Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

THE FOUNDATION

"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense."  — Thomas Jefferson http://PatriotPost.US/fqd/

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Immigration, Part 2: "Subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?

Would it surprise you to know that more than 20 percent of children born in the United States are born to illegal aliens? As recently as 2002, that figure was 23 percent. Currently, all those children enjoy birthright citizenship and all its favors, despite the fact that there are legitimate questions about the constitutionality of such a right.

More on that in a minute.

Thursday morning, Demo Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid attempted to rally a test vote on the so-called "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007," but Republicans and a handful of Democrats refused to end debate on the legislation. Reid failed to muster the 60 votes necessary for cloture by a wide margin — only 32 Democrats and one Independent voted to close the debate. Thursday afternoon, Reid called again for a vote to end debate and move the legislation to the floor, but strike two. Rather than risk a third strike, Reid pulled the legislation — and it may not be back this year.

In other words, the Senate is a long way from passing an immigration bill of its own, much less coming up with something that can get through the House. Indeed, that's the good news.

As I outlined in Part One http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=534 of this series on immigration, the debate is nothing more than political pandering to 12 percent of the electorate — Latino voters — unless it begins with a commitment to secure our southern border and coastlines. As Ronald Reagan http://Reagan2020.US/ declared, "A nation without borders is not a nation."

Only after the establishment of functional border security can a legitimate immigration debate take place.

At that point, immigration legislation must authorize and fund these priorities: enforcement of current immigration laws; immediate detention and deportation of those crossing our borders illegally; deportation of any foreign national convicted of a serious crime or seditious activity http://PatriotPost.US/news/reconquista.asp ; a guest-worker program (with reliable documentation as a prerequisite) to meet the current demand for both skilled and unskilled labor; penalties against employers who hire illegal aliens; no extension of blanket amnesty or fast-track citizenship (new citizenship applicants go to the back of the line); the preservation and provision of tax-subsidized medical, educational and social services for American citizens and immigrants here legally; and the Americanization of new legal immigrants, including an end to bilingual education and a national mandate for English as our nation's official language.

Currently, there are deportation orders for more than 600,000 illegal aliens, but virtually no funding or effort to enforce these orders. And while there are substantial penalties for hiring illegal immigrants, there is no funding or effort to enforce these laws, either.

Question: If there is no comprehensive effort to secure our borders and enforce existing immigration laws, what difference would any new legislation make, other than to shore up Latino voter constituencies?

While the swamp rats are sorting out that question, hundreds of thousands of immigrants are birthing children in the U.S. (more than three million at last count). It is assumed that they have a constitutional http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=487 birthright to citizenship. As such, those children, and their attendant families, are served up a plethora of social services at taxpayer expense. They are also the anchors for a chain of migration because upon reaching age 21, the children of illegal immigrants can petition to have citizenship extended to the entire family.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

But does the Constitution authorize birthright citizenship to illegal aliens?

The relevant constitutional clause concerning birthright is found in the 14th Amendment http://PatriotPost.US/histdocs/constitution/amendments.asp , one of three "reconstruction amendments" proposed after the War Between the States. The 13th Amendment banned slavery, the 14th ensured Due Process and Equal Protection under the law for former slaves and their children, and the 15th banned race-based qualification for voting rights.

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (as proposed in 1866 and ratified in 1868) reads, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." It explicitly referred to children born to U.S. citizens and those born to aliens lawfully in the U.S.

Why did the amendment's sponsors insist on adding, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"?

For insight, consider the words of Sen. Jacob Howard, co-author of the amendment's citizenship clause. In 1866, he wrote that the amendment "will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, or who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States..."

By extension, then, it is fair to conclude that, in addition to the children of those legally in the U.S. under the above exclusion, this would apply to the children of those illegally in the U.S.  — until the Supreme Court took up the question of the rights of illegal aliens to taxpayer services in 1982. In Plyler v. Doe, the judicial activists http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=330 concluded that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful."

But Plyler v. Doe is historically and legally inaccurate. In the context of original intent http://PatriotPost.US/alexander/edition.asp?id=487 , children born to those who have entered the U.S. illegally — those who are not citizens — are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." One would hope, in the course of the current debate about immigration, that Congress and the courts would actually pay homage to the plain language of our Constitution.

