ERIC CANTOR & HOUSE REPUBLICANS WILLING TO HOLD JOPLIN HOSTAGE

MIND BOGGLING, Lynn Jenkins in Campaign 2010 described Eric Cantor as America's Next Great White Hope. Never mind the blatant racism, just think about what Cantor thinks about those of us who live in or near Kansas' Second Congressional District. He thinks that when our cities are obliterated by Mother Nature, called Acts of God, that we can well be on our own.

Cantor says that there can be no federal relief for Joplin until we find budget offsets first. That's right, Jenkins' Great White Hope is using the pain and suffering of Joplin as a political football.

Republicans like Cantor and Jenkins have worked tirelessly to make sure that America's most wealthy get to keep paying little to no taxes while demanding that we can no longer afford Medicare. These Republicans now want to let an entire American city go to oblivion, being held hostage to their radical agenda.

Missouri's Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill said: "There is no question we have to be careful about the way we spend federal money, but with all due respect to Congressman Cantor, I have a hard time believing that if this were in his congressional district he would be talking about how additional disaster relief would not be available unless we found some other program to take it from"

Missouri's Republican Senator, Roy Blunt, echoed McCaskill telling Cantor to find the offsets. Politico reported the Senator's statement: "We need to prioritize spending, and this needs to be a priority. I’m sure Eric [Cantor] will help find the necessary off-sets."

In the end Lynn Jenkins' Great White Hope, Eric Cantor, caved to the pressure. He "Our hearts are w/ victims of #Joplin tragedy. House #GOP ready to help & has found offsets for emergency $$$". Cantor suddenly found the offsets.

Southwest Missouri auctioneer and Representative to Congress, Billy Long, responded to Cantor's tweet saying "Our deficit is not because we are taxed too little but because Washington spends too much. I was sent to Washington to rein in wasteful government spending. While we need to look everywhere to make spending cuts, making sure our first responder, disaster relief, and national defense communities have the tools they need will always be a priority while I am in Congress."

Talk about double talk. HEY BILLY what will you give me for an EF5? Our deficit is because too many American corporations pay little to no taxes. Our deficit is because the effective tax rate of the richest Americans is at the lowest point in our nation's history." Our deficit is because American jobs have been shipped overseas. We can learn from history.  Do you recall how Give 'em Harry watched the way we spent our dollars when he was in the Senate? Harry Truman showed us how during World War II.

For her part Lynn Jenkins has managed to not say a word about Joplin. Some leadership!

Meanwhile the Topeka hate group masquerading as a Baptist church plans to protest in Joplin. This may be the wrong town at the wrong time for the Wierdos from Westboro. Knowing Southwest Missouri as I do, well let me say that the Phelps Clan best be prepared to meet their Maker.

The Power of Simile

Call it the power of simile that roused me suddenly full awake at a quarter to three early this morning. I knew the tornado watch continued on to three but the chief meteorologist of my favorite evening news station said it wasn't likely. The National Weather Service from Topeka, she said, let a weather balloon loose not long ago. The data the balloon sent back showed calm air above the six mile level.

The killer tornados in central Oklahoma were topping out at about six miles according to Doppler radar. The jet stream was providing volatility to the winds aloft. An upper level low pressure system steered in to enhance vertical wind shear over Oklahoma. But now the air above the Sunflower state was placid. Sure we'd see the thunder storms move through, but not the evil appendages hooking on to their rear flanks.

With my mind set to rest I gathered grandchildren to their beds. Sleep came quickly. Then suddenly I was awake. A faint roll of thunder off in the distance was being drowned out by the steadily increasing roar of what sounded like a freight train.

I can't recall when the last time was when I moved so quick. In a split second I had spun to a sitting position and had my feet on the floor. I hit the television remote and the mute button. The television would provide light in less than a second.

My mind raced as I stood up and changed channels to the local stations. I heard it as the first station appeared. There were no local warnings and the engineer finally let loose with his whistle. The deafening sound of an approaching freight train turned out to be a freight train.

If tornadoes sounded like older women walking down wooden halls in orthopedic shoes, a sound not uncommon to my youth, then I'd not have been fooled by the train. That's the power of simile.

Blogger Wierdness & the case of the Missing Followers

The Blogger dashboard assures me that this blog has four followers.  I appreciate my followers.  When the magic number hit four the icons identifying the followers disappeared from the blog.

