Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

October 2014

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on October 31, 2014 12 Comments
According to a news source in San Diego, a Mexican federal judge ordered the immediate release of US Marine, Andrew Tahmooressi.  

Andrew Tahmooressi was on trial for crossing the border with ammunition and three loaded weapon on March 31. The Mexican Attorney General’s Office agreed to cease its prosecution of Tahmooressi and allow him to return to the United States.

The agreement brings to a close a high-profile case that has resounded far beyond the border. In the United States, it has prompted calls for his release from politicians, veterans groups, conservative talk show hosts. But for months there had been an impasse, as Mexican federal prosecutors insisted that the case be resolved through the courts -- not through diplomatic or political pressure.

Tahmooressi, 26, claims that he drove into Tijuana by mistake on a Monday night after taking a wrong turn near the Mexican border in San Ysidro. He recently had moved from Florida to San Diego, and says that he was driving out of a parking lot, intending to head north. But instead he drove into the El Chaparral Port of Entry, where Mexican customs inspectors examined his pickup truck and found more 400 rounds of ammunition and three loaded firearms: a 45-caliber pistol, a 12-gauge shotgun and a 5.56mm assault rifle.

Shortly before his incarceration, Tahmooressi was diagnosed with PTSD and began receiving treatment. When previous attempts for his release failed, Tahmooressi's Mexican defense attorney pressed forward using PTSD as a means for humanitarian release. According to UT San Diego:

Benítez, his Tijuana defense attorney, used a range of tactics to win his release. He initially pressed for dismissal of the case on the grounds that his client’s rights were allegedly violated when he was held at the El Chaparral Port of Entry for hours without the presence of an attorney or a translator.

But in recent weeks, the attorney focused on Tahmooressi’s PTSD in an attempt to win him a humanitarian release. Key testimony came from a prosecution witness, Dr. Alberto Pinzón Picaseño. The Mexico City psychiatrist interviewed Tahmooressi and concluded that he suffers from a condition that has him feeling in constant danger, recommending treatment “by specialized persons in his country of origin.”

Posted by New Neo on October 31, 2014 29 Comments
A District Court judge in Maine has overturned a lower court ruling that restricted Kaci Hickox's movements, which means that the formerly-quarantined nurse is now free to go about her business. The reason? The science on ebola transmission is apparently settled:
Judge Charles C. LaVerdiere ruled Hickox must continue daily monitoring and cooperate with health officials if she chooses to travel. The judge said there’s no need to restrict her movements because she’s not showing symptoms of Ebola. In his ruling, the judge thanked Hickox for her service in Africa and wrote that “people are acting out of fear and that this fear is not entirely rational.” Maine Gov. Paul LePage disagreed with the judge’s decision, but said the state will follow the law... The judge...acknowledged the gravity of restricting someone’s constitutional rights without solid science to back it up. “The court is fully aware of the misconceptions, misinformation, bad science and bad information being spread from shore to shore in our country with respect to Ebola,” he wrote. “The court is fully aware that people are acting out of fear and that this fear is not entirely rational.”
No doubt the judge is also fully aware of certain statements made by Nobel-prize-winning immunologist Dr. Bruce Beutler:
It may not be absolutely true that those without symptoms can’t transmit the disease, because we don’t have the numbers to back that up,” said Beutler, “It could be people develop significant viremia [where viruses enter the bloodstream and gain access to the rest of the body], and become able to transmit the disease before they have a fever, even. People may have said that without symptoms you can’t transmit Ebola. I’m not sure about that being 100 percent true. There’s a lot of variation with viruses.”
On the subject of possible further court action by the state:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on October 31, 2014 36 Comments
The October surprises just keep on coming, courtesy of President Obama. According to The Weekly Standard, "during a speech in Rhode Island today, President Obama called for more taxpayer-spending on pre-school in order to "make sure that women are full and equal participants in our economy." I can respect that. But then the President followed those remarks by saying (emphasis added):
And sometimes someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay at home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. That's not a choice we want Americans to make.
Um, ok. I'm interpreting his remarks to mean that women shouldn't have to choose between lower wages or being stay at home mothers. Sounds noble, but it's not realistic, at least not in most cases. Condescension aside, aggravating is the constant drum beat of the modern "feminist" lie that women can have it all. It's simply not true. Those with successful careers and families are routinely put in a place of choosing one or the other. Men with families also find themselves in the same dilemma, yet no one wants to talk about their struggles, because "feminism."