Not much chance of that, though, especially when it's not politically expedient.

Meanwhile, 12-20 million illegal aliens in the U.S. have hundreds of thousands of children, who are extended birthright citizenship — at an annual cost to taxpayers of between six and ten billion dollars.

On top of that, the "economic benefit" argument for "guest workers" is suffering a significant trade deficit. On average, the households of illegal aliens are paying about $9,000 in various taxes, and receiving about $30,000 in benefits — direct benefits, social services, public services and population based services like education.

Quote of the week

"In 1970, six percent of all births in the United States were to illegal aliens. In 2002, that figure was 23 percent. In 1994, 36 percent of the births paid for by Medi-Cal, California's Medicaid, were to illegals. That figure has doubtless increased in the intervening 12 years as the rate of illegal immigration has risen."  — Mona Charen  http://PatriotPost.US/opinion/entrylist.asp?source_id=32

GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

News from the Swamp: Budget battles

Democrats are doing their best to push the envelope on domestic spending, but President Bush has threatened to veto any measures that exceed his budget for fiscal 2008. Demos complain that the war has drained money from many of their precious social programs, and they want tighter oversight on federal contracts, particularly for defense, which account for many billions in government spending.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

The Democrats have quickly forgotten the $20 billion domestic sweetener in the Iraq funding bill the President allowed them to keep. At stake this time is $23 billion, which would add 2.5 percent to the President's $932 billion request. The House Appropriations Committee also added $2 billion to the President's request for homeland security, padding that bill enough to make active all the guidelines set by the 9/11 Commission. Extra spending for homeland security is certainly warranted, as the breakup of the recent JFK airport plot demonstrates (see below). However, DHS is a large bureaucracy that does need to be watched. As Heritage Foundation budget analyst Brian Riedl said, "There are important priorities in the homeland security budget, but there's also a lot of waste. The agency could be made to operate more efficiently." Unfortunately, we can't trust the Democrats to get it done.

In the Executive Branch: Libby's fate is in Bush's hands

A federal judge sentenced I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to two-and-a-half years in prison and a $250,000 fine this week, making anti-Bushies and federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald very proud. Libby's sentence is quite excessive, given that he is being convicted of perjuring himself regarding a "crime" that was never prosecuted. In other words, Libby is falling on his sword (or more correctly, Richard Armitage's sword), and everyone is waiting to see if President Bush will catch him. Libby is headed to prison within 60 days unless the President pardons him.

President Bush should not worry about the political backlash from issuing Libby a pardon. After all, his approval ratings can't sink much lower. Sarcasm aside, the President should spare Libby from going to prison because George W. Bush has always valued loyalty among those in his administration, at times retaining people who have outlasted their usefulness simply because they were loyal to him. Scooter Libby didn't believe he committed a crime and stood up to the charges in his own defense. Failing to see Karl Rove "frog-marched" out of a federal courtroom, liberals took the Vice President's chief of staff as their prized head on the wall. Scooter Libby has been loyal to this President. The time has come to reciprocate.

The beginning of the end for William Jefferson

The other shoe that has been hanging over Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) has finally dropped in the form of a 16-count indictment for racketeering, money laundering and obstruction of justice. Jefferson was under investigation for months before FBI agents pulled $90,000 out of his freezer. Now, federal authorities are accusing Jefferson of using his office to enrich himself through business dealings in Nigeria, Ghana and five other West African countries. Bribery of foreign officials violates the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, for which Jefferson is the first official ever charged. If indicted on all counts, he faces close to 200 years in prison... if any judge would follow through.

Jefferson's fellow Demos in the House have been much lighter on him for months, but with this indictment, Speaker Nancy Pelosi can no longer protect him — he will be pulled from his last committee post on the Small Business Committee. Minority Leader John Boehner has called for the House Ethics Committee to investigate Jefferson in a process that will lead to a Republican motion for his expulsion from the House.

