Tag Archives: constitution

Nanowire Introduces World’s Tiniest Battery

Now how about that? A filament that is thinner than a human hair but will hold twice the charging capacity of today's lithium-ion battery! Scientists at the Sandia National Labs in Albuquerque, New Mexico have created a filament that is thinner than human … http://bit.ly/fSBbfo added by: itgrunts

Judge strikes down federal health care law

RICHMOND, Va. – A federal judge rejected a key provision of the Obama administration's health care law as unconstitutional Monday, ruling the government cannot require people to buy insurance, in a dispute that both sides agree will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is the first federal judge to strike down the law, which has been upheld by two other federal judges in Virginia and Michigan. Several other lawsuits have been dismissed and others are pending, including one filed by 20 other states in Florida. The government had argued the Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the government the power to require individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty, a provision due to take effect in 2014. But Hudson sided with Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli in saying the mandate overstepped the Constitution. “This case, however, turns on atypical and uncharted applications of constitutional law interwoven with subtle political undercurrents,” Hudson wrote. There was no immediate comment from the White House. The Department of Justice, which defended the law in court, stood by its argument that Congress was within its rights to enact the law. Cuccinelli argued that while the government can regulate economic activity that substantially affects interstate commerce, the decision not to buy insurance amounts to economic inactivity that is beyond the government's reach. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul_virginia;_ylt =Ah21X60xT3d7uFclfRhXUAOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTQwMzNvaGE4BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAxMjEzL3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX292ZXJoYXVsX3ZpcmdpbmlhBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDanVkZ2VpbnZhc3Ry added by: JohnA

N.Y. Cops Brutally Beat Handcuffed Woman In Backseat After False Accusal Of Pet Droppings.

Ann Stanczyk had a Black Friday she'll never forget – the 49-year-old Queens woman says she was humiliated and beaten by two NYPD cops in a dispute over dog droppings. Pictures taken by her son a day after the Nov. 26 incident show Stanczyk with a welt under one eye and a garish purple bruise on her breast, plus injuries to her hands and knee. Yesterday, the Polish immigrant filed a complaint with the Civilian Complaint Review Board and plans to sue. “I just doing it to protect other people from police brutality,” Stanczyk told the Daily News. “I don't want what happened to me happen to anyone else. I want to protect the others. If it can happen to me it can happen to other people.” Stanczyk, a married housewife from Rockaway Beach, was walking her terrier, Psotka – Polish for “prankster” – when she wound up in a confrontation with two uniformed officers from the 100th Precinct, Shaun Grossweiler and Richard DeMartino. “They saw my dog and they said I didn't clean up,” said Stanczyk, fighting back tears as she spoke in halting English. “I said, 'No, she only pee.' They, of course, not agree with me and I say, 'Show me. Where is it?'” The officers found dog feces nearby, she said. “Pick it up,” she said one cop ordered her. “I got scared. I pick up. I said, 'It's cold, not belong to my dog.' When I smiled and said I didn't do anything, that made them very upset.” At that point, Stanczyk was handcuffed and arrested. When she used her feet to try to prevent them from closing the patrol car door to secure her, she says, the beating began. “I get scared to death,” she said. “I started to scream, 'My dog! My dog!' They punch me in my face. They punch me in my breast. They punch me in my stomach.” A neighbor ran over to take Psotka and cops took Stanczyk to the precinct. She was treated for her injuries – her knee still requires physical therapy – and charged with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Court papers indicate police accused Stanczyk of causing a ruckus by yelling at the officers to leave her alone. They also said she locked her hands in front of her to avoid arrest. The case was adjourned until May, when it will be dismissed as long as she stays out of trouble. Stanczyk had never been arrested before. She lost her job as a nurse in 2008 when she failed to attend a training program after an argument with a coworker. Her lawyer, Jon Norinsberg, said the workplace disagreement is “something that uneqivocally had nothing to do with what happened with police beating her the way they beat her.” Stanczyk said nothing she did warranted her injuries. She can't get past what happened. “I am afraid to leave the apartment,” she said. “I call my friends and beg them to go out with me. I feel better to stay home all the time.” Grossweiler, a four-year veteran, and DeMartino, a 10-year veteran, did not respond to a request for comment. Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/12/08/2010-12-08_cops_hit_me_cuz_i_didn… added by: keithponder

