Tag Archives: constitution

Karissa Shannon’s All-American Bikini Pictures

Obviously it’s a holiday weekend and I’m going to be hammered and shirtless for most of it, but I couldn’t think of a better way to show my colors than with some pictures of a hot piece of ass like Karissa Shannon in her tiny all-American bikini. If you ask me nothing says America like a fake blond in a thong. I think that’s in the constitution. Anyhow, Enjoy the pics and enjoy the holiday weekend.

As Much on Byrd’s Fiddle Playing as Klan Days; ‘Like Constitution and Bible, Permanent Fixture of the Senate’

The networks Monday night skipped lightly over the late Senator Robert Byrd’s segregationist and racist record, devoting as much time to the Democrat’s fiddle-playing prowess as his years in the Ku Klux Klan, which CBS’s Chip Reid excused as “an effort to help his political career.” Leading into file video of Byrd playing his fiddle, ABC anchor Diane Sawyer declared “Byrd was a powerhouse and old-fashioned crowd-pleaser on the stump, whipping out his fiddle.” Though Byrd is the only Senator to have voted against both Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas, Cokie Roberts asserted that “as the country changed, Robert Byrd changed with it. He readily endorsed Barack Obama for President.” After touting how by “writing several volumes of Senate history” Byrd had followed in Caesar’s “footsteps,” she concluded: “Like the Constitution and the bible, Robert Byrd will be a permanent fixture of the Senate.” On CBS, Reid also stressed the fiddle-playing: “Byrd grew up in poverty in the coal fields of West Virginia where he learned to play the fiddle. For decades, he used it to entertain audiences on the campaign trail.” Reid later recalled: His life was not without mistakes. He joined the Ku Klux Klan as a young man, an effort to help his political career — a decision that haunted him all his life. He also participated in the historic filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He later apologized for both actions and became a strong advocate of civil rights. Since he’s a Democrat, all is forgiven. The full coverage on the Monday, June 28 World News on ABC: DIANE SAWYER: An historic passing to note. On the same day Alaska became a state, Robert Byrd of West Virginia was sworn in as a U.S. Senator. Byrd died early today at the age of 92, the longest-serving member of Congress in history. His Senate desk draped in black bunting. Byrd was a powerhouse and old-fashioned crowd pleaser on the stump, whipping out his fiddle. Our Cokie Roberts remembers an icon now. COKIE ROBERTS: Though most politicians tout their humble beginnings, Robert Byrd was the real deal. An orphan raised dirt poor who never went to college, but went to Congress. In early days, he was a member of the Ku Klux Klan and filibustered against civil rights. He later apologized for his Klan membership. ROBERT BYRD: It was a mistake and one that I have greatly regretted over the years. ROBERTS: And as the country changed, Robert Byrd changed with it. He readily endorsed Barack Obama for President. And though he had supported the Vietnam war he became a forceful voice against the Iraq war. BYRD: Why is war being dealt with not as a last resort but as a first resort? ROBERTS: He never forgot the voters of West Virginia who saw more than $3 billion in federal funds come their way. It was, however, the United States Senate that mattered most to Byrd. He lauded the institution and often lectured it. BYRD: Caesar showed himself at this time to be also a historian. ROBERTS: Byrd followed in the Roman’s footsteps, writing several volumes of Senate history, reminding his colleagues and the country that the institution is more important than politics or Presidents. That’s why he always carried the Constitution, which names Byrd’s beloved Congress as the first branch of government. BYRD: I say we ought to read the Constitution more. ROBERTS: And, like the Constitution and the bible, Robert Byrd will be a permanent fixture of the Senate.

