“The real problem is not that we are different, nor that we disagree and have conflict. It's that most of us automatically view conflict as something negative rather than as a tool God can use to help us better understand ourselves and one another.

--Robert Ricciardelli”

Showing posts with label Courts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Courts. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

4/29 Morning Report

I have been on hiatus for a bit. Taking classes on-line, going through tax season in the financials industry, and raising a family. It makes January through mid-April, or so, too full to write. I was posting for ideas on a book idea over at the forums of Any Soldier. That’s been on hold, too. So have several projects I had in mind to do here…like a new layout (…this one is getting old and needs a makeover…)

Jumping back into things…

The media would have us believe that Indiana’s Voter ID laws are too restrictive and discriminatory. According to MSNCB…

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots.
Even my 12 year old son recognizes that 6-3 is a clear majority! (…oh…I forgot…there is no such thing as media bias…)

It takes getting all the way through the article, clearly slanted in favor of opponents to ID requirements, to find out just how strict and discriminatory the law really is…
Indiana provides IDs free of charge to the poor and allows voters who lack photo ID to cast a provisional ballot and then show up within 10 days at their county courthouse to produce identification or otherwise attest to their identity.
That same 12 year old then asked me how much this cost the government and why the money wasn’t used to help people?

(…it’s kind of scary that 12 year olds seem to be smarter than so many liberals…)

Saturday, September 08, 2007

9/8 Morning Report

Spoiling Petraeus’s report yesterday that gains are being made, but they are in a fragile state, come the Osama video. The only surprise was unlike his 2004 video, this one lacks any threats. He made two statements, one of which has no bearing on reality. He called the killing of insurgents and terrorists who murder innocent women and children wrong. The removal of murders is wrong? That’s frightening because he and his followers sincerely believe it. Somewhat more disturbing, and perhaps more realistically possible, he said the way to bring this to an end is for America to convert to Islam.

Meanwhile, as Reuters reports, General Petraus’s report is a mixed bag.

"Up front, my sense is that we have achieved tactical momentum and wrested the initiative from our enemies in a number of areas of Iraq. The result has been progress in the security arena, although it has, as you know, been uneven," Petraeus wrote to coalition forces.

But he said Iraqi politicians had not made the gains hoped for when the Bush administration added 30,000 U.S. troops to the war under the "surge" strategy.
There are, of course, no real surprises in the letter released to the troops in advance of his testimony to Congress. Many sources, mainstream and independent, have been saying this in one form or another. Unfortunately, the Democrats are already set to denounce it.
In advance of Petraeus' appearance, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate charged the general was part of a Bush administration attempt to mislead the public with manipulated information to show the current strategy a success.

"By carefully manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report will try to persuade us that violence in Iraq is decreasing and thus the surge is working," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.
Many liberal officials have been in the news for the last month saying everything has failed and to expect just such a thing as
Durbin described, should we be surprised there has been no change?
(…and they say conservatives have closed minds…)

And, here in the States, Sir Hillary is having legal problems again. Just weeks after suspicions were raised about contributions to her Presidential campaign, a court in California will hear arguments about a possible illegal fundraiser for her Senate campaign in 2000. The principle issue is the inclusion of a video tape where Clinton is acknowledging direct involvement with what would constitute an illegal fundraising act. The judicial panel will consist of two Democrats and one Republican.
(…I’m interested to see where this does…and how much Bush bashing goes on to drown out the whole event…)

Of course, given the political hey made over the Republican campaing contribution scandals, the MSM is soft peddling the damage of Mr. Hsu for Democratic campaigns. After failing to show up in California court again, he was found on a train in Colorado…ill. Despite several felony charges and a long history of questionable activity, the media still paints him as a poor unfortunate—instead of the criminal he is. Meanwhile, Democratic candidates are painted as heroes for offering to give the contributions he gave them to charity.
(…I thought if it was illegal for one, it was illegal for all…must be nice to be Democrat and able to make the laws do what you want…)

And, finally, I missed some sad news reported by Any Soldier on 30 August:
Maj. Henry S. Ofeciar, 37, of Agana, Guam, died Aug. 27 at Forward Operating Base Naray, Afghanistan, from wounds suffered when insurgents attacked their unit during combat operations in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. He was assigned to the 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan.
Major Ofeciar, at our house we remember your cry—the cry of all warriors:
"Tell them of us and say,
For their tomorrow, we gave our today."
--The Kohima Epitaph--
We remember what you have given. And we say thank you for the tomorrows you have given others. May God give back to your family more than they have sacrificed and lost.

And, now, we dance In Memoriam.

Friday, August 24, 2007

8/24 Morning Report

It must be due to the weekend arriving. This was a day for strange news. So, I’ll share what I found. You can go find more for yourself, I’m sure.

I generally don’t get deeply involved in the immigration issue. My stance is, simply, if you are here illegally you have broken the law and should be treated as a criminal. If you haven’t, then, of course, nothing should happen. Normally, I state my case, if the subject comes up, and move on. But, the courts have gone WAY over the top on this one. It seems that an appeals court has ruled that while entering the country illegally is a crime, remaining in the country afterwards is not.

(…yeah, I know…the logic doesn’t make sense to me either….but keep reading…)

All of this stemmed from Nicholas Martinez being sentenced to a year in jail after pleading guilty to possession of cocaine and endangering a child. Normally, this would have caused probation. But, since Martinez is an illegal immigrant, he couldn’t go on probation because that would have automatically violated his parole. Sounds logical, even sensible. The case went to appeal (…why did this go to appeal in the first place?... which, of course, generated a ruling

But then an appeals court panel threw out that sentence, saying that while it is illegal to enter the country without permission, it is not necessarily illegal for an illegal alien to remain in the country. In the opinion of that court, Congress has criminalized illegal entry into the U.S., but has not made the "continued presence" of an illegal alien in the country a crime "unless [he or she] has previously been deported."

Because Judge Kitts did not determine whether Martinez had ever been deported, the appeals court ruled she had no legal basis to deny probation.
If I am not mistaken, this court decision may have just rendered the entire current debate over immigration null and void. This court decision, I believe, sets the legal precedent which will allow illegal immigrants to remain in the country without penalty.
(…so much for the need for a fence…saved US taxpayers lots of money…yeah…sure…)

Of course, this is right on par with a $27 million research project over an animal that may not even exist now.
Federal wildlife officials say spending more than $27 million to research the suspected habitat of the ivory-billed woodpecker is worth the cost, despite conflicting views on whether the elusive bird even exists.

"There's enough out there that we've got to keep searching," said Jeff Fleming, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "It'd be irresponsible not to."

The agency this week released a 85-page draft plan aimed at preventing the extinction of the bird. The draft plan, which is open for public comment until Oct. 22, recommends spending more than $27 million in federal dollars on recovery efforts for the woodpecker.
The bird was thought to be extinct, until a possible sighting in 2004. So, they created a 185-page report? That’s where most of the cost comes from. More people will probably work on that report than will actually search for the bird, even though it is a four state effort.

And, in one final piece of odd news, it seems a wealthy Russian tried to buy a B-52 at a recent air show.
An astounded member of the U.S. delegation said the bomber was not for sale but that it would cost at least $500 million if it were to be sold on the spot.

"That is no problem. It is such a cool machine," the Russian was quoted as saying…
Wouldn’t you just love to have that kind of cash lying around?