US Government Claims Right to Kill Americans Anytime and Anywhere

(The+Media+Freedom+Foundation)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher The Obama Administration currently asserts it has the right to kill any American they deem a threat or terrorist without judicial review. The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and the ALCU currently are challenging this notion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This lawsuit stems from the killing of Nasser Al-Aulaqi’s son (who was an U.S. citizen) who was targeted and killed by the United States Government. It is interesting to note that according to CCR Staff Attorney Pardiss Kabriaei “The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the government’s claim to an unchecked system of global detention, and the district court should similarly reject the administration’s claim here to an unchecked system of global targeted killing”. The ACLU and CCR hopes the will court rule the U.S. Government can only kill a U.S. citizen if there is a proof of an imminent threat to life. “If the Constitution means anything, it surely means that the president does not have unreviewable authority to summarily execute any American whom he concludes is an enemy of the state,” said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU, who presented arguments in the case. “It’s the government’s responsibility to protect the nation from terrorist attacks, but the courts have a crucial role to play in ensuring that counterterrorism policies are consistent with the Constitution.” Title: Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority to Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones Publication: CommonDreams.org, November 8th, 2010 Author: ACLU and Center for Constitutional Rights URL: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/11/08-4 Faculty Evaluator: Cynthia Boaz, Sonoma State University Student Researcher: Jason Corbett, Sonoma State University For more information on the case, including fact sheets and legal papers, visit: www.aclu.org/targetedkillings and www.ccrjustice.org/targetedkillings added by: treewolf39

Bozell Column: Glorifying ‘Great’ Liberal Judges

America was founded on the principle of representative democracy: the government would make policy based on the consent of the governed. Liberal elitists have grown increasingly impatient with this unenlightened system, and more and more, they are relying on judicial activists to remake society in their desired image. Far from being tribunes of the people, these judges are honored by the media elite for going around public opinion – and the Constitution – whenever the liberal impulse beckons. CBS’s “60 Minutes” earned the title “Syrupy Minutes” on November 28 with a thoroughly one-sided tribute to the “great” liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, with a focus on how this “great” man publicly suggested George W. Bush was a tyrant. Pelley hailed how Stevens had “shaped more American history than any Supreme Court justice alive.” He especially underlined how liberals see Stevens’ opinions on the rights of terrorist suspects as “among the most important of his career.”

Indonesian maid tortured in Saudi Arabia, another beaten to death

DEAR VANGUARD JOURNALISTS / PRODUCERS: PLEASE INVESTIGATE THESE CASES — IT NEEDS TO BE HEARD, IT NEEDS TO BE SHOWN, IT NEEDS TO BE STOPPED. added by: dryeraser

WaPo Warns of ‘Far Right’ Ken Cuccinelli, But Virginia’s Democrat Stars Are ‘Centrists’

The Washington Post’s undisguised loathing for conservative Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is on display again Tuesday. Post reporter Anita Kumar put him on the “far right” and questioned the propriety (and even the constitutionality) of his working relationship with other Republicans in Richmond.  Kumar began by noting a list of Cuccinell’s “controversial” legal opinions, that “police could check the immigration status of those stopped by law-enforcement officers, that the state could impose stricter oversight of clinics that perform abortions and that local governments could allow religious holiday displays on public property.  In each instance, the request for the opinion came from the same person: Del. Robert G. Marshall (Prince William), a like-minded Republican who shares Cuccinelli’s far-right views .” Kumar obviously asked it this “symbiotic relationship” was unconstitutional legal activism that goes around the legislature: Observers say their relationship has become symbiotic — one that helps each promote themselves and advance their interests — but in a way no one envisioned before. “It’s not unconstitutional,” said A.E. Dick Howard, a law professor at the University of Virginia and one of the drafters of the modern Virginia Constitution. “It’s just not contemplated. It’s outside what the framers of the Constitution would have seen.” Democrats, who hold narrow control of the state Senate, accuse the pair of attempting to make an end run around a divided General Assembly, which had already considered — and rejected — similar proposals regarding abortion and immigration. “It circumvents the people’s elected representation,” Sen. R. Edward Houck (D-Spotsylvania) said. “It seems to me perfectly obvious what’s going on. They are now using this legal activism.” Notice the Post has no labels for the Democrats. Kumar ends with a liberal legislator (no label, just a Cuccinelli opponent): Sen. Mary Margaret Whipple (D-Arlington), who often opposed Cuccinelli in the Senate, said she predicts that the General Assembly will try to stop his actions through bills and amendments when the legislature returns in January. “It’s an element of checks and balances,” she said. The completely politicized Post is obviously nervous that Cuccinelli will seek the governor’s office or challenge their heartthrob Sen. Jim Webb in 2012. Kumar isn’t looking to put any Democrat on the “far left” in Virginia, or even describe them as liberal. On the American Conservative Union scale, Webb has an average score of 14. Sen. Mark Warner has a 24. But Kumar sold Warner as a “pro-business centrist” even while he raised taxes. Earlier, on Cuccinelli: WaPo Unfairly Paints Virginia AG As Working for ‘Erosion In Gay Rights’ WaPo Lashes Out Against ‘Militant,’ ‘Provocative,’ ‘Bizarre’ Conservative Candidate