Go here to read the rest:
As Much on Byrd’s Fiddle Playing as Klan Days; ‘Like Constitution and Bible, Permanent Fixture of the Senate’

Supreme Court limits local gun bans

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Constitution's “right to keep and bear arms” applies nationwide as a restraint on the ability of the federal, state and local governments to substantially limit its reach. By a 5-4 vote split along familiar ideological lines, the nation's highest court extended its landmark 2008 ruling that individual Americans have a constitutional right to own guns to all the cities and states for the first time. In doing so, the justices signaled that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges. The ruling involved a 28-year-old handgun ban in the Chicago area. The ruling was a victory for four Chicago-area residents, two gun rights groups and the politically powerful National Rifle Association. It was a defeat for Chicago, which defended its ban as a reasonable exercise of local power to protect public safety. The law and a similar handgun ban in suburban Oak Park, Ill., were the nation's most restrictive gun control measures. Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. It left little doubt, however, that they would fall eventually. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court, said the Second Amendment right “applies equally to the federal government and the states.” The Second Amendment and gun ownership rights are finally protected. Now people will be able to have their own equal protection from criminals, who have been the only people who owned guns in some areas. added by: 2helenahandbasket

Open Thread: House Passes DISCLOSE Act

Yesterday, by a vote of 219-206, the House passed a bill meant to counter the landmark SCOTUS decision in January overturning limits on corporate and union political expenditures. [T]he restrictions in the DISCLOSE Act only cut one way — against business. If you took TARP funds as a business, express political advocacy is now verboten. So GM has very limited first amendment rights, but even though arguably primary beneficiary of the auto bailout was the United Auto Workers union which got government garunteed billions directly as a result of the TARP funding — UAW can spend almost whatever it pleases, and it has a history of spending millions on Democratic campaigns. Further, under the DISCLOSE Act if a company has more than $7 million in government contracts, it has no right to political speech. But public sector unions can spend millions of recycled tax dollars campaigning for Democrats, no problem. All this will likely do is make business spend more money on lobbyists rather than campaigns. Of course, campaign spending is much more transparent than lobbying, but when it comes to the DISCLOSE act, clean elections and free speech seem to be secondary considerations to getting Democrats elected. House Minotiry Leader John Boehner said the bill “shreds our Constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain.” Do you think that’s hyperbole?

Here is the original post:
Open Thread: House Passes DISCLOSE Act

Newsweek Blogger: Tea Party Coverage Isn’t Harsh Enough

Newsweek blogger Ben Adler thinks the national media are giving the Tea Parties gentle treatment. “Unfortunately,” Adler wrote in a June 21 post , “what appear to be false notions of objectivity – or perhaps a lack of interest in policy – is preventing that coverage from illuminating what the movement actually represents and what it would do if empowered.” Adler complained that a recent Associated Press article, ” Enraged to Engaged: Tea partiers explain why ,” failed to examine the ideology of the demonstrators in the grassroots conservative movement. “The piece examines how and why a variety of individuals became involved in the Tea Party movement without once asking what precisely the platform consists of,” Adler said, leading one to wonder if he even read the article. The 2,300-word “stemwinder,” as Adler called it, written by reporter Pauline Arrillaga, presented various segments of Tea Party ideology on five separate occasions. In the third paragraph, Arrillaga notes that the purpose of the Tea Party-affiliated Lincoln Club in Yucca Valley, Calif., is “to promote educate and advance conservative principles of fiscal responsibility small limited government, free enterprise, the rule of law, private property rights, and the preservation and protection of individual liberty.” Eric Odom, widely regarded as a founder of the Tea Party movement, told Arrillaga said the group’s purpose was, “to make sure that we’re represented by people who are looking out for our rights and upholding the Constitution… And if they don’t, to make sure we have an infrastructure to really take them out rather than have these thugs that are in there for 30, 40 years.” As Adler put it, Tea Partiers are “vehemently opposed” to raising taxes. “But when it comes to specifics, suddenly every program seems worthier than when demonized in the collective abstract. Which politician wants to cut spending on Homeland Security? Education for students with special needs? (Surely not Sarah Palin!),” Adler said in a reference to Palin’s son, Trig, who was born with Down syndrome. Adler complained that the AP would dare characterized Tea Party demonstrators as “concerned Americans trying to find their voices, and a way to channel their disgust.” He suggested they aren’t motivated by love of country or concern for the future, but by ignorance. Arrillaga’s article refuted the notion that Tea Party activists are “ignorant,” however. Bill Warner, Lincoln Club member, ran his own engineering firm for three decades. Hildy Angius is currently running the Republican Woman’s Club, and is a staunch Tea Party Activist. She is an ex-PR agent with a degree from New York State Albany. Eric Odom started the Tea Party movement fresh out of college. Tea Partiers come from all walks of life and have diverse academic backgrounds. Adler also predictable recycled a tired media-drive stereotype that Tea Party members are racist. He suggested they are too dumb to realize they’re racist. “Might it be possible that the Tea Partiers who profess no racial motivation are, let’s say, not entirely aware of their own visceral motivations? I’m sure if you asked the Southern voters who switched to Republican voting habits why they did so, many would say race had nothing to do with it. But why should journalists take that at face value?” Adler said. Adler’s assertion that the media have been soft on the Tea Parties might come as a surprise to anyone who’s paid attention to media coverage of Tea Parties. From the very first demonstrations in April 2009, reporters have attacked Tea Party members . According to a Media Research Center study , the media at first tried to ignore the demonstrations, but quickly moved into attack mode, portraying Tea Party protestors as extremists. Just last week, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews aired a “documentary” about the Tea Party portraying its members as racists, terrorists and conspiracy theorists. 

