Pirate ‘Duped’, Time to Make Sure Others Don’t Make Same Mistake

The New York Daily News reports that the captured pirate now in New York City didn’t find the booty he was looking for in the end.

He shed some tears, which I’m sure is something not permitted in the Pirate Code.

In all seriousness, his mother said the following:

She said her son should not be held responsible for the Maersk hijacking.

“He was brainwashed. People who are older than him outwitted him, people who are older than him duped him,” she said.

“I cried when I saw the picture of him,” Hassan said of the arrest photo. “Relatives brought a copy of the picture to me. Surely he is telling himself now, ‘My mother’s heart is broken.'”

Surely he should be worrying about more than his mother’s heart.   Here is where the rubber meets the road; and while I’m certain he is younger man and I am also certain he was probably convinced that heading out to become a pirate would be a great thing to do for fun and profit, I am also certain that the best way to dissuade others from following suit is to hammer him to the wall and make sure everyone knows.

The longer people think they have an easy way to make millions of dollars in ransom, the longer people will take ships, crews, and goods.  The idea that they are just misunderstood people trying to get ahead in an area of the world where nothing is too good at all is as foolish as saying a homeless person can take money from someone walking by since, hey, he needed it more.  I know there are some liberals who do believe the above statement, and to be sure, I spend enough time focusing on that idiocy, so for now we should focus on pirates.

Convict this felon as an adult, make an example out of him, and have our navy actively engaging pirates and suspected pirates until the seas are clean.   If you want to carry guns and act tough and threat people with violence and death, then be prepared for someone to call you on it and take you at your word: kill or be killed.   The situation has escalated, and the only way the US Navy can lose is if the White House or lawyers hamper them.

GO NAVY!

Texas!

The Governor of Texas has spoken!

There’s a lot of different scenarios,” Perry said. “We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.”

Texas is a delightful place where people are not afraid to speak their minds, nor are they afraid to dissolve ties when those ties are more like shackles than willful and mutually beneficial connections.  People, all people, need to remember that the United States implies the State are united for a common cause.   As we move forward in time it becomes harder and harder to see what that common cause is.   The Constitution, this document, is an agreement amongst the states and it has less and less place in America, and with that, the union becomes less and less viable.

Ginsburg Explains Why She is not Fit to be a Justice

Ruth Bader Ginsburg professed that ““I frankly don’t understand all the brouhaha lately from Congress and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law.”  The article then states that [s]he added that the failure to engage foreign decisions had resulted in diminished influence for the United States Supreme Court, as if the Supreme Court has any responsibility to be engaged in foreign decisions.  The Canadian Supreme Court, she said, is “probably cited more widely abroad than the U.S. Supreme Court.” There is one reason for that, she said: “You will not be listened to if you don’t listen to others.”

Again, the question must be asked where, in the Constitution, does it say that the US Supreme Court must weight foreign designs, decisions, or influences?    It would seem members of our highest court in the land do not understand even the most simple of expectations:  Interpret American law based on American law.    This should not be a strange concept, there should be no confusion, and there should be no desire to be ‘popular’ overseas by having foreign courts cite our Supreme Court.    We should not expect others to listen to us because they have their own courts and their own laws, and their own legislatures to make new laws.   We should not listen to others because foreigners have no vested interest in the United States Constitution, they are not elected by the citizens of the United States, nor were they appointed by anyone from the United States.   Foreigners have no standing in our law, thus citing them is as daft as can be.

Continuing to give weight to foreign decisions she goes on,“The police think that a suspect they have apprehended knows where and when a bomb is going to go off,” she said, describing the question presented in the case. “Can the police use torture to extract that information? And in an eloquent decision by Aharon Barak, then the chief justice of Israel, the court said: ‘Torture? Never.’ ”  The message of the decision, Justice Ginsburg said, was “that we could hand our enemies no greater victory than to come to look like that enemy in our disregard for human dignity.” Then she asked, “Now why should I not read that opinion and be affected by its tremendous persuasive value?”

