You Go Dennis!

Robocop's Comment:

I can't believe that I used to dislike Dennis Miller. I am now a fan.

A Few Questions for Barack Obama

Editorial by Fox News' Radley Balko.

In my last column, I posed questions to GOP presidential hopeful John McCain. This week, it's Democrat Barack Obama's turn.

— In February, you said you might support vouchers and charter schools if empirical data showed that they improve education (some studies show that they do). Admirably, your position was, "I will not allow my predispositions to stand in the way of making sure that our kids can learn." After pressure from the teachers unions, you quickly backed off from that position, stating that your campaign doesn't support vouchers "in any shape or form." What prompted that change? And if it's important that we not "throw up our hands" and "walk away from the public schools," why do you send your own kids to private schools?

— Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton intends to terminate D.C.'s federal school voucher program, even though those vouchers are paid through a separate fund that takes no money at all from D.C.'s public schools (which already spend $10,000 more per pupil per year than the city's private schools). Del. Holmes Norton says the program undermines the public schools. You've signed on to the plan to eliminate the program. But given that the program takes no money from the city's already bloated public schools, isn't it only "undermining" the public school system by exposing how unhappy D.C. parents really are with the schools' performance? Isn't that a good thing?

— You've expressed support for the idea of a "no fly" zone over Darfur because of human rights abuses. What's happening in Sudan is certainly tragic and abhorrent. But what is our national security interest there? Should we send the U.S. military every time there are wide-scale human rights abuses happening anywhere on the globe? Should we send troops to Myanmar? Uzbekistan? Turkmenistan? Iran? Saudi Arabia?

— You not only supported the latest federal farm bill, you commended it, stating that it "will provide America's hard-working farmers and ranchers with more support and more predictability." Critics have called that $307 billion monstrosity an orgy of earmarks, corporate welfare, and protectionism. It actually increases subsidies to huge agribusinesses in an era of record grain prices — subsidies that are already crushing farmers in the developing world. The New York Times called it "disgraceful." The Wall Street Journal called it a "scam." How does the "change" candidate justify supporting a bill larded with sweetheart deals for big agribusiness when just about everyone not getting a check from the bill opposed it?

— You continue to support ethanol subsidies despite the fact that corn-based ethanol is inefficient, environmentally unfriendly, and part of the cause of rising food prices. Even liberal New York Times columnist Paul Krugman calls ethanol "[b]ad for the economy, bad for consumers, bad for the planet." Perhaps your support stems from you representing a corn producing state. But is supporting a wasteful policy to win votes "change we can believe in," or is it a good sign that you're just another politician?

— In your autobiography, you admit to using marijuana and cocaine in high school and college. Yet you largely support the federal drug war — a change from several years ago when you said you'd be open to decriminalizing marijuana. Would Barack Obama be where he is today if he had been arrested in college for using drugs? Doesn't the fact that you and our current president (who has all but admitted to prior drug use) have risen to such high stature suggest that the worst thing about illicit drugs is not the drugs themselves, but what the government will do to you if you're caught?

— In a speech to Cuban-Americans in Miami, you called the Cuban trade embargo "an important inducement for change," a 180-degree shift from your prior position. The trade embargo has been in place for 46 years. Did denying an entire generation of Cubans access to American goods, culture, and ideas induce any actual change? Wasn't the real effect just to keep Cubans poor and isolated? In communist countries like Vietnam and China, trade with the U.S. has ushered in economic reform, and vastly improved the standard of living. Why wouldn't it be the same if we were to start trading with Cuba?

— In addition to the drugs, Cuba, and school voucher issues, you have also changed or revised your position in recent months on the war in Iraq, government eavesdropping and immunity for the telecom companies, and holding employers accountable for hiring illegal immigrants. Under some circumstances, changing or revising one's position can show admirable introspection — the ability to revise prior conceptions with new information. Some of your new positions are more conservative. Some are more liberal. But they do seem to have one thing in common: Should we be concerned that your shifts have been to those positions that give more power and influence to government? Are there any areas where you'd actually roll back the federal government?

— In October you asked a congregation in South Carolina to help you become "an instrument of God," and to join you in building a "Kingdom, right here on Earth." Is such lofty, sanctimonious rhetoric really appropriate from a would-be president? Why shouldn't we be suspicious of a man who believes politics — indeed, his politics — are God's politics? Isn't using the political process to build a "Kingdom on earth" the sort of thing we're used to hearing from the religious right? Should we be cautious of political leaders who believe they're agents of the Divinity?

