The Impacts of 9/11 Part I – The Constitution

I think we need to be honest with each other as a country. With the blindly fearful reactionary passing of The Patriot Act following the 9-11 attacks, the 4th Amendment was essentially killed, or left very close to dead.  The constant renewing of the Patriot Act instead of letting it sunset as was originally planned while not making any drastic changes to it has kept that essential Constitutional protection at best on life support.

Some will say George W Bush & his administration is to blame. Others will argue that the Obama administration has continued to renew it. Both are true. Both parties are equally guilty here. Warrant-less searches & wiretaps, gathering private information about American citizens.  Americans that have been suspected of crimes held indefinitely without access to legal counsel, without being informed of the charges against them. The TSA. The list goes on.

We need to come together as a country to elect representatives who will do their proper duty to repeal the Unconstitutional aspects of the Patriot Act. For this issue, we need to forget about Democrat and Republican labels. We need to wake up and work together to fix this using our votes.

– “Left of Center”

Osama Bin Laden Killed by US Forces in Pakistan

Image by martin_kalfatovic via Flickr

President Barack Obama announced in a press conference shortly after 11:30pm EST on 05-01-11 that US forces had killed Osama bin Laden and taken custody of his body.  Reports are that this occurred several days if not a week ago, but announcement was held pending confirmation of a DNA test result.

May the families who lost loved ones in 9-11 finally begin to find some peace and be able to put that horrible day behind them. May the country find again and keep the spirit of patriotism and togetherness that we remembered we had in the weeks and months following the tragedy.

– “Left of Center”

Related Articles

• White House: Osama Bin Laden is Dead (benzinga.com)
• News Of Osama Bin Laden’s Death Spreads Like Wildfire On Twitter (techcrunch.com)

Catching Up, Part VII – The Arizona Tragedy

Image by Steve Rhodes via Flickr

I’d like to start by being another of many who wish Gabrielle Giffords and all others that were injured the speediest possible recovery.  Those that are no longer with us, may their families heal as best they can.  I hope also that many can and should learn a lesson in civility from this sad situation.

Unfortunately it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.  As divisive, heated, hateful and ignorant as the political rhetoric has been during and since the 2008 election, sadly it’s surprising to me that something like this didn’t happen sooner.

The hateful words spoken by crowds at McCain / Palin rallies in 2008.  The absolute nonsense fear mongering over “death panels” during the 2009 health care debate.  The oft-repeated false canard of the country becoming Socialist.  The murder of George Tiller after hours upon hours of news coverage on FOX labeling him a child killer.  The shooter at the Holocaust Museum.  Several other instances in the past 2 years of gun & violence themed euphemisms from some very prominent Conservatives.  People arrogantly, ignorantly and irresponsibly bringing loaded weapons to political rallies.

The media, those that are supposed to be journalists, many of them did nothing to defuse or dispel the lies and the nonsense or call out those that were (and still are) telling these lies and spreading this message of hate, this goal of trying to split Americans across political lines.  Rather than encouraging people to sit and talk about their differences, these individuals would rather incite violence and sit back and rake in the money from the ratings they get from their lies.

While it’s true that it’s almost impossible to prove that any of these things directly caused Jared Loughner to snap and carry out this shameful act of violence, the fact remains that these items I’ve mentioned are none-the-less reckless and irresponsible.  Whether they cause people like that who are on the brink of mental health at best to trip over that edge does not matter.’

What matters is that we have a responsibility to each other to avoid saying things that are false, and contain violent rhetoric that could potentially push someone past the edge of reason. Bringing a gun to a political rally may be your legal right but that doesn’t mean you should.  Using gun-themed statements or targets in your political speeches or materials reeks of ignorance and hate.  Neither of these things are illegal, but they are reprehensible and irresponsible.