Posted by David Gerstman on October 31, 2014 6 Comments
Elder of Ziyon picked up on a recent bit of hypocrisy when Egypt began destroying hundreds of homes along the Sinai's border with Gaza. In So where are the Rachel Corries for Egypt?  Elder writes:
800 homes demolished in the next few days? Israel has never demolished so many in so little time. Yet over the years there have been numerous NGOs and reports about Israel's home demolitions - and no one cares about Egypt's. There are no groups popping up where young idealistic moronic college students volunteer to act as human shields to protect these homes. Indeed, no one cares about Egypt's demolishing homes for security purposes.
Rachel Corrie was a college student who didn't heed the IDF's warning to get out of the way during the demolition of a house in Gaza that housed a smuggling tunnel; Corrie was killed during the demolition. Elder is right in saying that there has been precious little protest of Egypt's actions. (Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch has been exception. In the case of Egypt, as with Israel, he sides with Hamas.) But what's frustrating is not just in the vastly different reactions to demolitions carried out by Israel as opposed to those carried out by Egypt, but also the contrast in how the world treats Israeli construction plans. This week the topic of Israel building in its capital, Jerusalem, has gotten the world worked up. From the New York Times (emphasis mine):
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Monday that Israel would fast-track planning for 1,060 new apartments in populous Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem, a move that appears calibrated to appeal to the maximum number of Israelis while causing the minimum damage to Israel internationally, according to Israeli analysts. But as is often the case, Mr. Netanyahu’s decision prompted swift international condemnation at a time when Israel’s relations with Washington are already strained and risked further igniting Palestinian anger and tensions in Jerusalem. It was also unlikely to satisfy the right-wing political rivals it was intended to appease, the analysts said.
Though there was "Palestinian anger" there's no immediate consequence to this action. No one lost property. No one was displaced.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on October 31, 2014 10 Comments
After significant national pressure, Houston Mayor Annise Parker has withdrawn the controversial subpoenas entirely. Ed Whelen at National Review has the scoop:

I’m pleased to pass along word from the Alliance Defending Freedom, counsel for five Houston pastors, that Houston mayor Annise Parker has—finally—entirely withdrawn the harassing subpoenas that the City unjustifiably inflicted on the pastors.

I’ll repeat what I said in my first post on this matter: The law firm of Susman Godfrey, which is representing the City “pro bono” in the litigation, deserves to share in the ample blame for this fiasco. In particular, Geoffrey L. Harrison, Alex Kaplan, and Kristen Schlemmer of that law firm seem not to have given a moment of careful thought to the First Amendment implications in this case of the sort of bullying discovery that they and other lawyers routinely engage in. 

The Alliance Defending Freedom issued the following statement:

“The mayor really had no choice but to withdraw these subpoenas, which should never have been served in the first place. The entire nation--voices from every point of the spectrum left to right--recognize the city's action as a gross abuse of power. We are gratified that the First Amendment rights of the pastors have triumphed over government overreach and intimidation. The First Amendment protects the right of pastors to be free from government intimidation and coercion of this sort. But the subpoenas were only one element of this disgraceful episode. The scandal began with another abuse of power when the city of Houston arbitrarily threw out the valid signatures of thousands of voters. The city did this all because it is bent on pushing through its deeply unpopular ordinance at any cost.
The subpoena threat has been withdrawn but the mayor and the city should now do the right thing and allow the people of the Houston to decide whether to repeal the ordinance.”

Following a bitter battle over an overreaching city ordinance, Bayou City clergy and the city of Houston weren't on the best of terms. The ordinance, dubbed "HERO," allows transgendered persons to sue businesses that prohibit their use of their preferred bathroom.

