Liveblogging the State of the Union

"Tonight Bush will say that America is addicted to oil" - Carl Cameron, FOX News

Cindy Sheehan has been removed from the gallery and detained, now barred from seeing the State of the Union.

Mr Speaker, The President of the United States!

First comments are geared towards Mrs. King, and her reunion with her husband.

There needs to be a working together of those in government - "The state of the Union is strong, but we will make it stronger...be not shying away from terror...and by leading the world economy...the USA will continue to lead"

War on Terror and the need for democracy:

"every step makes our country safer...the advancement of freedom is the great story of our time...eriting a new chapter on the book of self government...half of the world lives in democracy, but we do not forget the other half..."

"the terrorists use the weapon of fear, hoping to break our will so that the violent will inherit the earth, but we love our freedom and will fight to keep it...it we leave them alone, they will not leave us alone...there is no peace nor honor in retreat...the USA will not retreat from the world nor surrender to evil"

"once again we accecpt the call of history, the call to bring peace."

Iraq

- Rebuilding the Economy
- Striking at the Terrorists

"The road of victory is the road that will bring our troops home. A sudden withdrawl...would show that a pledge from America means little, we must keep our word, defeat our enemies and stand behind the military in this vital mission"

Honoring of Dan Clay who was killed in Iraq last year...recognizing the family.

"Only way to defeat the terrorists is to defeart their dark vision of terror and fear. Election is the way to go, Hammas must acknowledge Israel, disarm, and work for lasting peace. Liberty is the way in the middle east, for it is the hope and right of all humanity"

Iran

"Sponsoring terror must come to an end and the nations of the world must not permit Iran to gain nuclear weapons...hopes to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran"

Economy

"Economy is heathy and vigorus, having created 4 million + jobs, more than the EU and Japan combined. Protectionism is not the way."

Imigration

"Stronger border protection"

Health Care

"Confront the rising cost, insurance coverage, improve provider/providee relationship...make coverage portable...need to pass medical liability reform this year"

Energy

America is addicted to oil...will invest more in clean coal plants, wind, and nuclear energy. Reduce foreign oil dependence by 75% by 2025

May God Bless America

-End Transmission-

Alito is in and Iran is out...

As of this morning, the Judge has become Justice

A great victory for the Bush Administration, but one that was certianly expected. Now we'll see what the SCOTUS is really made of, as well as how anti-Alito/anti-Bush liberals in Congress try and spin things.

Meanwhile, the world is going to take Iran to task at the UN for their "nuclear enrichment", while OPEC has curbed Iran's efforts to try to take the world to task through oil production and wanting to cut it, by saying that they will not let Iran do such things. Reguardless, "America is addicted to oil".



Keep watching...State of the Union in 15 minuites...

Back into action...

I've been away for a few days, as I was up at Lake Ann Camp in northern Michigan. It's a great place, very near and dear to me, as over the years I have seen God do some of the most amazing things. I was up there with some friends working support staff for one of the Snow Camps they do - Freezeout. It was a great time with friends and getting to hear something from God that I certianly needed, thanks to Ken Rudolph.

State of the Union is tonight, 9 pm. Watch it.

Netanyahu on Hammas

I just watched the Netanyahu segment on Your World w/ Cavuto. The most memorable quote: "Reality has just punched us in the face."

According to Netanyahu, Hammas will not negociate, they still seek the destruction on Israel, and "the missles will fall, it is just a matter of before or after the election in March". He also said that the rest of the world should not negociate, and part of the problem is a lack of a "Peace through Strength" policy that doesn't suceed territory, but instead, deters terror.

A very hard hitting ten minuites...

HILLARY on Hammas

Looks like Hillary is taking the path of Shumer.

Another democrat who wants to appear moderate politically and strong on terror. However this case is a little clearer, as HILLARY desires the title of "Madam" and will do what it takes to acheive such. This isn't a turning over of a new leaf or the appearance of agreeing with the Bush Administration. She still hates them, but does this for her own gain.

Israel, Hammas, and Iran

The election cycle for Palestine has once again come to pass, and this time around, Hammas seems to have garnered a victory. However, there seems to be a "Clash of the Titans" between Palestinian and Hammas electorate. If that were not enough, Israel is of course concerned how this might come out for them and their security (as they should be).

This morning, President Bush stated in a press confrence (that is still progressing) that "The United States will not work with a party that advocates the destruction of Israel, our ally"

Iran's response to Hammas's fortune: Congradulations

Is "Welcome to War" a possibility?

Joel Rosenberg on Hammas: "Welcome to Hammastan, the new terrorist state"

"Hamas is a terrorist organization, which means they believe it is their right to murder women, children and innocent civilians to achieve their goals," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

Under normal circumstamces I would not have such a quote, certianly from such a ruthless political figure, in my writings. However, I do this to illustrate a point - that liberals such as Schumer only say such things when it is to their advantage. Indiviuals such as he are weak on terror, and would rather harass Sam Alito about Roe, Casey, Vanguard, and Concerned Alumni of Princeton instead of actually being strong on terror. If such comments would were thought to not bolster Schumer somehow, then they would not have been uttered. To his credit though, he suprisingly speaks unspun and unadulterated truth for once.

Iran and Russia

Over at Captain's Quarters, Captian Ed has some interesting commentary on Iran and Russia.

I see this as "Hey lets work with Russia on uranium enrichment because they sold us weapons. Since they sold us weapons we might be able to get them to secretly enrich things for us so we can develop a nuke"

China and "Unrest"

This seems to be China's Future for the time being.

Now if what President Bush has said on various occasions is indeed true, and all poeple of the world do desire to be free, then would this not be a expected natural occourance? These people are oppressed by their government and they expect people who, deep in their hearts, desire to be free to just take it? What hurts more is that American tech giants are helping in that oppression - Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc. I almost feel as if the government had it comming, but that doesn't mean anything because you may get a governmental respose like that of Tiennamen Square in the late 80's...

There is some "fight" out there though...

Meanwhile, Sam Alito...

Judge Alito is now headed for a full Senate Vote, after having been voted on by the Judiciary Comittee yesterday.

Now we come to the pay-off. What will happen? I think he'll get confirmed. However there is the risk of a Filibuster on the part of the Democrats in the Senate, a move that I think will further their loss of credibility. However, that matters little, as the liberals in the Senate seem to want to oppose someone on the grounds of differing idology, and not look at their qualifications. I would submit that even the organizations that oppose him, such as NARAL, NOW, and the National Bar Assocation; they do so on idological grounds of "Women's Right to Choose" and "Moinority Rights" of which they both would concur that Alito is against, due to their chery-picking amongst his judical record for cases that support their point, while leaving behind a number of cases that do not. Kennedy failed, and so will the rest of them.

h/t: The Glittering Eye

What about Israel's Nukes?

