The BoBo Carnival of Politics – March 22, 2009 Edition
Posted by: The BoBo // Category: BoBo, Carnival, Congress, Conservative, Democrats, Liberals, Politics, blogs, government, libertarian
Welcome to the March 22, 2009 edition of the bobo carnival of politics.
Mr Wall Street presents Wall Street and Main Street are the Same posted at Mr Wall Street.
Alli presents Does Supporting the Constitution Make Me a Terrorist? posted at The Smoking Argus, saying, “Sourced credible analysis by Allison Bricker.”
J.D. Bell presents Bonus Babies (Or How I Got My Piece Of The AIG Bailout) | it-takes-work.com posted at It Takes Work.
Mar Matthias Darin presents The United States, the NEW Roman Empire posted at The Matthias Chronicles.
Mar Matthias Darin presents No more ‘Enemy Combatants’ posted at The Matthias Chronicles.
C. E. Dowalt presents Blog Carnival – Submit an Article to a Carnival posted at Money Confidential.
conservative
Selkirk presents Obama’s Aspirational Garbage: The Politics of Blame, Spend, and Retreat posted at Political Castaway Blog: Broadcasting Conservatism to Rescue America.
democrats
Silicon Valley Blogger presents First Time Home Buyer Credit, Cheap Property Market: Time To Buy A House! posted at The Digerati Life, saying, “Thanks!”
libertarian
Travis presents This started as a response posted at News Today.
news
Len Penzo presents Gordon Gekko Would Be Proud: It’s Time to Let AIG Fail posted at Len Penzo . Com, saying, “It’s time for Main Street to remind Wall Street of the principals of Capitalism. Pitchforks and torches are optional.”
Brian McKay presents Federal Reserve Leaves Rates Low posted at MonitorBankRates.com, saying, “The Federal Open Market Committee decided to leave the Fed Funds rate at historic lows of 0% to .25%”
U.S. Common Sense presents Barney Frank wants names posted at U.S. Common Sense, saying, “I owe you some articles. Here is one discussing the exchange between Barney Frank and Edward Liddy regarding the names of the AIG Executives that received large bonuses.”
U.S. Common Sense presents Taxes for the Rich? Deductions? AMT? Who needs them. | U.S. Common Sense posted at U.S. Common Sense, saying, “Why do we continue to play this game of increasing the size of the tax code just so we can target small segments of society in different ways? More deductions or less. Higher tax rates or lower. AMT or not. All of this can be cleared up with a simplified flat tax system.”
U.S. Common Sense presents The Exercise Challenge posted at U.S. Common Sense, saying, “This one isn’t quite “news” nor political, but I did want to get the word out for those that might want to consider participating in the six-week exercise challenge. I find that when more people are paying attention to your exercise activity, the more likely you will stick with the program. So I am offering myself as a coach, cheerleader, and participant … all in one. I will keep you going while you keep me going.”
politics
Angry Max presents The Quests for Truth and Blood posted at Pterodactyl Puke, saying, “Concerning who is to blame for the economic meltdown, and what to do with them.”
Mark Couturier presents Does Sen. Droopy Dog Really Like Obama, or is He Just Trying to Get Out of the Doghouse? posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
Mark Couturier presents Did the Israel Lobby Force Obama’s Pick for Top Intelligence Post to Withdraw? – THE POLITICAL ANIMAL posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
Mark Couturier presents No Taxpayer-funded Scholarships for Palestinians! posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
Mark Couturier presents Conservative Base Angry at Steele over Abortion Remarks posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
Mark Couturier presents Obama Administration Drops “Enemy Combatant” Term – THE POLITICAL ANIMAL posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
Wenchypoo presents Mole Hills into Mountains Part II: from Pyramid Schemes to Money Laundering, with a Bonus posted at Wisdom From Wenchypoo’s Mental Wastebasket.
presents People Need To Wake Up and Smell the Corruption posted at Bradley Hankins, saying, “We need to wake up and smell the corruption. Not just us, but everyone. We know what is going on, we need average Joe to pay attention, as there are more of them than us.”