View post:
Newsweek Blogger: Tea Party Coverage Isn’t Harsh Enough

Christian Only Prison being pushed by Correction Concepts inc

WASHINGTON – May 25 – Americans United for Separation of Church and State today warned corrections officials in three states not to use public funds to send inmates to a proposed “Christians-only” prison in Oklahoma. Corrections Concepts, Inc., has proposed building a private prison in Wakita, Okla., that will indoctrinate prisoners in fundamentalist Christianity and will be staffed solely with “born-again” Christians. The Dallas, Texas-based firm recently announced that discussions are under way with corrections officials in Oklahoma, Kansas and California about signing contracts to house prisoners. In response, attorneys with Americans United wrote to officials in the three states, advising them that using public funds to send inmates to the sectarian facility would likely spark legal action. Americans United asserts it would be unconstitutional for government to support a prison that indoctrinates inmates in one faith and limits hiring based on religion. “Taxpayers should never be forced to support religious indoctrination,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “This scheme is fraught with constitutional problems, and no state should subsidize it.” In letters to corrections officials, AU attorneys pointed out that a federal appeals court in 2007 struck down public funding of an evangelical Christian program at an Iowa prison. The Christian prison in Oklahoma, they say, would likely meet the same fate. “If the Department were to provide funding to Corrections Concepts’ prison, indoctrination would be the inevitable result…,” Americans United asserted. “And, just as inevitably, the funding of such indoctrination would violate the Constitution.” The AU letters to Oklahoma, Kansas and California were signed by Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan and AU Staff Attorney Ian Smith. Corrections Concepts founder Bill Robinson told the Tulsa World recently that the bonding company that has expressed interest in financing the project will not provide funds until states agree to send 285 prisoners to the facility, which is expected to have more than 600 beds. Robinson first proposed the facility last year. At that time, Americans United wrote to the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and advised it not to back the scheme. Officials there replied that they had no interest in the project. But Robinson now says he has an expression of interest from the Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs. added by: Stoneyroad

