Archive for December 4th, 2010

It’s back: Court to hear arguments over Ariz. immigration law

December 4, 2010

When the Federale’s refuse to enforce their own laws a state needs to do what it has to in order to protect itself, and it’s lawful citizen’s.

PHOENIX – The impassioned debate over the nation’s immigration policy takes center stage at the Supreme Court Wednesday in a dispute over an Arizona law that punishes employers who knowingly hire workers illegally in the U.S.

Arizona’s employer sanctions law has been used just three times in three years, but business interests and civil rights groups, backed by the Obama administration, have banded together to argue that only the federal government may enforce immigration laws.

The outcome in this case also could signal how the court would handle the controversial and more expansive Arizona immigration enforcement law, known as SB1070, that the administration challenged and a federal judge blocked key components this summer.

“It could take this less visible case and do something that impacts substantially on the SB1070 litigation by making some broader observations,” said Peter Spiro, who teaches immigration law at Temple University’s law school.

Full Story

ObamaCare Challenge Tossed

December 4, 2010

U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, a Clinton appointee, tossed out a challenge to ObamaCare in Virginia this week. This is the second victory for the Obama administration in a wave of lawsuits. Liberty University, the plaintiff in the case, has already decided to appeal in hopes of eclipsing Moon’s decision. “Congress does not have the authority to force every American to purchase a particular kind of health insurance product,” said Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty’s School of Law and an attorney on the case. Liberty argued that the law abuses the Commerce Clause of the Constitution in an attempt to provide the government strict control over the health care market. Their constitutional exegesis is completely sound, but Moon was blinded to that reality.

According to Moon, the law requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance falls legally under the Commerce Clause because the lack of the law would drive up costs, “precisely the harms that Congress sought to address with the Act’s regulatory measures.” To this we would ask, if the Commerce Clause can be melded to the whims of the backers of ObamaCare, what powers doesn’t Congress have to continue to shackle the American people?

Along the same lines…

A recent Investor’s Business Daily editorial calls it “the ultimate form of taxation without representation”: the continuing attempts by eco-fascists to force wealth redistribution upon the United States and other “rich” countries. This is all under the guise, of course, of saving the world from the scourge of global warming.

After its abysmal failure in wintry Copenhagen last year, the UN is holding another climate change conference in balmy Cancun, Mexico. There, surrounded by sun and sand, it will once again attempt to convince delegates from 193 countries that, a) the world is in peril and therefore we must drastically reduce emissions; and b) the U.S. and other developed nations must pay poor countries billions of dollars in retribution for the “damage” they caused in becoming, well, developed. The conference will feature the usual fanfare, including 250 presentations about the effects of climate change and proclamations that 2010 is tied for the hottest year since we began keeping records 131 years ago.

This is all smoke and mirrors. German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, who also serves as the pretentiously titled Co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, has openly admitted that “climate change policy is redistributing the world’s wealth.” This would be accomplished in the U.S. with cap-n-trade policies being pushed by Obama and his “progressive” pals in Congress.

Despite the sunny weather, the climate at this conference probably won’t be any friendlier than it was in Denmark. Even before the Republican landslide in last month’s elections, many lawmakers were leery of saddling Americans with more taxes during the recession, especially given the fact that China — the world’s biggest polluter — refuses to make any binding promises about emissions. In addition, in the wake of the Climategate scandal, emerging studies have shot more holes in climate change “science” than in Swiss cheese. Only time will tell, but it looks as if leftists will have to find another way to siphon America’s wealth to other nations.

In related news, House Republicans are set to eliminate the climate change committee created by soon-to-be-ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In Congress at least, the climate has changed.

And yet more commentary on epic fail obama’s choice of czar for BATFE

In another example of the “Chicago Way,” last week Barack Obama tabbed Andrew Traver, currently special agent in charge of the Chicago division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (better known by the ATF acronym), as the bureau’s permanent head. “You might as well put an arsonist in charge of the fire department,” quipped NRA spokesman Chris Cox.