— You have called for a "civilian national security force," essentially a non-military public service corps that in your words is "just as powerful, just as strong," and "just as well-funded" as the military. Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren has estimated that your proposal would cost somewhere between $100 and $500 billion—or between 10 and 50 percent of all federal income tax revenues. How do you plan to pay for this program?

— Your wife said that as president, "Barack Obama will . . . demand that you shed your cynicism . . . That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual . . ." How is any of this remotely the responsibility of the president? Where in the Constitution does it say that the president should be our personal motivator and spiritual leader? Will you help us lose weight and eat our vegetables, too?

Robocop's Comment:

Damn good questions. I suspect they will be both unanswered and ignored by the Libtard media.

Fun Monday 07.28.08

The week's Fun Monday is being hosted by Mommy Wizdom.

The Rules:

If you were ruler for a day/week/month/year (your choice on the time) you would...

ex...make coffee free to all citizens. Or you'd abolish the penny. You may also specify if you're ruler of the world or just your country. Have fun with it; be creative.

If you like to dress up, you may also choose to take pictures of yourself in your "ruler" outfit(s) and post them up with your entry.

Robocop's Comment:

This one is going to be fun. It is too bad that I could not upload or download images for this post (thank you Vista), but I will work with what I have. Of course, the rules do not specify one thing, which is good for me, because I have a number of things which I would do...

If I were ruler for a year (in this case, the year 1787) of the United States Of America, I would do a number of things. These things would not necessarily be in this order. Before I proceed, here is a quick SITREP of the year: It has been about four years since the American Revolutionary War was officially over with the Treaty Of Paris. The novice politicians were in the process of establishing a new form of government for the United States Of America. Now there are a few things I would have done to clarify our great country, and to avoid the future misunderstandings that would plague our history.

I would have freed the slaves,

gave women, and all races the right to vote (as long as they were US citizens),

legislated racial and gender equality,

actually paid the Revolutionary War Veterans their due,

and made common English the national language from the get go.

In addition to the above, I would have clarified The United States Constitution. Did I mention that I we would be using common English? I think the snobbish intellectual mindset of our founders caused them to write the document too formally, paving the way to future confusion. I would have it state things as what they actually meant. Now for a small example, I will use the Bill Of Rights, which are the first ten Amendments to The US Constitution. I might even tweak it out a small bit.

Amendment I

Before:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

After:

Congress will not force the people to worship God, or prevent them from worshiping God on their own free will. The peoples' right say what they want, write what they want, assemble in peaceful protest, or complain to the Government will not be interfered with.

Amendment II

Before:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

After:

The people have the individual right to keep, and carry arms for the purpose of defending their safety, and liberty.

Amendment III

Before:

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

After:

No homeowner or tenant will be required to house a soldier.

Amendment IV

Before:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

After:

There will be no unreasonable searches and seizures of the people, their homes, their property without a warrant attained due to an actual reason. The warrant will specify person, place, or thing to be searched and/or seized.

Amendment V

Before:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

After:

No Citizen will be charged with a serious crime without a Grand Jury indictment, unless in the service of the armed forces in time of crisis. No one will be tried twice for the same crime, forced to testify against himself, or deprived in any way without due process. Private property will not be taken for public use without just compensation that reflects the current market value.

Amendment VI

Before:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

After:

In all criminal prosecutions, the citizen who is accused has a right to a quick public trial by jury not to exceed 30 days, at the State and district the crime was committed. He will be told what he is accused of, confront and obtain witnesses, and to have legal representation.

Amendment VII

Before:

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

After:

In Civil suits that involve values exceeding twenty dollars, the right to trial by jury will be preserved.

Amendment VIII

Before:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

After:

Excessive bail or fines will not be imposed. The punishment shall always fit the crime.

Amendment IX

Before:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

After:

If a right is not listed in the Constitution, it does not meant a right does not exist, as long as it does not harm anyone.

Amendment X

Before:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

After:

Powers not given to the Federal Government specifically are reserved to the State governments.

Would this have changed history? Yes. This might have even prevented Civil War. Would this have prevented interpretation by the courts? No, but it would be harder for judges to make up stuff too.

I hope this was not too boring.

Masochism and Child Birth

Canadian Woman Gives Birth to 18th Child

A Romanian immigrant has given birth to her 18th child in British Columbia, making her the province's most prolific mother in 20 years.

Proud dad Alexandru Lonce said Saturday that his 44-year-old wife, Livia, gave birth on Tuesday. Their daughter Abigail weighed in at seven pounds, 12 ounces.

