Scalia scoffed for claiming Constitution is ‘dead’ document

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is drawing fire from legal colleagues for his characterization of the U.S. Constitution as a “dead” document – that is, judges should not take it upon themselves to interpret its clauses via modern meanings.

“It’s not a living document,” Mr. Scalia said Monday, during a Southern Methodist University appearance, according to reports in the Dallas Morning News. “It’s dead, dead, dead.”

Mr. Scalia, a Ronald Reagan-appointee, has always maintained an originalism view of the Constitution – one that holds fast to the need to interpret the text as the Founding Fathers intended at the time.

“I deny the premise that law has nothing to do with historical inquiry,” he said, during an April 2010 appearance at the University of Virginia School of Law, according to postings on the university’s website. “Historical inquiry has nothing to do with the law only if the original meaning is irrelevant.”

On Tuesday, a day after Mr. Scalia again emphasized that view, legal scholars scoffed.

“I think that it is a bit disingenuous in that he, Scalia, understands that his personal views play an important role in shaping and informing,” yet also says judges beliefs shouldn’t be tainted by modern day events and culture, said Yale Law School professor Peter Schuck told Politico.

Story originally posted here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/30/scalia-scoffed-claiming-constitution-dead-document/

Sen. Brown bill bodes of more regulatory crack-down on fishing

Radical Ohio liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown – while a member of House of Representatives, he was also affiliated with the Congressional Progressive Caucus – has introduced legislation to help stop the flow of Asian carp into the Great Lakes, the Ohio River, and its tributaries.

This is his second attempt; a similar bill proposed last session never got out of committee.

What’s interesting about the bill is two-fold: A) Any legislation introduced by the socialist-minded Sherrod is worthy of watch. And B) The Strategic Response to Asian Carp Invasion Act is sure to bring additional regulation on fishing industry folk, at least, and those who live nearby the water bodies, at the worst. What’s the clue of this?

The bill summary states its purpose is “to direct the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers, the National Park Service, and the United States Geological Survey, to lead a multiagency effort to slow the spread of Asian carp in the Upper Mississippi and Ohio River basins and tributaries, and for other purposes.”

That’s pretty much all the key regulatory land control players – minus the Bureau of Land Management, perhaps. So common sense alone tells Socialist Sherrod plus NPS equals regulatory crack-down on landowners and businesses. The text of the bill isn’t yet posted on the congressional legislative website. 

But a November 2011 Asian Carp Action Plan from the Department of Natural Resources in Minnesota lends truth to the idea that regulations are a-comingt: As part of its carp mitigation plan, the report suggests the DNR “evaluate more restrictive harvest regulations for some species of commercial and sport fish.” The report also recommends DNR agents “monitor commercial fishing catch” and require “commercial operators … to report their catch monthly.”

One more interesting point to note about the nation's carp population: It’s the government’s fault.

According to The News-Messenger: “Ironically, Asian carp were introduced by some of the very governmental agencies now fighting the species, to control algae in aqua-culture operations during the 1970s.”

Brown’s response? “Sometimes we make these mistakes,” he said, in The News-Messenger report.

Oops.

See here: http://www.thenews-messenger.com/article/20130124/NEWS01/301240004/Sherrod-Brown-tries-combat-Asian-carp-again

 

 

Benefits’ bill sends message to president: You’re the employee

H.R. 248 is a no-brainer.

Slipped into Congress on Jan. 15 by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act is aimed at saving taxpayers $3 million each year by amending the benefits awarded to former presidents under 1958 law. Specifically, the measure allows presidents exiting office to receive a $200,000 annuity and a $200,000 salary each year, and upon death, provides for an increase in surviving spousal benefits from $20,000 to $100,000 annually.

The catch, and the no-brainer change from existing law, is this: The benefits decrease dollar-for-dollar for any reported income the former president receives in excess of $400,000.

That’s a common sense provision, especially in light of the lucrative book deals, speaking fees and various engagements offered presidents once they leave the White House. Why should taxpayers pony up this extra pocket change?

