Monday, May 17, 2010

Barker's Newsbites: Monday, May 17, 2010


(Ignore the "video" itself; it's the sound quality I'm going for...)

They just don't write 'em like this anymore...

(*GRIN*)
Posted by at

8 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100517/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_s_aunt_3

A U.S. immigration court has granted asylum to President Barack Obama's African aunt, allowing her to stay in the country, her attorneys announced Monday.

The basis for her asylum request hadn't been made public.

(*SMIRK*)

Onyango moved to the United States in 2000. Her first asylum request was rejected, and she was ordered deported in 2004. But she didn't leave the country and continued to live in public housing in Boston.

* SO MUCH FOR THE RULE OF LAW...

Obama wasn't involved in the Boston hearing. The White House also said it was not helping Onyango with legal fees.

* WHAT A SWEETHEART OF A GUY, HUH...

May 17, 2010 at 2:54 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/local/sw_valley/mcso_cockfighting_ring_bust_05172010

An illegal cockfighting ring was busted in the west valley and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is not taking this animal cruelty lightly.

The fights were held in Tonopah, near 385th Avenue and Southern. Nearly 70 people were arrested, including 20 suspected illegal aliens.

"We do not give tickets out, we arrest them and put them in handcuffs, book them into our jail when they violate animal cruelty laws. I don't care if it's against dogs, cats, horses, roosters or what have you." Arpaio said.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

* FOLKS... AS WITH THE PREVIOUS NEWSBITE CONCERNING OBAMA'S AUNT... I'M TRYING TO MAKE POINTS ABOUT "CHARACTER" HERE; ABOUT "RIGHT VS. WRONG."

May 17, 2010 at 2:57 PM
William R. Barker said...

TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/17/AR2010051701355_pf.html

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that juveniles may not be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole unless guilty of homicide, declaring unconstitutional a sentencing practice that has been adopted by some states but, the court said, was "rejected the world over."

* TWO POINTS: 1) THE FACT THAT A "HOMICIDE EXCEPTION" IS CREATED OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH IS THE FIRST SIGN THAT THIS DECISION IS ALSO CREATED OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH; 2) THE SUPREME COURT SHOULDN'T BE TAKING ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION INTO ACCOUNT; CERTAINLY FOREIGN LAW HAS NO LEGITIMATE PLACE WITHIN THEIR DELIBERATIONS!

The court ruled 5 to 4 that locking up forever those under 18 who have not killed violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The decision follows the court's 2005 decision that juveniles may not be executed, and expands upon its decision that the Eighth Amendment must be interpreted in light of the country's "evolving standards of decency."

* NOPE. "EVOLVING STANDARDS OF DECENCY" ARE SOMETHING FOR THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT TO DEBATE AND DECIDE UPON. THE COURT HAS ONCE AGAIN BLATANTLY STEPPED ACROSS PROPER CONSTITUTIONAL BOUNDARIES.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said states must provide juveniles who receive lengthy sentences a "meaningful" chance to eventually show they should be released.

* THERE'S NOT A GOD-DAMNED WORD IN THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRING ANY SUCH THING. IF DULY ELECTED/EMPOWERED LEGISLATURES CHOOSE TO WRITE SUCH LAWS AND SAID LAWS ARE LEGALLY PASSED THAT'S ONE THING... OTHERWISE... (*GRITTING MY TEETH*)

* To be continued...

May 17, 2010 at 3:30 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)

"By denying the defendant the right to reenter the community, the state makes an irrevocable judgment about that person's value and place in society," Kennedy wrote. "This judgment is not appropriate in light of a juvenile non-homicide offender's capacity for change and limited moral culpability."

* KENNEDY AND HIS FOUR PEERS CLEARLY SEE THEMSELVES AS JUDGE, JURY, EXECUTIONER... EXECUTIVES... LEGISLATORS... DIRECT REPRESENTATIVES OF GOD ON EARTH (AS IN MONARCHICAL POWERS).

