The Importance of an Appellate Judge

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, sent a letter on Friday to his fellow senators outlining his objections to the nomination of David Hamilton of Indiana to the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

One of his objections to Hamilton is that Hamilton believes that an Appellate Judge has the right to amend the Constitution without any approval or amendment from Congress. The judge calls it "writing footnotes to the Constitution," - through evolving case law. A second objection was that Judge Hamilton in many cases has shown an extreme hostility against expressions of religion in the public square. Mr. Sessions noted that Judge Hamilton's odd ruling in Hinrichs v. Bosma "prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ ... yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah."

Third, Mr. Sessions pointed out that "lawyers in the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary describe Judge Hamilton as one of the most lenient judges in his district on criminal matters," including the case of a police officer who videotaped his own sexual encounters with two teenagers. The senator also objects to the judge's extreme actions in blocking an "informed consent" law on abortion.

Senator Sessions listed two more objections but the three listed here could affect every American should Judge Hamilton win appointment to the U. S. Court of Appeals. No man should have the right to alter the Constitution; or tell you who you can pray to; or allow others to abuse their power over someone else.

It’s clear that President Obama approves of Judge Hamilton. This action is a signal of the type of Appellate Judges he wants in power and should be a warning to Senators.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

Where Are We Really At in the Popularity Contest?

America once had a standing in the world as a force to be reckoned with. Once a foreign nation or a third world country could depend on the greatest of help during any situation it might find its self in. They could turn to us and expect help. We were a good neighbor to our foreign neighbors to the north and south of our borders. But according to a poll published Monday, Canadians are no more loving of the United States under its current leadership than during George W. Bush's presidency, Mondays poll suggested they do like President Barack Obama a whole lot more than his predecessor, said the Historica Dominion Institute survey of 1,018 Canadians. Obama was viewed favorably by 86 percent of respondents, compared to only 21 percent for Bush in 2005.

Canadians were split as to whether the United States is now "a force for good in the world." Forty-four percent agreed while 46 percent disagreed. This question was not asked in 2005. "There really does appear to be a hardy strain of anti-Americanism in Canada," Andrew Cohen, president of the Institute said. "Almost half of us don't believe America is a force for good in the world, even with Obama as president."

Our nation doesn’t appear strong or even stable enough to help others or our selves. We appear divided because of all the fighting between the two parties over the current issues that the President and his Democratic Party henchmen are trying to push down the throats of the nation. Our lawmakers spend money like there is no tomorrow and can’t finance our own projects or any ones needs without borrowing more debt to the national deficit.

So, now we know what Canada thinks of the U. S.; wonder what Mexico or the European countries really think of us? We know what the Middle East countries feel about us.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

The Plan For Government Take-Over of Business

“WASHINGTON — Congress and the Obama administration are about to take up one of the most fundamental issues stemming from the near collapse of the financial system last year — how to deal with institutions that are so big that the government has no choice but to rescue them when they get in trouble. The measure would make it easier for the government to seize control of troubled financial institutions, throw out management, wipe out the shareholders and change the terms of existing loans held by the institution.” The New York Times

Why does the government have to take control and “throw out management” of a troubled company? Wouldn’t the best plan be for the government to set measures in place to make low interest loans or no interest loans available to help a failing company? There is no reason the government has to be in control of a failing company. Some would even say that this gives the government opportunity to set the free enterprise system aside and make private enterprise socialist. It would seem the present administration is working hard to make America not based on the free enterprise of private businesses; but a place where capitalism is bad and everybody shares the wealth.