I've always though that "Truth was as strange as Faction" and once again, I seem to be correct. For those that haven't read any of Joel Rosenberg's novels, consider starting. It's as if what is really happening gets pulled from those books.

Waiting for the hook, I am.

Haleigh fights on...

Read Michelle Malkin's latest column on the subject, here.

Cindy and Hugo...

Inconcieveable, well, maybe not...

Now I understand the fact that there is a right to protest and dissent in America, and I respect that. However, I think it a bit much when you have a American going down to SA to trash the United States and side with Chavez, an indiviual who's buddy-buddy with Castro, and friendly with Iran. I ask the question, why does the Left, of which Sheehan is sure a part, hate America so much? Why do they want to see it fall?

Answer: Read, "Why the Left Hates America" - by Dan Flynn

Communist Google?

Since when does an American company do such a thing? More can be found here.

Why does it have to be all about money? Why does an American company such as Google have to pander to a Communist government? If Amercia is all about liberty and freedom (as it should be, within reason) then why is a big time American company going along with restricting that freedom in a down-trodden country? The problem lies in the fact that Google is the best, so it's not like there could be an effective boycot or something...

Here's a solution. Thanks to Mark Tapscott for pointing it out.

The Latest on Haleigh

Michelle Malkin is keeping up on the Haleigh situation, and the latest can be found at her blog, including the statement of Gov. Mit Romney, announcing an intestigation into the matter.

Who Ya Gonna Call? Porkbusters!

Who needs Peter Vankmen, Ray Stanz, or Egon Spangler when you've got John Fund and Sen. Tom Coburn?

The United Nations: Still Plauged and Diseased

The latest on the United Nations and it's scandal ridden infrastructure can be found here.

Eroupe and the New Cold War

The "conflict" continues across Europe as the Iceman claims lives, and oil is withheld.

Haleigh Poutre...

Thanks to Michelle Malkin and others, I was made aware of a situation in Massachusetts that seems to be getting quite the amount of attention: Halleigh Poutre's fight for her own life. While some might see this as similar to the Schiavo case, this is a child we're talking about, a child who cannot make such decisions for herself, much less express what she would want, and I echo the sentiment that "There should be a presumption that people, that children, even brain-damaged orphans, ought to live."

I find the follwing rather interesting...

Some patients with severe brain stem injuries may partially recover from a persistent vegetative state, but they rarely recover fully enough to communicate, feed themselves and live ordinary lives, Dr. Steve Williams, chief of rehabilitation medicine at Boston Medical Center, told the Globe. But he said recovery is more likely with children than adults. “There’s more plasticity to their brain. There’s potentially other areas of the brain that can take over,” he said.

Why? Because I'm a brain damaged kid who couldn't walk until he was seven years old, one who is convinced that somehow (God's grace really) other parts of by brain took over where the damaged part could not and enabled me to walk. If God can do that, then He sure can save this precious young life.

More Debate on Iran

As a continuation of the guest blogging I linked to the other day from Winds of Change, there is additional blogging on the issue (comments and thoughts to follow once I finish reading it).

h/t: The Glittering Eye

A Blast from the Past: Ronald Wilson Regan, 25 years ago

I'm listening to Regan's 1st Inaugural Address, as delievered 25 years ago yesterday (I wasn't even born yet). I'm amazed, I really am. Within the first seven minuites of the address, Regan tackles problems that are still issues today, issues such as government spending and personal responsibility. That was his FIRST address to the nation, and like a one-two punch he gets right to the point, incredible. It goes to furhter ones understanding of why he is so beloved, and should be...

The video of the address can be found here

Russia, Iran, and the Balck Gold: Episode II

So Iran wants Eroupe to open it's doors so that all the Jews that have migrated to what is now the modern state of Israel would have a place to still live, since the president of Iran wants them all expelled...how noble of him.

Russia is still fighting the "Cold War of the 21st Century"

The Spoil, is Oil...

"And cold weather in Russia led Moscow to cut natural gas supplies to Europe and trim some oil production."

Does the Iceman cometh with a hook in his mouth?

The Alito Saga Continues...

Teddy Kennedy seems to be the gift that keeps on giving...

And this will fizzle out and die just as the Concerned Alumni of Princeton issue did. Alito will be confirmed, if only along partisan lines, and "Teflon Sam" will sit on the nations highest court.

So continues the war...

Iran, Russia, and the Black Gold

Things are ever hopping with Iran this morning, as they've begun moving money from European banks. It would seem that they are taking the possibility of sanctions rather seriously. Such a confrontation also seems to have parts of the oil industry concerned as well.

The struggle over Iran between the political parties and idologies of the United States is discussed here.

If this weren't enough, Russia is still fighting it's new Cold War, and losing.

Why America must invade Iran...

Over at Winds of Change, there is a guest blog post that tackles this very issue, be warned however, it's a long one.

The Society of Serpents and Doves on Iran

One of my all-time favorite professors at Cedarville University, and the main man behind "The Society of Serpent and Doves", Dr. Mark Smith, put up a great post on Iran this morning - it's good stuff, go enjoy.

Al Queda strikes back?

The latest this morning, thanks to Drudge, is this, and there's more, here.

Michelle Malkin is following this closely....

France Threatens Nukes?

Inconcieveable!

France's Thinking...

Chirac: Let's make everybody happy, give them lots of wine, cheese, French Silk pie, and fries...and leave everyone alone.

Later, after the Paris riots and the realization that things aren't working...

Advisor: Mr President, you need to take a stronger stand, you need to be more "macho", like Bush.

Chirac: Oh, so our approach isn't working?

Advisor: No sir it isn't...

Chirac: Ok then, we will use nuclear weapons against the terr...what do you call them again?

Advisor: Terrorists sir...

Chirac: Oh yes, terrorists...we will use any nuclear weapons we have against...wait, do we have any nuclear weapons? What do they look like?

Advisor: Yes sir, we do, not many but we do...

Chirac: Oh, ok, then we will use them against the terrorists...I sure am glad that Saddam is out of power, because he sure wouldn't be happy about this...

"Plantation Politics" and "The Sith"

"So this is how Liberty dies, to thunderous applause" - Sen. Padme Amidala Skywalker, Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

...and the Dems Strike Back...

Truth: As strange as Faction

Faction is a term that's been coined for novels that are written that seem very real. This idea has made people like Tom Clancy famous. If that were not enough, in his keeping an eye on things, Joel Rosenberg has once again made an observation on current events that seem as if it was ripped from his last novel The Ezekiel Option. The difference? This isn't fiction.

