Featured Articles

Bush signs BRAC plan

WIth Presidential approval of the BRAC report, it's all over but the shouting & Ellsworth survived the process.

President Bush on Thursday endorsed a plan for closing 22 major military bases and reconfiguring 33 others, leaving their fate to Congress.

Bush had until Sept. 23 to either accept the entire report from an independent commission and send it to Congress, or return it to the commission for further work. The report will become final in 45 days unless Congress acts to reject it in full. In previous rounds, lawmakers never have rejected reports, meaning communities probably have little hope of a reprieve for their bases.

Likewise, bases left off the BRAC closure list, have little to fear at this point. Aside from the economics of the situation, the Chief believes that the strategic and military factors were the only ones that should have been significant in the final decisions. In the cases of Ellsworth, and the Naval bases in Maine and Connecticut at least, the Chief had NO doubt that this was the case, as did the commissioners, resulting in the positive outcome for South Dakota.

This is shaping up to be a great college football season. Notre Dame takes out Michigan. Iowa State up-ends Iowa for the Cy-Hawk Trophy. Next up: Horns and Ohio State. If things keep playing out this way, I'll be back...

1,100-pound elk bagged in New Mexico. The photo of this behemoth has to be seen to be believed....

John Roberts made an analogy between Judges and Umpires that I have frequently used in my constitutional law class to explain the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint. Jim Lindgren at the Volokh Conspiracy has this shrewd comment:Roberts' comparison...

A couple of items out today that illustrate once again the fundamental importance of the appointments to the bench in determining whether or not we live subject to the whim of judicial dictators arbitrarily wreaking their will, or as Lincoln phrased it, "whether government of the people, by the people, and for the people should not perish from the earth".

Pledge of Allegiance again ruled unconstitutional

A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday, a decision that could put the divisive issue on track for another round of Supreme Court arguments. The case was brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected last year by the Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

This comes out of the moonbat-grade US 9th Circuit

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Jerk-it Court of Appeals Schlemiels, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

Instead of "One man, one vote" with Judicial dictatorship we get "One man, I vote"....and as far as the current quality of SCOTUS that the LibDonks are so vociferously defending against conservatives, try this:

Sen. Lindsey Graham: Justice Ginsberg OK'd Child Sex

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg once argued that girls as young as twelve should be able to have sex with adult males, Sen. Lindsey Graham said Tuesday - while pledging to make an issue out of Ginsberg's radical philosophy during John Roberts' confirmation hearings.

"She argued that the age of consent for a woman should be twelve," Graham told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity. "She wasn't representing clients," Graham noted about Ginsberg's endorsement of child sex. "She was writing an article about her own views."

It goes on from there - yes, there is more where that came from...and the hits just keep on comin':

Justice Kennedy's New Rule of Law

In the Sept. 12 New Yorker, legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin pens a profile of Kennedy, who vigorously defends his use of foreign laws and constitutions to interpret U.S. laws and our Constitution. Some in Congress believe Kennedy's position ? and those of several other Court Justices - is a clear violation of both U.S. law and the justices' own solemn oath to uphold solely the U.S. Constitution.

I tried to find this at the site for The New Yorker, but it wasn't there - I suppose it's in the print edition only, at least so far.

What does the collective set of all this stuff mean? Mark Levin in his book Men in Black is right!

Fighting Terrorism in the U.S.

Gov. Mit Romney (R-MA) has deGov. finitely poked the hornets' nest of political correctness with a big stick in a speech before the Heritage Foundation. He reiterated in an interview with Gibson on Fox News:

And, in some cases, I'm sure the FBI infiltrates organizations they're concerned about. If they have probable cause, they're able to do wiretapping. And those are the tools that, of course, we use in protecting the homeland. What we need to do is more of that and have more resources devoted to the FBI in their effort to do intelligence work and counterintelligence work.

We don't need different tools. We need to use the tools we have got under the Patriot Act (search) and under our current laws to assure that we really are following groups that are preaching terror, that we really are following people who come here from terror-sponsored states, where that's appropriate, where we have concerns, that we have the resources necessary to prevent the bombs from going off, rather than just the resources to clean up afterwards.

In a later apppearance on O'Reilly Factor this evening, when asked what he thought of the ACLY complaining that his remarks and the policy advocated in them would have a "chilling effect" on foriegn students coming to the US. Romney's reply? Words to the effect that he would hope that students from terrorist-supporting countries like Saudi Arabia and others WOULD stay away - that it would make our security problem that much better if they were not here!

HEAR, HEAR! Right on, Gov'nor!

As I've stated in this space before, I think that the registered voters of Louisiana have a lot of questions that need to be answered. Nagin said that by daybreak, he might have to order the first mandatory evacuation in...

-----Original Message-----From: Schaff, JonSent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 9:54 PMTo: Blanchard, Kenneth; Grettler, DavidSubject: A Very Important Question This came up in Presidency class. If you become a vampire or a zombie, do you have to pay the inheritance tax?...

A Message from tdaxp

Send feedback to danhabbott@gmail.com

Browse the Archives

What's New with the Blogs

South Dakota Blogs

American Blogs

Pro-Freedom, Anti-Terror

South Dakota Blog Alliance

RadioActive Chief, Ryen McClaren, Sibby Online, South Dakota Politics, Straight Talk

tdaxp Blog Network

Jim River Report, tdaxp, Bloglines, Cobuyitaphobia, Junk Politics

Breaking News

South Dakota Mainstream Media

American Mainstream Media

British Mainstream Media

Everyone Else

Jim River Report Archives

1. today
2. this month
3. this year

How Popular is the Jim River Report?