Collected Thoughts

The Washington Dispatch ^ | October 29, 2003 | Paul M. Weyrich

[Scenic Sounds]

Every now and again I have several items I want to call to your attention. So here it goes:

Item One: Senator Wayne Allard (R-Co.), one of the most decent men serving in public life, has introduced the Religious Liberties Restoration Act (S 1558). The bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee where Sen. Arlen Specter (R.-Pa) holds the swing vote.

This measure is really a states’ rights measure via the Tenth Amendment. The Allard bill simply affirms that each state would have the right to display our national motto (In God We Trust), would be able to recite the Pledge of Allegiance with the words “under God” included, and would have the right to display the Ten Commandments.

The bill would only apply to public buildings, and that would include schools where the Pledge is most often recited.

The way this bill accomplishes its objectives is to withdraw jurisdiction on these matters from any court inferior to the Supreme Court. Had this bill been in force, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals would not have been able to issue their infamous decision declaring the Pledge unconstitutional. And in Alabama, the State Supreme Court could continue to display the Ten Commandments.

Of course I support the objectives of the bill, but in my view it is well worth consideration because of the precedent of removing courts from jurisdiction. That idea is one that deserves greater use. No less than the then-Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle passed a measure removing the jurisdiction of the lower courts regarding a matter which pertained mainly to South Dakota, so liberals will be hard pressed to claim that Allard is destroying the Constitution by this action. The Founders put this provision in the Constitution for precisely such matters to which this bill pertains. One would hope the Senate leadership would get on board this worthy cause.

Item two: Rep. Peter King (R-NY), no down-the-line conservative he, nevertheless has introduced H.R. 931. His bill would repeal bi-lingual voting requirements. He would restrict Clinton’s Executive Order 13166, which requires that when federal funds are involved, information about the use of those funds must be available in any language that a citizen speaks. The Bush Justice Department is now enforcing this Executive Order, combined with the Voting Rights Act. It will lead to so much chaos it will make us nostalgic for Florida in 2000.

King’s bill would also make English the only official language of the USA. This is a measure that I hope the Congressional leadership has the courage to take up. I say courage because the minute someone raises the issue of English being the only official language in this country he is labeled a racist. I am convinced that is why President George W. Bush didn’t repeal E.O. 13166, which even Clinton was ashamed to issue. We were positive that he would overturn this Executive Order the way he did Clinton’s cancellation of the Mexico City Policy and other issues as well. No, he is enforcing this hideous construction with an aggressiveness that even the Clinton White House did not display.

English First, under the capable leadership of Jim Boulet, is pushing the King measure. He provided an excellent example of why bi-lingual ballots are a terrible idea. In the Flushing area of New York in 2000, the Chinese ballot translated the Democrat label on all state races as Republican while Republican was translated as Democrat. The absentee ballot for state Supreme Court in English instructed voters to “vote for any three” but the Chinese ballot told voters to “vote for any five.” Then later it said to vote for any three.

English must be the official language here and those who live here must learn English just as my father had to do when he came here from Germany in 1923. And others of our relatives from Norway, Russia, Italy and Albania had to learn English. It made them part of America.

Finally item three: You will recall back when the Democrats were in charge of the Executive and Legislative branches of government, they had the American Bar Association involved in the selection of judicial nominees. Many of us had insisted that the ABA should have no special role in picking judges and indeed, President Bush 43 removed the ABA from this position, something that his father and Ronald Reagan had declined to do. Well, when that happened the Democrats howled to high heaven and insisted that the ABA ratings were the “gold standard” of judging judicial nominees.

Larson Frisby of the ABA was kind enough to provide me with the ABA ratings for the 108th Congress. The ABA has two categories for such nominees, Qualified and Well Qualified. Remember all of the circuit court nominees that liberals claim are extremist? Miguel Estrada, Carolyn Kuhl, Patricia Owen, Charles Pickering, William Pryor, Claude Allen, and Janice Rogers Brown come to mind. Every one of these has been judged “well qualified” either unanimously or by a substantial majority. Not a single nominee was graded simply “qualified.”

So what do we hear from the liberals about the ABA now? Would that organization, no bastion of conservatism, really rate all of these controversial judges as “well qualified” if they were extremist ideologues? I rather doubt it. The next time you encounter a liberal Senator you might ask him or her about the ABA. If they denounce the ABA as being part of the right wing conspiracy, why we’ll just have to revise our charts. Marion Harrison, President of Free Congress, used to be involved with the ABA. Perhaps he now secretly controls that organization. Or perhaps the liberals are just liars.

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

[Scenic Sounds]

Food for thought!!

[EternalVigilance]

Religious Liberties Restoration Act (S 1558) BUMP!!

[Pan_Yans Wife]

BUMP!