Here is the original post:
WaPo Warns of ‘Far Right’ Ken Cuccinelli, But Virginia’s Democrat Stars Are ‘Centrists’

Republican Joe Miller Says Unemployment Benefits Are Unconstitutional, Struggles To Say How He Would Deal With Poverty (VIDEO)

In an interview today with “Fox News Sunday,” Alaska GOP Senate nominee Joe Miller had trouble explaining how he would help the 43.6 million Americans in poverty, even as host Chris Wallace repeatedly pressed him for more than conservative talking points. Wallace asked Miller about his assertion in August on CBS's “Face the Nation” that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional, noting that without them, many more Americans would be in poverty. “What would you do for them?” asked Wallace. Miller, however, struggled to come up with an answer, and instead shifted to talking points about reducing the size of the federal government. Wallace repeatedly pressed him on the issue, without ever receiving an actual response: MILLER: I think the question is what is the role of the federal government? Right now we've grown the federal government into such a size we have, I think we have, what — in absolute terms now, $13.4 trillion in debt. If you look at the future unfunded obligation, a lot of those are the entitlement programs, by some estimates $130 trillion. That is unsustainable. That's just the facts. And I think Americans recognize that those are the facts. The exciting thing is Americans are looking for answers. Alaskans are looking for answers. Here in Alaska, 40 percent of our economy in Alaska is somewhat derived from the federal government. If we continue say things have to continue the way they are, the expansion from the government which is unconstitutional in many ways is the future, it's a dead-end road. Particularly for this state, because of the impending bankruptcy — WALLACE: Mr. Miller, if I may, I'm not sure you answered my question. Why are unemployment benefits unconstitutional? In the time of a tough economy, recession, and now kind of a jobless recovery, what are you going to do for the 44 million people who are living in poverty? MILLER: I think what you need to look at is the context. We had an extension of unemployment benefits several weeks ago, which is beyond what we had in the past in this country. What we have in this country is an entitlement mentality. Entitlement, not just as individual but even at the state level. If all goes wrong, it's the federal government's role to get in there and provide for the general welfare and provide for solvency; particularly, of states and the auto companies, and the banks. Everything else that fails, the government should be involved in bailing out. The Constitution provides enumerated powers. I guess my challenge is to anybody that asks, show me the enumerated power. And then look at the 10th amendment that says if it's not done in the Constitution, it's a power that belongs to the state and the people. And I think we as a people need to stop being disingenuous about what the Constitution provides for. It does not provide for this all-encompassing power that we've seen exercised for last several decades. It's what got us in the bankrupt position. Miller's views on unemployment benefits are further to the right than the positions of many Republicans in Congress, who oppose extending them if they aren't paid for, but haven't gone as far as to say that they're unconstitutional. Wallace also seemed frustrated when Miller tried to dodge his question about how he would change the way the Republican Party operates in Washington. He again brought out his talking points about “restricting the growth and actually reversing the growth of government and in the process transferring power to the state” and shifted the discussion to the federal government's role in Alaska. “But I'm asking you more than just Alaska,” responded Wallace. “You made that point clear. How would you like to see the GOP handle things differently in Washington on issues that affect the whole country?” Miller stuck to his message though, saying, “What is good for Alaska is good for the country. Transferring power from the federal government to the states provides opportunity to all states.” added by: TimALoftis

MSNBC Gives Liberal Filmmaker Rory Kennedy Platform to Pitch New Documentary, Bash Tea Party

