This article by Dennis Prager nicely summarizes how left-wing policies has brought California to the verge of bankruptcy…and how Obama’s policies threaten to do that to the rest of the nation.
“The left wants America to abandon its defining commitment to individualism and replace it with a European-style nanny, or welfare, state.”
Indeed.
The Freedom Foundation of Minnesota brings the rocking news that the stimulus is creating jobs like mad in Minnesota!
According to the report on Recovery.gov’s own website, thanks to the Stimulus there have been 35 jobs created in Minnesota’s 57th congressional district, 6 jobs in the 14th Congressional District, 5 jobs in the 13th Congressional District, but only a measly half a job in the 11th congressional district.
Too bad Minnesota only has eight congressional districts.
Then again, maybe it’s just an honest error, and the Obama Administration accidentally included congressional districts from one of the 56 other states…
(Hat tip to Powerline).
Update 1: And Missouri.
Update 2: And Arizona.
Update 3: And New Mexico.
Update 4: And California. (The last from fellow science fiction writer Dafydd ab Hugh.)
Update 5: And New Hampshire.
There’s an interesting article up by George Friedman at Stratfor discussing the difficulties of trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court of law:
“Imagine that in addition to stating that the United States was at war with Japan, Franklin Roosevelt also called for bringing the individual Japanese pilots who struck Hawaii to justice under American law. This would make no sense.”
But, of course, terrorist members of al Qaeda are not soldiers under international law. Friedman spells it out quite clearly:
“International law is actually not particularly ambiguous about the status of the members of al Qaeda. The Geneva Conventions do not apply to them because they have not adhered to a fundamental requirement of the Geneva Conventions, namely, identifying themselves as soldiers of an army. Doing so does not mean they must wear a uniform. The postwar Geneva Conventions make room for partisans, something older versions of the conventions did not. A partisan is not a uniformed fighter, but he must wear some form of insignia identifying himself as a soldier to enjoy the conventions’ protections. As Article 4.1.6 puts it, prisoners of war include ‘Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.’ The Geneva Conventions of 1949 does not mention, nor provide protection to, civilians attacking foreign countries without openly carrying arms.”
“Under the Geneva Conventions, [Mohammed]’s actions in organizing the Sept. 11 attacks, which were carried out without uniforms or other badges of a combatant, denies him status and protection as a POW.”
Clear, succinct, and what conservatives have been saying for the past eight years, which pretty much ensures that no one in the Obama Administration will read it.
“The real problem here is international law, which does not address acts of war committed by non-state actors out of uniform. Or more precisely, it does, but leaves them deliberately in a state of legal limbo, with captors left free to deal with them as they wish.”
The article goes on at length to explain taht it is equally impossible to try him under civilian law in a “fair” manner, and how international law has woefully failed to keep up with the realities of modern warfare and terrorism.
Read the whole thing.
Step 1. Journalist accuses National Iranian American Council (NIAC) of lobbying for the Iranian government (a no-no under federal law)
Step 2. NAIC sues journalist.
Step 3. Journalist files discovery motion against NAIC.
Step 4. Discovered emails prove NAIC is an Iranian front group.
Step 5. D’oh!
Next year is shaping up as potentially disastrous for House Democrats. Especially given:
I hope to take a further look at some of the most vulnerable Democratic House members who voted for ObamaCare in greater detail at some point in the not-so-distant future.
TXGunGeek posted this link to his blog to my two recent red light camera posts, and I thought it was important enough to bring up in a separate post.
A restraining order has been filed to prevent College Station from removing the red light cameras, ostensibly over the question of whether the issue got on the ballot as an “initiative” or as a “referendum.” Who filed the lawsuit? Well, by an amazing coincidence, it’s been filed by the law firm that did work for the pro-red light camera PAC American Traffic Solutions used as a front group.
Golly, what are the odds?
So there’s another reason to avoid red light cameras. In addition to causing accidents and transferring money from taxpayers to government, they’re also a gateway drug for deeper corruption of bureaucrats and elected officials.
Stratfor suggests that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan may have been heeding a call to jihad by Nasir al-Wahayshi, leader of al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula. (They also note how difficult it is for the FBI to investigate individuals such as Hasan.) Since mine is a relatively young blog, some readers may be unfamiliar with the tenants of Wahhabism, and the Saudi role in spreading its radical ideology. For more background on that, you might want to read Stephen Schwartz’s The Two Faces of Islam. And don’t forget the Saudi role in bankrolling CAIR, the primary Islamist apologist front group in the US.
Bottom line: The Saudis are still not our friends.
Redlight cameras cause more accidents in LA than they prevent. Golly, who would ever have seen that coming? Except, you know, everyone who ever studied the issue…
Remember how the Kelo vs. New London decision let the government take land for the benefit of private government? Well, Pfizer is closing down the facility on the site they seized the land for.
(Hat tip to Fark.)
(By way of Instapundit.)