Mark Couturier presents Inside Scoop on Former President Bush’s Upcoming Book! – THE POLITICAL ANIMAL posted at THE POLITICAL ANIMAL.
presents If We Are Going To Spend $1 Trillion? posted at Bradley Hankins, saying, “Bailout bad business? Why not give $1 Trillion to we the people?”
republicans
Ralph Sparkson presents Instead, It Turns Out Dick Cheney’s Dog Was Darth Vader! posted at Best Funny Dog Pictures, saying, “Turns out Dick Cheney has a sense of humor in his private life. Here are his dogs dressed up as Darth Vader and Superman.”
vjack presents Piyush “Bobby” Jindal in 2012 posted at Atheist Revolution.
That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of the bobo carnival of politics using our carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.
Technorati tags: the bobo carnival of politics, blog carnival.
March 22nd, 2009 at 8:20 pm
That’s a good listing for the past week (or two).
And Mattias is right on. There is too much political correctness involved with the handling of people-formerly-known-as-enemy-combatants.
Reply to U.S. Common Sense
March 23rd, 2009 at 10:37 am
Another fine week. I too read Mattias’ post. I just feel so safe with those idiots in power. Weak, I mean weak. God help us.
Have a terrific day.
Comedy Pluss last blog post..Awww…Mondays #10
Reply to Comedy Plus
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
This is way off topic, but I know you met Matt-Speak and I’m wondering if you or anyone else may have heard from him since the tragic death of his brother? You have a nice list of posts and links to check out and I’m sorry I haven’t visited to really check your blog, but I happened to see your name on a blog and remembered you had a real visit so was reminded of the concern I have been feeling. Thanks.
Judes last blog post..Shadow’s Transportation/Bill Wants A Newer Harley
Reply to Jude
March 23rd, 2009 at 5:02 pm
I left this over at Mattias’ blog:
Okay, let me see if I can clear this up a bit. You are correct, if they oppose you on the battlefield, they are both the enemy and a combatant.
But the term refers not to actions on the battlefied but what do you call the person once you have captured them. When a person from the opposite side is captured while fighting for a country, in that country’s uniform, they are call a Prisoner of War (POW) and should be afforded all rights under the Geneva Conventions for treatment of enemy prisoners.
But the Geneva Convention does not apply to those who are fighting for group, not a country, and therefore are not signatures of the Geneva Convention, and do not wear a uniform. So there is no term for that person. The correct term would be Enemy Combatant and not POW from X country.
The Obama adminstration is making a huge mistake here. What are they going to call them? Since they are fighting for a terrorist organization (i.e. Al Qaeda or the Taliban), they are not covered under the Geneva Convention and thus can’t be called POWs. The next option is criminal. But that doesn’t quite cover it.
The next problem is how to deal with them. Since they are not US citizens or legal resident aliens, the US Constitution does not apply to them either. If you believe that it does, try going to Afghanistan and using the US Constitution in their court, or in any other country for that matter. So they cannot be afforded Maranda Rights and other Bill of Rights rights. If you still believe the Constitution applies, then you have to believe it applied everywhere in the world and to anyone regardless of citizenship. Agian, try that in another country.
So what do you call someone who you captured on a battlefield, does not fight in the uniform of an actual country, and thus cannot be a signature of the Geneva Convention?
An ENEMY COMBATANT!! Since they are not US citizens or legal resident aliens, nor fall under the protections of the Constitution, they do NOT belong in US Criminal court. They belong in a Military Tribunal!!
Reply to Raider Steve
March 23rd, 2009 at 10:48 pm
It’s funny that you posted a link to VJack’s article under “republicans” when he’s a godless liberal whose article is mocking Bobby Jindal and the republican party.
Reply to Rodchester
March 23rd, 2009 at 11:03 pm
@US/Sandee – thanks. Mar Matt did have a great one this week didn’t he
@Steve – thanks for cross-posting that here. You’re right on target
@Rodchester – thanks for stopping in and commenting. I’m familiar with VJack’s work. When they submit to the carnival they get to choose their categories. I don’t edit them. I guess he considers this a Republican category since he’s rippin Repubs. I might have done the same if I was rippin on a Liberal and labeled as such.