"The Hammer" on Iran

It's all about Solidarity, isn't it?

Once again Mr. Krauthammer makes it a point to show how weak Eroupe really is on terror...

To the North: Russia

Today on Drudge Report there are a few articles on Russia and it's "new cold war". If some think the USA has it hard when it comes to energy, think again.

What is Putin going to do here? How many more people are going to suffer? What is Russia going to do to fix it's problems? How far will they go? We've already seen that they will cut oil supply to an entire country. Would they invade one to aleviate their problems? I'm reminded of Joel Rosenberg's "The Ezekiel Option".

Soon, "Captain Hook" may make a trip from "it could NEVER happen LAND".

Time will tell...

Iran Revisited, The EU and internal problems, Gore Speaks, The Grey Lady fakes it

Today has been quite the day, as Eroupe is now demanding UN talks on Iran. The Glittering Eye has additional thoughts.

The Europen Union seems to be having it's own trouble...

Is Mr. Solana going to advocate isolation from the "world community" here as well, sweeping things under the rug instead of taking action? Oh wait, this is an internal issue...I "forgot" - well let's hope against hope that internal issues are handled better than foreign policy.

Al Gore opened his mouth, once again.

When will people get it in their head that Bush bashing isn't the way to go?


One of the big thing in the blogsphere today has been something courtesy of "The Grey Lady" (ht: Michelle Malkin, Political Teen, and Powerline)

I guess the NYT hasn't gotten the picture yet...*sigh* oh well, may "The Paper of Record" waste away as it continues to lose the trust of the populace.

The Mullah's Strike Back

I'm reminded of the children's book If You Give a Mouse a Cookie as I read the latest on Iran this morning. If that were not enough, it appears that Iran has also expelled CNN.

I don't like the Clinton News Network either, but this is too much. I think that for once CNN actually spoke the truth as it really is. What's more, is this oil development. Once again we face a situation of a country willing to go "over the line" in terms of oil production and dispensing to other countries. Russia has already demonstrated that it was willing to cut off a country from its supply, and the step to dramaticly raise oil prices in response to any action the USA and the rest of the West may take to contain Iran's ambitions and protect the rest of the planet may only be a precursor to a cutoff as tensions escelate. There's no good way out of this, just bad and ugly, but when dealing with a regime that is lead by those like the current president of Iran, this is what it comes to. Iran is in control at this point and its president knows this, hence the flexing of such economic muscle.

Who will play their cards better in this international/political poker game? Let's hope that, having grown up in Texas, President Bush is a excellent Texas Hold 'em player...if that in fact is the name of the game.

Predators, Spies, and Automated Asassins

Sounds like the making of a great story doesn't it? Something out of the Terminator maybe? Well guess again; sometimes truth is as crazy as fiction...

Romulus, Remus, and Iran

Yesterday as I was watching Star Trek: Nemesis, there was a scene that caused me to pause and think: the top brass of the Enterprise E were sitting around a confrence table discussing Starfleet inteligence reports in relation to the planet Remus, and all they knew was "that the Remens lived on the dark side of the planet and that there was alot of underground activity, dilithium mining, and weapons manufacturing..."

At this point I stopped to think about how much that reminded me of Iran, as they are becomming more and more of a nemesis to the west and are conducting underground and hidden operations in nuclear weapons manufacturing. As I was looking at the news this morning I came across more on Iran. I found this article somewhat chilling as well as this.

The whole glow/aura thing surrounding the president of Iran when he spoke at the United Nations, and the hand holding them there, that's creepy, something way to "Left Behind/Carpathian" for me. It reminds me of the scene at the end of Left Behind, that actually took place at the United Nations where Carpathia "used the force" and forced someone to sit down, and they all believed his non-sensical story about Cothran and Stonigal actually killing themselves...

Captain's Quarters has some additional reporting on the latest with Iran, courtesy of The Scotsman, as well as some analysis that seems to answer many of the questions I posed yesterday (even the colw war era comments). Sadly they were answers I feared.

The Glittering Eye also has a lengthy post on the subject of Iran, it's nuclear efforts (including a timeline) and viable options that could be considered (or not).

Internationally, we seem to be entering a dark time if Eropue will not wake up to the threat that the West collectivly faces. Something has to be done, and I certianly hope that the Scotsman has gotten the reporting wrong and the military action is still a viable option if it comes to that, which it may. The problem faced here, is that of a civilized government such as that of the US is not hard pressed to "cross the line", something Iran would eagerly and quickly do to assert dominence. How do you deal with an enemy, even one such as a state, that would be willing to do so? Even the doctrine of MAD wouldn't work as it did with the Soviet's (as Captain Ed pointed out) because "MAD only works as a doctrine when both sides have the same stake in survival", of which the forces controlling Iran's government do not - going out in a blaze of glory (so to speak) is of greater importance that continuing to exist.

So what will we do?

Stay Tuned, different bat-time, same bat-web address

In the days after Alito: Iran (The Rebellion of the Real World)

Well, the hearings are over. The democrats have decided to postpone any comitee action for the next week, as that is as long as they are allowed to do so being the dissatisfied party that they are over the answers they recieved from Judge Alito (answers, not a lack of them).

Meanwhile Iran looms large. as Michelle Malkin said "we're on the brink". (Be sure to read everything posted there, as chilling as it is.) In addition, the master of all things Middle East, Joel Rosenberg has posted on the latest from both Bush and Cheney, as well as a article by Bill Kristol, of the Weekly Standard, that's worth a read . Powerline has a satilite photo that is needs a look.

Bush, Cheney, and Rice are all serious about the threat that Iran is. Eroupe is weak and lacks the spine for this kind of work. Iran's president is an irrational wacko who would go to great lengths. I get the feeling this is reminiscent of the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis maybe (even if I wasn't around for that). The big question is what is the United States going to do? Can we afford another military operation, espically in that region? I want to say yes, but I cannot do so. Does Bush have the political capital to expend on such an endeavor in an effort to get enough support in Congress to call for such an action? Would he be able to effectivly "sell" the idea to the American people so that a majority would be ok with it? (Wait, he's not motivated by polls and people's opnions like Pollmaster Clinton was.) I can't answer these questions effectivly yet, but at first glance I would say no. I don't know what to say that has not already been said, and much that could be said, cannot be said, yet. I do know that there will be negitive fallout to some degreee no matter what so the question is, how does the US instigate effective damage control? None of the options are stellar. Israel would sure face some massive backlash if they were to act, espically unilaterally, and that is something that is not needed at this point, as Sharon very well may have reached the end of his political career and elections for a new PM are on the horizon. Can the USA fight on another front, a front where massive airstrikes are requried and ALL of the locations would need to be leveled? (If they weren't Iran would be all the more motivated to try and nuke the West.) These questions and issues need to be weighed and answered. Sadly, it is well known that the media will not give this it's correct and deserved attention; the attention it does give will be negitive (Fox News not withstanding). Amidst all this, these chilling words come to mind:

