Obama Iraq

Obama Mulls More Military in Iraq: States Should Refuse to Participate

The Nov. 5 edition of Stars and Stripes reported that President Obama is considering renewed military assistance to Iraq.

After a White House meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Obama said he shares al-Maliki’s fears about militants’ growing foothold in Iraq’s western province and will join the Iraqi leader’s effort to crack down. Administration officials said this would include growing intelligence support and new weaponry.

Details
Colorado Marijuana Registry

Nullification Works: Despite Surge in Federal Raids, CO marijuana registry keeps growing

Nullification of unconstitutional marijuana criminalization laws is alive and well.

In the last 17 years, the DEA has performed 528 raids, with 270 of those under Pres. Obama (51 percent). So, Obama is keeping up, and even surpassing, the pace on domestic raids. That’s despite 26 states either decriminalizing marijuana, legalizing it for medical use or legalizing it completely.

But how effective is this effort? It may appear that the federal government can still shut down whatever drug activity they want. But can they really?

Details

Obama Wants Us to Trust Him

BALANCE“If people can’t trust not only the executive branch, but also don’t trust Congress, and don’t trust federal judges, to make sure that we’re abiding by the Constitution with due process and rule of law, then we’re going to have some problems here.” Obama added that the National Security agents behind the surveillance programs “cherish our Constitution…You can shout Big Brother or program run amok, but if you actually look at the details, I think we’ve struck the right balance,” he explained.

I actually felt a sense of relief when I read Obama’s statement. Finally, he gets it. We don’t trust him, or Congress, or the political appointees we loosely call federal judges. I can’t think of a single reason to place my faith in any of them.

Can you?

In my lifetime, the last executive I felt willing to trust was Kennedy.

And I was three.

I may have been taken in!

Look, we shouldn’t trust these people. And history bears this out.

Take Lyndon Johnson and his winking Congress. They led us into the undeclared Vietnam catastrophe. Did you know that the Viet Cong were quite comfortable ignoring the Geneva Convention because we didn’t formally declare war? As a result, U.S. POWs could be classified as political criminals…and tortured.

And of course, we were all disgusted with Nixon’s betrayal of the country in the Watergate affair. But like jailing Capone for tax evasion, we hardly nailed Nixon’s greatest crime. Under his leadership, supported by Congress, and repeatedly upheld by our courts, the shredding of the Fourth Amendment became a federal past-time. Thanks to the criminalization of drugs, policing shifted from community service to community intimidation. RICO laws sank to IRS levels, eliminating due process. Suddenly, property could be taken from an individual just on the suspicion of wrongdoing – no conviction required. DUI checkpoints, once illegal, became commonplace. Prior to that, police had to observe driving behavior and have probable cause in order to stop you. Oh, and if pulled over, our automobiles used to be safe from police searches under the Fourth Amendment. No longer. All thanks to the War on Drugs.

Details

Give ‘Em an Inch

Operating pretty much in the shadows, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) has issued a series of rulings vastly expanding National Security Agency power.

The New York Times reports that the secret court has issued hundreds of rulings creating a vast body of law empowering the NSA to gather all kinds of data on Americans. The FISA Court initially limited itself primarily to approving wiretaps in foreign intelligence investigations. But the court has gradually taken on a much broader role, even assessing and ruling on broad constitutional issues. According to the Times, the FISA Court has gone as far as carving out an exception to the Fourth Amendment.

In one of the court’s most important decisions, the judges have expanded the use in terrorism cases of a legal principle known as the “special needs” doctrine and carved out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures, the officials said.

Ever since Truman decided in 1946 that intelligence gathering is a civilian, peacetime activity rather than one restricted to wartime, we’ve quietly succumbed to a creeping loss of Fourth Amendment rights. I keep thinking of the old Steve McQueen movie, “The Blob”. The Blob was a slow-moving, gooey…well, blob. The unwary that merely touched the creature would be inexorably sucked in and consumed. Sort of a mobile La Brea tar pit. So goes the federal government. Give ‘em and inch, they’ll take a mile. Perhaps two.

In this case, we see court-creep. In 1989, the Supreme Court allowed drug testing of railroad workers, reasoning the “minimal intrusion” on privacy was outweighed by the need to keep people safe.  Who can argue with keeping drugged up engineers from running trains, right? Fast forward 24 years and we have a super-secret court building on the precedent to allow the NSA to gather up every American’s phone calls and Internet data. Of course there were in-between stretches of that 1989 ruling. There were airport security checkpoints and DUI roadblocks. That raised some eyebrows, but really – it was just to keep us safe.

Details