The reality of gas and energy prices

The further we get into the campaign, the more disappointed I am in Romney.  Rather than trying to capture the political center, he seems to be more interested in placating the Tea Party.  The Obama campaign plays the race and class and other cards and draws the party further to the Left. He has alienated many Jewish voters who usually vote Democratic.  Many American and Israel leaders and journalists label Obama the most anti-Israel Pres.ever. Like most politicians both mouth too many platitudes and oversimplifies complex issues.  An example is Mitt's comments on high gas prices.  For a rich guy, he doesn't seem to understand much about economics and energy markets.  This article explains the economic reality of gas prices. If you want to understand the economic and political reality of the international energy situation, I strongly recommend Daniel Yergin's book "The Quest."  In a the highly competitive and unstable international market, we are largely at the mercy of many others and national events.  Yes, we can increase domestic production but that is only a partial answer.  Further, even if we increase domestic production, what if the Chinese and Indians offer to pay more?  Will we pass a law outlawing domestic export of oil? I don't think we want to start down that road with all the potential reprisals.

"Intellectually shabby" Supreme Court Opinion

Have finally had some time to dig into the Supreme Court's Obamacare (NFIB v. Sebelius) decision.  Robert's argues that the penalty for not signing up for health care is really a "tax."  I've seem a lot of really weak and ridiculous things in Supreme Court opinions, but his is one of the recent worst.  As this article notes: " Here the key statement that he makes is this:  “it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income.” With all respect, the point is little short of absurd. The earlier portion of the Chief Justice’s opinion noted the huge expansion in federal power that could arise if the government were permitted to regulate various forms of inactivity.  What possible argument then could be put forward to say that the same risks do not apply to the expansion of the taxing authority to those same forms of inactivity, in ways that it has never been exercised before. The two examples that the Chief Justice gives are the tax on buying gasoline or earning income. Both of those are obvious activities that have long been regarded as acceptable bases for taxation. But not buying health insurance is not an activity.  I am not aware of any tax imposed on individuals for not buying gasoline and not earning income, or not taking a bath or not working in a home office. To allow this to stand as a tax is to accept the same kind of absurdity that was rejected in connection with the commerce power.  Intellectually shabby, to say the least."

TIH: RIP

'nuff said.

Good Website on CyberCrime and CyberSnooping

Check out this website if you are interested in CyberCrime and CyberSnooping. These are areas that are going to keep expanding rapidly.

Big 2nd Amend Case in Process

A number of states have argued (rightly so) that under the Second Amendment, applicants for concealed carry permits who meet all the requirements do not have to make a showing of specific need. The excellent opinion by the District Court is here.  This case is also important because the lower court held that the Second Amendment is not limited to the home. I hope the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this case and clarify the scope and standard of review for the Second Amendment.

Drew Peterson Guilty

Drew Peterson (of "Drew's law," see  below) was found guilty of murder he faces up to 60 years in prison. Innocent or guilty, his case is beginning to look a little Kafkaesque. Does the media attention cause judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys and jurors to go a little wacko?  Looks like lots of appealable issues, but who knows how it will turn out.

9-year old boy charged with murder.

Believe it or not, he is not the youngest.  This case will go to juvenile court.

U.N. Arms Treaty collapses, U.N. Presses on with new initiative

Talks on he U.N. Arms treaty that could have led to new gun controls in the U.S. if ratified and D.C. v. Heller was over-ruled (see earlier post), petered out. However, the busy beavers at the U.N. and gun controllers are staying busy.