Where in the Constitution does it say that government will meddle in private enterprise? I don’t recall that the Constitution makes allowance to bail out a business that is to big to fail. Were the Founding Fathers even concerned with private business when they were penning the Constitution? They meant that government and business would be separate and each free of the other.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

The Plan For Government Take-Over of the People

Nancy Pelosi: Harry Reid; Max Baucus; Henry Waxman; Charlie Rangel; Rahm Emanuel; and Barak Obama are just a partial list of the law makers that want to decide your healthcare. These are all members of the Democratic Party and all professional politicians, with no experience with healthcare. Not a good thing for America for the Democratic Party to decide healthcare for the nation. No Republican support or only one or two maybe, but not enough to call healthcare reform bipartisan.

Is it right for one political party to make a major decision for the masses? There is not a doubt that healthcare needs reform, but that reform pushed down the throats of the nation is not the way our system is suppose to operate. We’re suppose to be a democracy were everyone has a say and it’s plain to see the Democratic Party doesn’t want to listen to the people, who doesn’t want the kind of healthcare reform the Democrat’s in power want for us. It would be a different situation if Nancy Pelosi: Harry Reid; Max Baucus; Henry Waxman; Charlie Rangel; Rahm Emanuel; and Barak Obama was going to use the healthcare they were pushing to get; but they will keep their healthcare they have now.

No matter how many people tell them they don’t want their healthcare they keep pushing to pass their plan to change the way healthcare will be handled. Once the government system gets control of the American people’s lives and their health; they can control other aspects of their lives. People will be afraid to cross the government because they can deny healthcare. When the people are afraid of the government the government has the control. It’s no longer a democracy but an ugly form of government, something unrecognizable to America.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

The Government's Plan Against Democracy

Kingston, N.C. voters decided last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections. The Obama Justice Department overruled the electorate deciding equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without their help. The Justice Department's ruling went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice." The “candidates of choice” was identified by the department as Democrats and almost exclusively black.

If the Justice Department can do this, overruling the authority of the state; who obviously allowed the city of Kingston to decide and vote this ruling into law; what else can they do in the line of elections? Would it be safe to say they can legally suspend elections? Or, could they declare the Republican Party and all the other political parties to be un-Constitutional or un-American? Or, they could legally suspend elections completely. There’s no limit to the power the Justice Department could exert over American people.

This administration is dangerous to democracy and the freedoms we know as Americans. This news article wasn’t broadcast on the national news or on the local news; it wasn’t published on the front page, or even close to the front, of many newspapers: why? Could it be that most news agencies have sold out to the administration, afraid of being frozen out of getting any news?

There were some news agencies that shared this article with the public and I applaud them for it. If the story didn’t get out, the American people wouldn’t know to be aware to the danger the Justice Department or what they could do if no one knew of their actions. Be on the watch!

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

Shut-Up Stupid: Pro-Gang Rape Senators

Unbelievably, 30 Senators have come out in favor of gang rape. Here is the condensed version of the story.

In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones while working for KBR/Halliburton in Baghdad was violently gang-raped and locked in a shipping container for 24 hours. She was told if she left Iraq for medical treatment she would be out of a job.

After complaining she was sent back to work with the same men who gang-raped her.

After struggling through all that she returned to the States to find out that she couldn’t press charges due to a clause in her contract that stated that allegations of Sexual Assault (Rape) will be handled in private Arbitration.

She soon found out that there were over 40 women that went through similar situations.

As Halliburton was working on a Government Contract with federal money she complained to Congress.

Senator Al Franken heard her story proposed an amendment to limit federal money going to contractors, “if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.”

How this loophole got into law is mind boggling, but getting rid of it shouldn’t be a partisan thing it should be something that any halfway or even a quarter-way decent human being should vote for.

However 30 Senators voted “No” on the amendment apparently feeling not letting companies to allow their employees to be gang-raped would place too much of government “burden” on them.

I guess their answer to the question, “Have you no sense of decency?” their answer is “No”.

Here is the list of Senators that voted “No” to stopping legalized Gang-Rape.