"The course is chosen, it cannot be turned, the way has been prepared...all the world is a stage, in the eyes of the sotrm" - Saviour Machine

The Senate Calls: The Former Pres. of NARAL

Can we say "ugh!"? Of course she came out against Alito and calls his nomination dangerous, as those that desire a solid answer on the upholding of Roe have not gotten one (or I should say, one that they would like). I am sure that in the comming minuites, Fiengold, Fienstien, Biden, and others will question her heavily in an attempt to bolster their case against him (in support of abotion). I can only hope that Sen. Coburn questions her long and hard, and pulls out that study from New Zealend that looks as the physical and physcological effects of abortion on 600 women who were followed for 30+ years.

Go get 'em Doc...

The gift that no one wants at the Senate Hearings: Teddy K

I'm still watching the Alito hearings, as witnesses are commingn forth to testify in reguards to Alito. I don't know why I am still watching these hearings, as I have heard more than enough, more than someone would want to hear, yet I am.

Before I comment on Sen. Kennedy, Sen. Fienstien is once again asking about Roe. She has been rather infatic about Roe during this entire process, as other Sen. predicted she would be. Her being so, backs up what Sen. Coburn stated during his first round with Alito - that Roe and Casey, cases that are foundational to the "right" to murder infant life, are central to these hearings, to make sure that this "right" is secured.

On to the "Teddy Bear". I see him as similar to fruitcake. First off, fruitcake is that one gift during the holidays that no one wants but more often than not has to endure. Second, I see Sen. Kennedy as less than sensible. The Democratic party only lets him open his mouth when it is either safe to do so, or they have no choice, because of the confusing and liberal things that tend to come out of it. As to his role in these hearings, I see him as a broken record with the most horrid music imagineable playing. Over and over and over again he has spewed CAP (of which one of the issues brought up was male eating clubs - one of which, the Owls, Kennedy was a part), Vanguard, and Elecutive Power issues; issues that he has used over and over again to try and trap Judge Alito and cast him in a bad light. This has also lead to a massive cleanup/counterpoint operation on the part of the Republicans on the comittee to take care of the mess that Kennedy has created here. He certianly qualifies a "Chief Bag 'o' Wind" on this committee. I find his kind disgusting. On the bright side, I still see Judge Alito as "Teflon Sam", as the garbage and stink slides off him and rests at his feet for the Republican members of the committee to deal with.

May he speedily be confirmed.

So Fox News isn't running the hearings today, and it took me forever to find C-SPAN on my TV. I'm not expecting much today in the way of anything new, as yesterday was somewhat shocking. At this point I would think that the Democrats on the committee would continue to badger on CAP, Vanguard, Roe, and whatever else might be found to degrade a great nominee.

Here we go again at 11:15 AM

Alito v. Fienstien III

Fienstien is discussing with Alito her, DeWine's and Hatch's positions on the Intellegence Comittee. The discussoin has become one against President Bush and his authorizing the NSA to wiretap indiviuals who are known to have connections to Al Queda and other terrorist cells and organizations. As I see it is an attempt to trap Bush. However, Alito has infaticly stated that the President is bound by laws and statutes but is not giving any specifics.

Fienstien and Alito talked about some enviromental issues as well.

Currently, there was a bit of a laugh concerning a Anita Hill story from 1991, and now Fiengold is up to the plate.

Alito v. Fiengold III

"How does the law restrict the president?" Fiengold is concerned that Alito was preped by some lawyers who were involved in supporting the NSA wiretapping.

Alito v. Shumer III

12:23 - Alito and Shumer are going back and forth about strict constructionism and how it applies to various issues. I'm just thankful that CAP and Vanguard are all but vanished completely.

Alito v. Sessions III

I didn't catch much of the Sesssion questioning, aside from his recognizing Alito's sister as a top level attorney and asking who was the better debater.

Alito v. Durbin III

"Revenge of the Strip Search" - it got mentioned again in relation to another case about a vetrenarian and the IRS.

Executive session till 2:30 PM ET

The Senate Hearings: Alito v. Roe

It is just after 5 pm and the hearings are still going. Russ Fiengold is questioning Alito on Roe, and it is very attack oriented. Why in heaven someone cares so much about an issue that is bad law when you go back and look at it, because the origional ruling had to do with the rights of physicans to perscribe treatment, not the moster of a woman's right to "choose". I want anyone who reads this to understand that Abortion and Roe are key here, they are one of the central constructs of these hearings - determining of Sam Alito would hear a case concerning and vote to overturn Roe. Various Republican senators on the Judicary comittee have stated as such, and it is obvious as these hearings are watched that Democrats on the commitee seek to trip, trap, and pigieon hole "Teflon Sam"

Chuck Shumer, of all people makes the comment that "oh we have limited time" as he continually intertupts Alito and tries to control the conversation as he continues to drone on like Charlie Brown's teacher. Hearings such as these confirm to me the love/hate relationship I have with Washington - I love the city, I love being there, but I hate watching things like this happen. It is this deep rooted dislike of beloviating and deception that drives me to want to understand the system so I can help to change it.

Shumer is now going on again about CAP, just like all the other Democratic Senators on the committee. Wanting to know Alito's "state of mind in 1985". One thing that is ceritan to be praised about Alito is his patience and his endurance of such people. I commend him and see that as a trait worth attempting to emulate. Praise God Shumer is done.

Alito v. Cornyn

Another great Repubican who is once again taking his time to bolster and defend that which Alito has done, having asnwered 431/441 questions, or 98 percent. This is in direct counter to what Democrats have said about Alito being unresponsive. *The truth of it has already been stated* Cornyn has said that Alito is his own person, not a "Scalito" - clone of Justice Scalia.

Apparently, Mrs. Alito was in tears and left the room as Sen. Lindsay Grahm apologized for the conduct of the Democrats on the committee earlier today...

Big Story with John Gibson and Judge Napolitano break...

The Saga continues: Alito v. Senate

I've had some technical trouble in trying to get blogger back up to continue chronicling the hearings, but we're back. The speech by the POTUS was excellent, be sure to try and find it online. I really appreciate that Bush is trying to connect with the American people on this issue, educating us on things from his perspective, in terms of Iraq and the GWOT, the NSA issue, economy, and others. Viva Bush.