Piddley amount or not – after all, $3 million saved from a national debt that’s hitting $16.4 trillion is hardly cause for cheer – the real meat of H.R. 248 is the message it bears: The president is the employee. The U.S. taxpayer is the employer.

This is a timely message. We have a president who, in his last term, steamrolled through an unpopular health care reform that led to a constitutional crisis, and who, heading into his second term, is trying the same ramrod tactics with gun control – bringing yet another constitutional crisis upon this nation. It’s a tough time for Americans who believe in the concept of a small government with limited powers to the president, and in a Constitution and system of governance based on God-given rights rather than government-granted bestowments. As Chaffetz said, in a Feb., 2012, written statement, when he introduced into Congress a similar measure that ultimately died in the House: “Nobody wants our former presidents living the remainder of their lives destitute. But the fact is, none of our former presidents are poor. Reports actually indicate that between book tours and speaking fees, these men are making millions of dollars a year. There’s little reason why American taxpayers should be subsidizing these former presidents when they’re doing fine on their own.”

Exactly. And there’s little reason why the voters shouldn’t insist on the passage of a bill that keeps the executive branch in check with a blunt reminder of who holds the wallet.

‘Team Soros’ gains a big wedge in America’s foreign aid program

This is why George Washington warned of entangling foreign alliances. In a quiet, barely noticed session wedged between fiscal fiascos on Capitol Hill, House members on Jan. 1 confirmed the nomination of Morton H. Halperin to the board of directors of the Millennium Challenge Corporation.

Who?

Well, before answering that, it’s important to understand the basic gist of the Millennium Challenge Corporation. According to its website, MCC was established in 2004 as “an innovative and independent U.S. foreign aid agency that is helping lead the fight against global poverty.” MCC generally takes a carrot-stick approach to funding other nations’ poverty eradication programs. In return for its reported $8.4 million in global investments, for instance, recipient nations must show “good governance, economic freedom and investment in their citizens.”

Sounds a common sense means of providing foreign aid. After all, why should Americans pay into nations with anti-American beliefs?

The problem, however, is that MCC has become basically a cash-cow for politicians to push their political agendas and foster their own business dealings. In 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – who serves as the chair of the MCC – signed a $600 million MCC compact with Indonesia to support a “green prosperity program to improve sustainable management of Indonesia’s natural resources and support clean energy investments,” according to a statement from Climate Advisers.

How exactly does that contribution play into the poverty eradication mission of MCC? Good question.

“In addition to the benefits for Indonesia, the focus on Green Prosperity and reducing deforestation is in the United States’ national interest,” Climate Advisers’ statement continues. “Primarily because of carbon emissions from deforestation and peatland degradation, Indonesia is the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind China and the United States.”

Talk about spin. But at least you get the idea. MCC money isn’t exactly spent on pure poverty eradication – at least, in the classic sense most people would see it, as food aid, or agricultural assistance.

Enter Morton H. Halperin.

“Morton H. Halperin is a senior advisor to the Open Society Foundations,” according to his posted biography for the Open Society Foundations. “Halperin has been associated with a number of universities and think tanks including … the Council on Foreign Relations and the Center for American Progress.”

The Open Society Foundation, of course, was founded by none other than George Soros, billionaire investor of all things antithetical to America, capitalism and free market principles.

And now, due to his Jan. 1 board appointment to MCC, Halperin’s potential to influence America’s foreign aid investments will prove substantial. Halperin’s fellow board members, aside from Clinton, include Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, as vice chair; Ambassador Ron Kirk, as U.S. trade representative; and USAID administrator Rajiv Shah.

Look for more tax dollars appropriated for poverty eradication through MCC to flow from this nation for more social justice, environmental and other progressive causes. What a win – and barely noticed – for Team Soros.

See here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r112:FLD001:S08633-S08634,S08636 

And here: http://www.mcc.gov/pages/about

And here: http://www.mcc.gov/pages/about/boardofdirectors

And here: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/people/morton-halperin