"Last Flag Flying" – "Death Trap for Americans"

Where was the security? Where was the care? All others national presences had left. We left all right, we left our people hanging out to die.

Ambassador Chris Stevens reports and pleads.
The President pleads ignorance.
Incompetence as a leader doesn’t qualify Obama for anything other than a ticket out of office.

Did President Obama know?
What did he know when?
Greta has this video reminder

The President, referring to the death of 4 patriots on the Daily Show: “Well. I’ll say this. It was not optimal

Where is Obama’s heart? Cool is fine for a jive-talking glad-hander but cold is inexcusable in a President of the United States.

Documents show Stevens worried about Libya security threats, Al Qaeda before consulate attack

Read more and video: Damning stuff here

What Happens When We Are No Longer a Nation of Law? and the Press Doesn’t Care?

 

"The Roman Republic fell, not because of the ambition of Caesar or Augustus, but because it had already long ceased to be in any real sense a republic at all. When the sturdy Roman plebeian, who lived by his own labor, who voted without reward according to his own convictions, and who with his fellows formed in war the terrible Roman legion, had been changed into an idle creature who craved nothing in life save the gratification of a thirst for vapid excitement, who was fed by the state, and directly or indirectly sold his vote to the highest bidder, then the end of the republic was at hand, and nothing could save it. The laws were the same as they had been, but the people behind the laws had changed, and so the laws counted for nothing."
– President Theodore Roosevelt

H/T Ace of Spades

Considering Human Life

  • From a comment considering human life
  • Yong Lee
  • Shanghai, China
  • We must not forget that life is a continuum and a mystery. Dissecting it into small fragments destroys both. One thing is for certain, destroying a fetus guarantees one less baby, one less toddler, one less child, one less adolescent, and one less adult man or woman in the world. With that, all of the potentials as well as detriments of the loss are gone. But it is not up to us to determine the value of a life by the outcome. We can only take it as it comes- that is the wonder of life.In all of nature, life cannot be chopped into pieces. Either we embrace it whole, or we lose it all. Disrupt the migration of salmons (a trip) and we destroy the species. The virtue, and perhaps the trouble of our existence, is that whole does indeed need every piece.

    By arguing and devaluing a passage in life common to us all, specially the most frail of our stages, we miss the point entirely. Argue endless about whose body it is, whose body it is not, whose right to choose it is, what a fetus is, and we forget that each of us belong to a web people without whom we cannot exist.

Welcome?

"I stand at the door and knock"

I pass this welcoming scene everyday. I think it must qualify as an oxymoron. It may be indicative of this present age.
I call it: "I stand at the door and knock."

Resting in Your Spirit

I am witness.
I am martyr.
You are silence in action,
No moving parts,
Yet accomplishing Your intent,
While I keep watch.
You rest upon Your Altar.
I rest in You.

You are Son.
You are Witness.
You are Martyr.
You are Living Testament,
Covenanting with Man,
Promising me.

Draw me.
Give me Your vision of holiness.
Cause me to desire.
Infuse wisdom
As answer to my pleading desire.

O, Happy Cause.
O, Moving Spirit.
Be one with the essence of me,
That fallen nature might drink
Of Your Eternal Spring.

By Joann Nelander
Copyright 2011
All rights reserved.

Kagan Competence Questioned

Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey writes:

“Without any judicial experience, Kagan has to rely on her performance at the Court as Solicitor General over a short period of fifteen months — and at best, it’s mixed.”

Lack of preparation will out. Morrissey’s case for Kagan’s competence or incompetence to be on the Supreme Court is made based on her own bad:

ORAL ARGUMENT OF ELENA KAGAN

ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLEE GENERAL KAGAN: Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the Court:

I have three very quick points to make about the government position. The first is that this issue has a long history. For over 100 years Congress has made a judgment that corporations must be subject to special rules when they participate in elections and this Court has never questioned that judgment.

Number two –

JUSTICE SCALIA: Wait, wait, wait, wait. We never questioned it, but we never approved it, either.  And we gave some really weird interpretations to the Taft-Hartley Act in order to avoid confronting the question.

GENERAL KAGAN: I will repeat what I said, Justice Scalia: For 100 years this Court, faced with many opportunities to do so, left standing the legislation that is at issue in this case — first the contribution limits, then the expenditure limits that came in by way of Taft-Hartley — and then of course in Austin specifically approved those limits.

JUSTICE SCALIA: I don’t understand what you are saying. I mean, we are not a self — self-starting institution here. We only disapprove of something when somebody asks us to. And if there was no occasion for us to approve or disapprove, it proves nothing whatever that we didn’t disapprove it.

GENERAL KAGAN: Well, you are not a self-starting institution. But many litigants brought many cases to you in 1907 and onwards and in each case this Court turns down, declined the opportunity, to invalidate or otherwise interfere with this legislation.

JUSTICE KENNEDY: But that judgment was validated by Buckley’s contribution-expenditure line. And you’re correct if you look at contributions, but this is an expenditure case. And I think that it doesn’t clarify the situation to say that for100 years — to suggest that for 100 years we would have allowed expenditure limitations, which in order to work at all have to have a speaker-based distinction, exemption from media, content-based distinction, time-based distinction. We’ve never allowed that.