Reply to The BoBo
March 23rd, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Steve, the problem with your comment is that if foreign nationals are arrested for a crime in this country they are still protected under the constitution. They still have a right to a speedy trial, a trial by their peers, protection from cruel or unusual punishment and protection from self-incrimination. The same is true for foreign nationals who commit crimes punishable by US courts and are extradited (like assaulting a US citizen on the grounds of an embassy and the like).
So while enemy combatant might be a good term (for some people in US foreign prison complexes like Guantanamo) it doesn’t mean that shouldn’t be treated like criminals instead of prisoners of war. The problem is we invented a third category out of thin air that allowed us to circumvent the spirit and letter of the law and treat other human beings poorly.
And even if you are right and they shouldn’t fall under civilian courts that does mean they should be tortured, imprisoned indefinitely, and kept from counsel.
Reply to MurthaFer
March 24th, 2009 at 4:50 am
I will agree with your point about foreigners arrested in this country. But, these individuals were not arrested, they were taken off the battlefield and they were not taken in this country (US). So by what you say, the US Constitution does not apply to them.
Are you saying these prisoners have a right to a speedy trial? That would be the case if this were a criminal trial in the US. But they are not criminals in the sense that our law defines a criminal in the US. Do they have a right to a trial by their peers? I would say no. But going by what you say, then their peers are foreign (non US) terrorists. Do you think the jury should be comprised of terrorists? Protection from cruel and unusual punishment? I take that to mean like having your head chopped off like they do to our people (Daniel Perle and civilian contractors). Protection from self incrimination? Again, that is a criminal protection for a crime committed here in the US.
Your example of assaulting a US citizen on the grounds of a US Embassy is different because of the agreement with each country that US Embassy property is considered US soil and vice versa.
Not one of the things you have stated applies to any of these individuals.
You see the problem is they are neither criminals or POWs. As I stated before, to be a POW you must be a soldier, sailor, airmen, or marine, fighting in the uniform of an actually country. These people are none of that either. Hence they fall into a category, Enemy Combatant, and since they were taken off a battlefield, must be tried in a military tribunal. The law never covered or has seen a situation like this so we could not have circumvented the law. We are having to set precedence.
As to your last question. Yes they should be in a military tribunal. I would like to know what the torture was. I need a complete and accurate definition first. Because many people are using a definition that would include harsh questioning, loud music, and yelling as torture. Me, I would consider having your head cut off, body mutilated, burned and hung from a bridge as torture, but that is just me.
As for being imprisoned indefinitely: yes, I wish lefties (ACLU and such) would stay out of the way and would have let the mitltary trinbunals go forward much faster so we could have executed many of the top terrorist leaders we have captured and life in a prison for the rest.
The biggest problem I see with the left side, Obama and the Bill Clinton administration, is that they see terrorism as a Law Enforcment issue when it is not. It is a military issue.
Reply to Raider Steve
March 24th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
And..just to add on to Steve’s comments – what they consider as “torture” is being shackled, made to stand, listening to loud music non-stop – at least that is what the last detainee released stated. This isn’t half of what we went through in our survival training school. These are just stress positions – hardly torture compared to what they did to our guys.
Also – The Geneva Convention and Rules of Engagement specifically state these individuals are non-uniformed enemy combatants and are not afforded the protection of the Geneva Convention. Also, as enemy combatants – they have no rights to our courts. According to the Supreme Court Ex Parte Qurin precedent set in 1942 – these individuals are subject only to military tribunals.
Reply to The BoBo
March 25th, 2009 at 2:27 am
Bobo, thanks for the additional information. But people like MurthaFur just don’t want to understand. They are all members of the group “if we are really nice to the terrorists, they won’t hate us” just like Obama. That is the crowd that is going to get us all killed.
Reply to Raider Steve
March 25th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
And that is a very scary thought and a damned shame at that, Steve
Reply to The BoBo