Jan 20, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Now we see the reward Juan Miguel Gonzalez got for returning his son to a life of slavery that his mother died to free him from:
Cuba's Communist Party said Monday that more than 97 percent of voters showed overwhelming support for the nation's socialist system by electing 609 candidates who ran uncontested for parliament....
[Among them were] Juan Miguel Gonzalez, father of Elian, the Cuban boy at the heart of the international child custody battle in 2000.... [Associated Press, 1/20/03]
Jan 19, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Courts have gone too far to keep religion out of public schools and other forums, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says.
Although the Constitution says the government cannot "establish" or promote religion, the framers did not intend for God to be stripped from public life, Scalia said Sunday at a religious ceremony....
The rally-style event about 50 miles south of Washington drew a lone protester, who silently held a sign promoting the separation of church and state.
"The sign back here which says 'Get religion out of government' can be imposed on the whole country," Scalia said. "I have no problem with that philosophy being adopted democratically. If the gentleman holding the sign would persuade all of you of that, then we could eliminate 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance. That could be democratically done." [Associated Press, 1/13/03]
Question to Judge Scalia: If atheists became a majority in the country and decided to "democratically impose" the wording, "under NO God" on the whole country, would he regard that as legitimate? The removal of the words "under God" does not promote atheism or any other religious doctrine.
But Scalia is wrong on a much more fundamental level. The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights is to limit the power of government--to forbid things from being done even if a democratic majority wants to do them. Our country is not a democracy, nor should it be; is is a republic: a system of representative government limited by the rule of law to the protection of individual rights. That is the system the founders intended to impose on the whole country, and that is the system the Supreme Court has a constitutional duty to impose on the whole country.Jan 19, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
In case you haven't heard, Libya will chair the United Nations' human rights commission.
Says Mumar's son, Seif Gaddafi: "We have a better human rights record than our neighbours. Sure, we are not Switzerland or Denmark; we are part of the Third World and part of the Middle East. But we are better than our neighbours."
How about if we let the D.C. snipers sit on an anti-crime commission? The shoe bomber terrorist advise the Homeland Security office? Child molesters advise on children safety?
The simplest proof about the moral bankruptcy of the United States is that it is a member of the United Nations. If this country had a shred of moral resolve, a shred of confidence in its morality, it would have long rejected the very idea of a U.N. as the most perverse institution on earth.Related Article: Another United Nations Sham: Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to Head the U.N. Human Rights Commission
Jan 17, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON--Bushmaster Firearms, Inc. now finds itself looking down the barrel of one of the deadliest weapons known to man: a ludicrous lawsuit filed by irresistibly irrational plaintiffs backed by the agenda of America's most fashionably fascist. Bushmaster's "crime?" Manufacturing a product that performs as advertised, and legally selling it to an authorized distributor.
On behalf of the families of two victims of last year's Washington, D.C. snipers, the Brady Center to Prevent (non-government initiated) Gun Violence filed suit yesterday against the company in the Superior Court of Pierce County, Washington. The lawsuit claims that Bushmaster, who manufactured the Bushmaster XM-15 E2S .223 allegedly used by sniper suspects John Lee Malvo and John Allen Muhammad, has "intentionally and willfully chosen to sell and distribute firearms in a grossly negligent manner." Bushmaster sold the rifle to a legal gun dealer in Tacoma, Washington, who later reported the weapon stolen.
Paul Luvera, the clueless attorney who filed the suit, claimed that the rifle was a "very deadly weapon designed for combat use, highly lethal, military copy." [Please write in if you think of uses for a rifle that isn't "highly lethal."] Despite the many nasty adjectives he attached to the gun, most military snipers disagree; they prefer not to use a .223 caliber weapon because it is not sufficiently powerful to deliver potent long-distance shots against human targets. Most hunting rifles would have performed just as well, if not better. But Luvera also slapped the dreaded "assault weapon" label on the Bushmaster .223, which is sure to scare hordes of soccer moms into an anti-black-gun-with-pistol-grip-and-extended-magazine hysteria. In further condemnation of the inanimate object, he noted that the rifle had been "used for sniper purposes." Duh. So was Muhammad's car. We watched the news, too, Paul.
Hey, wasn't the Quran "used for sniper purposes?" Come to think of it, the Quran has historically been deadlier than all the Bushmaster .223s on the planet combined. Now THERE'S a lawsuit, Paul...
Jan 16, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
ALEXANDRIA, VA--The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism (CAC) today filed a "friend of the Court" brief with the United States Supreme Court supporting the petitioners in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, a pair of challenges to race-based admissions policies at the University of Michigan. Gratz deals with UM's undergraduate admissions, while Grutter challenges the Law School's policy. Both cases are on appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, based in Cincinnati."Race has no place in a university's admissions process," CAC Chairman Nicholas Provenzo said. "The University of Michigan's emphasis on race in admissions is so obviously irrational and illogical, it is almost beneath us to have to debate it. However, given the vast number of groups supporting the University, CAC felt it was necessary to emphatically state the case for individualism in education."
The eight-page brief offers the Court a clear philosophical context for declaring Michigan's policies unconstitutional. CAC argues that race has no bearing on an individual's educational ability, and that any reliance on racial factors denies prospective students their right to be judged on individual merit.
"Michigan's undergraduate school gives prospective students 12 points [towards the required 105 points for admission] for a perfect SAT score, yet automatically awards 20 points simply for stating one is black, Hispanic, or Native American," says Provenzo.
"The message here is unmistakable--the University believes that an individual's race impacts their achievement, and then it grants their race more prominence than their actual abilities in evaluating them for admission," says Provenzo. "The University's position is patently false, racist and bankrupt. Under the Constitution, no government-run institution should be allowed to use race to judge for or against any individual."
The brief was drafted by Nicholas Provenzo and CAC senior fellow Skip Oliva, and filed by attorney David R. Burton of the Argus Group.
Jan 16, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
An anti-war group has recreated and will air one of the most deplorable political commercials in history: the Johnson presidential campaign ad called "Daisy" that said Goldwater would cause a nuclear war. (It was aired only once because of the strenuous objections it received.) Like the old one, this version shows a girl plucking petals off a daisy--and then a mushroom cloud.
"We wanted to run an ad that would highlight that very real possibility (of nuclear war) and help encourage a national discussion," said MoveOn.org's international campaign director.
This is left-wing paranoia. There is no attempt to argue this position; it's an arbitrary assertion. I have no doubt it, and the commercial, appeals to anti-conceptual, emotionalist dolts that dominant the Left. Thinking people dismiss these scare tactics.
The group's site wants people to sign a campaign to send a letter to President Bush that says, in part:The United States has made a commitment to approaching the danger that Saddam Hussein poses through the international community. The resumption of the inspections regime is a triumph for the U.S., international law and multilateralism. But the United States will lose all credibility with its allies if it appears that it will go to war regardless of the inspections' success. And by alienating and infuriating allies through unilateral action, the U.S. could throw the success of the campaign against terrorism into jeopardy. Mr. President, it appears that your administration is looking for an excuse to go to war, when a peaceful and just solution may be at hand. We ask that you live up to your word and give diplomacy a chance.
As of today, with weapons inspectors discovering chemical weapons artillery shells in Iraq, this weak argument is officially null and void.