* WE ARE LOSING OUR COUNTRY, PEOPLE.

The case at hand involved Terrance Jamar Graham, who was convicted of robbery in Jacksonville, Fl. when he was 16. He received probation, but was arrested again at 17 for taking part in a home invasion. The judge in the case then sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Kennedy said there were 129 juvenile non-homicide offenders serving sentences of life without parole in 11 states, including Virginia. The vast majority of them -- 77 -- are in Florida.

* LISTEN... EVERY HOUR OF EVERY DAY OF EVERY YEAR THE SITTING GOVERNORS OF THE STATES IN QUESTION HAVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO GRANT CLEMENCY/PARDON. THAT'S THE PROPER CHANNEL FOR DEALING WITH THIS SORT OF THING. WHAT THE HIGH COURT HAS DONE IS REPLACE THE RULE OF LAW WITH THE RULE OF "MEN" - FIVE "MEN" TO BE EXACT.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a stinging dissent, saying the majority's interpretation of the Eighth Amendment is "entirely the court's creation."

* AND NO DOUBT JUSTICE THOMAS IS CORRECT!

"The court is quite willing to accept that a 17-year-old who pulls the trigger on a firearm can demonstrate sufficient depravity and irredeemability to be denied reentry into society, but insists that a 17-year-old who rapes an 8-year-old and leaves her for dead does not," Thomas wrote. "The question of what acts are 'deserving' of what punishments is bound so tightly with questions of morality and social conditions as to make it, almost by definition, a question for legislative resolution."

* NO DOUBT! IT IS A QUESTION FOR LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION! MY GOD... THIS ISN'T "LEFT" VS. "RIGHT." THIS IS LEGITIMATE VS. ILLEGITIMATE! ANY HONEST CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR WILL TELL YOU THAT THE FOUNDERS WOULD BE OUTRAGED BY THIS DECISION.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. joined [Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor] in rejecting the outcome of Graham's case, saying the sentence was harsh given the crime. But he did not join the opinion that the sentence of life without parole is always unconstitutional.

* IT'S NOT ROBERTS PURVIEW TO DECIDE WHETHER A PARTICULAR SENTENCE IS "HARSH" OR NOT; IT'S HIS JOB TO DECIDE WHETHER A PARTICULAR SENTENCE IS CONSTITUTION... CONSTITUTIONAL ACCORDING TO A GOOD FAITH UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT AND CONTEXT AND WHAT THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT "MEANT" AT THE TIME IT WAS ENACTED!

May 17, 2010 at 3:31 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/98041-tax-extenders-bill-may-include-drug-discounts

Drug makers would be forced to offer more discounts for hospitals that treat the poor under a provision that may be included in the tax extenders bill expected to be unveiled early next week.

Under the current law, drug makers must offer deep discounts to federally qualified health centers and other places that serve poor patients – but only for outpatient care, for patients who haven’t been admitted to a facility such as a hospital.

The Senate health reform bill would have extended the discounts to cover people in the inpatient setting. Under the current law, drug makers must offer deep discounts to federally qualified health centers and other places that serve poor patients – but only for outpatient care, for patients who haven’t been admitted to a facility such as a hospital.

The Senate health reform bill would have extended the discounts to cover people in the inpatient setting.

* HOW THE F--K IS THIS EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL...??? IT SURE AS HELL SOUNDS LIKE A "TAKING" TO ME!

* BASICALLY, FOLKS... WE'RE TALKING LEGALIZED GOVERNMENT EXTORTION; NOTHING LESS.

May 17, 2010 at 4:21 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2010/05/17/vt_farmer_draws_a_line_at_us_bid_to_bolster_border/?page=full

The red brick house sits unassumingly on a sleepy back road where the lush farmlands of northern Vermont roll quietly into Canada. This is the Morses Line border crossing, a point of entry into the United States where more than three cars an hour constitute heavy traffic.