"We never planned how many children to have. We just let God guide our lives, you know, because we strongly believe life comes from God and that's the reason we did not stop the life," said Alexandru Lonce.

The couple immigrated to Canada from Romania in 1990 and now lives in Abbotsford, British Columbia. Their 17 other children range in age from 20 months to 23 years old. Lonce said he did not know if the couple would have more children.

The family now has 10 girls and eight boys.

"We would have liked a boy to be even," he said. "We thank God all of them are healthy and happy."

Lonce said the family has received calls from Germany, Romania and England, as well as from media outlets across Canada.

Robocop's Comment:

"There was an old woman who lived in a shoe, she had so many children, her uterus fell out" Andrew Dice Clay

Learning From The Enemy

Iran Hangs 29 Convicts

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian state television's Web site says 29 people convicted of murder, drug trafficking and other criminal charges have been hanged in Tehran's Evin prison.

The Web site says the convicts included people found guilty of murder, rape, armed robbery and drug trafficking. The hangings were carried out after the death verdicts were approved by Iran's Supreme Court.

Murder, rape, armed robbery, kidnapping and drug trafficking are all punishable by death under Iran's strict Islamic regime.

The hangings bring to more than 100 the number of people executed in Iran so far this year.

Robocop's Comment:

Perhaps the Libtards are correct with the idea that we can learn from our enemies. I do not think this is what they had in mind, but it still annoys me that Libtards can be correct sometimes. I am glad this story did not include religious executions of Christians this time.

Douche Of The Month June, 2008

The Winner: The United States Supreme Court

The Reason: Baning states from executing baby rapers.

Robocop's Comment: You are either for baby rapers, or against them. The Liberal Justices of the United States Supreme Court are FOR baby rapers. They all deserve honorary life memberships for NAMBLA.

Senator Obama’s Excellent Adventure

From Fox New's Colonel Oliver North

Senator Obama’s Excellent Adventure

"What’s this guy running for, ‘Emperor of the world?’” asked the sunburned fellow at the next table where we stopped for lunch. Mr. Sunburn was holding a copy of The Charleston Post and Courier and pointing to a headline, “Obama pledges to work for peace.” The inquiry, addressed to those sitting beside him elicited only shrugs, so he answered his own question: “Just doesn’t make any sense to me.”

The Obama machine’s, “Hope & Change World Tour” has left more than a few people perplexed. Some – like the gentleman beside us at the restaurant – are American voters who wonder why the presumptive Democrat nominee is campaigning in foreign countries for president of the U.S. Others – seem baffled by the places and people chosen for meetings and photo-ops with the candidate. Apparently, among the mystified are members of the media who should have been asking tough questions. A brief look at what actually took place during this ten-day soiree only adds to the confusion:

The first five legs of the Obama overseas campaign swing were paid for by the U.S. taxpayers. Billed as a “Congressional fact-finding trip” it included U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and GOP dissident, Nebraska’s Chuck Hagel.

The first stop after departing the U.S. on July 17, was Camp Arifjan in Kuwait. There, Senator Obama preened for the cameras with U.S. troops playing basketball – a stunt unlikely to be replicated by Senator John McCain whose war wounds keep him from raising his arms over his shoulders and doing a decent lay up.

Shortly thereafter I got my first inquiry from a colleague who asked, “Why do all the images, taken by the U.S. military and released to the public, show Obama in such a positive way?”

The answer, of course, is simple: No one in our Armed Forces today knows who the Commander in Chief is going to be in January, and no one in uniform is going to send out images of the man who could turn out to be their boss showing him picking his nose or committing a foul under the backboards.

Then, it was on to Afghanistan for a surreal meeting in Jalalabad with Gul Agha Sherzai, the governor of Nangarhar Province. Though the governor is suspected of being involved in the Afghan opium trade, no one in the mainstream media questioned the propriety of such a confab. Later on Saturday the “CODEL” – military speak for “Congressional Delegation” – received a briefing at Bagram Air Base from Maj. Gen. Jeffrey J. Schloesser, Commanding General of the NATO Regional Command East. Again, the photos and video-tape were spectacular.

On Sunday, after more photo-ops with U.S. troops at Camp Eggers, the presumptive Democrat nominee met with President Hamid Karzai at the Presidential Palace in Kabul. Pictures of the meeting show the two men seated and chatting by a fireplace.