I know you faithful four are out there and hopefully this glitch will go away as fast as it came. Thanks for following.

USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART EIGHT

Judge Bea starts with the premise that determining Congressional intent is the touchstone from which judicial inquiry of America's immigration laws and Arizona's SB1070 must begin. There he agrees with the majority in the way two persons on opposite sides of a fence on the otherwise open range see that fence.

Judge Bea tips his hand early in his lengthy concurrence/dissent. He frames the issue differently than did Judge Paez. Bea says "[t]hus, this court is tasked with determining whether Congress intended to fence off the states from any involvement in the enforcement of federal immigration law."

The way a legal question is framed often leads to an obvious conclusion. Bea is not asking what are the perimeters Congress established whereby the States may become involved with enforcement of federal immigration law. In Wild West fashion Bea assumes that the range is either open or fenced, either the States can't engage or they may Willy-nilly do as they please.

Bea feathers the framing of the legal issue writing "[m]oreover, it is the enforcement of immigration laws that this case is about, not whether a state can decree who can come into the country, what an alien may do while here, or how long an alien can stay in this country. Bea is correct in this part of his analysis but he conveniently ignores the impact of ad hoc immigration enforcement schemes by the States on the uniform federal scheme written by Congress and enforced by the Executive branch.

Judge Bea seems to want to hang his hat on 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(10)(B) which says:

Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to require an agreement under this subsection in order for any officer or employee of a State or political subdivision of a State—

(A) to communicate with the Attorney General regarding the immigration status of any individual, including reporting knowledge that a particular alien is not lawfully present in the United States; or

(B) otherwise to cooperate with the Attorney General in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States.

The question now remains whether Judge Bea sees SB1070 as cooperation with the Attorney General. I am fairly certain that Attorney General Eric Holder sees SB1070 as anything but cooperative.

Does SB1070 reflect and mirror the laws of New Jersey and Rhode Island? That is Judge Bea's opinion. There are significant differences. Most glaring is that neither New Jersey nor Rhode Island enacted a statute. Arizona's SB1070 is statutory law, and that law has an express intent which strikes in stark defiance at the uniform federal scheme adopted by Congress and enforced by the President. Arizona's intent is attrition through enforcement. That statutory intent which Judge Bea is ignoring distinguishes the way Judges Bea and Noonan see this case.

Here are those New Jersey and Rhode Island directives, which come from Judge Bea's footnotes (always remember and never forget to read the footnotes).

In August 2007, the attorney general of New Jersey issued a directive which stated:

When a local, county, or State law enforcement officer makes an
arrest for any indictable crime, or for driving while intoxicated,
the arresting officer or a designated officer, as part of the booking
process, shall inquire about the arrestee’s citizenship, nationality
and immigration status. If the officer has reason to believe that
the person may not be lawfully present in the United States, the
officer shall notify [ICE] during the arrest booking process.

Anne Milgram, Attorney General Law Enforcement Directive No. 2007-3.

Rhode Island Executive Order 08-01, “Illegal Immigration Control
Order,” issued March 27, 2008, states at paragraph 6:

It is urged that all law enforcement officials, including state and
local law enforcement agencies take steps to support the enforcement of federal immigration laws by investigating and determining the immigration status of all non-citizens taken into custody, incarcerated, or under investigation for any crime and notifying federal authorities of all illegal immigrants discovered as a result of such investigations.

For his part Judge Paez sees SB1070 much differently than does Judge Bea. In Paez's analysis of §2 (B) he addressed the distinction between the majority and minority views in his footnote number 7.

The dissent claims that Section 2(B) “merely requires Arizona officers to inquire into the immigration status of suspected” undocumented immigrants; that “simply informing federal authorities of the presence of an[undocumented immigrant]. . . represents the full extent of Section 2(B)’s limited scope.” Dissent at 4873-74. Section 2(B) requires much more than mere inquires—it requires that people be detained until those inquiries are settled, and in the event of an arrest, the person may not be released until the arresting agency obtains verification of the person’s immigration status. Detention, whether intended or not, is an unavoidable consequence of Section 2(B)’s mandate.

Next we will look at Judge Bea's legal analysis beginning with United States v. Salerno and the law about facial challenges and what I call the Inconceivable Standard.

ARNOLD & MARIA

Arnold: "I'll be back!"

Maria:  "Let me say this about that!"