The government is planning an estimated $8 million renovation here as part of a nationwide effort to secure border crossings.

* EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS...???

It intends to acquire 4.9 acres of border land on a dairy farm owned for three generations by the Rainville family. Last month, the Rainvilles learned that if they refuse to sell the land for $39,500, the government intends to seize it by eminent domain. The Rainvilles call this an unjustified land-grab by federal bullies. “They are trying to steamroll us,’’ said Brian Rainville, 36, a high school government and civics teacher whose grandfather bought the farm in 1946 and whose parents and two brothers run it now. “We have a buyer holding a gun to our head saying you have to sell or else.’’

* SOUNDS LIKE IT. (WHERE THE HELL DID THEY COME UP WITH THAT $39,500 FIGURE ANYWAY...???)

The Rainvilles say the land, where they grow a portion of the feed for 150 head of cattle, is worth far more than the offer, and is critical at a time when the low price of milk has dairy farmers struggling to cover the cost of production. “It’s like taking a leg off a stool. If you reduce the hay, you reduce the herd; if you reduce the herd, you immediately affect the viability of the farm,’’ Brian Rainville said. “Last year, the farm lost money. Right now, we are hanging on by our fingernails.’’

The family’s many supporters in the area do not dispute that the Morses Line facility, some 50 miles southeast of Montreal, is outdated. But they do not understand why the government needs to spend millions on it. “The whole thing is a perfect example of waste,’’ said Glen Gurwit of Swanton, a customs inspector for 31 years who frequently worked at Morses Line before retiring in 2004. He said the port is used mostly by locals crossing to visit relatives, play hockey, or shop, and is notable for its “peace, quiet, and isolation.’’ “We used to spend hours watching deer graze,’’ he said.

The Rainvilles suggest that the Morses Line port, where only 14,811 vehicles crossed in 2009, could be shut down altogether. They say the stimulus money would be better spent upgrading the busy Highgate Springs port 11 miles to the west, where Interstate 89 connects with a Canadian route to Montreal. Hundreds of thousands of vehicles cross there each year.

* MAKES SENSE TO ME...!!!

May 17, 2010 at 4:22 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/17/napolitano_admits_she_hasnt_read_arizona_law_but_says_she_wouldnt_sign_it.html

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano admits she hasn't read the Arizona immigration law...

* SO LET'S SEE... OBAMA HASN'T READ IT... HOLDER HASN'T READ IT... NAPOLITANO HASN'T READ IT...

* AND WE - MYSELF INCLUDED - ONCE LOOKED UPON CANDIDATE OBAMA AS "AT LEAST INTELLIGENT...?" MY GOD, THIS ADMINISTRATION IS A DISASTER! THE ONLY MEMBER OF OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION WHO HAS SHOWN ANY BRAINS AT ALL IS GATES... AND HE'S A BUSH HOLDOVER!

* SERIOUSLY... YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS FRIGG'N STUFF UP!!!

May 17, 2010 at 11:19 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/arizona-immigration-law-human-rights-china-conservatives-apology.html

During two days of talks about human rights with China last week, the US raised examples of problems on its own soil and cited Arizona's controversial new immigration law as an example of "racial discrimination."

* DO YOU BELIEVE THIS...?!?! JEEZUS CHRIST... I ACTUALLY AM STARTING TO MISS GEORGE W. BUSH...

“We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session and as a troubling trend in our society, and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination. And these are issues very much being debated in our own society,” Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy Human Rights and Labor Michael Posner, who led the US delegation to the talks, told reporters on Friday.

* THIS POSNER SHOULD BE FIRED. IMMEDIATELY! OF COURSE HE WON'T BE BECAUSE HE'S ACTUALLY SPEAKING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION. SICKENING. DISGUSTING.

That the US mentioned the Arizona law during talks about human rights with China, consistently ranked among the worst human rights violators in the world...

May 17, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)