On to the hearings. Alito is currently being drilled by Sen. Kohl once again on his comments in 1985 on abortion and Robert Bork and the things that Bork stood for that Alito appreciated or not so.

Joe Biden has already been up for his second round and the dead horses of CAP and the eithics of Vanguard were revisited. Many things have been repeated again and again today that need not be - Democrats using it for attack and wanting to trip and trap "teflon Sam" and the Republicans doing their best to give him a fair shake and allow him to explain and defend himself.

Kohl is finished and Specter is dealing with the Kennedy/CAP issue...

Alito v. Dewine

Dewine is up, having discussed ADA and is now dealing with Antitrust issues. Talking about companies selling things in bundles (using the example of a 3M case and it's scotch tape). To me, this is reminicent of Microsoft and the Internet Explorer.

3:10 - Dewine is now talking about judges legislating, due process, and search and seizure. This sounds alot like the "strip search issue" from yesterday but it has not been couched in such terms.

3:15 - Free Speech is the current issue. Stories of not being allowed to protest, not pass out bible stories, and limited on when and where to display signs on their own property. Dewine is also discussing comerical speech, and wants to know what Alito's position is.

Alito v. Fienstien

Fienstien, after applauding Alito for the Wash Post headline "Alito will keep an open mind" has launched into a line of questioning that Specter used on Roberts, questioning that deals with Roe and Casey. Her bottom line is that of "do you see the abortion issue as one settled by the courts and cannot be overturned?" Alito won't go for that, as he just said, "if settled means, don't come into my courtroom because I've made my decision and won't read your brief and hear your arguement, then I don't consider something settled" (and that, in my opnion, is how Fienstien sees things).

It is here that I am going to halt for now, as Jeff Sessions is up for questioning Alito. There are other things that need to be done.

And we're back after the break from the Galactic Senate...

Alito V. Patrick Lahey II

The exchange here is currently focusing on war power and picking between a discent between O'Connor (who Pat perfers) and Thomas (who Pat does not) - an attempt to pigon. It seems to be more of an executive power discussion now - an issue that has been beaten over the last few days like a dead horse, all because certian members on the commitee want to try and trip up Judge Alito, where as right now he's "teflon covered"

Alito v. Hatch II

Hatch is continuing to bolster Alito by directly countering the claim by democrats that Alito is being evasive and unresponsive, yet Hatch came back and said that out of 300+ questions yesterday from 15 senators, Alito felt he could not answer 15 or so, 5% of the questions.

Hatch has also bolstered Alito against the charges from Lefty interest groups, by allowing him time to defend himself as it were against these charges, including "deciding against workers and the little guy" - this was something that was covered yesterday, and today, and it was Sen. Coburn that cited 8-10 examples in which Alito did decide on the side on the "little guy". Hatch once again defended Alito against the "Vanguard issue.

Alito v. Teddy II

Here we go again. Kennedy is continuing to badger Alito on the Vanguard issue and his ethics, as well as the "initial period of service" and defining the length of that service. As if executing a one-two punch, Kennedy has launched into an attack on CAP one of the alumni orgs at Princeton University and Alito's membership to it.

Alito: Senator I have testified to everything I recall in relation to this matter, and all these things that you attest to are nothing that I identified with.

As a personal aside, Judge Andrew Napolitano, a analyst on Fox News and classmate of Alito, who (Napolitano) is also a founding member of CAP, stated yesterday that the creation of CAP was in order to defend ROTC, not for these other things that Kennedy is accusing Aliot of, and this is why Alito joined, out of concern for ROTC's standing at Princeton. These comments rieceived recognition from Sen. Coburn this morning during his first round.

12:39 pm - Kennedy is now asking for a vote as to submit a subpoena to get the records concerning CAP, and Specter and Kennedy are getting a bit heated about it. The issue has been resolved and now it's Grassley's turn.

Alito v. Grassley II

Grassley, using a football analogy, is restating the idea that Alito is untouchable and in my own words, "Teflon Sam". He is continuing to defend Alito by bringing about the other side of the issues discussed and giving Alito a chance to clarify and defend himself

Lunch break and speech by the POTUS...

Alito Hearings - Episode III

*For what transpired before I began blogging this morning, check Captain's Quarters

The Senate is back at it today with Judge Alito. Right now it is about 10:40 am. Tom Coburn, one of my favorite Senators, is talking with Alito about using foreign law to interpret the Constitution - something that was asked by Senator Kyle yesterday, and Alito once again stands by his idea of not using foreign law on the SCOTUS to interpret the Constitution. Prior to Coburn discussing things with Alito, Sam Brownback, another favorite, discussed marriage and the protection of it with Alito, as they agreed that it needs to be protected. Roe has also been discussed in a negitive context this morning by both Brownback, and now Coburn (which would be expected from one who is a Christian/Conservative/Medical Doctor.

Alito v. Coburn

Abortion - Coburn entered into the record a study that lasted 35 years, from New Zeeland, in which 600 women were followed and the ill health and physcological effects of an abortion noted and recorded.

"Why do you?" - Coburn just asked Alito why he wants the job. Alito sees it as a chance to make a contribution to the country, to serve it. The SCOTUS has a important role to play, esp. in excerciseing restraint, the only real check that exists.

"What's Important to Sam Alito?" Alito is discussing different case types, immigration, disability, discrimination, ect. and what goes through his head.

2nd Round has begun

Alito v. Specter II

Alito and Specter have been going back and forth in reguards to the balance of power between the Courts and the Court's ability to restrict the power of Congress. Spector stated that he does not appreciate the court seeing congress as "uneducated school children" and spoke about legislation that is currently being decided as to allow Congress to defend it's own cases before the SCOTUS, instead of the Solicitor General doing so.

On break right now, be back soon...same bat web address

The SCOTUS Hearing Saga: The Last Class for the Day?

5:04 - Alito and Finegold are discussing the seperation of powers and the wiretapping/NSA/FISA issues.

5:06 - Alito and Finegold are discussing the case of Nixon's attroney general and the desire for immunity (once again). Alito once again defends himself

5:21 - Fiengold and Alito are now going back and forth about the Vanguard issue, as it would appear Fiengold is attempting, unsucessfully, to ensare Alito on this issue.

Alito v. Grahm

5:25 - Grahm makes a crack about Alito's lifetime appointment and comming before the court on the Abramoff issue, which garnished much laughter

5:27 - Grahm and Alito begin talking about the GWOT and detaining terrorists and enemy combatants.

5:30 - Grahm is comming at it with a very proactive stance, while Alito is being somewhat evasive...

5:42 - who is better suited on intellegence issues, the military or a judge?

