and sign an online petition stating that “I have had an abortion.”

The petition targets the recent South Dakota abortion ban, which has been stayed until voters in the state decide on the November ballot whether they want to overturn the ban.

“Whatever happens in South Dakota, 17 states now have trigger laws or pre-Roe bans that will ban abortion if the Supreme Court were to reverse Roe v. Wade,” Ms. Magazine warns.

It’s a I-Killed-My-Baby-athon:

The Ms. Magazine petition asks females to “publicly join the millions of women in the United States who have had an abortion in demanding a repeal of laws that restrict women’s reproductive freedom.” Then the magazine asks for money.

Those scary pro-lifers:

The Ms. Magazine campaign, Brown said is fueled by fears of the growing “pro-life” movement.

“The biggest reason why they are doing this is because they are petrified,” said Brown. “The pro life movement has made tremendous advances in Congress, in the state legislatures and it continues to move forward. And I think that some of this is to frighten the complacent woman who has had an abortion into thinking that if they don’t do something they will lose their ‘right to abortion.’”

Pro-Life organization responds:

Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, told Cybercast News Service that the pitch from Ms. Magazine takes “absurdity to a new level with a campaign bragging about their past abortions.”

“These women are celebrating an act of violence that has proven traumatic for millions of mothers and deadly for their innocent pre-born children,” Brown stated. “We know from all the research that’s been done that most woman who have aborted their children are number one, not proud of what they did, and number two, are not going to come out and publicly say that they are,” she said.

– ‘The Commish’ A.J. Sparxx

Prager bodyslams this one right through the table:

If you are ever morally confused about a major world issue, here is a rule that is almost never violated: Whenever you hear that “world opinion” holds a view, assume it is morally wrong.

And here is a related rule if your religious or national or ethnic group ever suffers horrific persecution: “World opinion” will never do a thing for you. Never.

“World opinion” has little or nothing to say about the world’s greatest evils and regularly condemns those who fight evil.

The history of “world opinion” regarding the greatest mass murders and cruelties on the planet is one of relentless apathy.

Excellent point:

It is difficult to overstate the damage done to the world by television news. Even when not driven by political bias – an exceedingly rare occurrence globally – television news presents a thoroughly distorted picture of the world. Because it is almost entirely dependent upon pictures, TV news is only capable of showing human suffering in, or caused by, free countries. So even if the BBC or CNN were interested in showing the suffering of millions of Sudanese blacks or North Koreans – and they are not interested in so doing – they cannot do it because reporters cannot visit Sudan or North Koreaand video freely. Likewise, China’s decimation and annexation of Tibet, one of the world’s oldest ongoing civilizations, never made it to television.

Stay the course:

Fourth, those who don’t fight evil condemn those who do. “World opinion” doesn’t confront real evils, but it has a particular animus toward those who do – most notably today America and Israel.

The moment one recognizes “world opinion” for what it is – a statement of moral cowardice, one is longer enthralled by the term. That “world opinion” at this moment allegedly loathes America and Israel is a badge of honor to be worn proudly by those countries. It is when “world opinion” and its news media start liking you that you should wonder if you’ve lost your way.

— ‘The Commish’ A.J. Sparxx