– “Left of Center”

Weekend Special Edition: Olbermann Wrong, MSNBC Overracted

Let’s get one thing out of the way to start. Keith Olbermann was wrong. Not for donating to Democratic candidates. He’s a private citizen, he used his money and did not directly endorse or recommend that anyone vote for any specific candidates on his program. No, he was wrong because he broke the rules outlined by his employer. As an employee of GE/NBC/MSNBC he is required to inform his employer of his choice to make campaign donations. He did not do this, so he was wrong.

Full disclosure, and in the interest of honesty and fairness. I’m a fan of Olbermann’s political commentary. Is he hyperbolic? At times. Is he sometimes divisive? Sure. Does he frequently report false information? No. Is he always trying to scare people to further his own agenda? Not unless you count trying to scare you with truthful information about what’s actually happening. The belief that he’s the Progressive “Liberal” mirror image of Bill O’Reilly is a shameful false equivalency.

I have watched Countdown & other MSNBC news commentary shows for years and cannot recall a time when something untrue was reported that was not corrected on a subsequent program. When you measure that against just Glenn Beck alone, the comparison is ridiculous. Add in Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity, Palin, etc and the scale of truth is very heavily weighted in Olbermann & MSNBC’s favor.

That doesn’t change the fact that he was wrong. However, what is also true is that GE/NBC was more wrong. Requiring employees to essentially get permission from your boss before making a private political donation with your own personal money, while apparently not illegal, perhaps should be. What business is it of your employers what you do with your money? Even for news station’s television personalities, why should your employer have the right to know where that money is going? Their policy is wrong and overreaching.

Setting even that aside, suspending the very popular host of your number one show indefinitely without pay? Despite the fact that he was wrong, that’s really an extreme response. Certainly they want to make it clear to the public that the common comparison of MSNBC to FOX “News” is a fiction, but suspending someone indefinitely without pay for what, from the information that has been released, is a first offense is an extreme overstep and is likely to hurt the viewers opinion with the network more than it will help.

What’s worse is that, thanks to the SCOTUS “Citizens United” decision, we now live in a United States where NBC or another corporation can give unchecked, undisclosed millions to a campaign or candidate without any question but a private citizen cannot donate their own money without fearing reprisal should their employer dislike the candidate or campaign you’re donating to. I don’t know about you, my fellow Americans, but that’s not the way I want things to work in this country.

Update 11-07-10: MSNBC has confirmed Keith Olbermann will return to Countdown on Tuesday 11-09-10

– “Left of Center”

$200 Million Per Day? Absolute Laughable Idiocy

Image via Wikipedia

Earlier in the week a report was published in an Indian newspaper that President Obama’s 10 day trip to India would cost roughly $200 million per day. That’s the only source for this, no vetting or verification in US papers or news outlets.

Yet, despite the evidence to support this being as flimsy as wet toilet paper the typical cast of the ultra-Conservative fringe took the ball and ran with it. Michelle Bachmann, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Matt Drudge, Michelle Malkin, Don Imus, and several other less prominent talking heads parroted this clearly false story without any regard for research, responsibility, or facts.

Given that the Afghanistan War costs roughly $190 million, there’s no logical way that a Presidential diplomatic trip could come remotely close to that cost, let alone eclipse it. The idea that such a thing is possible is laughable on it’s face and should never have gotten past water-cooler jokes. However, unsurprisingly the Republican TEA Party’s communications division, FOX News went to town with a false non-story yet again.

The actual cost of Presidential working trips abroad is not discussed due to security concerns. The excuse is overused, for sure, but in this case it fits. If a dollar figure was known, security experts could potentially determine the scope and strength of efforts to protect the President. This isn’t new under the Obama Administration, it was the same under Clinton & George W Bush. If we’re to return to a time of responsibility and proper journalistic integrity in our politics, perhaps we need to entertain the idea of assessing civil penalties to those who are caught in these kind of intentional falsehoods.

