Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

Nov 20 02:09 PM US/EasternBy MARK SHERMANAssociated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to “keep and bear arms” in nearly 70 years.
The justices’ decision to hear the case could make the divisive debate over guns an issue in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.
The government of Washington, D.C., is asking the court to uphold its 31-year ban on handgun ownership in the face of a federal appeals court ruling that struck down the ban as incompatible with the Second Amendment. Tuesday’s announcement was widely expected, especially after both the District and the man who challenged the handgun ban asked for the high court review.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8T1I6H80&show_article=1

Liberal Media Employ Terrorist to Cover War in Iraq

US military accuses AP photographer of being “terrorist media operative”

Nov 19 11:46 PM US/Eastern
The US military has filed a formal complaint with an Iraqi criminal court accusing a detained, award-winning Associated Press photographer of being a “terrorist media operative,” the Pentagon said Monday.
Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said the military made the complaint about Bilal Hussein, who has been held for more than 19 months without charges in US military custody, to Iraq’s Central Criminal Court.
“We believe Bilal Hussein was a terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP,” he said. “MNF-I possesses convincing and irrefutable evidence that Bilal Hussein is a threat to security and stability as a link to insurgent activity.”
Morrell said an investigative hearing into the case by the court is scheduled to begin on or after November 28.
Hussein was detained April 12, 2006 after marines entered his house in Ramadi to establish a temporary observation post and found bomb-making materials, insurgent propaganda and a surveillance photograph of a US military installation.
Morrell said Hussein, who was part of an AP photo team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2005, had previously aroused suspicion because he was often at the scene insurgent attacks as they occurred.
He said other evidence, which he would not describe, came to light after his detention “that makes it clear that Mr. Hussein is a terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP.”
Under Iraq’s legal system, an investigative judge reviews the evidence and decides whether it is sufficient to press charges. The case then goes before a panel of three judges for trial.
The US military’s role in the trial would be as a “complaining witness,” Morrell said.
Hussein remains in US military custody, he said.
The Associated Press was notified that the military planned to seek criminal charges on November 14.
“While we are hopeful that there could be some resolution to Bilal Hussein’s long detention, we have grave concerns that his rights under the law continue to be ignored and even abused,” AP President and CEO Tom Curley said in a statement.
“The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at a fair trial.
“The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve,” the AP statement said.
“At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071120034615.7crpsb43&show_article=1

Democratic-Controlled Congress’ Approval Rating at 20%; 69% Disapprove

Congress’ Approval Rating at 20%; Bush’s Approval at 32%
by Joseph Carroll
Page:12PRINCETON, NJ — Gallup’s latest poll finds only one in five Americans approving of the job Congress is doing at this time. The public’s rating of Congress had shown slight improvements in recent months, but the current rating is down again and is among the lowest that Gallup has ever measured dating back to 1974. Americans’ assessment of the job President George W. Bush is doing is also quite negative and has shown little change over the past two months, with about one in three Americans expressing approval of him.

Congressional Job Approval

According to the Nov. 11-14, 2007, poll, 20% of Americans approve of the way Congress is handling its job, while 69% disapprove. Congressional job approval ratings tied their historical low point — an 18% reading in 1992 — in August of this year. Americans’ ratings of Congress showed some improvement in the following months, reaching 29% in mid-October before falling back again this month.

By historical standards, the current 20% approval rating is among the lowest Gallup has ever recorded. In fact, in the 173 times since 1974 that Gallup has asked Americans to rate the job Congress is doing, Congress’ approval rating has been at or below 20% only four times.

Republicans and Democrats do not differ much in their ratings of Congress at this time. Just 26% of Democrats say they approve of the job Congress is doing, while 20% of Republicans approve. Independents’ approval rating is lower still, at 14%.

Presidential Job Approval Ratings
Bush’s job approval ratings have shown little change in the past two months — 32% of Americans now say they approve of the job he is doing as president and 61% disapprove. Over the course of the year, Bush’s approval ratings have been fairly stable, averaging 34% and fluctuating between a high of 38% in April and his administration’s low point of 29% in July.