Hillary Clinton's ethics playbook

The junior senator from New York has a lot to say about ethics in business and politics, but she follows a whole different directive when it comes to her own actions. InfoUSA has given the Clinton family more than $900,000 in free private travel to Hawaii, Jamaica, Switzerland and other destinations since 2001, and Bill has received $3.3 million for "work" he has done for them. Few people, including the company's shareholders, know what that work actually was, but InfoUSA CEO Vin Gupta is a certified sycophant. He's donated $1 million to the Clinton Library and hundreds of thousands to Hillary's campaign. He's also the target of a lawsuit by InfoUSA shareholders who claim that the free Clinton plane rides were a waste of corporate resources. No kidding. In the face of these revelations, Gupta has found "other things to do" and did not attend last night's fundraiser.

While Hillary is openly calling for restrictions on corporate executive pay and a redistribution of oil industry profits, she hasn't said a word about InfoUSA or Gupta. She claims to have followed existing Senate rules about free air travel, which call on her to reimburse the company at a first-class ticket rate, all while having no opinion about the ethics of said rules. And of course, first class isn't nearly as nice as having a whole luxurious jet to oneself.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

Administration trumpets 'No Child'

A new independent study conducted over 18 months through every state shows that students around the nation are testing better in math and science since No Child Left Behind went into effect five years ago. Not only that, but the "achievement gap" between black and white students is closing in most states, making liberals feel good about their success in social engineering. "This study confirms that No Child Left Behind has struck a chord of success with our nation's schools and students," said U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings. "We know the law is working, so now is the time to reauthorize."

No Child is due up for renewal this year, but not everyone is on board, including us. NCLB is a monstrous increase in federal interference in public education, which, antiquated as it may be to point out, is not among the enumerated duties of the federal government and it tramples on the Tenth Amendment. As if this weren't enough, there is the enormity of the program's cost, and the desire for liberals to throw even more money at it. Notably, the NEA appears to be warming to NCLB, which is bad news in and of itself. While it are encouraging to see that our children is learning — scratch that, testing better on dummed-down tests — education is best left to local control.

New & notable legislation

The Access to Birth Control Act was introduced by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) in the House and in the Senate by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). It would require pharmacies to offer "Plan B," an abortifacient, as a contraceptive regardless of moral objections.

The House voted 247-176 to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The Senate passed the legislation in April, but neither house has the votes to override a promised presidential veto.

G-8 agrees to emissions target

At the Group of Eight summit in Heiligendamm, Germany, an agreement was reached to "seriously consider" a proposal to halve greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. Importantly, the goal is not mandatory, but rather a "target." One of the key factors in the proposal is the effort to get China and India — the world's most populous countries — on board, because without them, emission-reduction goals are meaningless. The agreement has been hailed by the Leftmedia as a capitulation by President Bush, who has supposedly "seen the light" on the need to fight climate change. The inconvenient truth is that the agreement is essentially the President's proposal and not what Europeans have fought for. It is European greens that have caved, admitting that Kyoto is a failure — economically and in terms of meeting its own standards — and they have agreed to less economically harmful measures for combating dreaded warming. In other words, they have come around to President Bush's way of thinking, without admitting it, of course. To wit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has made warming her signature issue and the compromise is somewhat of a face-saving measure for her. That being said, warming is not what we consider scientifically proven, much less human induced. It would be wise not to agree to fight an imaginary boogeyman.

NATIONAL SECURITY

On the Homeland Security front: Another terror plot

Four men were arrested and charged this week for plotting an attack on Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Russell Defreitas (who calls himself Mohammed), Kareem Ibrahim, Abdul Kadir and Abdel Nur planned to blow up fuel tanks and underground fuel lines, as well as terminal buildings. Three of the men are from Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago; the fourth is a naturalized American citizen. All are of the Islamic extremist variety (no surprise there) who, according to the FBI, harbor "hatred toward the United States and the West in general."

The media and some law-enforcement officers downplayed the plot because it was in the "preliminary phase" and they were not "Grade A" terrorists. We might remind them that civilians are killed in Iraq every day by less than "Grade A" terrorists. Also, Defreitas was a contractor at the airport in the early 90s, gaining substantial knowledge about it. However, the fuel system has several shut-off valves that would prevent mass explosions as envisioned by these jihadis. Regarding criticism of the bust, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) summed it up: "[It's] the price of success when you haven't been attacked in six years. We've gone from criticizing them for not doing enough immediately after 9/11 to now criticizing them too much."