In Iraq on Monday, Sen. Obama’s first stop was at the Basra International Airport for photos and briefings from British, Iraqi and U.S. military commanders – and then on to Baghdad for a red-carpet-roll-out at the residence of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. After the hour-long meet-and-greet, separate Kodak moments were held with Iraq’s Kurdish President Jalal Talabani, Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and Shiite Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi.

After a well-photographed tour of the 86th Combat Support Hospital inside the Green Zone, Sen. Obama sat still for photos and a briefing by Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, and then took a picture-perfect helicopter ride over Baghdad with Gen. Petraeus before dining – and being video-taped with the CENTCOM commander.

On Tuesday, following a photo-breakfast with U.S. troops, the Obama entourage headed for Ramadi, the once-bloody capital of Anbar province. There he took photos with the provincial governor, Maamoon Sami Rasheed al-Alwani, police chief, Tariq Yousef al-Asaal, Ahmed Abu Risha, and Ali Hatem Suleiman, of the Sunni Awakening movement. At day’s end, it was pics in Amman with Jordanian King Abdullah II and a press conference during which Senator Obama summed up all he had learned: “My view, based on the advice of military experts, is that we can redeploy safely in 16 months so that our combat brigades are out of Iraq in 2010.”

Wednesday, taxpayers got a break as the Obama for President campaign started covering costs for the Global Hope & Change Tour. Photos were taken with Israeli and Palestinian leaders and promises were made to “work for peace.”

By Thursday it was photos with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin. Frantic Friday was a whirlwind of photos and “press avails” in Paris with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and in London, with U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Conservative Party leader David Cameron. Space will surely be saved in the campaign scrapbook for frenzied “welcome home party” in Chicago on Saturday night.

Bottom line: Image is everything. Lots of great pics which we’re sure to see again. Nothing changed on issues that matter – but a big bill for beleaguered U.S. taxpayers to cover the costs of Senator Obama’s excellent adventure.

Robocop's Comment:

Glad we could flip the bill. Just think,he wasted the money before getting elected.

Douche Of The Week 07.22.08

The WINNER: Andrea Curry-Demus, 38, of Wilkinsburg,PA

The Reason: Stealing a baby from a pregnant woman (18 year old Kia Johnson), yes,she cut it out of mother/killed her.

The Story:

Pa. Woman Accused of Stealing Baby Charged With Homicide

PITTSBURGH —
A woman suspected of cutting open a pregnant woman's uterus and stealing the baby has been charged with homicide, unlawful restraint and kidnapping, police said Sunday.

Andrea Curry-Demus, 38, of Wilkinsburg, is charged in the death of Kia Johnson, 18, of McKeesport. Curry-Demus is accused of taking the baby boy to a Pittsburgh hospital and claiming it was her own.

Johnson's body was found Friday in Curry-Demus's apartment. The body was positively identified through dental records, Allegheny County Medical Examiner Karl Williams said Sunday.

Police said Sunday that the two likely met during visitation at the Allegheny County Jail. Police believe they were there at the same time to visit different inmates.

Curry-Demus showed up at the hospital Thursday with a newborn that still had the umbilical cord attached, police said. Tests later proved that she was not the mother.

Police said Curry-Demus then said she bought the baby for $1,000 from the baby's mother.

The baby was "apparently doing well," Williams said Saturday. The hospital would not release any information about the boy's condition.

In 1990, Curry-Demus, then known as Andrea Curry, was accused of stabbing a woman in an alleged plot to steal the woman's infant. A day after that stabbing, Curry-Demus snatched a 3-week-old baby girl from a hospital. The baby was found unharmed with Curry-Demus at her home the next day.

Curry-Demus pleaded guilty in 1991 to various charges from both incidents and got three to 10 years in prison, according to court records. She was paroled in August 1998.

Robocop's Comment:

Ten years was too short of a sentence. If she got at least 20 years with no parole, that victim would still be alive. Ms. Cury-Demus, and the Judge that sentenced her to only ten years are both equally guilty of this disgusting crime. There should be a special place in hell for all of them.

Fun Monday 07.21.08

Wow, it has been awhile since I did a Fun Monday. This week's Fun Monday is being hosted by Irish Coffeehouse.

The Rules:

Careers- Then and Now

THEN: As a child day dreaming of what your future would hold for you, what did you want to be when you grew up? Did you ever pursue or achieve it?

NOW: If you could be trained and placed in any career beginning tomorrow, what would it be?

THEN:

Now this is a tall order because as a small child,I wanted to do many things. My childhood dreams included being a soldier, police officer, doctor, or lawyer. As I progressed into my teen years, I narrowed it down to lawyer. I am not too sure what happened after that because after my first semester of college, I was no longer interested in becoming a lawyer.