My question comes back, still unanswered:  Where in the Constitution does it talk about torture?   Cruel and unusual punishment is discussed, and that should be the limit.   What Israel decides is for Israel to figure out.  Citing Aharon Barak’s decision is worthless in the light of American law and has no persuasive value in the light of American laws on the books — which is what a justice should be looking at when formulating an opinion.  Why not cite Saudi law about stoning homosexuals?   To them stoning is not cruel or unusual, so is that of value when considering our laws?   Of course not and a former ACLU lawyer like Ginsburg would be crying bloody murder if it were used to persuade, and rightfully so since foreign law is not the product of civil debate in America and enacted into law by an elected legislature in America.  WORTHLESS.

With the election of liberals like President Obama we can look forward to more justices being concerned about how many foreigners cite their decisions in a world of seeminly fragile egos which need to be soothed by popularity contests instead of looking at the body American law in order to determine what is meant by, and what is consistent with, American laws.  How much longer will Wee the People permit our laws to be outsourced to foreign countries?

President Obama’s Method of International Relations

Giving DVDs usable in North America to the PM of Britain, Obama’s State Department’s inability to translate a ‘Reset Button’, as well as stating that The United Kingdom is just another nation… nothing special there are all signs of his ineptitude and all within the first hundred days.

While pushing away from, and then trying to get back in favor with, Britain Obama has been busy giving town hall speeches to Turks declaring that the United States does not consider itself a Christian or Jewish nation.   Strangely, the US does not have to define itself, nor let any individual define the US either.   When the vast majority of a country is of one form of faith then it is structured as such. The President should realize, unless he is too to understand that values always get translated into laws, ethics, and morality, then we are completely influenced by the largest single moral guide:  The Christian Bible.  Why? Because the majority of the people in the US is Christian.   Why has Iraq colored its laws in an Islamic frame?   Because the vast majority are Muslim.   This is not an insult or some sort of indictment; this is just a simple reality.  Why would someone need to backtrack and act like this is not the case unless that person is not happy with the current standing.   After 20 years of having Minister Wright as a moral lighthouse, perhaps I’d be turned from Christianity as well.

Obama also wants to get in bed with Cuba, cater to Venezuela, and make threats to North Korea with no plans of following through what so ever.   His cowardice and willingness to reverse so many US positions is giving more power to those who despise us.  This charity for our adversaries does go into the idea of spreading the wealth, but int his case it the wealth of international power and that is at the detriment of the United States.   His foolishness weakens the US, his stupidity makes it impossible for him to realize it, and his naivety makes him willing to give more away.

How much longer will Americans tolerate this?

Biden: Either Out of Touch or Out of Clues

Vice President Biden stated, “I would say to the protesters that unless we talk, unless we attempt to deal with this changed circumstance we find ourselves in, there is no solution. Things will only get worse.” This comment was in relation to the several thousand protesters who will be camped outside of the G20 meetings in London.   I do not find myself sympathizing much with these protestors because they have not been able to convey any message of meaning.  As reported, “The Put People First march was organised by a “rainbow alliance” of 150 trade unions, church groups and charities including ActionAid, Save the Children and Friends of the Earth. The theme was “jobs, justice and climate” and the message was aimed at the world leaders who will be gathering for the G20 summit here next week.”

Of course, anyone should be able to figure out that this not a ‘theme’, but three themes all jumbled together in a way to weakly link a lack of jobs, a lack of justice, and a changing climate to the ‘big bad rich nations’ and their ‘corporate goons’.  These people don’t like the way things are going, they haven’t like the way things have been going for quite some time and are interested in a completely different way… at least those not paid to be in attendence in order to boost numbers.

Vice President Biden should realize that their opinion will not change no matter what the results or decisions made in this conference; they do not like the fact that there even is a conference.  VP Biden comes off sounding weak and as if he is whining about there being a group of people who despise him and in fact, the idea of personal freedom.   Strangely, it is the unions and the environmentalists which his party woos during every election, and yet here his is offering up the weakest effort to explain what is going on to them.

We need to all remember the lack of effort and the false assumptions VP Biden works under: He assumes these people who are currently against him want the same ‘end game’ he does, he also assumes that talking it over will get them all neatly on the same page if they only would listen to good ole Joe.

Joe’d do well to listen, The Put People First march was organised by a “rainbow alliance” of 150 trade unions, church groups and charities including He said the march would have to mark the start of a more concerted movement to properly regulate financial institutions and invest in climate change solutions. “This is just the beginning of the prelude of the prologue. The forces of greed are very tenacious and just because we march up and down it won’t make a difference on its own.”

The protesters know this alone will do nothing to make the G20 people change, yet Biden thinks that if they only read the plans and proposals they’ll ‘see the light’.   This is very problematic and something that can be seen in the rhetoric not just with the Vice President, but also with the President: There is an idea, a false mind-set that assumes that talking and negotiation will make people see things your way, whether it is related to G20 protesters or talks with Iran, Venezuela, or even North Korea.  I do not think the modern Democratic Party understands that there are people out there who will never like or agree with the way we do things, and they will stop at nothing to first stop the spread of these ideas and then reverse the trend all the way up to and including destroying the United States.  These people do not want to hear your pathetic cries for diplomacy, unless it gives them more time to plan their own actions.

Not just Joe Biden, but the controlling body of the Democratic Party have lost contact with the realities of foreign policy and now send YouTube messages to foreign leaders or beg for protesters to give them a chance in a set of negotiations where the protesters will hate the outcome no matter what.

How much longer will ‘We the People’  permit these types to be elected and let them dictate the policy of this nation?

What, Obama Worry?

Initially there was a crisis, then President Obama was down-playing it all, and now he yucks it up.  In his 60 Minutes interview the President seemed quite content to laugh it all away:

His remarks came in a “60 Minutes” interview in which he was pressed by an incredulous Steve Kroft for laughing and chuckling several times while discussing the perilous state of the world’s economy.“You’re sitting here. And you’re— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he’s sitting there just making jokes about money—’ How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asks at one point. “Are you punch-drunk?” Kroft says.
“No, no. There’s gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama says, with a laugh.

The running ideas of comparing the situation to the one faced by Roosevelt fails on so many levels, and most obviously his current levity regarding putting $1 trillion of new currency into the financial world is not fit to compare to the actual Great Depression.

Hope and Change?   Change is all that’s left from the dollar bill I used to have, so I guess he can laugh it up with his ex-Fannie Mae multi-millionaire friends who now hold positions in his administration.   I guess he is laughing; he is laughing at us.

How much longer will you tolerate such elitist, out of touch, people in positions in power?  How much longer will America permit the Federal government to have and abuse all this power?

Slanted Media?

Is there anyone who still does not think there is a media bias in favor of President Obama?  The media has fallen in love with the idea of the Obama Presidency so much that are willing to ignore stories which may tarnish their own estimation of his pending greatness, and they will also bury any attempts by thier own people who decide to be critical.   This is the state of today’s media, this is the state of today’s political atmosphere.   Luckily our friends across the pond have not bought into this idiocy and they have not shirked their duties to report and inform both the positives (few and far between these days) and the negatives.

This article at the Telegraph is a good example of things you may or may not have heard about:

Just after he’s been sworn in by him, the newly-minted Vice President Joe Biden gets the name of Justice John Paul Stevens, “one of the great justices” of the Supreme Court, wrong by calling him “Justice Stewart”.

If the VPs name were Dan Quayle I know we’d still be hearing about this inability to get the name correct of someone who the VP thinks is a great justice.  Didn’t make the news?   Too inconsequential to bother reporting?  Perhaps.

Barack Obama jokes about Nancy Reagan having séances in the White House. He later called her to apologise after the AP noted that although she had consulted astrologers, “she did not hold conversations with the dead”.

I’m not a big believer in astrology, to be fair, but the usual habit of not speaking ill or mocking of former presidents or their families seems to be a lost art for modern Democrats.  Poor form for the new President.  Didn’t make the news?   Too inconsequential to bother reporting?  Perhaps.

Joe Biden forgets the “website number” for the White House internet site designed to show how TARP money is being spent.