Posted by Amy Miller on October 31, 2014 16 Comments
It's almost over. The election cycle, that is. It's been a bizarre one, and I think we're all about ready for a little peace and quiet from our phones, front doors, and inboxes. But before we put the ads, e-mails, and stump speeches behind us (we still have a few days to go, after all,) we'd like to take a look back at the best (or worst? we can't really decide) ads of the election cycle. Our nomination comes to you out of the great state of Texas, courtesy of the David Dewhurst for Lieutenant Governor Campaign:

Posted by Mike LaChance on October 31, 2014 19 Comments
What's one to do when it looks like the midterms aren't going their way? Stealing Republican lawn signs is always an option, as long as you don't get caught. One Delaware Democrat wasn't so lucky. Thomas Lifson of American Thinker provides this stunning yet funny report:
Dem state senator's husband busted while stealing GOP lawn signs The Democrats have become the win-by-cheating party, so much so that the President of the United States jokes about vote fraud to a party rally, just as he joked about using the IRS to punish his political opponents. Just as a fish rots from the head down, so too does a political party that depends on the votes of ineligible aliens and that fights tooth-and-nail against the sort of voter identification measures common in other advanced (and not-so-advanced) democracies. The ethos, one that predates Obama by a century or more, has filtered down to the local level, for instance a contest for the Delaware State Senate (hat tip: The Blaze). In the town of Middletown, GOP lawn signs bearing the slogan “Fix the Economy! Vote Republican” had been disappearing, so GOP volunteers set up a surveillance operation and caught the miscreant, who happened to be the husband of an incumbent state senator, one Sen. Bethany Hall-Long.
The sting was caught on video and here it is:

Posted by Andrew Branca on October 30, 2014 32 Comments
Hot on the heels of the Department of Justice's suddenly-renewed interest in George Zimmerman's civil rights liability in the self-defense killing of Trayvon Martin (see: FBI Convenes Grand Jury For Zimmerman Civil Rights Case) just days before next week's election comes another DOJ action timed perfectly for electoral manipulation. National Review Online is reporting that the FBI (a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DOJ) has made the highly unusual decision to disclose their investigation into Mike Rounds (pictured above), a Republican Senate candidate in South Dakota, less than a week before next Tuesday's vote. The alleged misconduct being investigated is somewhat obscure--something involving a work visa program in the state--but it is notable that the alleged misconduct was to have occurred three years ago, and the FBI's announcement comes a year after the state's own attorney general closed its own investigation without bringing any charges. The concern, of course, is that the FBI announcement was timed to influence Rounds' prospects in next week's voting.  When asked for more detail, the FBI replied that the agent in charge of the investigation would be unavailable to provide additional information until late next week, after the election, thus leaving a cloud over Rounds' candidacy through election day.

Posted by Amy Miller on October 30, 2014 16 Comments
We wrote previously about UC Berkeley students' attempt to block comedian Bill Maher from speaking at the university's commencement ceremonies. Students circulated a petition citing "hateful" statements like the one contained in the tweet below as reasons why Maher should not be allowed to speak at the ceremony. Unfortunately for Berkeley's future community organizers, Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas B. Dirks disagrees with the premise of their petition, and has overturned a student vote blocking Maher from speaking at graduation. Via Inside Higher Ed:
"The UC Berkeley administration cannot and will not accept this decision, which appears to have been based solely on Mr. Maher’s opinions and beliefs, which he conveyed through constitutionally protected speech," said a statement from the university. "For that reason Chancellor Dirks has decided that the invitation will stand, and he looks forward to welcoming Mr. Maher to the Berkeley campus. It should be noted that this decision does not constitute an endorsement of any of Mr. Maher’s prior statements: indeed, the administration’s position on Mr. Maher’s opinions and perspectives is irrelevant in this context, since we fully respect and support his right to express them. More broadly, this university has not in the past and will not in the future shy away from hosting speakers who some deem provocative."