What I ended up doing is completing a double degree in Public Administration/Criminal Justice with a minor in Economics. I did, however, end up serving as a Soldier for 8 years (4.5 Active,3.5 Reserve), a Police Officer for a combined five years (two different departments), and a Corrections Officer for a combined seven years (one department, and one company), which I am currently doing.

NOW:

Currently, I am a Sergeant/Corrections Officer. What I would do if I had the means to do so is go back to college and get a job teaching either High School,or College History. It has always been my best subject in both high school, and college. I would teach both what is in the current text books, and what is reality, since they are not the same thing these days. Since I am not either a spring chicken, or rolling in the dough, this will always remain a pipe dream, but hey, without dreams, there would be no hope.

Now to end this post with some inspirational music:

Democratic Party Unity

Warning: Contains some implied sexual content.

The Wilting Anti-War Movement

Hearing a presidential candidate "nuance" his position on the war in Iraq seems to surprise some in the media. But it shouldn’t.

Events on the ground — not politics in Washington — are what will likely drive any administration’s decisions. One reason is the reality of international affairs. America can’t just impose its wishes on the world. The rest of the world gets a vote in how things turn out.

Presidents must respond to the global situation they face, even if that means flouting political promises they made in Iowa a year before.

One thing’s certain: The anti-war movement in the United States won’t drive foreign policy. Indeed, such factions never do.

Anti-war movements are a fixture of American culture dating back to the Revolution. Americans argue about their wars before, during and after. That’s an inherent feature of how democracies go to war. Nevertheless, the role of dissenters in shaping American attitudes is particularly overblown. Americans like to make up their own minds.

Anti-war movements don’t drive public will. They ride the crest of the public opinion wave. For example, there was a vocal and well-organized movement to keep America out of World War II. It was led by aviator Charles Lindberg, an all-American hero, and Gerald Nye, the irrepressible populist senator from North Dakota. Their following collapsed after Pearl Harbor.

Today’s anti-war movement didn’t so much shape public opinion as feed off it. Americans had been frustrated by the lack of progress in stabilizing Iraq after the conflict and the death spiral of violence dragging the country into civil war. But contrary to what anti-war activists fervently claimed, that angst wasn’t the result of Americans' feeling repelled by a long war or by causalities.

Americans are averse to failure, sending their sons and daughters and national treasure into harm’s way when there seems no purpose. Americans can accept sacrifice as long as they believe that the cause serves their national interest and that the goal is attainable.

A new U.S. strategy in Iraq has stemmed violence, put Al Qaeda on its heels, frustrated Iran’s hope to dominate the country and renewed hopes for establishing a stable state. Indeed, for many Americans, the ferocity with which Al Qaeda and Iran have tried to exploit conditions in Iraq is a grim reminder of how dangerous America’s enemies really are.

In turn, Americans have become more sanguine about meeting our responsibilities in Iraq, even though it appears the effort will take years and all the troops won’t be coming home soon. The anti-war movement is continuing the charge, but most Americans aren’t following.

Nor do the anti-war movements share any political coherence. All they have in common is opposition to the war. When that cause goes away, the movement will fall apart. This is already happening with the anti-Iraq war movement.

It’s ironic to watch the veterans against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan trying to mimic the Vietnam era "Winter Soldier" project by allegedly documenting widespread atrocities by U.S. military forces.

The Vietnam project produced sensational, but highly dubious, results. America’s Army was never the "barbarian horde" that young John Kerry famously claimed it was. Likewise, virtually every one of today’s men and women in uniform serve honorably, as well. Most Americans believe in their soldiers, so a new "Winter Soldier" project will only further distance the movement from mainstream politics.

The Constitution designed a government that insulates the president from such political factions. A newly elected president has a mandate from the American people and usually is able to rise above the demands of divisive groups.

Only one American president, Gerald Ford, was ever forced to quit a war. He is the exception that proves the rule. Congress voted to cut funds supporting South Vietnam even though by 1975 our country had largely put the war behind it. The problem was Ford was an unelected president with no support from either the left or the right.

In contrast, the next president will have more than enough political will to push back against a now wilting anti-war movement. The winner will, however, have to put America’s interests first and have the courage to deal with the realities of international affairs rather than the whims of political factions here at home — no matter what he has promised.

