Bailing on the Constitution? By Todd Gaziano

One of the principal benefits of the constitutional separation of powers is that citizens know which branch to hold accountable when something goes wrong. It is symptom of the separation of powers sloppiness of modern times that instead of writing detailed laws that the president is then responsible to execute, Congress delegates vast new authority to the executive branch to “fix” he problem de jure and then tries to invent new ways to micromanage and nitpick the exercise of the authority. Such a power-sharing relationship is the exact opposite of the constitutional separation of powers perfected by the Framers of our Constitution.

The outline of the compromise bill seems to do very little to guide the Treasury secretary’s almost limitless discretion on what financial or other debt he may buy, for what purposes, to whom he may sell it, and on what terms. Instead, congressional negotiators simply added the tools of modern micromanagement: a quasi-unconstitutional inspector general (depending on how “independent” he is when the ink is dry), extra-special GAO audits and reviews, multiple layers of specially burdensome congressional reporting, and a questionable-sounding, whiz-bang oversight board.

James Madison would not approve. It’s a classic recipe for fingerpointing if something goes wrong and an equally worrisome precedent even if the immediate “crisis” abates. I prefer the Constitution.

— Todd Gaziano is the director of the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
I prefer the constitution too.
Jenny Hatch

John Glenn (DEMOCRAT) said this —– It should make us all think a little:

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That’s just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq .
When some claim that President Bush shouldn’t have started this war, tell them the following :

Continue reading “Thoughts on War and Presidents” →

The kicker in this article was here:

“At one point, Wilders presented what he called a lesson in “Islam 101.” It went like this: “Islam is not a religion. It’s a political ideology. If you want to compare it then the only thing you can compare it to is communism. It’s a totalitarian ideology.” Lest there be any misunderstanding, Wilders added that there was no such thing as moderate Islam. “Sure, there are moderate Muslims,” he said. “But there is no moderate Islam.”

Kindred themes feature in his film “Fitna.” To say that Wilders does not present Islam as a religion of peace is to put it mildly. “Fitna” juxtaposes graphic footage of Islamic terrorism – including the 9-11 attacks, the Madrid train bombings, and the beheading of Nicholas Berg – with Koranic verses and clips of Islamic clerics preaching murder of non-Muslims and Jews. Low-budget and unabashedly one-sided – Wilders seems uninterested in the possibility that there is more to foundational Islamic texts than murderous calls to arms – it is not exactly a polished work, something Wilders readily concedes. “I’m a lawmaker not a moviemaker,” he says. But like its creator, the film is nothing if not direct.”

<embed id="VideoPlayback" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=3369102968312745410&hl=en&fs=true&quot; style="width:400px;height:326px" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always"
I have long believed that the terrorists are using religion to cover their communism from the blind in the west. Arafat was a revolutionary marxist and only agreed to tone down the political rhetoric when convinced that it was the best way to fool the west.
I pray for Geert Wilders, that he will be protected from harm and able to stand up for Freedom and Democracy in Europe.
Jenny Hatch
Jenny Hatch

Click on this link to read about these families.

“The U.S. Court of Claims is hearing a series of arguments from parents who charge that vaccines gave their children autism.

The claims court is considering arguments from 4,900 parents who say that the vaccines produced autism or neurological problems in their previously normal, healthy children. While the disorder normally develops before the age of three, many of the parents claim that their older children only developed the condition after being vaccinated.

In order to deal with the large number of claims, the court’s Office of Special Masters ordered lawyers for the families to select three test cases for each of the three vaccine-autism arguments that have been put forward.

The group currently being heard claims that autism was produced by a preservative thimerosal, which contains mercury. The vaccine caused mercury to build up in children’s brains, the lawyers say, reversing their normal mental development when brain cells became chronically hyperactive in order to try and purge the metal.

Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that is known to cause a variety of developmental and brain problems, especially in children.

“In some kids, there’s enough of it that it sets off this chronic neuroinflammatory pattern that can lead to regressive autism,” attorney Mike Williams said.

In the past, many children’s vaccines were made with the thimerosal. Although the FDA denies that the thimerosal in vaccines is dangerous, it ordered the chemical phased out of childhood vaccines in 1999. It is currently found only in adult vaccines and in certain multi-dose flu vaccines that are also given to children.

Another group of parents, which went before the court in 2007 and has yet to hear a verdict, argued that autism was produced not only by thimerosal, but also by the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, which does not contain the chemical. A third group, to be heard in September, alleges that only the MMR vaccine produced autism in their children.”

Jenny Hatch