Posted by Andrew Branca on October 30, 2014 76 Comments
Note: Title has been updated. The Orlando Sentinel newspaper today reported that the Department of Justice has assembled a Federal Grand jury to meet next week to hear testimony about whether George Zimmerman violated Trayvon Martin's civil rights on the night that Zimmerman ultimately killed Martin in self-defense. It was only last month that the Washington Post reported that unidentified Federal law enforcement officials thought it very unlikely that federal charges would be brought against Zimmerman, due to insufficient evidence.  Indeed, despite having dozens of FBI agents interview scores of people regarding Zimmerman's shooting of Martin, not even a smidgen of racism was uncovered in Zimmerman's past or in the particular events surrounding his self-defense shooting of Martin. Indeed, quite the contrary: what evidence was uncovered with regard to race showed the opposite of racial animus.  For example, Zimmerman and his wife tutored black school children. Zimmerman's elderly black neighbor testified at his trial (by television, due to severe illness) in glowing terms about Zimmerman's kindness towards her.  One of Zimmerman's college professors, a black Naval officer, also spoke glowingly about him, and noted that Zimmerman had told him he'd planned to become a prosecutor someday.  When a local black youth was beaten by the son of a local police official, Zimmerman organized the community to rally in favor of accountability.

Posted by Bryan Jacoutot on October 30, 2014 7 Comments
Remove yourself from the monotonous political rhetoric for just a moment, as difficult as that may be at this point in an election year. Consider a reality that needs no embellishment. Consider a race that stands on its own as a stark choice of great consequence. A story of the longshot. The kind of story that Americans are proud to say can happen here. In a recent Facebook post, Maryland’s Dan Bongino decided the time was now to silence his opponent’s downright fallacious — but all too commonplace — political rhetoric. The kind of rhetoric that, if given enough money, stamps out the potential of great candidates for office.
After a long day of campaigning in the rain I just returned from the grocery store. Diapers are really expensive, as many of you already know.

Why am I telling you about the price of diapers? Because my multimillionaire opponent has spent over $600,000 of his $250,000,000 net worth on television ads attacking me for, get ready for it, a "war on women." I've tried to let it go, but I won't any longer. Does this fake know anything about me? He has no idea how hard my wife and I have to work to pay for little things like diapers for my daughter.

Posted by Amy Miller on October 30, 2014 14 Comments
We've written extensively about Democrats' troubles this election cycle, and how Republicans have reason to be confident (although not overly so) heading into Tuesday's midterm elections. Most of the polling and analysis has focused on Republican chances to take the Senate, but recent reports show that Democrats are also scrambling to maintain their hold on key House and gubernatorial seats. Analysts have never doubted Republicans' ability to maintain their hold on the House, but Democrats' spending in House races shows that even in normally friendly areas, their candidates are in trouble. Via AP's Big Story:
In one example, the Democratic committee has bought $99,000 in radio ads for eight-term Rep. Lois Capps in her Santa Barbara-area race against Chris Mitchum, the son of the late actor Robert Mitchum. The GOP candidate has relatively little money still on hand for his campaign — $96,108 — but the contest is considered close. The committee also reserved $360,000 in air time for ads for first-term Rep. Steven Horsford in his central Nevada district north of Las Vegas after the Karl Rove-founded group Crossroads GPS made a late ad buy of $935,000. And In Hawaii, the Democrats are spending $200,000 on television ads and voter outreach for Mark Takai, who is locked in a tight race with former Republican Rep. Charles Djou in an open Honolulu-based district that Obama won with 70 percent of the vote. In the closing days, the Democratic committee has invested $1.1 million in an effort to protect six incumbents in Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, West Virginia and California. With Obama persona non grata for many Democrats, former President Bill Clinton was campaigning in California on Wednesday. "It's a tough climate, it's getting tougher," Israel said. "It's the worst climate for Democrats since 2010, but it won't be 2010. We knew that this was coming and we prepared for it."
They may think they're prepared for a fight, but things aren't looking good with regards to gubernatorial races, either. Real Clear Politics has classified just two races (California and New York) as "safe" for Democrats, and even their most high-profile candidate of the cycle is maintaining a slow and steady implosion.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on October 30, 2014 6 Comments
Although I live in the NY-23 congressional district, we're in the NY-24 (Syracuse) television market. NY-24 is represented by Democrat Dan Maffei, who portrays himself as a moderate Democrat. Maffei is being challenged by John Katko. [caption id="attachment_104451" align="alignnone" width="500"](Dan Maffei and John Katko) (Dan Maffei and John Katko)[/caption] Maffei first was elected in 2008, but lost his seat in 2010 by a few hundred votes, only to gain it back in 2012 with less than 50% of the vote (a third party candidate received almost 8%). Now the race is tight.  Roll Call rates it "Tilts Democratic" (in contrast, NY-23 is rated "Safe Republican").  The Cook Political Report rates it a "Toss-up" (NY-23 is rated "Solid Republican").