James Jay Carafano is a senior research fellow for national security at The Heritage Foundation

Robocop's Comment:

What sucks about this is that when the war is won, there will be no one to rub it in. These Libtards will disperse like roaches when the light is turned on.

Never Forget Their Sacrifice

Recreational Tazing

Welcome Pedo Supporters

I would like to welcome the visitors from the Something Awful Forums for visiting this blog in support for baby rapers. Your "Anonymous" attempts to rescue the reputation and well being of pedophiles provides a look into the other side. I especially like the thread titled: "hope after all: supreme court rejects "megan's law"". Too bad for them it was not the Supreme Court. Please welcome these NAMBLA groupies.

Douche Of The Week 07.15.08

The Winner: Appellate Judge Joseph F. Lisa, New Jersey Appeals Court

The Reason: Overturning Megan's Law restrictions

The Story:

NEWARK, N.J. —
New Jersey towns cannot ban sex offenders from living near schools, parks, or other places where children gather, a state appeals court ruled on Tuesday.

The three-judge panel found that New Jersey's Megan's Law was "pervasive and comprehensive" and should be the only law governing how sex offenders are treated. The ruling upheld findings by judges who invalidated ordinances in Cherry Hill and Galloway townships.

Supporters of those ordinances hoped the towns would appeal. Richard D. Pompelio, a lawyer for the New Jersey Crime Victims' Law Center, filed a brief endorsing the town's laws.

He questioned how Megan's Law, which requires sex offenders to register with the state, was pre-empted because it does not impose residency restrictions.

The towns banned adults convicted of sex offenses against a child from living within 2,500 feet of any school, park, playground, church or other place "where children might congregate."

Similar laws are in place in many states and dozens of New Jersey towns; those in New Jersey will be at risk if the latest ruling stands.

Appellate Judge Joseph F. Lisa, writing for the court, said the Cherry Hill and Galloway ordinances "interfere with and frustrate the purposes and operation of the statewide scheme."

Cherry Hill Mayor Bernie Platt was considering whether to appeal the ruling and maintained that the ordinance "is valuable to our community," spokesman Dan Keashen said.

A message seeking comment from Galloway officials was not immediately returned.

The ruling was applauded by the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had a volunteer attorney represent one of the offenders.

"Megan's Law is already accepted as constitutional and as the state's comprehensive approach to sex offenders. The residency requirements do not contribute to rehabilitation and may in fact undermine it," said Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the state chapter.

State Public Defender Yvonne Smith Segars filed a brief urging the appeals court to strike down the laws.

"You can't impose unrealistic burdens on people and expect them to reintegrate. They paid their debt to society and are under supervision," Segars said.

The Cherry Hill law was challenged by two sex offenders convicted of violating the law after being placed in a motel by welfare officers with the approval of their probation and parole officers. The two men were considered at moderate risk of committing another sex offense.

A 20-year-old college freshman at Richard Stockton College, in Galloway Township, challenged the law there after moving into a dormitory on campus. The student was considered a low-risk sex offender for an offense he committed when he was 15 against a 13-year-old girl.

Calls to attorneys for the men were not immediately returned.

The three men were among about 11,000 sex offenders registered in New Jersey, the first state to enact a Megan's Law. It was passed after a 7-year-old Hamilton Township girl, Megan Kanka, was killed in 1994 by a sex offender who lived in her neighborhood. Similar laws in other states and eventually the nation followed.

In New Jersey, neighbors of high-risk offenders are notified by police.

Robocop's Comment:

So far,it looks like the courts are competing for the Douche Of The Week titles. Appellate Judge Joseph F. Lisa needs to be sodomized. The ACLU proves that AIDS happens for a reason. If they are so concerned with the rehabilitation of pedophiles, I have a suggestion: 165 grain jacketed hollowpoint.

RIP Jesse Helms

Former North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms Dies at 86

Former Sen. Jesse Helms, a Capitol Hill icon who devoted 30 years in the Senate to championing conservative causes, died Friday morning. He was 86.

The Jesse Helms Center posted a brief statement on its Web site saying Helms died at 1:15 a.m. in Raleigh, N.C., on the Fourth of July.

"He was very comfortable," said former chief of staff Jimmy Broughton, who added that Helms died of natural causes.

The five-term Republican senator from North Carolina formerly chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and used his clout to rail against Communism, liberalism and big government.

Known by some as "Senator No" for his opposition to Democratic measures, Helms was a polarizing figure for his positions on social issues.

He was a proponent of school prayer and an opponent of abortion rights and gay rights groups. In the Senate, he forced roll-call votes that required Democrats to take sensitive positions on topics such as flag burning and school busing.