Hours after being featured on this morning’s edition of “Morning Joe” program, liberal filmmaker Rory Kennedy sat down with MSNBC host Thomas Roberts for a softball interview shortly before 2:30 p.m. to promote her new documentary “The Fence.” Kennedy argued that the fence being built along the U.S. border with Mexico was a waste of money, both in its actual construction and in the money required for its maintenance and upkeep over its lifetime.  At no point did Roberts challenge Kennedy by pointing out the conservative argument that border security and national security are fundamental responsibilities of the federal government under the Constitution. Robert closed the interview by asking Kennedy about her views on “what the Tea Party is doing to American politics.”  The daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy painted the movement as borderline anarchistic and simplistically anti-government, as well as bigoted [MP3 audio available here ; WMV video for download here ]: Well, you know, I’m concerned about the Tea Party. I think a big part of their message is anti-government, and the role of government in society. And for me, government plays a huge role. Uh, it historically has done a great job creating an education system, creating a highway system, you know our trash is collected because of this, our kids are educated because of the role of the government. So I think when you say we don’t want government, then what’s going to take that’s place?  And I have a lot of concerns about the bigotry and the racism that comes out of a lot of, from a lot of the Tea Party leaders. I don’t think it’s the direction that this country needs to be going in right now.  Leaving aside her unsubstantiated charge of Tea Party bigotry, where are these anti-trash collection demands Kennedy’s seeing from the Tea Party movement? Roberts of course failed to call her out on these charges as he thanked Kennedy for the interview and reminded his viewers that “The Fence” airs tomorrow on HBO at 8 p.m. and to be sure to “check it out.”

Read the original here:
MSNBC Gives Liberal Filmmaker Rory Kennedy Platform to Pitch New Documentary, Bash Tea Party

Amazing: AP Writers Obsess Over Negative Electoral Impact Of Upcoming Census Bureau Poverty Stats

It seems reasonable from their coverage in anticipation of the Census Bureua’s release of income and poverty statistics this week that Hope Yen and Liz Sidoti of the Associated Press have a roof over their heads and aren’t particularly worried about where their next meal is coming from. If so, good for them; may those circumstances continue. What’s remarkable, though, is how a government report that the media, especially the AP, has traditionally treated as an indicator of society’s alleged failure to take care of its neediest –with the blame often directly aimed at Republicans and conservatives — is now primarily a political problem for the party in power. Yen and Sidoti engage in a presidential pity party, and in the process come off as indifferent about what the numbers, for all their imperfections (and they are substantial), might mean in human terms — again, something the press normally obsesses over, especially when a Republican or conservative is president. This time, it seems that if Ms. Yen and Ms. Sidoti had their way, this unfortunate information would be held until at least November 3. What follows are graphic capture’s of the pair’s first four paragraphs, followed by paragraphs 12-16: Comments: This report comes out each September, but this one is suddently “unfortunate timing” and “another blow” for the president and his party. The AP didn’t seem to handle things the same way eight years ago, the last time a new president and his Congressional majority party faced mid-term elections. Even though George W. Bush’s administration was dealing with the aftermath of an official “recession” and the poverty rate rose, you’ll see in this unbylined AP item in the September 24, 2002 Gainesville Sun published after the release of that year’s report that there was no reference to how unfortunate the timing or the news might be for W. The AP did find the time to get a quote from Democrat Paul Sarbanes, who, in AP’s paraphrasing, said that “the Bush administration had focused too much attention on tax cuts and not enough on the needs of the most vulnerable citizens.” “Rightly or wrongly, Republicans could cite a higher poverty rate as evidence” that “Obama’s economic fixes are hindering the sluggish economic recovery.” It would have been interesting to see Yen and Sidoti try to find someone to quote on this topic. It seems only fair, given that they gave Paul Sarbanes a chance to say why George Bush was allegedly wrong. Yen and Sidoti automatically assume that blacks and Hispanics will respond to the reported rise in their poverty rate by voting as they usually do or staying home during the midterm elections. Isn’t it just a little bit possible that some of them will decide that voting for the other team might make more sense after almost two years of not so benign neglect at the hands of the party they have traditionally favored? Oh, and am I supposed to believe that the Essential Global News Network doesn’t have a homelessness-related photo dated later than the April 13, 2009 article-accompanying item seen at the top right of this post? Why, you’d think AP might be trying to imply that homelessness hasn’t gotten any worse in the intervening 17 months. But  it has .  Really . As is seemingly typical at AP, in unexcerpted material the report quoted and labeled one allegedly “conservative” political science professor at New York University while later quoting an economist from far-left American Prospect co-founder Robert Kuttner’s Economic Policy Institute (board members, including Kuttner, are listed and described  here ). Of course, the EPI “somehow” went unlabeled. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See the original post:
Amazing: AP Writers Obsess Over Negative Electoral Impact Of Upcoming Census Bureau Poverty Stats