In other domestic-terrorism news, all six suspects in the Fort Dix Army Base terror plot http://archive.PatriotPost.US/pub/07-19_Digest/page-3.php were indicted Tuesday on multiple charges, including conspiracy to murder members of the U.S. military — five of the six face possible life sentences, while the sixth was charged on a weapons offense with a maximum ten-year sentence.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

Cases dismissed on Gitmo detainees

In two separate cases this week, judges of the special military commissions to try terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, dismissed cases against detainees on jurisdictional grounds. The cases involved Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a driver for Osama bin Laden, and Omar Khadr, whose father led an al-Qa'ida Canadian operation and who killed an Army medic and wounded three other soldiers in fighting in Afghanistan in 2002.

The good news here is that the world can see that these military commissions are anything but rubber stamps for the White House. The bad news is that the commissions' dismissals were lousy legal decisions. In both cases, the judges ruled that they have jurisdiction only to try "alien illegal enemy combatants," but that the prosecution had only established that the detainees in question were "enemy combatants," not "alien illegals." According to the law by which the detainees are tried, the 2007 Military Commissions Act, the special commissions do not have authority to try "legal enemy combatants." This fact notwithstanding, under their current structure the commissions have not attempted to determine whether any of the Gitmo detainees were "legal" combatants in the first place!

Andrew McCarthy, director of the Center for Law & Counterterrorism at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, questions whether the military-tribunal model is the best approach for the complexities of the war on terror:

"We ought to design a new national-security court, an amalgam of the military and civilian systems, to deal comprehensively with the war's novel challenges... a war which involves alleged terrorist operatives whose status will often be ambiguous (because they don't wear uniforms) but who cannot be given the presumptions that favor ordinary criminal defendants (since it would reward and thus perilously encourage their flouting of the laws of war). That new system should employ civilian judges, who have great expertise in moving terrorism cases and are independent of the executive branch — something important to our allies, whose cooperation is vital if we are to prevail against our enemies. But to combat the proclivity of civilian judges to push the due process envelope, the proceedings should be predominantly military and hew to rules exactingly prescribed by Congress."

The decisions to throw out these cases will not affect the status of any of the 380 or so Guantanamo detainees, but the government likely must respond by adjusting the Military Commissions Act. Given the ludicrous grounds for dismissal, though, an appeal may be more to the point.

Profiles of valor: Texas Army National Guard

Four Apache helicopter pilots from Company B, 1st Battalion, 149th Aviation Regiment (Attack), 36th Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB), were providing air support for Marine and Iraqi soldiers in Ramadi as the ground forces searched for insurgents in the heavily populated town.

The pilots, 1st Lt. Matthew Salo, Chief Warrant Officer 4 Robert Stacy, Chief Warrant Officer 4 William White, and Chief Warrant Officer 2 Marcus Moore, heard an IED explode over an open mike, followed by additional IEDs and a firestorm of insurgent fire. Because vital communication equipment had been destroyed by the IEDs, the Marines on the ground had no way of contacting their command post about the attack.

The Apache pilots became the ground forces' only means of communication. As the Marines began to evacuate the wounded, the pilots contacted the command post and drew fire away from the ground forces, even though they were unable to return fire because of the potential for civilian casualties.

Once the evacuation team removed the wounded, the Apaches went to refuel, only to find that their helicopters were severely damaged by gunfire. "We knew the mission was vital and we had to go back in," Salo said. The flight crews flew two more missions into the battle that raged for seven hours, all the while providing communication and air support under enemy fire. Eventually the Marines were able to evacuate under the cover of the Apaches, preventing countless casualties. For their part, the pilots were each awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

Putin, Bush spar over missile defense

During the lead-up to this week's Group of Eight Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany, all sides have ratcheted up the rhetoric over U.S. missile defense for Europe, slated for placement in Poland and the Czech Republic. Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened to redirect Russian warheads toward European targets if the systems are installed, leading Polish Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski to call Putin the most inflammatory Russian leader since the shoe-hammering Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev.

