Many people think the Internal Revenue Service was violating civil liberties when it harassed tea party groups. After all, the groups were targeted because they wanted to exercise their civil liberty to challenge government policies. However, the specific issue in the IRS case was the groups’ application for tax-exempt status, which seems to be an aspect of economic liberty. In fact, the IRS case demonstrates that there is no meaningful distinction between civil and economic liberties. A true friend of the
During his time as a congressman, Kasich served for 18 years on the House Armed Services Committee. As a candidate for president, Kasich is positioning himself in the Republican Party’s more hawkish wing on foreign policy.
A CNN op-ed by Kasich, published on Monday, painted a frightful picture of U.S. national security under President Obama. “Terrorism is increasingly striking here at home. Regional powers are challenging the postwar security order. Nuclear weapons are proliferating. Cyberspace has become a battlefield. The U.S. has neglected both our military and our alliances and has apparently decided, instead, to try to lead from behind,” wrote Kasich.
Though his op-ed fell short of outlining specific foreign policy positions, in May, Kasich told Jonathan Karl on ABC’s This Week, “I said months ago that we ought to have a coalition of our Western partners and our — any of our allies in the Middle East to form a coalition to knock ISIS out. And if that includes American boots on the ground, so be it.”
The dust-up between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul over presidential fidelity to the Constitution -- particularly the Fourth Amendment -- was the most illuminating two minutes of the Republican debate last week.
It is a well-regarded historical truism that the Fourth Amendment was written by victims of government snooping, the 1770s version. The Framers wrote it to assure that the new federal government could never do to Americans what the king had done to the colonists.
What did the king do? He dispatched British agents and soldiers into the colonists’ homes and businesses ostensibly looking for proof of payment
Rep. Jones had a great interview on infowars today. Mr. Jones seems to believe we have a real shot of dumping Boehner, but we all need to be pro active. Call your Congress critter and tell them to support H Resolution 385 https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...ution/385/text. Mr. Jones discusses some of Boehner's strong arm tactics, used mostly to promote Obama's agenda and special interest groups. He has got to go !!
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio voters will decide this fall whether to legalize marijuana in the Buckeye State for recreational and medical use.
ResponsibleOhio's marijuana legalization constitutional amendment was certified Wednesday by the Ohio secretary of state. It will appear as Issue 3 on the statewide ballot for the general election on Nov. 3.
If approved by voters, Ohio would be the fifth state to legalize marijuana for recreational use and the first to do so without first having a medical marijuana program.
"It's time for marijuana legalization in Ohio, and voters will have the opportunity to make it happen this November -- we couldn't be more excited," ResponsibleOhio Executive Director Ian James said in a statement. "Drug dealers don't care about doing what's best for our state and its citizens. By reforming marijuana laws in November, we'll provide compassionate care to sick Ohioans, bring money back to our local communities and establish a new industry with limitless economic development opportunities."
The title of the piece says both Paul and Christie "get it right", but really it is much more of a pro-Paul piece. Also interesting is that Kerik is someone who was even more intimately involved with the events of 9/11 than Christie, but he challenges Christie's anti-constitutional bluster that 9/11 trumps all.
Christie, Paul Get It Right in Debate
By Bernard Kerik
Tuesday, 11 Aug 2015 09:48 AM
On the recent Fox News presidential debate, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie lashed out at United States Sen. Rand Paul for not supporting the NSA's surveillance program, which came off to many watching as a bully mentality and myopic prosecutorial mindset that I’m sure animates Paul’s concerns in the first place.
Whether you agree with Paul’s decision to support the freedoms protected by our Bill of Rights — such as freedom of speech and the requirement of a search warrant, and to place some limits on the otherwise un-cabined and massive NSA surveillance program is one thing. However, Christie’s rage at a U.S. senator because that senator has serious concerns over our civil liberties and made a decision that he feels would protect the freedom and liberties of his constituents, evidences precisely the prosecutorial mentality that has caused countless injustices across the country and resulted in the incarceration of thousands of people — many of whom are innocent or wrongly convicted.
I’m sure Christie is well intended, but seems to ignore a reality that judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals and countless others have revealed over the past several years, and that is that there is a plethora of increasing evidence that overzealous and over-reaching prosecutors are violating laws themselves, and there is neither oversight nor existing remedy to appropriately hold them accountable.
I was there on 9/11, both during and in the aftermath of the attacks on the World Trade Center. I spent 10 years of my life, living and working in the Middle East and know and understand the threats we face from radical Islamic terror far better than most Americans. I have personally witnessed death so barbaric that it would haunt most men, and I have nearly died for this country more times that I can count — all out of love for this country.
But, unfortunately, I have also witnessed firsthand that deprivation of liberty by overzealous and over-reaching prosecutors and the irreparable toll they take on people that they wrongfully target and prosecute, and the innocent families and children that they destroy, so I know exactly what Rand Paul is concerned with and for more reasons than I can count, I am no longer confident that Americans’ freedoms and liberties are adequately protected under the law.
In the next round of Rand Paul vs. Donald Trump, the Republican senator from Kentucky is releasing his campaign's first digital ad against his presidential rival, hitting the frontrunner in a video for supporting Democrats in the past.
The video, which his campaign says will be aired in a "substantial" ad buy, launches Wednesday in New Hampshire and Iowa and runs through the weekend.
With ominous music behind it, the video opens with favorable statements that Trump has made about Democratic economic policies, Hillary Clinton, and universal health care. It also features a comment he made in 1999, in which he said, "I really believe the Republicans are just too crazy right."
At one point, text on the screen appears, asking if Trump is really "telling it like it is?"
Then it switches to the infamous clip of former President Bill Clinton answering: "It depends on what the meaning of the word is is."
The second half of the two-minute video features footage of Paul talking about his record and policies in major speeches that he's delivered in the past year, portraying him as a candidate eager to reform Washington and return the Republican Party to conservative principles.