Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg’s response when asked about the Uniting American Families Act which would give same sex couples the same access to green cards and visas as is currently afforded to traditional partners.
(emphasis below mine)
We oppose this bill because it is, although it may be at the margins, part of an assault on the definition of family … I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe homosexuality is destructive to society.
Just ship them out? Mighty “love thy neighborly” of them isn’t it. Whose next to get the boot from our country if these folks have their way?
Jason Heppler over at South Dakota Politics links to a Glenn Reynolds piece about our legislature’s attempt to allow guns onto South Dakota universities (HB1261). Following the usual NRA talking points Reynolds proclaims that being able to carry guns into the classroom could have saved lives at Virginia Tech, you even got to love Reynolds headline, “People don’t stop killers. People with guns do”.
Just what is needed to prevent gun violence, more people with guns and lucky us it is our own legislature that is seeking to bring that extra firepower onto our own OK Corrals, I mean colleges. If our lawmakers get their way I guess backpack manufacturers will have to scramble to add new pockets to their products as our college students will need a place to keep that .357 along with their English Literature textbooks…
The next time you are searching for the money needed to put gas in your tank between your couch cushions, try to remember just how rough that $3 plus a gallon gas is on our big oil companies.
Royal Dutch Shell reignited anger over excessive profits today after revealing it made $27.6 billion (£13.9 billion) in 2007 - a new record for a UK company.
The figure - equivalent to more than £1.5 million an hour - prompted a fresh call from unions for a windfall tax on oil companies. It also comes at a time when motorists are paying forecourt petrol prices of more than £1 a litre.
AmericaBlog does the math for us, Shell only made a paltry $3 million a minute. How can they possibly survive?
The AP ran a story yesterday about a study from 2 non-profit organizations that provided blow by blow accounts of what they called “false statements” from President Bush and members of his administration following the terrorist attacks in 2001. The study found over 900 instances where these apparent false statements were given with over 250 coming from the mouth of George Bush.
On the surface the study is quite damning and for sure the left wing blogosphere has been all over it with “I knew it’s” and “I told you so’s” with their comment sections filled with the usual anti-bush rhetoric including more impeachment calls which is to be expected. On the right, I originally thought things would be quieter than a church mouse but as it turns out, the right doesn’t hold much credence to the sources of the study and soon after the story broke, the shoot the messenger posts began in earnest.
Apparently one of the non-profit groups behind the study, The Center for Public Integrity, is partially funded by righty hater George Soros which in the eyes of the blind followers means that the study must be false and should be dismissed with prejudice. In some cases a few even tried to spin it to accuse certain Democrats of being the real liars.
I guess the question that should be addressed is should a story be dismissed just because of who is behind it? If that was the case the accusations by Jose Conseco would never have been proven to mostly be true and Ruppert Murdoch’s Faux News would have long since gone silent.
So if you are questioning the story because of it’s sources but you have an open mind I recommend you watch the clip below of Keith Olbermann’s show last night (the righties will be screaming foul) where he discusses this issue in detail including how many of these “statements” coincidentally occurred at politically advantageous times for the Republican’s and George Bush. Maybe you’ll think differently and maybe you won’t…
You would think that government loans owed by US serviceman killed in the line of duty would be forgiven, at least my version of common sense would have assumed that to be true. But believe it or not, the VA has been trying to collect money from the estates of these fallen soldiers and though rare, they have gone after and collected over $56,000 from the families of 22 soldiers who died in the line of duty owing mainly GI Bill over-payments.
Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison has introduced a bill (S 2536) that would relieve any VA owed debts, and if passed would be retroactive to Sept 11th, 2001 so that those already harassed by the VA in collection attempts will receive refunds. The bill seems to have bi-partisan support including from VA Secretary Dr. James Peake, so hopefully it will pass without problems but how would you like to be the guy from the VA that is tasked with calling family members of fallen soldiers and have to ask them to pay back these loans?
This proposal, while definitely long overdue, seems to be incomplete as it lacks any mention of debts owed to other government agencies such as the IRS. Why this obvious omission? I hope that during the debate process our legislators do the right thing and ensure that all government debts get forgiven, it is the right thing to do. After all haven’t these individuals payed back any debts owed to Uncle Sam in spades already?
It does say something for capitalism when our wonderful telcoms have no problems breaking the 4th amendment at the urging of the Bush administration and spying on US citizens but fail to pay the phone bill for that spying and all that flag waving so-called patriotism goes right out the window.
Telephone companies have cut off FBI wiretaps used to eavesdrop on suspected criminals because of the bureau’s repeated failures to pay phone bills on time.