For all its bluster, Russia understands the necessity — and the inevitability — of missile defense for Europe. However, the placement of anti-ballistic missile systems in Russia's traditional sphere of influence will be hard sell to the Russian public, meaning this week's fiery rhetoric will not be Putin's last. Nevertheless, the Bush administration's response to Russian reticence has been equally unhelpful. In a direct response to Russia's opposition, the State Department's David Kramer, head of European and Eurasian affairs, gave a heavy-handed condemnation of Russia's record on human rights and democracy in a major policy speech endorsed by the White House. President Bush echoed this rhetoric on Tuesday in a speech in Prague, Czech Republic, speaking in the very room where the Warsaw Pact was dissolved in 1991.

"In Russia, reforms that once promised to empower citizens have been derailed, with troubling implications for democratic development," the President said to a room of former leaders of the 1989 Velvet Revolution. Speaking of a Czech and Polish-based missile defense, President Bush reiterated that this move "is a purely defensive measure aimed not at Russia, but at true threats" to Europe; namely, Iran. On Wednesday, Putin proffered the untenable proposal that the interceptors be relocated to Azerbaijan, whose authoritarian leader is sympathetic to both Russia and Iran.

On Thursday, Bush and Putin met privately at the G8 Summit to discuss their differences. Hopefully this meeting was more constructive than the public discourse. Putin continues to be immensely popular in Russia making Bush's decision to pressure the Russians on missile defense by targeting their human-rights record an odd one, to say the least. It seems the administration needs to choose one diplomatic track with Russia: missile defense or human rights. If the Iranian threat to Europe is any measure, the choice seems obvious.

Flag Day 2007

On 14 June 1777, the Marine Committee of the Continental Congress adopted a resolution, which gave birth to our National Flag. The resolution read: "Resolved that the Flag of the United States be made of 13 stripes, alternate red and white, that the union be 13 stars, white in a blue field, representing a new constellation."

General George Washington explained: "We take the stars from heaven, the red from our mother country, separating it by white stripes, thus showing that we have separated from her, and the white stripes shall go down to posterity representing liberty."

On 30 May 1916, President Woodrow Wilson announced during his Memorial Day address, that 14 June of each year would be celebrated as Flag Day. "This flag, which we honor and under which we serve, is the emblem of our unity, our power, our thought and purpose as a nation. It has no other character than that which we give it from generation to generation... Though silent, it speaks to us — speaks to us of the past, of the men and women who went before us, and of the records they wrote upon it."

Today, our flag is a beacon for liberty, a symbol of hope for all people who "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

On this Flag Day 2007, we American Patriots will display and pay homage to our National Flag.

For further information on the history of our flag, as well as proper etiquette, protocol and disposal of flags that are no longer serviceable http://PatriotPost.US/histdocs/flag/retiring.asp , take advantage of The Patriot's resources on our Historic Documents page http://PatriotPost.US/histdocs/  (scroll to the bottom of the page).

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Tax cuts continue to fuel economy

With the addition of 157,000 jobs, May marked the 44th consecutive month of job growth and brought to eight million the total number of jobs created since the 2003 Bush tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. These cuts, coming on the tail of the 2001 reduction of individual income tax rates, have fueled the American economy. Unemployment has fallen by a quarter; tax revenue has increased (by 14.5 percent in 2005 and 11.7 percent in 2006), and productivity has grown steadily (at a rate of 2.8 percent a year since 2001). After a slow economic start in 2007, forecasters are optimistic. "We had a very weak performance in the first three months of the year," observes Richard Yamarone of Argus Research, "but now we're in the middle of the year and economic conditions are extremely bright."

Jared Bernstein, senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute, notes that "[t]hough job growth of this magnitude is moderate, if it persists, it is likely fast enough to provide consumers with the needed income growth to propel the economy forward in coming months."

The liberal response to this economic growth? Why, higher taxes, of course! In his push for universal healthcare, senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama (D-IL) has proposed not only increasing both estate and income tax rates (on the "rich" only, of course) but also allowing the 2003 cuts on capital gains and dividends to expire. Ignoring the fact that lower taxes and economic growth are flip sides of the same coin, Obama would trade both for government-run healthcare. Yet another example of the liberal belief that government is better able to do for you what you can and should do for yourself.