Article on "government-imposed racial labels"

Good article on "government-imposed racial labels" and the Fisher case from the Supreme Court's next term on affirmative action. Pardon my "political incorrectness," and "racism", but  IMHO, if they ever were, racial preferences are no longer justified.  "Equal Protection" means "equal protection."    As Justice  Harlan wrote (dissenting in Plessy v. Ferguson): "Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law."   While racial preferences may have been motivated originally by good intentions, they have become a form of patronage and vote-buying. Preferences only add to the division of a badly-divided country.  Further, even if justified, such programs should be authorized only by a politically accountable source (governor, legislator).  Higher ed faculty and administrators generally lean far left and have no political (and rarely any other kind of serious accountability) accountability for rights violations.  Lawsuits are the only real remedy.  Of course, the taxpayer pays the costs for the legal defense of these policies.

FIRE'S 7 Best Colleges for Free Speech

FIRE is an organization that presses and litigates for free speech on college campuses. It has released it list of the 7 top colleges respecting freedom of speech.

(Drew's Law) Evidence Law Changed to Help Prosecution with Case

Former police officer Drew Peterson is charged with murdering his wife.  The issue here is hearsay testimony from friends of the victim that implicate Peterson.  The investigation was botched and the prosecutor specifically asked for a change in the law to help him with a botched case. Unlike many laws that are named after victims, this one is named after the defendant-- "Drew's law." This may have happened before, but it's the first time I've seen an evidence rule changed specifically to help a particular prosecutor get a specific conviction.  Yes, once passed the rule of evidence applies to all cases, but this troubles me.  Does this comport with due process which requires "fundamental fairness?"  Secondly, it may be unconstitutional under the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause.  Even if guilty, Peterson is entitled to due process and Sixth Amendment rights. The case will go to the jury today after the challenged hearsay was admitted. If convicted, this case may get to the U.S. Supreme Court. I wonder if changes will be requested in Florida law to help the prosecution in the George Zimmerman case?

P.S. Internet searches are so great.  They  allow everyone the opportunity to become a e-investigative reporter.

Dem Party Platform on 2nd Amend & Gun Control

The 2012 Republican Platform was discussed in prior post.The 2012 Democratic National Platform provides:

“Firearms.  We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American

tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We

believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible

consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and

precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective

enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work

together to enact commonsense improvements – like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole – so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.”

Not nearly as strong as the Republican platform reviewed earlier. First it states that firearms are subject to “reasonable regulation.”  This sounds like the minimal judicial scrutiny under which almost all regulation is upheld. “Reasonable” is a very vague standard.  No mention of self-defense or the thousands of incidents of lawful self-defense that occurs with firearms every year. They call for an “honest, national conversation about firearms.”  This has never happened before and probably never will    As indicated in a prior post, the individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment (D.C. v. Heller)hangs by one vote on the U.S. Supreme Court.  Anyone who thinks that Obama will put a pro-Heller Justice on the Court is living in a dream world.  His first appointee, Sotomayor voted against making the Second Amendment applicable against the states. Notice the call for reinstatement of the “assault weapons” ban.  It didn’t have any effect on crime when it was in force.  Yes, life is fragile and we need more effective enforcement of existing laws (no more BATF “fast and furious” fiascos). More hot air.  On this issue, Dems speak with forked-tongue.  On the other hand, party platforms are often ignored once the election is over. Perhaps the Democratic left (which dominates the party) will get off this hobby-horse.  I doubt it.  This issue has too strong an ideological hold on the Left.

Geo. Zimmerman wins one--judge disqualifed

The handling of the Geo. Zimmerman case was beginning to look like a kangaroo court proceeding. However, Zimmerman's motion to disqualify the trial court judge was granted.  He will get a new judge.  Appellate courts rarely grant such motions. However, this was a rather flagrant case. Perhaps there is a chance Zimmerman will get a fair trial. I'm still not optimistic as the race card undoubtedly will be played (again) once the case gets to trial. However, this is a step in the right direction.

Presidential Candidates & Civil Liberties

Civil liberties issues tend to be ignored in Presidential campaigns. This article is an exception.  Most candidates have very little say except vaguely mouthing support.  It is difficult to figure out where our two Presidential candidates stand.  However, it is fairly obvious that Obama is not a supporter of the individual rights approach to the Second Amendment announced by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 in D.C. v. Heller (e.g., "Bittergate," appointment of Sotomayor to Supreme Court). It is somewhat puzzling, and disturbing to some, that Romney chose Robert Bork to head his "Justice Advisory Committee."  In this age of anti-terrorism, cyber-snooping, and mass murder, it is not looking good for civil liberties in the U.S.-- no matter who is in the White House.

Thanks to commenters! Comment on older post

I appreciate all who comment here.  Wish I had time to respond to everyone.  However, I'm still at my full-time gig and try to squeeze in a little "real life" once in a while. Thanks for keeping it "clean" and avoiding personal attacks. I don't want to start moderating.  I have never deleted anyone's post and would never do so in ideological/political/disagreement grounds.  Sometimes we miss new comments on posts because the original post is no longer on the first page.  On Aug. 16, BM commented on the post "Fort Worth Offers $2 million to settle Taser death case."  Unfortunately, the original post was no longer on the front page. BM's post was very informative.  Check it out.  Search for "Fort Worth."  Again, thanks BM!  To help deal with this,  I have increased the number of posts (and their comments) on the main/first page to 27 (Very roughly a month-worth of posts).  Please scroll down to see all 27.  Let me know if you would like to see more older posts and comments on the first/opening page of the blog.

Repub. Platform Pro-Second Amendment

Just in  case you didn't already know who to vote for if you value the rights to keep and bear arms and self-defense. On the other hand, sometimes political platforms turn out to be forgotten once the candidate is selected.   Demo Platform review above.

Williams on public education

I hope you don't get tired of Walter Williams.  He pierces the political crap and tells it like it is.  He exposes the idiocy, lies and hypocrisy of the far left.  (The far right has its share, but that's another topic.)  In this article Williams exposes some of the liberal fraud about public education.  Politicians in general, and liberals in particular love, to throw money on problems without any real plan or hope of success. Why?  It's a convenient cover for pretending to have a solution and for  buying votes. More money for teachers and technology, etc. do not solve the problems of inner-city schools. Teachers, teacher's unions, school bureaucrats and school boards love extra money.  So do all the vendors and contractors who make profits. However, have you noticed that the problems never seem to get fixed no matter how much $ we throw at them?  Look at D.C.   The fundamental problems, violence in school, lack of parental support for education, peer group pressure against academic achievement, lax discipline, dumbed-down standards, teaching for tests, etc. are not tackled.  While there are constitutional limits on how far government can intervene in the lives of children and families, poor parenting, single-parent household, etc. these problems can be addressed in a constitutional fashion.  But, they are not, for ideological reasons. However, don't just blame the liberals.  "Conservative" Pres. George W. Bush brought us the catastrophe known as no child left behind.   Although I am not so sure that alternatives to public education are the cure, it's obvious that reason needs to prevail.

More left-wing bigotry in academia

The left dominates most universities and their irrational  fear/dislike/loathing of even lawful gun carriers is obvious, in spite of the fact that there has never been a licensed carrier shooting up a classroom because of something a prof. or other student said.  Zero cases in spite of millions of licensed carriers. This case is from Colorado where the state supreme court said campuses could not  ban licensed concealed carriers.  I don't think there are too many emotional discussions in physics classes. Another prof. who doesn't believe in the rule of law.

Good article on proposed national reciprocity act

Heeeeeeee's Baaaaack!  Good article on the proposed national concealed carry reciprocity act.

Budget, spending and borrowing crisis

Last post for a while as I go on vacation (again).  Please hold the applause!  I promise to get back to the NDAA issue then.

Come January we might have fewer border patrol and FBI agents.  We might even get lower farm subsidies.  Those are just a few of the automatic cuts that will take place on Jan 2 (a "sequester') if there is no deal to cut spending.  The strategy is designed to force Congress to deal with huge deficits. These deficits currently require the federal  "government to borrow 33 cents of every dollar it spends."  When is sanity going to prevail in D.C.?  Hasn't anyone there heard of the crises in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and all the problems in the EEC?