A Justice Department audit released Thursday blamed the lost connections on the FBI’s lax oversight of money used in undercover investigations. In one office alone, unpaid costs for wiretaps from one phone company totaled $66,000.
Just like your local criminal, breaking the law is only beneficial when it puts money in your pocket. I hope members in Congress remember this when this issue, especially the part about immunity for telcoms, makes it’s way back onto the floor for debate.
This isn’t a post that seeks to get into the global warming argument, I will post about that later I am sure, but instead details what Religious Right leader Pat Robertson thinks could be the cause behind the latest ice storm to hit the Midwest. Believe it or not it has nothing to do with what many are claiming is more proof that global warming is just a liberal snow job. Seems in Robertson’s mind, it could just be God getting back at us for being less than nice to Israel. Watch it.
And some think those that believe in global warming are crazy…
Another provision of our Constitution that is hanging on even now because of our love of killing things is getting set to be debated by the Supreme Court during the upcoming session when they look at the Constitutionality of Washington DC’s gun control law. Whenever talk of limiting someone’s access to guns comes up, the crazies are sure to come out of the woodwork. This morning’s Argus has a letter from one of these individuals.
My solution to this debate is simple. Let’s all join the South Dakota State Militia and urge all American citizens to join their state militias. All states, I believe, have one. This action not only would stop the current debate on the amendment but also would leave those lawmakers who support gun control looking kind of silly. Because if we all are members of our resident state’s militia, we all can bear arms not only to protect ourselves but our country.
Speaking of looking silly, knowingly or not this guy just volunteered to go to Iraq or Afghanistan (as part of the SD National Guard which could be considered a current day militia) just so he can legally own an assault rifle which serves no purpose other than to kill people. Maybe the Bush Administration has just found a new recruiting tactic for the military? Predictably, he goes on to give his unwavering support for our Constitution comparing it to, you guessed it, the Bible.
I don’t always support our government, but I do and always will support our U.S. Constitution. To me it’s the most important document - second only to the Holy Bible. And I, as most Americans, am willing to die for it.
The issue of gun ownership isn’t something that is divided by party lines especially in a rural state like South Dakota where it could almost be considered a second religion, so my question is why are these folks so adamant about the perceived right to bear arms but yet have no problem when our government takes away other Constitutional rights? Did I miss this guy’s letter condemning the recent FISA legislation that would authorize warrantless spying on Americans and amnesty for those companies that have already spied on us? How about the CIA’s destruction of video taped interrogations and the approved use of torture by our government? Habeas corpus anyone? Apparently it’s only certain parts of the Constitution many of these folks care about or are willing to die for.
As is often the case when gun control is mentioned, the idea of being able to shoot Bambi with an AK47 seems to take precedence over any real Constitutional issues facing this country in the mind of the “pry my gun from my cold dead hands” crowd. It’s all about one’s priorities.
While I understand that it was common practice here in South Dakota to blame all our problems on Tom Daschle, just ask Jon Lauck, but now apparently Daschle bashing has become common place nationally as well. This morning former Bush puppeteer Karl Rove all but blamed Daschle for our presence in Iraq.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, Karl Rove–who is quickly becoming the laughing stock of Washington– appeared with Rep. Chris Van Hollen (chair of the DCCC) to talk politics. When the discussion turned to Iraq, Van Hollen seized the opportunity to confront Rove for his failed attempt to blame the Democrats for pushing the White House into voting on the 2002 Iraq war invasion resolution. Rove’s response? Why, it was all the fault of former Democratic Senator, Tom Daschle. What?
You know Mr Rove, they have made great strides in treating dementia…Watch it.
Apparently the talk of lowering the drinking age that started West River with Rapid City’s Bill Napoli has now migrated East River to of all places Flandreau. N. Bob Pesall, a lawyer from the town best known for their casino, thinks that 19 year olds should be allowed to imbibe 3.2 beer and is starting a campaign that could lead to getting that on the ballot in 2008.
Pesall said he and several other people, whom he declined to identify, believe the drinking age should be 19. On behalf of the group, Pesall drafted a proposal that was submitted to the Legislative Research Council for review. But Pesall is not yet sure if he’ll help launch a petition campaign.
The measure could make the 2008 general election ballot if 16,776 signatures are collected by April 1. It would allow 19 and 20 year olds to buy low-point beer. They could be served in bars only if those businesses do not sell liquor or have separate areas for consumption of beer by those younger than 21.
So now a lawyer wants to put alcohol into a teenagers hands, what’s the matter not enough ambulances to chase so you have to look to drum up more business?