Posted by New Neo on October 30, 2014 20 Comments
The senior official in the Obama administration who referred to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as "chickshit" probably has much more courageous things than Operation Isotope on his resume. Operation Isotope was a raid involving the rescue of hijacked Sabena Flight 571, and Netanyahu was a participant, along with another Israeli Prime Minister-to-be, Ehud Barak:
On 9 May 1972 at 4:00 p.m. the rescue operation began: a team of 16 Sayeret Matkal commandos, led by Ehud Barak and including Benjamin Netanyahu, both future Israeli Prime Ministers, approached the airplane. The commandos were disguised as airplane technicians in white overalls, and were able to convince the terrorists that the aircraft needed repair. The commandos stormed the aircraft and took control of the plane in ten minutes, killing both male hijackers and capturing the two women. All the passengers were rescued. Three of the passengers were wounded, one of whom eventually died from her wounds. Netanyahu was wounded during the rescue, presumably by friendly fire. The two female surviving terrorists were eventually sentenced to life imprisonment, but were freed as part of a prisoner exchange after the 1982 Lebanon War.
[caption id="attachment_104421" align="alignnone" width="550"]Benjamin Netanyahu is congratulated by former Israeli President Zalman Shazar during a ceremony honoring the elite commandos who rescued the hostages from the Sabena Flight 571. [Benjamin Netanyahu is congratulated by former Israeli President
Zalman Shazar during a ceremony honoring the elite commandos who
rescued the hostages from the Sabena Flight 571. (via Maggie's Notebook)][/caption] To paraphrase Winston Churchill: some chicken, some shit.

Posted by Mike LaChance on October 30, 2014 8 Comments
To be fair, Senator Kay Hagan wasn't the only Democrat who said people would be able to keep their healthcare plans and doctors under Obamacare. Lots of Democrats made that claim, including Obama and many of his supporters in the media. It's funny how they're so tongue tied now. Kay Hagan was asked about her position in a TV Interview Tuesday night. Transcript and video by the Washington Free Beacon:
Kay Hagan Won’t Say She Regrets Falsely Telling People They Could Keep Their Health Plans Senator Kay Hagan (D., N.C.) refused to answer whether she regrets repeating President Obama’s famous lie that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” Hagan talked about failed legislative proposals to help North Carolinians keep their health care plans instead of expressing regret over her endorsement of President Obama’s statement in a TV interview Tuesday night. “But if you knew then what you know now, do you think you would have said it that many times?” the anchor asked.
Here's the video: The North Carolina senate race took an especially nasty turn recently when Harry Reid's super PAC tried to blame Hagan's Republican challenger Thom Tillis for the death of Trayvon Martin.

Posted by Leslie Eastman on October 30, 2014 25 Comments
Are Democrats at risk of losing the most reliable voting base, Blacks? Or, just as bad for Democrats, having low turnout? This video may just be an anecdote, or it may be the sign of something larger happening. An 82-year old Black woman named Joyce explains why she voted Republican for the first time in her life (via Tammy Bruce via Right Scoop). Joyce's rant is pure gold, and hits on the several points:
  • The economic devastation Democratic policies have wrought on the black community.
  • Abortion and its prevalence among African Americans.
  • The foolishness of calling people "racist" because they disagree with President Obama.
Black disappointment with President Obama himself is hurting Democrats in this election cycle.
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH