Yes Sir! Can I get a Litmus!?

As I stated in a previous column, the Democrats say they want someone who will faithfully follow the U.S. Constitution. That's all they're really looking for. I also said previously, ignore their words, watch their actions, because those speak louder than words. So, what have we here now? I pointed out that Judge Roberts made the comment that he felt that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, but, it's the law of the land currently and so therefore he'd follow that. Well, despite the fact that that is what Judge Roberts said, Democrats are apparently jumping on that now. It's not enough that he said that he would uphold the law of the land as per the U.S. Constitution. He's apparently not allowed to disagree with the law of the land. Henceforth, unless he believes that Roe v. Wade was correctly decided, it appears that the Democrats don't want Roberts on the Court. Gee, that sounds like a Litmus test whereby a candidate is going to be held to a belief otherwise, he can't get on the Court.
Wasn't it the Democrats who were worried that President Bush would hold potential nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court to a Litmus Test in order to be seriously considered in the form of a very Conservative judge? And yet now, it is the Democrats who seem to be the ones interested in a Litmus test? The judges have to follow the Constitution and use previous decisions as a means of deciding current ones. Granted, if a particular case comes before them that could be decided the opposite way from what Democrats would like, then prior decisions by the Court may be overturned. If that happens, it happens. However, to cerimoniously hold nominees to the view point that they must always be pro-abortion in every case otherwise they will not get in does not seem to have an aura of neutrality when a U.S. Supreme Court Justice comes to mind. Plus, it sure does sound like a Litmus Test huh? Either believe as we do, or we'll try to stop you from getting on the Court. The next few weeks will be incredibly interesting in how the proceedings go. Regardless of how you feel about Judge Roberts, I encourage you to make your views known to your Senator! You can find them using the link that follows; most senators have a means by which you can e-mail them your views. Get involved, for the choice that's made will have an impact upon you at some point in your life.

www.senate.gov

Yep, we just shot a terrorist...wait a minute......

As you undoubtedly know by now, British Police have shot a suspected terrorist to death. After having done so, they have discovered that, oops, it was the wrong guy. The question is, should the British Police be punished or cited? My question is, why? It is understood that the "suspect" was acting suspiciously. The "suspect" ignored repeated requests to stop and halt. The guy ran onto the subway, where the attacks took place. What were the British Police supposed to do? Were they to have risked taking the chance that this guy was going to blow up another section of subway, a subway car and henceforth killing innocent people? Maybe it would be better to allow dozens of innocent people to be killed just to ensure the "suspect" didn't have his civil rights violated. Well, let's look at those "Civil Rights" of his. Does he have a civil right to act suspiciously in an area where terrorist activity has gone on? Does he have a civil right where run for the police and ignore their requests to stop? Does he have a right to run onto a train where terrorist attacks have occurred recently? He does? Oh, ok, well then I guess we shouldn't complain when another attack happens huh?
Let's look at the NY Subways. Many folks are complaining about the searches there. They feel it's an invasion of privacy. Well, the other option is to not search anyone, then wait for something to happen, and then complain about why something wasn't done to stop it. Where's the ACLU? Why aren't they suing the crap out of the NY Subway system? Crap, why doesn't the average American understand that a terrorist has a Constitutional right to bring a bomb on-board a subway train?! Morons with common sense, I'll tell ya!
How safe do we, as individuals, want to be? That's the question? Personally, I've not lost any civil rights because of these searches. I haven't taken a subway train either, but, I would not mind being searched if those with the powers that be feel that it would help to make things safer. What else can we do? If we don't search, we may miss something. If we miss something, someone's going to get blamed for that too. So, why not play it safe? This guy in Britain, he acted suspiciously, he ignored requests to stop by British Police, and, he ran onto a subway train, which had been targeted not once, but twice, for terrorist attacks. The police had a split second to react. I'd say they performed pretty well. If they had not done what they did, and, it turned out the guy was up to no good and blew up another train, wouldn't we then be calling attention to their not stopping him and letting him go?
It is a tragedy that an innocent person was shot to death. I feel for that person's family. However, if he was so innocent, why was he acting suspiciously, why did he ignore police requests to halt/stop, and, why did he get on board a train? Certainly, he must have known about the previous terrorist bombings. I guess we'll have to see how it turns out. However, I argue the British Police were justified in the shooting. All indications pointed toward this guy might have been a possible terrorist. And ignoring that would be a much more fatal mistake than what happened. It is tough to tell one family their loved one was shot and killed. It's another to tell dozens and dozens of families their loved ones were killed by a terrorist because the British Police were making every attempt to be politically correct.

Get ready to rumble!!!!!!