Combined Gallup data from the past two months show that ratings of Bush vary most by political attitudes:

Seventy-two percent of Republicans approve of the job Bush is doing, compared with 27% of independents and just 7% of Democrats.
A majority of self-described conservatives, 54%, approve of Bush, while only 25% of moderates and 9% of liberals do.
Among the combined party and ideology groups, conservative Republicans show the highest level of support for Bush, at 74%, while liberal Democrats show the lowest support, at only 4%.
Bush’s approval rating is higher among men than among women; among frequent churchgoers than among those who seldom or never attend religious services; among those living in the South than among those living elsewhere; among those in higher-income than among those in lower-income households; and among whites than among blacks. There are only minor variations in Bush’s approval rating by age and education.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102829/Congress-Approval-Rating-20-Bushs-Approval-32.aspx?version=print

USMC Silent Drill Platoon

Hillarycare Preview: Prince George’s Co. parents brought to court over vaccines

Prince George’s Co. parents brought to court over vaccines
Getting tough on immunizations, courthouse becomes health clinic
By Matthew Barakat
The Associated Press
6:09 PM EST, November 17, 2007
Scores of grumbling parents facing a threat of jail lined up at a courthouse today to either prove that their school-age kids already had their required vaccinations or see that the youngsters submitted to the needle.The get-tough policy in Prince George’s County was one of the strongest efforts made by any U.S. school system to ensure its youngsters receive their required immunizations.Two months into the school year, school officials realized that more than 2,000 students in the county still didn’t have the vaccinations they were supposed to have before attending class.So Circuit Court Judge C. Philip Nichols ordered parents in a letter to appear at the courthouse today and either get their children vaccinated on the spot or risk up to 10 days in jail. They could also provide proof of vaccination or an explanation why their kids didn’t have them.By about 8:30 a.m., the line of parents stretched outside the courthouse in the county on the east side of Washington.Many of them complained that their children already were properly immunized but the school system had misplaced the records. They said efforts to get the paperwork straightened out had been futile.”It was very intimidating,” Territa Wooden of Largo said of the letter. She said she presented the paperwork at the courthouse today and resolved the matter.”I could be home asleep. My son had his shots,” said Veinell Dickens of Upper Marlboro, who also blamed errant paperwork.Aloma Martin of Fort Washington brought her children, Delontay and Taron, in 10th and 6th grade, for their hepatitis shots. She said she had been trying to get the vaccinations for more than a month, since the school system sent a warning letter. She had an appointment for Monday, but came to the courthouse to be safe.”It was very heavy handed,” she said of the county’s action. “From that letter, it sounded like they were going to start putting us in jail.”School officials deemed the court action a success. School system spokesman John White said the number of children lacking vaccinations dropped from 2,300 at the time the judge sent the letter to about 1,100 Friday.After today’s session, 172 more students were brought into compliance, including 101 students who received vaccinations at the courthouse and 71 whose records were updated.That still left more than 900 students out of compliance with vaccination requirements, White said.”Obviously, we still have some more work to do,” he said.Any children who still lack immunizations could be expelled. Their parents could then be brought up on truancy charges, which can result in a 10-day jail sentence for a first offense and 30 days for a second.Prince George’s State’s Attorney Glenn Ivey couldn’t say today whether he would prosecute parents who fail to comply.”We have to sit down with school and health services,” he said. “We haven’t ruled anything out. We need to figure out where we stand.”White said the school system, with about 132,000 students, has been trying for two years to get parents to comply with state law. That law allows children to skip vaccines if they have a medical or religious exemption. It was unclear how many medical or religious exemptions were involved.Maryland, like all states, requires children to be immunized against several childhood illnesses including polio, mumps and measles. In recent years, it also has required that students up to high school age be vaccinated against hepatitis B and chicken pox.Nichols said nobody actually came before him today, but he was there if any parent asked to see him.The judge noted the unhappy looks of some of the kids in line waiting for vaccinations.”It’s cute. It looks like their parents are dragging them to church,” Nichols said.Several organizations opposed to mass vaccinations demonstrated outside the courthouse. While the medical consensus is that vaccines are safe and effective, some people blame immunizations for a rise in autism and other medical problems.”People should have a choice” in getting their children immunized, said Charles Frohman, representing a physicians’ group opposed to vaccines.
Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-vaccines1117%2C0%2C6746721.story?coll=bal_tab01_layout