While the gun grabbers at the Brady Center applaud the choice, Second Amendment advocates are predictably aghast. They criticize Traver because of his ties to the gun-control advocating Joyce Foundation and work during a 2007 conference on reducing gun violence sponsored by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, another fervently anti-gun organization. The IACP report includes a call for legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry. What Second Amendment?

Others question Traver’s lack of senior-level executive experience, but when has that ever stopped anyone in Washington? The Senate may get a chance to question and confirm Traver, who would take over an agency laboring under acting leaders since 2006, unless Obama decides to use him as yet another recess appointment. Certainly Traver would fit right in with the rest of Executive Branch Washington in an era where the president relies on regulation, as opposed to legislation, to enact his agenda.

SOURCE

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

December 4, 2010

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) is due out in 2013. Psychiatrists use the manual to diagnose mental illness. Among the changes in this edition will be the exclusion of five of the 10 personality disorders listed in the current edition. One of those five is narcissistic personality disorder. According to The New York Times, “The central requirement for N.P.D. is a special kind of self-absorption: a grandiose sense of self, a serious miscalculation of one’s abilities and potential that is often accompanied by fantasies of greatness.”

Many psychiatrists aren’t happy about the change. Dr. John Gunderson of Harvard calls the removal “unenlightened” and says, “They have little appreciation for the damage they could be doing.” But for some N.P.D. sufferers, the change brings hope. In two short years, for example, one particular occupant of a majestic white house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will likely be seeking new employment and new living quarters. Better, then, that he’s free to do so without the stigma of this dreadful disorder.

SOURCE

Congress is in session: Rut roh!

December 4, 2010

Our intrepid Congress returned from its Thanksgiving break Monday to take on several important items facing the nation, such as the looming tax increase for all Americans, fixes for some provisions of ObamaCare, the nuclear weapons treaty known as START and funding for the federal government itself. But before our elected representatives could tackle those important chores, they turned their attention to school lunches, a food “safety” bill and regulating volume for television commercials. Ain’t our republic grand?

First Lady Michelle Obama has made it her cause to fight childhood obesity. A fine goal, but not if it includes the $4.5 billion child nutrition bill headed to her husband’s desk. The legislation will supposedly improve the nutritional value of school lunches and take sugary snacks and drinks out of vending machines in schools. To pay for it, future funding for food stamps will take a hit. We’re sure that money will never actually be cut, but it looks good on paper.

The Senate, meanwhile, passed the Food Safety Bill, which would merely saddle the nation’s 2.2 million farms and 28,000 food producers with even more regulations and taxes. As The Wall Street Journal aptly put it, “maybe the bill won the votes of 13 Republicans because there was hardly any public controversy. These days, the government needs to take over entire industries to get anyone to notice.” However, House Democrats may block the bill — because it violates the Constitution. The legislation includes fees (a.k.a. taxes), and according to Article I, Section 7, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” Don’t be fooled, though. House Democrats aren’t concerned for the Constitution per se, only their own power to get this ball rolling.

Democrats are also set to vote on the quaintly named Commercial Advertising Loudness Mitigation, or CALM, Act, which will regulate the volume of ads on TV. The FCC received tens of thousands of complaints about blaring ads in the first quarter alone this year, but to those who say, “There oughta be a law,” be careful what you wish for — Congress is always willing to oblige.

In the meantime, a massive tax increase awaits all Americans if action isn’t taken to preserve current rates that expire on Dec. 31. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) engineered a rule-making vote that prevents Republicans from offering amendments to stop all of the Democrats’ tax increases from kicking in, and the House voted to extend rates for those earning less than $250,000 a year. Those earning more, i.e. small businesses, will be saddled with a job-killing tax hike. The White House and congressional Republicans are still trying to make a deal.

Senate Republicans have vowed to block legislation of any kind until bills dealing with taxes and funding the government are passed. It’s likely that a temporary extension of all tax rates will garner enough support from both parties to pass, but that merely kicks the can down the road. Rates should be lowered again and permanently, not raised, even if the economy improves. Congress should be focused on reducing taxes and cutting spending, not monkeying around in the school lunch room.

SOURCE