Alexander (R-TN)

Barrasso (R-WY)

Bond (R-MO)

Brownback (R-KS)

Bunning (R-KY)

Burr (R-NC)

Chambliss (R-GA)

Coburn (R-OK)

Cochran (R-MS)

Corker (R-TN)

Cornyn (R-TX)

Crapo (R-ID)

DeMint (R-SC)

Ensign (R-NV)

Enzi (R-WY)

Graham (R-SC)

Gregg (R-NH)

Inhofe (R-OK)

Isakson (R-GA)

Johanns (R-NE)

Kyl (R-AZ)

McCain (R-AZ)

McConnell (R-KY)

Risch (R-ID)

Roberts (R-KS)

Sessions (R-AL)

Shelby (R-AL)

Thune (R-SD)

Vitter (R-LA)

Wicker (R-MS)

To these 30 Senators that voted to support legalized Gang-Rape I say, “Shut-up Stupid” from now on your opinion on anything doesn’t count as you have shown that you haven’t a shred on basic human decency.

By Project Savior

http://projectsaviorreborn.blogspot.com/

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

Surfing the Internet is Good For Your Health

Amanda Gardner, HealthDay News: MONDAY, Oct. 19 -- “Surfing the Internet just might be a way to preserve your mental skills as you age. Researchers found that older adults who started browsing the Web experienced improved brain function after only a few days. "You can teach an old brain new technology tricks," said Dr. Gary Small, a psychiatry professor at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the author of iBrain.”

Imagine surfing the web for an edition of a book in the Smithsonian. Or, you could look up the most recent version of a popular magazine. Or, go to a major Department store and looking for the most recent fashions from the comfort of your home. The world has certainly changed and who would think the changes would be good for you? There was a time that surfing the web was considered just waste of time; the hours of late night surfing. The internet has an appeal that the more you surf, the more you want look for more. So, now you don’t have to feel bad for missed time; wasted on the internet, you have been preserving mental skills.

Many of a home has been ruined because one of the spouses has found the pleasures of the internet. Would it have made a difference if this study would have come out sooner? Would dad not have been looked upon as a dead beat loser because he got involved in some sleazy online site? After all he was restoring the mental skills the alcohol burned up the night before.

"We found a number of years ago that people who engaged in cognitive activities had better functioning and perspective than those who did not," said Dr. Richard Lipton, a professor of neurology and epidemiology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City and director of the Einstein Aging Study. "Our study is often referenced as the crossword-puzzle study -- that doing puzzles, writing for pleasure, playing chess and engaging in a broader array of cognitive activities seem to protect against age-related decline in cognitive function and also dementia."

You might say the internet is a waste of time but science says it is good. Who knew surfing all those porn sites was actually good.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content

Power to the People

How sorry are our Senators? When you read articles like our lead story this week, you have to ask the question. Fox News reported a story about Republican Senators going to bring up the Countrywide Reality mortgage scandal last week and the Democratic Senators filing out the side doors of the Senate chambers like flies to honey. Could it be that Chris Dodd a major player in the Democratic Senate and the Democratic Party is also a major player in the scandal?

Fox also reported that Senators have plundered the excess fund that the military feels is necessary in case it need more funds. They have spent $2.3 billion on earmarks of things that doesn’t remotely look militarily. Fox reported that Senator Kerry spent several million dollars on a new memorial to Senator Edward Kennedy; while other Senators spent money on their own state projects. None of the money went for military spending. Granted the money was excess but it was the military’s to spend not Senators.

No wonder the Obama administration has declared war on the Fox News channel. It can’t control Fox like it can MSNBC; CNN; or ABC. None of the three covered things like the two ACORN scandals; the things mentioned above; or the reaction of angry people who are against healthcare at the summer town hall meetings. They don’t report the real truth about the tea party gatherings; the large number protesting our U. S. government; the real distrust of Americans that have been pushed over the line by liberal politicians promoting their own agenda.

I say it’s time for all of them to go! Let’s get new men and women in positions of government that will work for the people and put the government back in their hands.

TOP

Sphere: Related Content