You gotta read this on immorality and inequality"

Many have suggested that the "science" in the social sciences (e.g. sociology, economics, psychology, etc.) is largely illusory.  Too many "scientists" let their ideology (or "morals") get in the way of the objectivity that science requires.  One example of this may be the Arming America book scandal. Here's another possible example from an economist:

" What's wrong with the economy can be traced to the growing gap between the wealthy and everyone else. . . . I'm not arguing for the elimination of inequality.  Bur the extreme that we've reached is really bad.  We could have a more equal society and a more efficient, stable, higher-growing economy.  That's really the "so what." Even if you don't have any moral values and you just want to maximize GDP, this level of inequality is bad."

Wow! Economic inequality is the cause of problems with the economy. Further, it appears that anyone with moral values (like the writer's) would want less inequality. Shame on you folks who aren't smart enough to figure this out and are immoral enough to support a system with this much economic inequality. Is this writer's left-wing sense of morality influencing his analysis?  Talk about demonizing the opposition.

Latest on the Geo. Zimmerman case

FWIW, defenders of George Zimmerman have started a website to counteract the the massive and negative media coverage.  In related news,  as expected, the trial judge refused to step down from the case.  Zimmerman has appealed.  Although there are reasons to suspect the judge's neutrality, these motions are rarely granted unless there is a "smoking gun." 

House sues Holder

The House of representatives filed suit against AG Holder for his refusal to turn over documents related to BATF's notorious operation fast and furious.  No way to predict how this will turn out.  It will probably be deemed moot or dropped if Obama loses the upcoming election.  Anyone who thought things would be different in D.C. under Obama has to be sorely disappointed.  Some observers have rated Chicago as the most corrupt city in the U.S. Corrupt machine politics is still the norm in Chi town.  Illinois has a horrible record of having governors and public officials convicted. Seriously, did anyone think a Democratic politician from Chicago was going to really improve anything about honesty and transparency in government?

Another Serious Civl Liberties issue ignored by the NYT and most media.

The National Defense Authorization Act has been challenged by many journalists for its detention and other provisions. However, even though journalists may be among the most affected, they, and the New York Times, have been very quiet.  This is not surprising as re-electing Obama is priority #1, taking precedence over civil liberties. Thanks to Mike Perry and Bennett Jones for this link. 

Review of Recent S.Ct. 4th Amendment cases

See this review of the 4 Fourth Amendment cases from the U.S. Supreme Court's latest term.  I agree with Jones and strongly disagree with Florence and Messerschmidt.  This writer and the cited author have some problems with Messerschmidt.  The author is, IMHO, being "generous" in his critical evaluation of Messerschmidt (emphasis supplied):

