It’s just that I’ve been here before. This is opening up a lot like the Carter Presidency. I was too slow to judge in that case, and I’m making up for it this time. Perhaps, too quick to judge, but I don’t believe so.

Habeas Corpus

April 21, 2009

An editorial about the President’s contradictory stance on the Writ of Habeas Corpus. I construe his actions here to be one piece of evidence he isn’t a foreign agent, or at a minimum, evidence he doesn’t want his personal residence to be attacked while he’s in office.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124027091370936935.html

From my point-of-view, the writ of Habeas Corpus does not apply to prisoners-of-war, and, in fact, I don’t believe the detainees at Guantanamo even meet the definition of such prisoners, as they aren’t uniformed members of any country’s armed services. They ought to exist outside the protections of the Geneva Convention.

Regardless, I think this situation is handled fairly well in Article 9, Clause 2 of the US Constitution.

“The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

Why this just doesn’t end the argument shows how ridiculous we’ve become.

. . .I thought they had intended it to be the first step in a campaign to eliminate such compounds around the nation. That is, from their point of view they wished to clean up the nation of all sorts of odd balls. After eighty people died and Janet Reno took responsibility (but did not resign-and was given a pass by the press), they gave up on that goal.

Truth be told I have a reflexive fear of Liberals in positions of power. They view the State as a means to establish social justice. Any failure along the way becomes a reason for more control to be granted to the State. Hear anyone on the Left discussing how well their approach to the “War on Poverty” is going? The answer is more and more government control even in situations where the government can be demonstrated to be a large part of the problem.

Provide financial incentives to create single parent households, destroying communities along the way? No problem. Just send more money.

This view does not make me an anarchist. Like Thomas Hobbes, I believe life without a Sovereign would be “nasty, brutish, and short.” Therefore, it makes sense to surrender some rights to the government in order to establish a basic social order, as such orders do not naturally emerge. What emerges in such situations looks a lot like Somalia.

So, I believe in limited government. Where one draws the line becomes the issue.

Nikolai Lenin, who believed that government was the solution to society’s ills, thought mass starvation to be a reasonable tactic. When I think of John Lenon’s song, “Imagine,” I think of Pol Pot, who earnestly (and I believe genocidal maniacs can be earnest) tried to make the ends of the song a reality.

I love the Beatles, but I hate, hate, hate that song.

As I see it, the people I reflexively fear-those who believe the government is the answer to every problem–are precisely the kind of people running the country at the moment.

So, getting to my point, some may also recall my asking as to when the Obama adminstration would go after its version of the Branch Davidians. We may have just seen it. The head of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano has distributed a report that without statistical evidence stresses a potential threat from right-wing extremists. And who are these extremists?

I quote from the report,

“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

So, basically, believing the 10th amendment to the Constitution should be taken seriously is something meriting the attantion of the State. Where are all those “civil libertarians” who made so much noise over the last eight years now?

This and the main-stream-media’s coverage of last week’s tea parties is increasingly making me ill. My nephew told me today, “I no longer care what happens to the newspaper industry.” I’m with him. We need some creative destruction in that sector of the economy to make things right (no pun intended).

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTI1MTYwMjhmMjZkMmNiYjg1NGJhNmIyYzQ2NTk4Yjg=&w=MA==

Why was moving Musharraf out of office a US objective?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090416/wl_mcclatchy/3214054

You didn’t have to be the frickin’ Amazing Kreskin to foressee his departure would accelerate this process.