Alito - The judicary does not have expertise here, but the issue does come up. The courts do not have expertise in military and foreign affairs, this must be considered.

Senator Grahm is continuing to question Alito, as Special Report comes on and the live coverage of the Alito hearings in my living room has ended.

Tomorrow, same bat time, same bat web address...

In the interm, check out Captain's Quarters and The Political Teen who have a more "boots on the ground/closer to the battle" perspective of the Alito hearings...go get em guys!

Sam Alito and the Senate Hearings: Return of the Judge

The hearings have commenced again, and I am picking it up 5 or so minuites into the afternoon session.

Kyle v. Alito

2:20 - Kyle and Alito are talking about different cases, dealing with once again, search and seizure (the 4th Ammendment) with the overarching idea being the refutation of the idea (put forth by Biden and Kennedy) that Alito bows to the executive branch and its powers.

2:25 - Now they are touching once again on the discrimination issue, that may even be tied to the CAP issue as well. The bottom line here is that there have been numerous cases in which Alito did indeed come down on the side of discrimination, saying that the plaintiff was indeed being discriminated against.

2:30 - Kyle and Alito goback and forth about a couple of cases he decided.

2:34 - Alito v. Kohl

Kohl is citing examples of laws that have come down over the years thanks to a "broader interpreted Constitution"

2:47 - Alito and Kohl are discussing Alito's inspiration when it comes to law, examining Warren court decisions that he disagreed with (according to a 1985 quote) - reaportionment and "one person, one vote"

2:49 - Traditional Value: "What is a traditional value and who decides what a traditional value is?" - Kohl

Alito: "A traditional value is that of living safely where you live, raising your family, and following one's concience"

2:50 - Abrotion: Casey v. Planned Parenthood - Regulating and undue burden.

2:55 - Reaportionment/One Person, One Vote - redictricting and the desire for congressional and legislative districts to be equal in population, according to Alito this made no sense in the middle of a decade when population levels had changed.

2:58 - Family and Medical Leave Act - Alito puts forth that the issue in his case was different than the case cited by Kohl: Hibbs. In Hibbs there was a violation of Constitutional provisions. Yet in Alito's case Chitister, there was no violation - as concluded by the entire panel and 7 other circuits.

3:00 - Bush v. Gore - Alito could not comment unless it had been brought before him directly

Alito v. Dewine

3:03 - DeWine is attempting to set the record strait on Alito and defend the decisons that Alito has made, directly opposite of the charges that others on the commitee are making.

3:10 - Vanguard, from another angle. Vanguard was technically part of the suit and a defendent, but not in the same manner that the public would consider. All vanguard was asked to do was "who do I give the money to?" "for the sake of the process I hope we can put these issues behind us, this is about...what kind of judge would you be on the SCOTUS?"

3:11 - Courts v. Congress on Congressional Power. Dewine calls this a "frightening trend" as shown by various ADA cases. "What is the judicary's role in fact finding?"

Alito - Congress is due great respect in these matters

3:18 - DeWine - What can congress do or not do under the spending clause?

Alito: There must be clear and fair notice in terms of what a state is agreeing to, those standards would be applied to future precident.

3:20 - Roe as Precident/Super/Super Duper - DeWine disagrees and only has found 4 actual cases out of the 38 cited as having been directly deat with by the courts. He states that things are different now, the plaintiff wants it overturned, and we know much more medically now then we did then, trimesters and all. DeWine states that Blackmun "trusted his gut" on this issue.

3:23 - Discussion of Curcuit splits. Alito says that they are unfortunate but do happen. DeWine stipulates that the Supreme Court could assist with this by taking on more cases than they do now.

3:30 - Pornography

DeWine puts forth that it is lesser free speech because it does not contribute to the public debate and just hurts those that it touches, but reguardless, the courts have struck down many congressional attempts at safewgaurding people from it. Alito says that things need to be worked out further to keep people from it, but it is harder, as children have a greater aptitude towards computers and pron is quickly available online at a conputer.

3:35 - the Cert pool - Alito would acess the stuation once confirmed.

Alito v. Fienstien

3:37 - The Commerce Clause and Lopez - as it is pressing as a issue and in future cases, Alito cannot say much, as it might come before the court.

3:38 Rybar - a gun case involving being indited on a count of unlawful posession of a sub-machine gun. Fienstien cites an Alito decision and says that it appears that he wanted to follow precident.

3:40 - discussion as much as there can be one, on Lopez and interstate commerce. Alito states that the very owning of a machine gun has an effect on interstate commerce.

3:49 - Abortion and Roe - Fienstien asks for examples of special cases where Stare Decisis would be over turned, as an overruling of prior precident. "What special circumstance would there need to be to overturn Roe?"

Alito - If the rule has proven to be unworkable or changes in how things are in the real world. States that there is a right to privacy that is Constitutionally protected.

Fienstien - In Casey you decented, saying that there should be spousal notification, as you stated that generally it is single/unmarried indiviuals who get abortions. A women has a right to choose and in a 1985 memo you wrote to overturn Roe, what about precident then?

Alito: I didn't advocate overturning Roe.

Fienstien: Casey again...

Alito - Idon't equate an adult woman with a minor

Fiensstien: Wiretapping, Spying, and FISA. Great concern because of electronic survailence towards americans and foreigners.

Alito: Case law under 4th ammendment requires a warrant, but there are circumstances where that things might be different.

Alito v. Sessions

4:07 - Sessions concerned, as DeWine is, with the attacks on Alito that have been made. "Please explain how you do things as a judge on your curcuit"

Alito - we have an adversary system where both sides can state their case. Both sides can present arguments that have a bearing on the case, judges get to read the briefs, both sides are assured a stong presentation. All of this is read and oral arguments are made. I come to it with a general idea of how the case shoud be decided, however I keep an open mind. A final conclusion is not reached until the entire process has taken place.

Sessions asked a question in re: to what happens before Alito sees a case (what happens in the lower courts)

4:20 - Alito and Sessions are discussing interstate commerce.

4:21 - Sessions is now asking questions about a memorandum that Alito wrote in '85 about the government filing as a friend of the court, and that he was doing his job as the best he could as an advocate, inso doing "disagreeing" with President Regan and General Meese.

4:27 - Sessions states that he believes that the courts have been wrong and dismissive when it comes to Roe.

4:28 - small discussion about Alito's salary and who can alter it, including a good laugh.

4:30 - Conservatives can be activists too (according to Sessions). Alito agrees, that an activist is one who desires to superceede the Constituton.

4:33 - Alito: do not look at the decisions of foreign courts to interpret our Constitution, for it gives no insight into American Constitutional issues

4:35 - Public officers need to abide by the Constitution as to foster public trust and not interpret things on their own.