This seems like a small error, but as I recall the Obama campaign railed against a technologically illiterate John McCain because he doesn’t send emails, and does not use the web until it was reported the reason being due to the injuries sustained while being tortured as a POW.   The media ran with the out of touch line, but when the truth as to why came out they were silent and simply dropped the angle.   What is Bidden’s excuse for 1) not knowing the web site for such a historically large bill,  and 2) not even knowing the correct term for the website — and please do not claim he was asking for the IP address.  Didn’t make the news?   Too inconsequential to bother reporting?  Perhaps.

A Marine One double. First, on his maiden Marine One trip Obama breaches protocol and makes life uncomfortable for an enlisted marine by shaking the the serviceman’s hand as he’s saluting his commander-in-chief, then – Gerald Ford, eat your heart out. Barack Obama bangs his head as he boards his helicopter.

I’m not so concerned with biffing his head, but when you become Commander-in-Chief, is it not worth your time to know some of the protocols and expectations of the position since you will be publicly interacting with members of the branches of the military which you now command?   The election was won in early November but he was never briefed, or just does not care?  Didn’t make the news?   Too inconsequential to bother reporting?  Perhaps.

Joe Biden tells his wife that he had the choice of being either Secretary of State or vice-president – an offer that was news to Obama aides and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when Jill Biden spilled the beans on Oprah.

A candid moment from the VPs wife results in…  nothing for the media.   Seems intriguing to see that such high level positions were being tossed around and that, evidently Joe was given pick before Hillary.   Any news-worthy items there?   I guess not.  Didn’t make the news out side of Oprah’s show?   Too inconsequential to bother reporting?  Perhaps.

Gordon Brown presents the new President with: a pen holder carved from the timbers of HMS Gannett, a sister ship of HMS Resolute; the commissioning certificate of HMS Resolute; and a seven-volume biography of Winston Churchill. In return, the Prime minister gets 25 DVDS, which don’t work in Britain.

This one is unforgivable.  This arrogance and inconsideration is topped off with a large dose of stupidity.  Let’s not forget also that a State Department official declared [t]he real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key. The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: “There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.”

These arrogant fools in the White House now want to equate the relationship we have with the United Kingdom to being on the same level as, and no more important than, our relationship with, say, Iceland?  I’m uncertain if this Administration is aware as to how many British soldiers have given their lives to honor the treaties and requests of the United States in overseas engagement.  What we have with the United Kingdom is special, and if the Democrats in power can not see that, then their worthless ideas of culrutal relativism are firmly in place.

How much longer are you willing to accept people like this as being the best possible candidates to represent us at the federal level?

Unelected Officials to have Authority of Company Payrolls?

The New York Times reports, “That proposal would, for instance, make it easier for the government to cancel bonus contracts like those given to executives at the American International Group which have stoked a political furor. Under the proposal, the Treasury secretary would have the authority to seize and wind down a struggling institution after consulting with the president and upon the recommendation of two-thirds of the Federal Reserve board.”

The Treasury secretary (unelected) would have the power to seize a ‘struggling’ institution after merely consulting (what does that mean?) with the president, and upon recommendation of two-thirds the Federal Reserve board (none of whom are elected).  Consultation with the president could mean something like, “Mr. President, I think I’d like to be the new CEO of Microsoft, and I think some other unelected bureaucrats agree.  The company is distressed in the estimation of the the Fed. because of the personal scandal involving the current CEO and since many of the government systems use Microsoft was their operating system, it is in the interest of both the public and the nation as a whole to seize.”

It would be sort of like a mini-UN worth of unelected elitists getting to call the shots, but unlike the UN these career bureaucrats would have the backing of US law to walk Federal Agents through the front door and by force of law (thus force of gun) remove executives and change the policies of private institutions.  Why?  All because the elected officials of Congress passed a corporate charity bill without actually knowing what it said.  So because the failed efforts of Washington have come home to roost and neither party can adequately blame the other the only logical answer is to blame private citizens.  And since this is a small enough group of private citizens who make substantially more money than most, they can play the Marxist class-warfare strategy and single out this minority group of citizens to shoulder the blame because the average American won’t seem to notice or care… at this time.