Education Department makes new loan rules

The U.S. Department of Education proposed new rules for the student-loan industry this week in response to criticism of lax oversight. In some cases, loan companies have been paying off university officials who then recommend these lenders to students. "Inducements" have been barred, however vaguely, since 1995, but clearly have continued brazenly. The new rules require universities to provide at least three loan companies in listed recommendations for students as well as bar the kinds of gifts (entertainment, travel, etc.) that have corrupted the process. The Federal Register has 60 days to review the new rules, which, if approved, will take effect next summer. Congressional hearings are also scheduled to investigate improper relations between lenders and universities.

As we have said before, the problem with the student-loan industry begins at the federal level, regardless of the good intentions. Tuition costs have skyrocketed due mainly to federal subsidies. Imagine the cost of healthcare if these sorts of subsidies were implemented... er, never mind.

The 'inevitable' carbon tax

Global Warming fans in the form of economists and tax analysts are pushing for a new tax in a bid to reduce industrial greenhouse gas emissions. "This is going to happen anyway," remarked Eric Toder, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, "so we might as well enjoy it." Ah, there's nothing like an invigorating "inevitable" tax. Toder was one of four panelists at the organization's DC headquarters this week discussing whether a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system would be best to foist upon on the already overburdened U.S. taxpayer. Furrowed brows all around, no doubt.

A carbon tax would simply tax measured CO2 emissions. The disincentive would theoretically serve as a means by which the U.S. could deter industry from further besmirching the atmosphere. On the flip side, a cap-and-trade scheme would limit the amount of carbon dioxide industries may emit while offering "credits" that big belching factories could swap like Pokemon cards. However, like all best laid plans, there's a catch... or two. First, who will guard the henhouse? If the atmosphere were truly as befouled as the MSM (and the UN's back-pocket science squad) would have us believe, we would need a level of industry oversight and accountability par excellence to save mankind. Thus we can't have a single evil multi-national corporation running amok and globally warming us with carbons. Like Pokemon, you gotta catch 'em all. Furthermore, does the federal government really need an additional $100 billion in tax revenue — especially from such patently absurd gimmickry?

CULTURE

Around the nation: Marriage and abortion

In 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22 with an overwhelming 61 percent of the vote, barring that state from recognizing same-sex marriages. For the second time in three years, the state assembly has tried to thwart the will of the people by legalizing said unions. A bill sponsored by San Francisco lawmaker Mark Leno has passed the house and is on its way to the senate. However, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill two years ago and appears ready to do so again.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

Democrats made emotional appeals with personal anecdotes to support same-sex marriage. Leno relayed the story of a UC Berkeley student as proof that such marriages are good. What more proof is needed? Republican Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa simply noted, "The voters spoke pretty loudly and pretty clearly." Surely LaMalfa is aware that liberals will find any method possible — courts, legislature, executive order, whatever — to make same-sex marriage legal, the will of the people or the rule of law notwithstanding.

In Michigan, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the state's partial-birth-abortion ban. The appeals court found that the state's ban, passed by petition in 2004, was beyond the scope of a federal partial-birth ban that was upheld by the Supreme Court in April. Michigan's law "opted to use statutory language that pushed almost every boundary that the Supreme Court has imposed for these types of laws," and the three-judge panel found that other abortion methods could be banned.

Pam Sherstad, the spokeswoman for Michigan's Right to Life chapter, said the ruling was a blow to the 460,000 people who had signed the original petition, not to mention the babies who will continue to be gruesomely murdered at birth. An appeal is being considered.

Faith and Family: Philadelphia Boy Scouts under fire

The City of Brotherly Love passed a resolution last week threatening to kick the local Boy Scouts' Cradle of Liberty Council (COL) out of their rent-free headquarters in Philadelphia unless the COL adopts a non-discrimination policy toward homosexuals. "It's as a consequence of [COL's] refusal to clarify their policy that we've taken the steps that we have," said City Solicitor Romulo Diaz. "We're not trying to hurt the Cradle of Liberty Council, but at the same time, this is a commonsense approach that recognizes we have non-discrimination policies that are established in Philadelphia law."

The COL, which has worked from the headquarters under the same agreement with the city since 1928, already has a non-discrimination policy that was approved in 2004 by both the city and the Boy Scouts' national organization. Based on the Supreme Court's 2000 ruling, the Boy Scouts are still allowed to bar homosexuals from the organization. "There has never once been a charge or allegation of discrimination based on sexual orientation brought against the Cradle of Liberty Council in its history, and I'm not quite sure what their basis is for eviction," said a COL spokesman.

The basis of the city's actions seems pretty clear to us, however: The Scouts must sacrifice their founding principles on the altar of the homosexual agenda.

NBC to campaign for Gore

Al Gore's upcoming "Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis" will enjoy coverage Hillary and Barack could only dream of. NBC will lavish 75 hours of airtime to the Warming Reverend Gore and his band of climate gurus. NBC-TV's Saturday prime time line-up on 7 July will be devoted to the concerts, CNBC will carry seven hours, Bravo will run 18 hours and the Sundance channel and the Universal HD channel will air the concerts for 22 hours each. Among the featured artists will be Madonna, Bon Jovi, Kanye West and one-toilet-paper-square-for-you Sheryl Crow http://archive.PatriotPost.US/humor/toilet-paper-nazi.jpg . An NBC press release gushed, "this monumental music event will bring together more than 100 of today's hottest artists and two billion people to focus the world's attention on this global climate crisis and what can be done to reduce global warming." As the Media Research Center notes, should Gore run for president (and we believe he will), this would be "one of the largest ever, if not the largest, in-kind contributions to a presidential campaign."

FCC regulation rejected by court

By a 2-1 margin, the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals in New York this week rejected a Federal Communications Commission indecency ruling against Fox Television for airing "fleeting expletives." The case history dates to the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards, in which Cher and Nicole Richie, respectively, uttered expletives that were broadcast uncensored. In 2004, following yet another "accidental airing" the prior year on NBC's showing of the Golden Globes during which singer Bono used the phrase, "f*****g brilliant," the FCC ruled that a certain word, regardless of context, "inherently has a sexual connotation" and can thus be regulated by indecency standards.

The court cited lack of "reasoned basis" for the FCC's ruling, claiming that it violated the commission's pre-2004 policy that "fleeting and isolated remarks of this nature do not warrant commission action." Yet, while regulators debate the obscure notion of expletives by intent, broadcasters continue their mad dash towards moral decadence. Where broadcasters once held themselves to at least a modicum of decency, they now embrace what public culture once would have condemned. Abandoning all societal responsibility, they have once again proven themselves an enemy to moral values as a basis for civil society. Rather than propagate a false interchange of libertinism and liberty, broadcasters should renounce their discipleship of depravity in exchange for a standard of decency.

[nChrist]

The Federalist Patriot
Patriot Vol. 07 No. 23 Digest | 08 June 2007

FREE E-mail Subscription:
http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
____________________

And last...

Global warming has created yet another problem in America: Animal shelters nationwide are being overrun with cats and kittens. According to Pets Across America, the 30 percent increase in intakes of cats from 2005 to 2006 is due to the extended breeding season... and thus due to global warming. "Cats are typically warm-weather, spring-time breeders," said the group's president, Kathy Warnick. "However, states that typically experience primarily longer and colder winters are now seeing shorter, warmer winters, leading to year-round breeding." We could mention that in the 2005-2006 period, according to NASA, temperatures actually fell, but we'll be helpful instead. One solution was suggested by the group's Vice President Bob Rhode: "It is likely that global warming is probably not going to be slowing any time soon, therefore, it benefits everyone when pet owners take action and spay and neuter their pets." The other solution is a bit grander: The extra cats could be a valuable export to balance our trade deficit with China.

PUBLISHER'S NOTE

Please join us in welcoming aboard our newest little Patriot, son of The Patriot's content editor, Gus Andrews, and wife Kirsten: PFC Jonah Thomas Andrews, USMC. Date of Enlistment: 1 June 2007, Height: 20.5 inches, Weight: 8 pounds, 4 ounces, Favorite guttural sound: Ooorah! Soon-to-be favorite food: Puree of MRE.

Veritas vos Liberabit — Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families — especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty, while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.)