4:37 - Return of the strip search: Alito was looking at the case of the officers being sued for civil damages, not insomuch the search itself. The magistrate was supporting exaclty what the officers had done in terms of the search

Same Bat-time, Same Bat web-address...after this 20 minuite punditry by our sponsor FOXNew's Brit Hume and Chris Wallace.

Sam Alito and the Senate - Episode 2.1

Back at it again...

Kennedy v. Alito

Kennedy is talking with Alito about the "Vanguard Issue" again, despite the fact that Hatch already discussed it and inoculated Alito to a degree. Kennedy totally over-looked the issues that Hatch discussed with Alito on Vanguard, and just barreled on through. Kennedy is now talking about the Bush Administration and the Tourture issue, wanting to know if Alito will "check the President when he has gone too far" and is "concerned that you (Alito) will not be that kind of Justice" - citing both Berger and O'Connor among others (both of those Justices that tend to vote left of Center), because back in '85 Alito phrased that he was favorable to the executive branch.

Kennedy is about to move on to another issue, but not before making sure he doesn't get stymied on his time (even to the point of moving the clock so he can see it). Kennedy is now delving deeper into the "executive branch issue". He is now talking about a case where US Marshalls who were tapped to go to a farm and evict the tennants, using force, too much according to Kennedy, their conduct being "gustapo like" according to a fellow judge on Alito's circuit at the time that he heard the case. Kennedy also stated that Alito "took the case from the jury" and decided it, not allowinging the farmers a trial by their peers.

In Alito's reply he is bringing out facts of the case that Kennedy has not touched...

Case II: "Strip search strikes back" - Kennedy is bringing up the issue again, as Layhe did, citing again and again how Alito and Michael Chertoff (current DHS Dir.) disagreed. Alito is talking about the issues of this case and how the affidavit and warrents were incorporated, saying that such a incorporation authorized the searching of people on the premisise because of the hiding of drugs.

3rd Circuit Rulings - "Not in a vaccum". Kennedy just summed up Alito's "alligence to the executive branch" and has moved on to the connected issue of tourture in light of the Senate's anti-tourture law and how the President "gutted" this law that he signed, in private. Kennedy is talking about "control over independent agencies" by the "unitary executive" and the tourture issue.

Sen. Specter is now giving Alito the chance to clarify the "gains and losses" point in the Vanguard issue, and Alito stated once again that there was little to know chance he could have gained anything.

Alito v. Grassley

Sen. Chuck Grassley opened much as he did yesterday, saying that his view of Alito "is much more positive" than others happen to hold. Grassley is quickly recapping what has been discussed already, and is going to bring up some things that have arisen against Alito from the Left interest groups in reguards to ethics. Grassley is once again discussing the ABA and their resolution that Alito is "Unanimously Qualified" as a judge. There are also resolution from five leading ethicists that Alito is certainly qualified as a man of integrity with a great example to follow, good things for a SCOTUS judge to exemlify. (The comical part of it all is the signs that are being held up and viewed by the news cameras. Grassley calls the leftist claims an attack to "tar and blame" him.

From Grassley: "Judge Alito, do you belive that the Executive Branch

should have unlimited and unchecked power?" Alito: "Absolutely not"

From Grassley: "Do you belive that the President is above the Law?" Alito: "Absolutely not!"

Grassley: "What is the position of a Judge in a democratic society?"

Alito: "Our government has a structure that everyone has to follow...one that protects people's rights...and enforces the laws."

Alito on personal politics: "Judges have to keep their own view out of

interpreting statutes and the Constitution The framers gave Judges lifetime tenure for a reason, so that they would be insulated from making decisions dependent on the way the political wind is blowing"

Alito: Judges have to respect Constitutional restraints...and engage in a process of asking themselves "should we bve doing this?" The Judicary not a law making body, that's for the Legislature. There are important provisions of the constitution that are not put in ceritan terms..."

Factors that affect the interpretation of the constitution - Judicial Review. Judges have to look to certian things. First impression, text, and precident.

Grassley: majority rule and indiviual freedoms...tension that needs to be resolved, what about silent majority?

Alito: there is tension, and the judicary has the power to execute Judical Review, as the legislature makes the law, the judicary reviews it. For silent majority, look to the text and to precident.

Grassley: what about the approach where the Judicary can create a constitution that is viable for today?

Alito: the Judicary cannot do that, the constitution is an enduring document.

Grassley: Should the courts fill vaccums left in the law by congress?

Alito: The courts are to enforce the statutes that the Congress passes, not to add or take away.

Grassley: Are their circumstances where the courts should diviate from the idea of deciding what is before them?

Alito: Focus on what is before you. If you speak in broader terms, you run the risk of saying things you do bot mean to do.

Grassley: Is the court within it's power to correct a "bad law"?

Alito: No it is not within their power. Sometimes though, when a unjust result comes about, the courts can go back and take asecond look. Occasionally, something will come along that when applied things come out badly in the real world and has unforseen consequences, it can advise as far as if it is going to be revised.

Alito: it is not within the Judicary to invade the athority of Congress

Alito v. Biden

Biden is puzzled. He is now talking about the Concerned Alumni of Princeton issue. Was Alito aware of the other issue going on in 1972? (The effort to prevent the entrance of minorities and women). Biden was sure aware because "he spoke on campus at the time". Once again, Biden brings up the issue of O'Conner and her swing seat. It is here that my father, who is watching with me, asks this question: why is she the swing seat? Is it because they vote in a certian order and O'Connor always votes last?

Biden has stated that O'Conner "fully understood the arena of discrimination...so I am going to ask you about discrimination"

Alito: the judical process has to be attentive when it comes to discrimination. The case that was cited here was one where there was no direct evidence of discrimination and people can disagree on such things,

as my colleuges and I did on this issue."

Biden and Alito are continuing to go back and forth on the discrimination issue. In the current case that is being discussed, along side Reeves v. Sanderson Plumming, Alito stated that O'Connor agreed with his analysis.

Alito and Biden have continued along the discrimination route, and did not have enough time to deal with the Planned Parenthood v. Casey

Alito v. Kyle

I missed the beginning of this due to laptop problems, but there has been a break for lunch till 2:15, so I'll be back at it in about an hour.

SCOTUS Hearings for Sam Alito - Episode II

I'm blogging from my living room this morning as I watch the Alito hearings live on Fox News (once again, for those not acessible to a TV, Fox is running them live online).

As of this moment 10:47 am, Alito has talked with Sen. Specter of PA, Sen. Layhe of VT, and is now talking to Sen. Hatch of UT.