Court strikes down state’s ‘hate crimes’

Court strikes down state’s ‘hate crimes”
No matter how salutary a bill, it still must be constitutional’
Posted: November 17, 20071:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
A court has struck down Pennsylvania’s version of a “hate crimes” law, ruling that what officials there call an “Ethnic Intimidation Law” restriction was “unconstitutional and therefore null and void.”
“Praise the Lord,” said Michael Marcavage, chief of Repent America, a Christian organization. He was one of nearly a dozen people, who became known as the Philadelphia 11, arrested under the law and charged while ministering in 2004 at a publicly funded homosexual event called “OutFest.”
Although the Christians who had been giving their testimony on public property later had their charges dismissed, they had been threatened with up to five decades in jail.
They then challenged the law itself, suing over its adoption, and the 4-1 decision in the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court said the amendments enacted in 2002 were unconstitutional.
“This is a victory for constitutional government, so let us be thankful,” Marcavage said.
The petitioners said the passage of the bill, which originally criminalized agricultural crop destruction but was altered to become the first proposal in Pennsylvania to recognize “sexual orientation” as a protected class, failed to follow Article III of the state constitution. That provision prohibits the complete overhaul of a bill in the course of its passage.

The provisions adopted under the failed procedure increased penalties for crimes based on what the criminal was thinking, specifying the additional penalties for “actual or perceived … ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity.”
“The legislative process that led to the enactment of these amendments clearly violated Article III of the Pennsylvania Constitution,” said Aaron Martin, attorney for Repent America. “The court rightly found that there was no logical or legal connection between trampling down a hay field and assaulting someone on the basis of sexual orientation.”
The opinion was written by Judge James Gardner Collins, who was joined by Judges Doris Smith-Ribner, Dan Pellegrini and Robert Simpson. Judge Bonnie Ledbetter dissented.
The bill had been signed into law by ex-Gov. Mark Schweiker.
Repent America said the case was pursued because members plan to share their testimonies at future public events, and they were concerned charges would be brought – again.
A spokeswoman for a homosexual advocacy group, Stacey Sobel of Equality Advocates Pennsylvania, said the plan was “needed.”
There was no immediate announcement from Gov. Ed Rendell whether the decision would be appealed.
“It’s … important to note that this legal challenge [to protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity] was mounted by individuals who themselves may benefit from the law’s protections for religious minorities,” Rendell told the Associated Press.
“It is well established that a legislative enactment enjoys a strong presumption of constitutionality and it will not be declared invalid unless it clearly, palpably, and plainly violates the constitution,” the court said.
In this case, “We agree with petitioners that [the law] did not retain its original purpose as it moved through the enactment process. … The original version and final version of HB 1493 regulate vastly different activities.”
“We cannot conclude that the amendments retained the original purpose of HB 1493,” the ruling said.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58744