Well here we are! We've arrived at the time we've all been waiting for! We have us a genuine U.S. Supreme Court Nominee chosen by President Bush. Now, comes the big fight. This guy has TONS of things against him! For starters, he's a White male who's qualified. The Democrats can't have that. Next, he's given good marks by the American Bar Association. An organization who's approval was always accepted before, until that is Justice Janice Brown. You know, the Black lady who President Bush nominated to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The ones the Democrats trashed and villified. Yet, black voters apparently didn't have a problem with that. Nor, oddly enough, did the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Why? She had grown up from parents who had been Share Croppers, she grew up in racism and poverty. And, just look at what she's made of herself! She became a judge. No wonder the Democrats hated her so much! She pulled herself up by her own boot straps! She's a self made woman! Now, the NAACP. Why wouldn't they support her. Oh! I know! She's CONSERVATIVE. Apparently, the NAACP should change their name to the NAALCP (National Association for the Advancement of Liberal Colored People). Apparently, you can only be black if you're Liberal. Hmm. Make a mental note. Clarence Thomas is out of his mind........
Now, back to the White guy nominated, John G. Roberts. You'll hear all kinds of excuses as to why he shouldn't be a U.S. Supreme Court Judge. They'll be looking a lot at his record. He's got a great record of sticking to the Constitution. He interprets it very intentionally, he tries to stay honest to what it says, and, what he feels the Founding Fathers would mean in what they wrote in the U.S. Constitution. However, that's what the Democrats say they want. So, pay special attention to their actions. In the questions they ask, will they be asking about how he views the Constitution, or, will they have an agenda? Judge Roberts has made it clear that he believes that roe was mis-judged and mis-decided. That is, he feels it was decided incorrectly. Have you ever looked at the Amendments the U.S. Constitution are claimed to support abortion? Well, that's another discussion for another time. However, Judge Roberts clearly stated that although he feels that the case of Roe v. Wade was mis-decided, it is currently the rule of law that is to be followed. So, he would abide by that decision. Presumably until a time when another case comes before him in which there may be room for interpretation. So, with that said, will the Liberals accept him, or deny him? He states he will be following the rule of law, and the Constitution. So, it seems as though he's a good candidate. But, if something should come before him later, might he decide differently? Listen to what the Democrats say, but even more so, watch what they do!

For continued news on this topic and to follow it, please check the following websites:

www.foxnews.com
www.washingtontimes.com
www.newsmax.com

Allow me to introduce myself.......

Why hello. I see that you have found my blog among the literally thousands of other blogs found here on the internet. What makes mine special, different and unique? Well simply, because I'm writing it. Seriously though, I take great pride in my writing and hope that you will enjoy future blogs here on my blog. I sincerely hope that you will also be kind enough to share my blog with others and invite them to my blog so that they may enjoy reading it, be challenged in their beliefs, or have their beliefs reinforced.
In the words of Austin Powers "allow myself to introduce......myself." I'm a well educated individual. I have an Associate in Arts and Science, Bachelor Degrees in each of the following: History, Social Science, Political Science and Sociology. I have minors in Anthropology and Philosophy. I have a Teaching Certificate and I'm nearly complete with a Master's in Counseling Psychology. I substitute teach in the Wapato School District in Wapato, Washington, I work a retail job, and, I am doing an internship currently at a local mental health facility.
I am a pretty Conservative guy politically speaking. I frequently have a letter to the editor in our local Liberally biased newspaper, The Yakima Herald Republic. Around here it is often referred as the Yakima Herald Repulsive or the Liberally Biased Rag of a local paper. The local paper frequently prints anti-Bush letters, and places anything that is negative concerning President Bush dominantly on the front page, or within the first section of the paper. If something good does happen concerning President Bush, it is often burried within the confines of the newspaper. The paper goes to great lengths to appear fair and balanced, but seriously lacks. Henceforth, one reason I have taken on writing this blog. I am quite well known by name around the Yakima Valley. Mostly by name and not by anything else. Most folks around here think that I am simply a cranky old man that loves complaining about everything. However, this would be the half of Yakima that hates me; there is a half that love me and agrees with most of what I say.
I have not always been a Conservative, I have, in fact, been quite Liberal once before. I voted for President Clinton the first time. I liked how he reached out to young people, despite how we do not vote in large numbers. However, he reached out nonetheless. What changed my mind? Simple. Hillary's health care plan. Had it passed, it seemed very likely that I would have lost my health insurance. So, I was clearly not in favor of that. Since about March 1993, I have been a Conservative.
I am quite politically active. In my time as a substitute teacher, I frequently will encourage kids to get politically involved. It is important that they get involved. I give them any info they ask for regarding politics. Particularly, I give them the contact information for their senators and representatives.
So, that is a bit of who I am, and, what I'm all about. I hope that in the coming months you will be interested in reading my blog. If you choose to comment on it, please keep it clean. I make good efforts to be respectable, however, we do all accidently slip occassionally. I will have a variety of topics here. I tend to talk about politics mostly, however, I will address many different topics and issues here. There are tons of different topics to be discussed here, and I hope you will find me informative, educational and entertaining. Not necessarily in that order, but we'll see!