No matter his positions, colleagues said he always was a gentleman.

"America has lost a great public servant and true patriot today," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said after learning of Helms' death.

"Today we lost a senator whose stature in Congress had few equals," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement. "Senator Jesse Helms was a leading voice and courageous champion for the many causes he believed in."

North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole, who succeeded Helms, said, "I knew I could never replace him, but I continue to strive each day to provide the dedicated constituent service he provided the people of our state for 30 years."

"He's just a good, honest, decent man," former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole told FOX News. "Now his philosophy would drive some people up a tree."

Helms had a habit of blocking nominations and frequently clashed with former President Bill Clinton. In the '90s he blocked all of Clinton's judicial nominations from North Carolina for eight years.

But he also worked with some Democratic leaders, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

Albright once said of Helms, he "was the kindest, most infuriating, politest, most aggravating and nicest politician I had to deal with in the United States Senate."

As he aged, Helms was slowed by a variety of illnesses, including a bone disorder, prostate cancer and heart problems, and he made his way through the Capitol on a motorized scooter as his career neared an end.

In April 2006 his family announced that he had been moved into a convalescent center after being diagnosed with vascular dementia, in which repeated minor strokes damage the brain.

His opposition to Communism defined his foreign policy views. He took a dim view of many arms control treaties, opposed Fidel Castro at every turn and supported the contras in Nicaragua as well as the right-wing government of El Salvador. He opposed the Panama Canal treaties that President Jimmy Carter pushed through a reluctant Senate in 1977.

Helms first became known to North Carolina voters as a newspaper and television commentator. Building a reputation through media, he won election to the Senate in 1972 and decided not to run for a sixth term in 2002.

Helms never lost a race for the Senate, but he never won one by much, either, a reflection of his divisive political profile in his native state.

He won the 1972 election after switching parties and defeated then-Gov. Jim Hunt in an epic battle in 1984 in what was then the costliest Senate race on record.

He defeated black former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt in 1990 and 1996 in racially tinged campaigns. In the first race, a Helms commercial showed a white fist crumbling up a job application, these words underneath: "You needed that job ... but they had to give it to a minority."

"The tension that he creates, the fear he creates in people, is how he's won campaigns," Gantt said several years later.

Helms also played a role in national GOP politics — supporting Ronald Reagan in 1976 in a presidential primary challenge to then-President Ford. Reagan's candidacy was near collapse when it came time for the North Carolina primary. Helms was in charge of the effort, and Reagan won a startling upset that resurrected his challenge.

Helms and his wife, Dorothy, had two daughters and a son. They adopted the boy in 1962 after the child, 9 years old and suffering from cerebral palsy, said in a newspaper article that he wanted parents.

FOX News' Major Garrett and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Robocop's Comment:

Rest in Peace for another great Conservative.

Declaration Of Independence

"IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We 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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

Robocop's Comment:

Happy Birth Day America!

Crash Dummies For "The Cause" 07.03.08

Robocop's Comment:

Ok. admit, this is wishful thinking. But as they say, "Never give up on your dreams."

Douche Of The Week 07.03.08

The WINNER: Unidentified 16-year-old Lee County, Georgia Boy

The Reason:



The Story

LEESBURG, Ga. —
A Georgia teen is facing child cruelty charges after an online video showed a young man launching a baby several feet across a room using an inflatable pillow.

The video posted on YouTube shows the boy putting a baby on one side of a large yellow pillow and then jumping on the pillow, sending the child flying several feet across the floor, where the baby lands and cries.

"He really had no explanation — just thought it would be funny to put it on YouTube," Col. Duane Sepp of the Lee County Sheriff's Office told FOX News. "It's all about, I guess, that five seconds of glory or whatever, and it's terrible it has to happen at the cost of an 8-month-old child."

The 16-year-old Lee County boy was arrested Tuesday after a school teacher saw the video and called the sheriff's office. The boy's name was not released because of his age.

"This is going to be handled in juvenile court, although this has some detention time that can be placed on the juvenile offender," Sepp said. "The judge, I'm sure, is going to take this very seriously, and when the tape is shown I don't think it's going to be as funny as what he [the offender] originally thought it was."

The teen has been charged with a felony count of cruelty to children as well as a misdemeanor count of the same charge.

Sepp told FOX News that the teen who filmed the baby launch with his cell phone is not facing charges at this time.

"The investigation is ongoing," Sepp said. "This isn't over. We're still digging into it."