Only days after deciding to create in incredibly large amount of fresh currency does the same federal government now plot to control even more of the market in an effort, as usually, to protect us all.   Strange how protecting us always results in more federal authority and  more of  ‘We the People’ having to either ask permission or completely losing the freedom to simply do it on our own.    And you want these same people to have more authority over you and your freedoms?

Making more Dollars is not the Answer

Terence Corcoran recently wrote about how the United States is fabricating more currency in order to assist itself in buying back some outstanding debt.  At best, this is a silly as when people have tired to keep their credit card debt cycling from one card to another: yes, it works at first until no one wants to deal with how many lines of credit you have open and they offers stop coming.   Of course with the U.S. the ‘offers’ do not come from outside companies, but from our ability to mint or otherwise produce our own currency.  The obvious problem with this approach should be obvious: If when we had $100 floating as a total of US currency, $1 used to buy product A, and now there’s $200 out there, odds are the price of Product A will rise.   Perhaps product A will not rise to $2 due to the fact that the new increase of dollars isn’t spread evenly across those who may be willing to purchase product A, but it will rise accordingly to meet the demand.    It may rise MORE than expected as well if there is concern that more currency will be minted or that there may be a financial panic on the horizon due to this action.

Look to see how much banks begin to raise their rates as well if they see any chance of inflation on the horizon.  Part of their equation for lending is to make sure that they equal or beat the rate of inflation over the time of the loan and if this injection of currency throws off their projections then it will not matter how low the Fed makes any of their rates, the banks will adjust their own accordingly.

Of course, in the short term, this now reduces the amount of our own nation debt as a proportion of how much currency there is and since the government takes initial posession of the money it would be easier to pay downt he debt with this fresh currency, but as stated, once everyone knows exactly how much new currency there is and where that currency is headed all parties will adjust their terms accordingly — including rasing their rates against US debt or being unwilling to lend at all.   Odds are that it will not come to the extreme since the US is such a large consumer, but it is good to remember that we are also a debtor nation so while adds are not in favor of that happening, someone may do a call on us and force our hand.

What do the powers that be in Washington D.C. think about all this?   I’m uncertain that they have given it much thought.  Perhaps they are complicit in it as Mr. Corcoran suggests, “The AIG bonus firestorm is a diversion from real issues , but it puts the ghastly political classes who make U.S. law on display for what they are: ageing self-serving demagogues who have spent decades warping the U.S. political system for their own ends. We see the system up close, law-making that is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship.”

To close it seems most fitting to let Mr. corcoran have the final say, “Reform of health care, environmental policy, education, energy, banking, regulation — every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy has been put on alert for major change. Expansion of government spending, plunging the U.S. into unprecedented deficits, is without parallel. In economic policy, through regulation and control of energy output, financial services and monetary expansion, the U.S. government has embarked on a fundamental reshaping of America. It is designed, in short, to bring on the end of America.”

Speaker Pelosi calls law-breakers ‘Patriotic’, but to which nation?

Confused Speaker Nancy Pelosi decided to tell illegal that there were patriotic by coming out of hiding and joining her at a speaking engagement, “The speaker, condemning raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, referred to the immigrants she was addressing as “very, very patriotic.””

I want to clarify some things:

The Oath of Office for members of the House of Representatives:

“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Federal Law, as provided for under said Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act specifies exactly what is considered to be a legal, and thus illegal alien in this country and authorized the Attorney General to take appropriate measures to ensure that illegal aliens are apprehended, held, and then imprisoned / deported.  Congress passed this legislation and she, as a congressman is sworn to uphold it.  Calling those who break this law patriots, and her neglect at ensuring the law is followed is at the very least failing to uphold her oath, and at it’s worst is seditious.

As a citizen, I certainly would like to know to which nation Speaker Pelosi thinks these law-breakers are patriots?   Certainly not the one in which she is Speaker of the House, sworn to uphold and maintain the laws of the land.  It is one thing to disagree with a law, and as a member of Congress she has it within her power to change the law, it is a totally different thing to promote the breaking of the law and to go even further by condemning the U.S. Government for following the same law Congress has passed.  Is this the type of person to whom you want to give more of your money and freedom, to have more authority over you and your life?