With the Senator from VT, there was discussion of NSA and wiretapping, "administrations above the law" (is the administration above the law and can they counter act the Foregin Intelegence Security Act) cases that have to do with strip searches on kids and women (the case is one in which the man who was originally searched had a MO of hiding drugs on others that happen to be on the premisise so the officers wanted to search others on the premisie and were allowed to do so). The Senator fromVT, jumped all over this and saw the strip searching of a 10 year old as the sticking point. In addition they discussed CAP (Concerned Alumni of Princeton). Here, Alito put on a job application that he was a proud member of such an organization, one that apparently was concerned with the entrance into Princeton of women and minorities. Here's Alito clarified that his concern was that of the "booting" of ROTC from the campus during the Vietnam Era because of anti-war sentidments. The sticking point here, obviously, was that of minorities and women (comming from the VT Senator).

Alito is now talking with Orin Hatch about his instances where he decided against the Executive branch, parrying the blow that came yesterday from Democrats on the commitee, saying that Alito was in favor of the Executive Branch, having worked under Edwin Meese at the Justice Dept. during the Regan Admin. Just prior to this, Hatch and Alito discussed his conduct with the "Vanguard Mutual Fund Issue, bringing to light his high moral and ethical character and how he went way out of his way to remain impartial on a panel that saw a case involving Vanguard, where Alito was on the panel after he said he would not be. Having realized the mistake, he stepped down and advocated a brand new panel be formed, one that saw the issue and ruled the same as the panel that Alito was on.

11:05 - Hatch and Alito just discussed "standards of review", and how such abilities that the court has to review things in previous cases is limited.

11:05 - 15 Minuite Recess...

More to come, same "bat time" same "bat web address"

A New Hope: SCOTUS and Sam Alito

The War for the SCOTUS begins today, as the Senate opens it's doors for the Alito Hearings. FOXNews is going to be streaming the event live online, so watch there if you aren't near a TV. Townhall has a great round-up of links at "Alito Central" Michelle Malkin also has a short list of bloggers who will be in DC today to attend a blogger event at the RNC. it sounds as if blogging on Alito will be a solid part of the diet there. I can only hope Alito will perform as well as Roberts did in September.

The Republic and the Future of the Galaxy...

The last few days have been an interesting indeed, both news wise and personally. I've riecently retuned from California and the funeral of one of the most amazing men I've ever had the privledge of knowing - my Great Grandfather, Jack Cochrane. I've no doubt that his going home was a welcome transition in his life. To hear his stories and to wax theological with him from time to time, not to mention play him in gin, was always an expirence - one that I will greatly miss.

Meanwhile, Israel finds itself in a crisis of leadership due to Ariel Sharon's medical problems. For the best on that, as always, check out Joel Rosenberg's blog. He has a great post that is a few days old now on "what to watch for" Personally, I hope that Benjamin Netanyahu can get back in the game and become Prime Minister again, as much as I disagree with the Krauthammer position on this (as he is a Sharon fan). I'm not a fan of Israel giving land away. Granted that idea is not helped by media's spin on riecent comments made by Pat Robertson on the 700 Club. Relitivly unconsidered I think is the comment itself - God says woe to anyone who would give His land away. You see, this is certianly not someone saying that Sharon is being punished my having these medical problems, these problems are a fact of life for a 77 year old individual. All Robertson is doing is stating a position that God takes in His Word, that's it. Granted the Media won't jive with that espically after the Hugo Chavez comments last year, but theis is a seperate occasion; a fact the media would choose to ignore.

What all this could mean for our beloved republic and the rest of the world, time will tell, and shortly I think.

Atomics, Terrorism, Israel, and Society

Chuck Colson has another great article up at Townhall, about what "could be"; I just hope his vision never comes true.

The sad part about the article is that I could see it happening some day if Congress doesn't unite behind the GWOT and what our Armed Forces are accomplishing in Iraq. I can't imagine how demoralizing it must be for our troops to hear reports of how the MSM treats the war over here in America, while they are fighting and dying for a cause they believe in, one that all of America should believe in: the spread of demoracy and freedom. For this situation we have liberal democrats in Congress to thank; sometimes I honestly wonder if they want our country to fall apart and bow it's knee in submission to the rest of the world...

Iran continues to be an issue on the word stage with their desire to continue "enrichment research"

Seriously, does Iran think she can fool the entire planet into thinking they don't want to have nuclear weapons? If she thinks she can, then the anti-Israel rhetoric that is spewing out of the mouth of Iran's new president sure is not helping. In the least, the deals that Iran is brokering with Russia make the whole situation look real shady. I am sure that the author of "The Ezekiel Option", Joel Rosenberg, is following this with great interest.

The way Israel makes it's decisions in reguards to fighting terror is someting I find rather facinating

I find myself agreeing with most of this article, but there is one thing that give me pause:

1. The "International Test" - it is here that "International Moral Standards" are considered; what are these standards and do they change? After 9/11, the international community was all too eager to assist the USA in hunting down and killing those responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers, mainly the Al Queda network and their protectors, the Taliban (thanks to Article 5 of the document that governs NATO, saying that an attack on one ally is an attack on all and they had no choice but to honor that). By their actions in support of the US, one would gather that the "International Moral Standard was met, even if it is unknown, because this was (and still is) a war on terrorists, and if that standard was not met, no action would have been taken.

However, in the spring of 2003, when the rumblings and wispers of war with Iraq finally materialized into something tangible and the USA went to war, there was a large section of the international community that would not join with us, (for whatever reason, politically motivated or whatever else) in effect saying that this part of the GWOT did not meet the "international moral standard". What were the "international moral standards" at this time in history, and did they change, were they somehow altered, as to be different than they were on 9/12 when the world rallied around the USA and said "we're with you"?

Today in Iraq an arm of that same evil and deadly network, Al Queda, still operates and yet the USA is condemmed by many on the international stage as being unilateralist, having gone into a war they "should not have" and members of the US Congress even serve up condemnation on a regular basis while the organization that the world "so agressivly" wanted to stamp out after 9/11 still works against them in a country crying for freedom, freedom that the US and our "coalition of the willing" gladly and sucessfully have imparted.

So again I ask, "what were the standards, and did they change; as to serve up condemnation against those comitted to doing what was right?"

The "PyrE curve"...very interesting...

I find it interesting that Pinkerton puts forth as the solution to the "PyrE Curve" (but does not appear to condone) a "all-knowing and all-powerful government" in which yes, the greatest casuality to the "Curve" would be freedom. Someday, maybe sooner than we think, a government molded after that idea may indeed rise. The fact that it is being tossed around now by bright minds is frightening.