[Grampa Dave]

What a wake up call 9/11 must have given Peter King:

"Item two: Rep. Peter King (R-NY), no down-the-line conservative he, nevertheless has introduced H.R. 931. His bill would repeal bi-lingual voting requirements. He would restrict Clinton’s Executive Order 13166, which requires that when federal funds are involved, information about the use of those funds must be available in any language that a citizen speaks. The Bush Justice Department is now enforcing this Executive Order, combined with the Voting Rights Act. It will lead to so much chaos it will make us nostalgic for Florida in 2000.

"King’s bill would also make English the only official language of the USA. This is a measure that I hope the Congressional leadership has the courage to take up. I say courage because the minute someone raises the issue of English being the only official language in this country he is labeled a racist. I am convinced that is why President George W. Bush didn’t repeal E.O. 13166, which even Clinton was ashamed to issue. We were positive that he would overturn this Executive Order the way he did Clinton’s cancellation of the Mexico City Policy and other issues as well. No, he is enforcing this hideous construction with an aggressiveness that even the Clinton White House did not display.

[ppaul]

"Congress shall make no law _____________________."

[alex]

It seems to me that this a wrong bill. It has to be something like First Amendmend Protection Bill and require wall of separation between government and atheism.

[JustPiper]

Collected "Good" Thoughts ;)

[EternalVigilance]

The bill is very well thought out, and is well within Congressional purview:

U.S. Constitution
Article III

Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

[EternalVigilance]

What a wake up call 9/11 must have given Peter King:

Yes, indeed.

[Gelato]

Thanks for the ping.

[EternalVigilance]

There is another bill sending its way through the House; one that is a bit different.

There are some great minds working on this, and the reception it is getting from Congressmen and Senators is very good.

If we help push, I look for it to pass in some form sometime next year.

[Grampa Dave]

This was the wake up call for me re Peter King's wake up call:

Media Has Blood On Its' Hands, Iraq GI Tells Rep.King

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1010199/posts

Media Has Blood On Its' Hands, Iraq GI Tells Rep.King
Newsmax.com ^ | October 29, 2003 | Newsmax.com


Posted on 10/28/2003 9:57 PM PST by Lady In Blue




Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Wednesday Oct. 29, 2003; 12:12 a.m. EST

Media Has Blood on its Hands, Iraq GI Tells Rep. King

Rep. Peter King, R-NY, delivered a stark message on Tuesday from an unnamed U.S. military officer now stationed in Baghdad who believes negative press coverage of the U.S. war effort has cost American soldiers their lives.

While flying back to the U.S. aboard a military transport, King told nationally syndicated radio host Sean Hannity via satellite phone, "I promised an American colonel yesterday, an Army colonel, that [I'd relay his message]: 'There's blood on the hands of the American media.'"

"He's lost men because of the terrible reporting and it's just creating a terrible atmosphere," King said the Army colonel told him.

"The troops have tremendous morale. But unfortunately the terrorists are encouraged and the Iraqi people are being dissuaded from cooperating with the American forces because of the terrible coverage back here," King said.

The unnamed GI, who King said had two graduate degrees, shared his disturbing assessment as the two flew by helicopter from the Baghdad airport to the Al Rashid hotel.

Paraphrasing the Army colonel's words, the New York Republican said, "I just want you to know that there's blood on the hands of the American media; that my men and women are going to die because of them."

The GI's message continued, "We are winning this war and the only way we can lose this is if the American people lose their nerve and that's because of what's going on in the American media."

King said he concurred with the Army colonel's complaint, saying, "What I saw is totally different from what the American media is reporting."

Noting that he was in Baghdad during the wave of terrorist attacks this weekend, King said that, "in spite of all of that, life is virtually normal in Baghdad."

"What the media doesn't show is that the rest of Baghdad is traffic jams, markets open . . . you would have thought you were in midtown Manhattan," the New York Republican contended.

"Life is so different when you're there from the way it's being portrayed in the media."

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[EternalVigilance]

A very stark message indeed.

This is one of the first times I've ever felt compelled to say this, but kudoes to Congressman King.

[Grampa Dave]

His stand on the Plame/Wilson scam, shut up a lot of the phoney cry babies on that issue.

[Scenic Sounds]

English must be the official language here and those who live here must learn English

Yes, and it should be spoken like it is spoken in California - with no accent!

[EternalVigilance]

I didn't see that.

Guess I just wasn't following that psuedo-scandal very closely. ;-)

[Grampa Dave]

Actually the best in English in America are the people from the mid west like my wife and Lee Rogers a local conservative talk show host.

They have zero accent and can be understood by those of us with or without accents.

Lee has recorded many of the male recordings we hear on voice mail and other automated responses. My wife was urged to do this by a younger relative who was working on a voice response system for the internet.

[bjcintennessee]

Excellent post with excellent "thoughts".

[Scenic Sounds]

I can detect a Midwest accent. I grant you, though, they don't have as much of an accent as some places, but California is the only spot without any accent at all. It's just pure English, as it was meant to be spoken. ;-)