An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Archive for 17 April 2009
Hey West and Middle Tennesseans! Mark your calenders!
When: 24 April 2009 (Friday) 5:00pm
Where: Liberty Garden
Baudo’s will have sausage sandwiches, pulled pork, smoked ribs and hamburgers. ALL of the proceeds go to the FASF.
Feel free to bring your own grill and pork as well! If you can’t schlep your grill, we will have two giant grills ready for you to throw your own meat on it!
Southeastern Termite and Pest Control will be auctioning off a LIFETIME of pest control (for 25 years, that’s well over a $6,000 value). ALL of the proceeds go to the FASF.
More info at Mike Slater.
If anyone thought this was a one time thing (15 April), they were SADLY mistaken.
Swiped from Mike Slater. I think I might have to add that to the sidebar.
“Let me be clear: The United States government has no interest in running GM,” President Obama said just three weeks ago. He continued: “We have no intention of running GM.”
But what about Chrysler?
In a letter to employees released late last night, Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli stated that, under the evolving terms of the company’s deal with the government, “a board of directors for Chrysler will be appointed by the U.S. government and Fiat.” This board, he explained, will appoint its chairman and “select a CEO” and other executive officers of the company.
Well, that solves that problem. When it comes time to replace my PT, it will NOT be with another Chrysler/Dodge product. NOR will it be from GM!
They really DO want to destroy the economy, don’t they!
Don’t forget! I’m updating the posts from the Tea Parties from around the state, and country, as I come across them, so if you have one that isn’t listed, or come across one I don’t have, please, let me know. I wonder if I should turn it into a separate “page”. Hmmmm…..
“He thought very long and hard about it, consulted widely, because there were two principles at stake,” Axelrod said . “One is … the sanctity of covert operations … and keeping faith with the people who do them, and the impact on national security, on the one hand. And the other was the law and his belief in transparency.”
Belief in transparency? The only “transparency” this bunch of incompetent boobs believes in is when it damages national security. Was there transparency in all those spending bills they’ve shoved down our throats? Uh….no. But if it ties the hands of those who would keep us safe from further attacks? Well then, that’s ok.
I have to ask the question: Just whose side is this clown on??????
Ace of Spades has the whole thing here.
The Thomas Moore Law Center has sued the Department of Homeland Security because of the “Rightwing Extremists” intelligence assessment released last week. The suit is filed on behalf of a pro-life group, an Iraq war veteran, and Michael Savage. All three allege First and Fifth Amendment violations. According to their allegations, the report has a “chilling effect” on protected political speech and subjects them to unequal treatment because of their political beliefs or veteran status. They seek a declaratory judgment, an injunction, and attorney’s fees.
You can read a copy of the complaint here.
Professor Orin Kerr is already making fun of it, calling it a “frivolous” lawsuit. (Attorneys can be sanctioned for filing frivolous suits.) Kerr characterizes the suit:
As I read it, the lawsuit is claiming that the issuance of a government report criticizing certain groups violates the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights. But the Constitution doesn’t provide a constitutional right to have the government not say things that might be considered criticism. Perhaps the plaintiffs want the Constitution to be radically reinterpreted by activist judges to invent some brand-new constitutional rights?
I can only imagine that he hasn’t actually read the report and fell for the lefty drivel trying to explain it away. A copy is linked from here. It doesn’t merely criticize individuals or groups. It classifies individuals as susceptible to or aiding in the creation of violent criminals and that classification is based on political beliefs. In particular, the report identifies support for state and local government, the Second Amendment, border security, unborn children, and several other conservative issues as fostering violence. It makes generalized reference to “hate-groups” that, in context, refers to conservatives.
More than that–and this is the kicker–it does not merely focus on identifying, isolating, and preventing violence. That is something we can all agree is the proper job of government and there is, of course, no constitutional protection for committing violent crimes. Rather, the report specifically labels speech, conservative speech, as an activity of extremists. It then goes on to encourage law enforcement and other agencies to report “suspicious or criminal” activity to DHS or the FBI. A plausible explanation is that DHS is surveilling conservative groups and encouraging law enforcement to do the same.
So, no, I don’t believe it is a frivolous lawsuit. Perhaps if, as Kerr apparently assumed, the report merely criticized “rightwing” groups and perhaps if it hadn’t included a call to action.
This is not to say that it the lawsuit is without its problems. Though it is clearly not frivolous, it may not prevail on the merits. I’m not convinced that the plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged an injury caused by the report. Thus, as regularly seems to be the case around here, the first major hurdle for plaintiffs will be standing.
As was said in the post, Discovery is gonna be a bitch. I’d love to get my hands on the interrogatories and requests for production! This will be a very interesting case to follow.
Sorry Chris…..had to add this ‘toon.