Supreme Court: Sex offenders can be held indefinitely

(CNN) — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday the federal government has the power to keep some sex offenders behind bars indefinitely after they have served their sentences if officials determine those inmates may prove “sexually dangerous” in the future. “The federal government, as custodian of its prisoners, has the constitutional power to act in order to protect nearby (and other) communities from the danger such prisoners may pose,” Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the 7-2 majority. At issue was the constitutionality of federal “civil commitment” for sex offenders who are nearing the end of their confinement or who are considered too mentally incompetent to stand trial. The main plaintiff in the case, Graydon Comstock, was certified as dangerous six days before his 37-month federal prison term for processing child pornography was to end. Comstock and the others filing suit remain confined at Butner Federal Correctional Complex near Raleigh, North Carolina. Three other inmates who filed suit served prison terms of three to eight years for offenses ranging from child pornography to sexual abuse of a minor. Another was charged with child sex abuse but was declared mentally incompetent to face trial. All were set to be released nearly three years ago, but government appeals have blocked their freedom. The government says about 83 people are being held under the civil commitment program. Corrections officials and prosecutors determined the men remained a risk for further sexually deviant behavior if freed. The inmates' attorneys maintain the continued imprisonment violates their constitutional right of due process and argue Congress overstepped its power by allowing inmates to be held for certain crimes that normally would fall under the jurisdiction of state courts. The law in question is the 2006 Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which includes a provision allowing indefinite confinement of sex offenders. A federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, ruled lawmakers had overstepped their authority by passing it, prompting the current high court appeal. “The statute is a 'necessary and proper' means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned but who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others,” Breyer wrote. Breyer equated the federal civil commitment law to Congress' long-standing authority to provide mental health care to prisoners in its custody, if they might prove dangerous, “whether sexually or otherwise.” In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas said the federal government overstepped its bounds. “Congress' power, however, is fixed by the Constitution,” Thomas wrote. “It does not expand merely to suit the states' policy preferences, or to allow state officials to avoid difficult choices regarding the allocation of state funds.” He was joined by Justice Antonin Scalia. added by: TimALoftis

Preparations to take on the US government when it declares martial law

THE .50 CALIBER Bushmaster bolt action rifle is a serious weapon. The model that Pvt. 1st Class Lee Pray is saving up for has a 2,500-yard range and comes with a Mark IV scope and an easy-load magazine. When the 25-year-old drove me to a mall in Watertown, New York, near the Fort Drum Army base, he brought me to see it in its glass case—he visits it periodically, like a kid coveting something at the toy store. It'll take plenty of military paychecks to cover the $5,600 price tag, but he considers the Bushmaster essential in his preparations to take on the US government when it declares martial law. His belief that that day is imminent has led Pray to a group called Oath Keepers, one of the fastest-growing “patriot” organizations on the right. Founded last April by Yale-educated lawyer and ex-Ron Paul aide Stewart Rhodes, the group has established itself as a hub in the sprawling anti-Obama movement that includes Tea Partiers, Birthers, and 912ers. Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, and Pat Buchanan have all sung its praises, and in December, a grassroots summit it helped organize drew such prominent guests as representatives Phil Gingrey and Paul Broun, both Georgia Republicans. There are scores of patriot groups, but what makes Oath Keepers unique is that its core membership consists of men and women in uniform, including soldiers, police, and veterans. At regular ceremonies in every state, members reaffirm their official oaths of service, pledging to protect the Constitution—but then they go a step further, vowing to disobey “unconstitutional” orders from what they view as an increasingly tyrannical government. More on the link above. added by: sydtaylor

Gay marriage goes on trial in US federal court

By Romain Raynaldy (AFP) LOS ANGELES — Opponents and defenders of homosexual marriage in California go toe to toe Monday in a potentially epic court showdown that could decide the future of gay unions in the United States. The plaintiffs are challenging Proposition 8, whose approval by 52 percent of California voters in a November 2008 referendum annulled a state supreme court decision that authorized homosexual unions. Federal court Judge Vaughn Walker agreed to hear the suit filed by proponents of gay marriage and said it was a constitutional issue that belonged in a federal court, despite objections from those who oppose giving same sex couples the right to marry

Go here to read the rest:
Gay marriage goes on trial in US federal court

University of Colorado bans Nerf Guns; Zombies and Humans disappointed

“DENVER | It was a rough week for gun rights in Colorado. First, Colorado State University voted to ban concealed firearms on campus. Then the University of Colorado went a few steps further and cracked down on another nefarious threat: Nerf guns.

Go here to see the original:
University of Colorado bans Nerf Guns; Zombies and Humans disappointed