Monthly Archives: August 2009

Toomey Sells Out Even Before He is Elected

Before the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor, Pat Toomey said he would vote for her if he was in the Senate. The scoundrel is already moving to the center and he hasn’t even been elected yet. There is no way he would have done this if he was still running against Specter in the GOP primary. Now that he isn’t, he obviously feels a need to run to the center.

Thankfully conservative GOP primary voters in Pennsylvania have an alternative, Peg Luksik.

Pope calls for global government?

“In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority….” ~ Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI (via Thomas E. Woods Jr.)

Disappointing indeed.

August recess

If politicians can take the month of August off, I don’t see why bloggers can’t either.  Actually,  my tasks at my job are going to increase significantly in the next few weeks so unless something major happens and except for occasional stray comments, I will see you after Labor Day.

I leave you all with a few article for yourt consideration:

Here’s J.J. Jackson’s latest - “Your Paper’s Please”

Radley Balko over at Reason.com gets right what so many overlook about Gates affair.

Andrew Napolitano talks about state sovereignty.

Daniel McCarthy warns about the logical consequences of the “Birther” movement.

Just because you live in a big city (which a combinations of lots of little cities called “neighborhoods”) doesn’t make you any less paleo as Eve Tusnet writes in “Squaring DuPont Circle”

Please do contribute your favorite songs about home for Bill Kauffman at Front Porch Republic.

Patrick Deenan writes about the “Oilenomics” at FPR.

William Lind writes about the folly of drone warfare.

Maddow vs. Buchanan on Sotomayor

Maddow vs. Buchanan on Sotomayor

I don’t know how many of you saw this segment of Rachel Maddow’s show a few weeks ago, but Pat Buchanan did an excellent job of bluntly telling the truth about demographics in America, past and present. Specifically, he blasts Obama for making an obvious affirmative action pick by appointing Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. Whatever your opinion of Buchanan, he must be given credit for letting her have it when it comes to this particular issue. He did not mince words.

Obviously Maddow is offended at the historical reality that white folks were the exclusive authors of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and the rest of the framework of American law and jurisprudence. Since there’s no “diversity” in those accomplishments, they have to be reshaped, corrected, and molded into something else entirely. Hence, we get stuck with Supreme Court justices like Ginsburg and now Sotomayor.

Even Someone at Huffington Post Gets the “Birther” Issue Right

Here is a surprisingly good article on the “birther” issue at Huffington Post. It expresses my sentiments almost exactly.

The only thing weirder than the Birthers are the anti-Birthers, who blame the Birthers for being conspiracy theorists yet actively feed the conspiracy by refusing to call for President Obama to release his birth certificate.

The state official in Hawaii who manages such things has reiterated that there is indeed an original birth certificate on file which would confirm President Obama’s having been born in Hawaii and that she has seen it, but state law won’t allow her to release it unless the president authorizes it.

So what’s the problem here? Release the original and let’s be done with this madness.

And:

During the last campaign, John McCain faced similar questions and promptly responded by releasing his original birth certificate. That’s how normal people with nothing to hide handle these things.

Most American’s aren’t Birthers or anti-Birthers, but we are beginning to wonder why the president doesn’t put this one to rest once and for all. Every day he allows this circus to continue is another day that he behaves less like the President of the United States facing weird accusations from fringe groups and more like a strange politician…

HT: Lew Rockwell

A Few Thoughts on the Birthers

I haven’t had much to say about the “birther” issue so far. I don’t believe Obama was born in Kenya. I believe he was born in Hawaii. And I even argued before the election (mostly at Third Party Watch and the Independent Political Report I believe) that I don’t think “natural born” means born on American soil. If so, McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, would have been ineligible. I think “natural born” means not naturalized. I do think there could be something to the allegation that he became a citizen of Indonesia when he was a child. That isn’t far fetched or unreasonable at all, but has been focused on less because it is less sensational. Whether that would have caused him to lose his US citizenship is a legal question, and I have seen conflicting opinions on that.

That said, I do think Obama has acted very fishy during this whole thing. It is not unreasonable or outrageous to ask him to just authorize the release of his original “long form” birth certificate if for no other reason than to put the issue to rest and shut everyone up. Why spend thousands fighting in court when all he would have to do is authorize the release? Those who suggest he doesn’t just so the fringe will keep talking about it are engaging in a kind of conspiracy theory themselves.

I am not prone to embrace conspiracy theories myself, but neither am I conspiracy phobic, a common malady on the “respectable” right. The insinuation by the respectability mafia that merely asking him to produce the original long form birth certificate or wondering aloud why he hasn’t (As Sen. Shelby and Rep. Blunt reportedly did and then backtracked when confronted) is somehow out of line is absurd. The sentiment “just show us the birth certificate” is eminently reasonable and common sensical, and suggestions otherwise smack me as “I’m more conspiracy phobic than thou” respectability bona fides polishing.

I don’t think he is hiding his place of birth, but I do think he could be hiding something. The whole thing stinks. He never released his medical records or his school transcripts either as is customary for Presidential candidates. Personally, I have always thought this obligation to be intrusive and unnecessary. Maybe someone had a case of gonorrhea in the past and doesn’t want their spouse to know about it. Or maybe they goofed off too much in school and made a couple of D’s they aren’t proud of. But it has unfortunately become the norm, so Obama is conspicuous by his refusal to do so. I think his transcripts would prove he was clearly an Affirmative Action admit to Columbia and Harvard Law. My suspicion is that he may somewhere in them have indicated Indonesian citizenship, but that is a wild hunch.

I do think the birth certificate debate could become a distraction, just as Clinton hate distracted from simply opposing his policies. I think it has the potential to do more harm than good although if it does as much of the blame for this will rest on the hand-wringing, squeamish respectability police conspiracy phobics left, right and center as it will the “birthers” for overstating their case. Simply wanting to see the original birth certificate and wondering why Obama hasn’t produced it, as opposed to the dogmatic assertion that he was born in Kenya, is entirely reasonable.

This video by Jack Hunter, a friend of this site, is what prompted me to venture into this no-man’s land which I had before been intentionally avoiding. I normally agree almost entirely with Jack, but I have to take serious issue with something he says here. He asks what do “birthers” expect even if their allegations are true, “that Obama would be stripped of his office.” Huh? Is this even a question? Of course he should be stripped of his office if he is not in fact a “natural born” citizen and therefore constitutionally ineligible to hold it. Should he be allowed to continue in office anyway? To allow him to remain in office would make a laughingstock of the Constitution and the rule of law. As Jack and I know we already do that every day, but this would do so in a way so blatant and easy to understand by all that any future attempt to claim a constitutional prohibition against anything would be meaningless.