– “Left of Center”

More Commentary:

CNN’s Anderson Cooper

Injunction Against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, Part II – The Reaction

 

Image via Wikipedia

 

Earlier, I covered the facts regarding “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Federal Judge’s ruling. Now let’s review what the predictable Conservative reaction will be. This one is too easy. The primary vector the Republican Tea Party and it’s associated talking heads will use will be nothing more than two words – “judicial activism”.  This very statement gives light to their sad and obvious irrational misunderstanding of how our Federal Government is structured.

As anyone who passed high school history (and/or government) class should have learned, there are three branches to our government. The Legislative Branch is comprised of the House of Representatives and the Senate. This body writes bills and votes on them. The Executive Branch – The President, Vice President and their respective cabinets and staff. Once Congress passes a bill, it’s sent to the President to be signed. Once the President signs the document, it is considered officially law.

Here’s where the Conservatives that constantly throw around the idea of “judicial activism”. The next branch of our government is the Judicial Branch. Their job is to review bills passed into law by the other two branches and decide based on the Constitution (and precedent set by previous rulings) if the items in question are legal! So when Conservatives whinge about “judicial activism”, they are protesting the fact that the Judicial Branch is doing it’s Constitutionally appointed duty!

So, despite that reality, individual Americans who subscribe to the Republican Tea Party mantra are under educated in matters of civics, political science will still echo the cries of “judicial activism” coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, et al. What excuse do those individuals have? Do they not understand the function of the Judicial Branch any better, or are they intentionally ignoring the reality of their job for the purpose of making people afraid and angry? Has anyone else noticed that Conservatives only cry “judicial activism” when it’s a decision they don’t agree with, but they seem to have no complaints or concerns about the Citizen’s United decision?

– “Left of Center”

The TEA Party is… — Part II: Cowardly

 

Image by Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com via Flickr

 

Across the country, TEA Party candidates are doing something that may not have been seen in a national election in this country’s history. They are hiding in their offices. They are refusing to get out and discuss their positions with the people. They are going on FOX News, but ignoring interview requests from other news sources. They are even running away from local reporters when the questions get too tough or when a reporter has the gall to actually ask them to explain their policy positions.

Sharron Angle (NV), Christine O’Donnell (DE), Carl Paladino (NY), Rick Scott (FL), Joe Miller (AK), Ken Buck (CO), Marco Rubio (FL) and several others don’t have the spine to answer the real questions about their viewpoints. Instead they choose to only do interviews with FOX News that, for all intents and purposes, amount to infomercials that garner them huge donations despite them saying nothing substantial. The reason they do this is clear, as their viewpoints are so radical, so extreme that the Republican National Committee has been doing quite a lot of spin and re-design of these candidate’s websites to tone down or hide the truth of their outlandish ideas.

In short, these people are cowards.

– “Left of Center”

An Example Exchange Between Rational and Irrational, Part II

Image by hodag via Flickr

Since the last post was running long, I’ve decided to split this entry into two parts. Below is the second portion of the exchange on Facebook regarding the immigration history of President Obama’s aunt (see: Part I)

The Conservative’s Second Comment:
Wow, so because I stated my opinion, my statement is “borderline arrogant and Unchristian”? 1 question, do you want to be the pot or the kettle? You said – She stayed in this country despite her illegal status because she said she could not …afford to leave. Here I go sounding “arrogant and Unchristian” again, but her not being able to afford to leave really isn’t my problem. It’s hers. This country is drowning as is, and still, we’re out trying to save everyone else and fix their problems.

Much like being on an airplane, we need to put on our oxygen mask first, before we help someone else with theirs.

I’m not saying she shouldn’t be allowed to appeal her case. I’m saying she should have to do it from her own country while she appeals it. This country has a HUGE immigration problem. I get the whole tired, poor, hungry bit, I really do. But this country has spent generations robbing Peter in order to pay Paul, and now Peter and the future generations after him are BROKE, hence why if someone wants to come to this country, get permission first. You want asylum? Get it before hand. It is not our responsibility to save, and then pay for, the entire world to seek refuge here.

People in other countries are never going to learn to stand on their own 2 feet, and make their country better if we keep bailing them out, taking them in and/or rescuing them. You know, the whole – give a man a fish or teach a man to fish??

If you want to rescue the world, by all means, have at it. But do it on YOUR dime, because I’m tired of paying for people who don’t contribute a damn thing to live here.

My Response To This:
Your comment shows you’re not grasping the concept of asylum. It’s not like standard immigration. A person cannot be made to argue for this from their own country because they are asking for asylum here because they are *in fear of their li…fe* !!

As for the arrogance, my comment pointed out facts that were ignored (willfully or otherwise) by both the article you posted and by your statements. Therein lies the difference in my opinion. Facts are facts and if you perceive them arrogant, that is your concern not mine. The same cannot be said for opinion.

Do you know the full political and factual history of why this country is in such bad debt problems? If you’re truly concerned about not paying for people that don’t contribute their fair share you should be far far more concerned about the rich people who claim to argue for our interests while taking advantage of every loophole imaginable to not carry their weight rather than the far lesser problem of helping poor people have the chance to avoid being homeless and starving.

I stand by my statement that your viewpoint is Unchristian. Your recent comment only furthers that conclusion and it illustrates an apparent misunderstanding of why this country is facing the problems it is.

– “Left of Center”

An Example Exchange Between Rational and Irrational, Part I

Image by hodag via Flickr

I had a discussion on Facebook regarding this link that was posted:

Obama’s aunt not sorry she accepted public housing

I’ve posted the discussion below (with names changed to protect the ignorant). I’ll post any further comments as they are added to the Facebook thread:

My initial response
There is more to this situation than this article states. The woman came to this country on a valid visa in 2000. She asked for asylum for the first time in 2002 and was not denied until 2004. She became very ill and was hospitalized. Once she recovered she first lived in a homeless shelter and then was assigned public housing. She stayed in this country despite her illegal status because she said she could not afford to leave.

She’s been seeking asylum and it was not granted until 2010. She asked for safe legal refuge in this country and it took 8 years for it to be granted? Does that not point to a glaring flaw in our immigration system? Did she apply for asylum because she was broke? Because she was already illegal or was she really afraid of her government? Only she, possibly her lawyer and her God can know for sure.

If she applied for asylum because she liked getting a free ride and lied about being afraid of her government than clearly she is a bad person. Given that this case has 8 years of history, 6 of those years occurring before her nephew became President and, according to reports, aware of her status, how does this reflect negatively on the President?

The article is short on facts and details and comes across, at least to this reader, as a veiled attempt to blame this situation on President Obama despite any proof of influence. My bottom line is we should be striving to know the facts of any issue instead of accepting any report at face value. This article lacks the journalistic integrity to carry out that goal.

The 1st response from the initial poster
Her asylum was denied 6 years ago. Why was she not booted then? I think the point of the article was that she hasn’t paid into anything, yet is able to collect disability. Go collect disability in your own damb country. If you haven’t contributed anything, why should one be able to collect anything?

My second response
Your statement is ignorant of the facts I’ve outlined in addition to borderline arrogant and Unchristian. She contributed nothing because she had nothing to contribute. She was homeless for quite awhile and then jobless after that. Your attitude of sending her back to her country when she claims her life would be in jeopardy is shameful and representative of the largest problem we face in this country. People who think like you have lost the spirit of what America is. What happened to “Give us your tired, your poor, your hungry?”. When was that replaced with “I have mine, so screw you and die?”

As to why she was not kicked out of the country immediately after losing her case? She was appealing the decision. Regardless of immigration status, people are permitted to stay in the country while their case for asylum is active. Does this lead to abuses of the system? Certainly. There will always be a small amount of abuses, especially in regards to government programs. However, the difference between the ignorant and the informed viewpoints is that the informed do not jump immediately to the irrational conclusion that *all* people receiving benefits from said system are abusing it.

Was my reply insensitive? Certainly. I am not ashamed of that. Was my reply false or in any other way incorrect? No. I stand by my statements.

– “Left of Center”