The video has since been removed from YouTube. The baby is OK, Sepp said.

Robocop's Comment:

Too bad we can't get a name for this pond scum. I think a fair punishment would be to place this teenager into one of those circus canons, or better yet, an 8" howitzer , and launch his ass across a field into a carpeted hard surface. Post a video of the event on You Tube.

Pedophile To Be Held Until The Second Comming

Man get 4,060 years for sexually assaulting teens

WEATHERFORD, TX— A man was sentenced to more than 4,000 years in prison today for sexually assaulting three teenage girls over two years.

A day after finding James Kevin Pope guilty, jurors sentenced him to 40 life prison terms — one for each sex assault conviction — and 20 years for each of the three sexual performance of a child convictions.

At the request of prosecutors, state District Judge Graham Quisenberry ordered Mr. Pope to serve the sentences consecutively, adding up to 4,060 years. He will be eligible for parole in the year 3209, according to the Parker County District Attorney's Office.

“We believe it was a just result,” prosecutor Robert DuBoise said, adding that he was “overwhelmed” with the judge's decision to stack the sentences.

Mr. Pope, 43, of Springtown, abused the girls for nearly two years, and it came to authorities' attention earlier this year after Mr. Pope made several inappropriate comments to a friend who notified Child Protective Service.

During the trial, the teens testified about the abuse, and their sexually explicit photographs were shown as evidence.

But Rick Alley, Mr. Pope's defense lawyer, told jurors in closing arguments that the victims were incapable of understanding what happened, the Weatherford Democrat reported in its Wednesday online edition.

“If it was as traumatic as they indicate, they would be able to give you (specific dates and times of the incidents). Simply because it's shocking doesn't make it true,” Alley said.

During the sentencing phase of the trial, a U.S. Secret Service agent testified that while examining Mr. Pope's home computer he found more than 200 images of child porn.

Later today, some jurors said the case was difficult because of the subject matter.

“We were careful not to make any mistakes in viewing and evaluating the evidence and taking in the totality of the case and that there was a man's life at stake here,” said juror Dale Lewis.

Robocop's Comment:

It sucks to be him.

Obama's Friends In Low Places

Another Win For The Good Guys

Texas Man Cleared of Shooting Suspected Burglars Next Door

HOUSTON —
A Texas man who shot and killed two men he suspected of burglarizing his neighbor's home was cleared in the shootings Monday by a grand jury.

Joe Horn, 62, shot the two men in November after he saw them crawling out the windows of a neighbor's house in the Houston suburb of Pasadena.

Horn called authorities and told the emergency dispatcher he had a shotgun and was going to kill the men. The dispatcher pleaded with him not to go outside, but Horn confronted the men with a 12-gauge shotgun and shot both in the back.

"The message we're trying to send today is the criminal justice system works," Harris County District Attorney Kenneth Magidson said.

Horn's attorney, Tom Lambright, said his client was relieved by the grand jury's decision and never wanted to hurt anyone.

"He wasn't trying to take matters into his own hands," Lambright said. "He was scared. He was not playing cowboy."

Horn did not speak with reporters Monday, and had a "No Trespass" sign blocking the path to the front door of his home.

Lambright said Horn believed the two men had broken into his neighbor's home and that he shot them out of fear for his life when they came into his yard and threatened him.

"He wasn't acting like a vigilante," Lambright said. "He was well within his rights to do what he was doing."

The men Horn killed, Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, were unemployed illegal immigrants from Colombia. Torres was deported to Colombia in 1999 after a 1994 cocaine-related conviction.

The episode touched off protests from civil rights activists who said the shooting was racially motivated and that Horn took the law into his own hands. Horn's supporters defended his actions, saying he was protecting himself and being a good neighbor to a homeowner who was out of town.

"I understand the concerns of some in the community regarding Mr. Horn's conduct," Magidson said. "The use of deadly force is carefully limited in Texas law to certain circumstances ... In this case, however, the grand jury concluded that Mr. Horn's use of deadly force did not rise to a criminal offense."

Lambright did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment from The Associated Press.

Texas law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they are in mortal danger. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect a neighbor's property; for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.

It is not clear whether the neighbor whose home was burglarized asked Horn to watch over his house.

Robocop's Comment:

I see two things that would make those liberal activists happy: 1) The two dead criminals were white, and/or 2) Mr. Horn was the one killed by those two illegal scumbags. It is getting increasingly difficult to figure out the liberal mind. I guess the '60s were THAT good to them.