"Messerschmidt is the more interesting remedies case, in part because it involved the all-too-common practice among investigators of being sloppy with the particularity of warrants. The Fourth Amendment requires warrants to particularly describe the property to be seized, and the warrants must develop probable cause for each of those items to be seized. In the suppression context, which is by far the more common context in which warrant particularity is litigated, courts tend to be quite generous with defects in particularity. If the police add in a “catch all” clause in the warrant that is obviously overly broad, courts usually just sever the obviously unconstitutional part of the warrant and allow the evidence if it was obtained by reliance on other parts of the warrant. (See, for example, the Sixth Circuit’s 2001 decision in United States v. Greene.) As a result, officers often aren’t as careful with particularity as they should be. By arising in a civil setting, Messerschmidt didn’t allow the easy path of severability often seen in criminal cases.
A divided Court in Messerschmidt ruled that qualified immunity applied by taking a rather generous view of what kind of evidence might be present and relevant to a domestic dispute involving a gun fired by a gang member. As a practical matter, the most important aspect of the majority opinion is its conclusion that seeking and obtaining the approval of higher-ups bolstered the case of qualified immunity by indicating that the officer was not at personal fault. This ruling is in in significant tension with United States v. Leon, (a criminal prosecution, exclusionary rule case) which generally requires only a facial review of the warrant to see if a defect is so significant that suppression is warranted. (The Court has generally equated the good-faith exception in the criminal setting and qualified immunity standard in the civil setting, so precedents from one context should be applicable to the other.) At the same time, the ruling is consistent with the recent trend of Roberts Court cases on Fourth Amendment remedies in emphasizing the personal culpability of individual officers as a prerequisite to liability. In my view, focusing on personal culpability is problematic: Bad faith is hard for defendants to uncover and the appearance of good faith is relatively easy for the police to game. Under Messerschmidt, even if the warrant has a serious defect, review by higher-ups may provide an extra defense against not only personal liability but suppression of evidence. It’s too early to tell whether lower courts will connect those dots and use Messerschmidt in this way, but it seems quite plausible that they will."

If too many lower courts connect the dots, it could result in a serious weakening of 4th Amendment protections.

Latest in Geo. Zimmerman case

George Zimmerman's chances of getting a fair trial seem to get worse as time goes on.  Guilty or innocent, all defendants are entitled to a fair trial.   The prosecutor "mistakenly" released a picture of Trayvon Martin and Zimmerman's  unflattering college transcript.  Fla. law did not authorize release of either item.  As this case has developed, I'm having doubts about the judge and prosecutor.   A prosecutor's obliagation is not to get convictions, but to see that justice is done. (See prior post re Alan Dershowitz's assertion that the prosecutor should step down.) Judges are supposed to be impartial.  The media, in general have been strongly biased against Zimmerman.
Another disturbing trend is that some groups may be  getting ready to play the "riot card."  If Zimmerman is acquitted there will be riots, as occurred  following the state court acquittal of the officers involved in the Rodney King case.. Martin also filed motions that are mentioned in the article.  Even if innocent, will Zimmerman be sacrificed on the altar of racial harmony?

Dangers to liberty

As we ponder more gun controls, bans on large sweet drinks, and all sorts of other restrictions urged by both the left and right, it is always wise to keep in mind the following great quote:

“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)

Local Fiscal Responsibility

We almost always focus on fiscal irresponsibility at the federal level.  However, the problem is almost as bad for many cities and states (e.g. California).  This article by  Texas A&M San Antonio Prof. Dennis Elam discusses "The failed policies of poorly run (by Democrats) cities . . ."  Although both parties have spend recklessly on the federal level, it appears to be the Democrats who are clearly most responsible at the state and local levels.  Check out some of the other posts there.  Also, check out Prof. Elam's site, esp if you are interested in some of the economic and business issues involved in our current political debates.

More Williams' Wisdom:

As Williams points out, the CJ system is just the last line of defense when informal social controls (e.g., family, neighborhood, church, etc.) fail.

Left-wing Political Correctness v. First Amendment

After Chick-Fil-A's-CEO announced opposition to gay marriage on religious grounds, the left reacted angrily. Private citizens don't have to honor the First Amendment, but public officials must.  Two of the nation's worst knee-jerk authoritarian left-wing mayors, Emmanuel of Chicago and Menino of  Boston threatened to ban Chick-Fil-A from their cities. Both are also strong supporters of gun control laws that would probably  not pass Second Amendment muster.   Even the left-leaning Dallas Morning News called them out on their disrespect for First Amendment rights.  Left-wing political correctness is the supreme law of the land for many on the left.  However, the Constitution is the the real supreme law of the land.  As you may recall, Emmanuel was Obama's Chief of Staff.  I hope Obama doesn't share his former staff-member;s attitudes.  However, Obama's infamous "Bittergate" remarks suggest that Obama is also not a supporter of freedom of religion.