Hillarycare Preview: New Zealand bars British man’s ‘fat’ wife

New Zealand bars British man’s ‘fat’ wife By Paul Chapman in Wellington
Last Updated: 1:24am GMT 18/11/2007
A British man who moved to New Zealand has been told by officials that his wife is too fat to join him.
Richie and Rowan Trezise have been battling to shed pounds
His wife, Rowan, is now on a strict diet. However, she has been battling for months to shed the pounds so they can be reunited and live Down Under. Mr Trezise moved to New Zealand in September after shedding two inches from his waist on a crash diet. He said that if his wife was not allowed to come out by Christmas they would abandon the idea of emigrating.His employer-backed skills visa was initially rejected by immigration officials when they discovered that his body mass index, or BMI, was 42, making him morbidly obese.BMI measures a person’s weight in relation to their height. Anything over 25 is regarded as overweight, and 30 or above is obese.
But his wife Rowan, who planned to emigrate with him, has failed to overcome the obesity test.
Mr Trezise is a submarine cable specialist, who has also served in the Army.
He said yesterday: “My doctor laughed at me.
advertisement
“He said he’d never seen anything more ridiculous in his whole life. He said not every overweight person is unhealthy or unfit.
“The idea was that we were going to change our lifestyle totally and get outdoors and on mountain bikes and all sorts of activities.”
Robyn Toomath, a spokesman for Fight the Obesity Epidemic and an endocrinologist, said the BMI limit was valid in the vast majority of people.
She said she was opposed to obese people being stigmatised.
“However, the immigration department’s focus is different,” she said. “It cannot afford to import people into the country who are going to be a significant drain on our health resources.
“You can see the logic in assessing if there is a significant health cost associated with this individual and that would be a reason for them not coming in.”
New Zealand is critically short of skilled workers, and many large firms are intensively recruiting in Britain.
Mr Trezise was recruited to supervise the Southern Cross Cable, which links New Zealand with Australia and the west coast of the United States.
He is one of only four highly qualified specialist technicians working on the improvement of the cable.
The New Zealand Immigration Service said it did not know how many people were denied entry to the country because of high BMI readings.
However, comments posted on the Emigrate New Zealand website reveal that many people have been turned down after medical tests revealed that they were obese.
Mr Trezise has private health care in New Zealand and his employer, Telecom, has a gym membership scheme.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/17/wfat117.xml

New Jihad Watch: The Islam is Peace Campaign’s Government Angle

Hillary campaign takes cash from the people that Bill pardoned

Cha-ching! Hillary campaign takes cash from the people that Bill pardoned
posted at 10:05 am on November 15, 2007 by Bryan
Three recipients of controversial 11th-hour pardons issued by former President Bill Clinton in January 2001 have donated thousands of dollars to the presidential campaign of his wife, Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., according to campaign finance records examined by ABC News, in what some good government groups said created an appearance of impropriety…
One of the pardonees who has become a donor to Sen. Clinton is David Herdlinger, a former prosecutor in Springdale, Ark., who, according to press accounts at the time of his pardon pleaded guilty in 1986 to mail fraud after taking bribes to reduce or drop charges against defendants charged with drunken driving offenses.
Now a life and business coach in Georgia, Herdlinger was pardoned by President Clinton in January 2001; he donated $1,000 to Sen. Clinton’s presidential campaign in August.
Insurance agent Alfredo Regalado, who gave Hillary Clinton $2,000, was pardoned by her husband for failing to “report the transportation of currency in excess of $10,000 into the United States,” according to the Department of Justice.
The third is John Deutch, the Clinton CIA Director who was accused of mishandling government secrets. ABC’s phrasing on this is worth repeating.
Pardoned by President Clinton for charges he had mishandled government secrets — but before the Department of Justice could file the proper paperwork against him — Deutch, now a professor at MIT, gave Sen. Clinton the maximum allowable donation, $2,300.
We never learned, and never will learn, the true extent of Deutch’s actions. Just like Sandy Berger, who is one of Hillary’s national security advisors.
Read the whole story. ABC does a good job of reminding readers about the controversial January 2001 pardons and shenanigans that the Clintons conducted on their way out of power, even mentioning Hillary’s brother’s involvement.
Hillary’s accepting these donations isn’t illegal. But it sure looks like a payback, and taken together with the massive and corrupt bundling that Norman Hsu did on Hillary’s campaign’s behalf, her campaign looks like it’s the most corrupt of the lot by a long shot.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/15/cha-ching-hillary-campaign-takes-cash-from-the-people-that-bill-pardoned/

Hillary denies, then plays the gender card

Hillary denies, then plays the gender card
Send to a Friend printer-friendly Hillary Clinton answered the licenses for illegals question definitively tonight, removing it as a problem. She also answered the question concerning whether human rights or national security is more important (Richardson and Obama both whiffed badly on that one, as they did on the licenses question). But she’s still an equivocator. In this clip, which I’ve shamelessly swiped from Ian Schwartz and Stop the ACLU, she is asked whether she’s playing the gender card. She says no, but then goes on to lay that card right in the middle of the table like an Ace.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/15/videos-hillary-denies-then-plays-the-gender-card-and-edwards-gets-booed/