Conservative legal scholar endorses Obama

In addition to picking up the powerful endorsement of Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania today, Barack Obama has received some unlikely support. Douglas Kmiec - a conservative law school professor with strong traditional Catholic credentials and also associated with the evangelical-related Pepperdine University - has announced his backing of Obama.

WBIR TV http://www.wbir.com/ reports:

One of the nation's top conservative Republican Catholic legal scholars has endorsed Democratic Senator Barack Obama for president.

Constitutional law professor Douglas Kmiec , who served in the Reagan administration and in Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, says he believes Obama can unite the country and inspire Americans to overcome racial and religious divisions.

Kmiec supports the Catholic teaching that abortion is a grave moral evil, but also considers the war in Iraq to be a life issue. Kmiec says the church was troubled by arguments for a "pre-emptive war" that has proven costly in both lives and treasure. Kmiec, former dean of the Catholic University law school, now teaches at Pepperdine University.

http://www.wbir.com/news/national/story.aspx?storyid=56105

Kmiec's statement from Catholic Online http://www.catholic.org/

“Today I endorse Barack Obama for president of the United States. I believe him to be a person of integrity, intelligence and genuine good will. I take him at his word that he wants to move the nation beyond its religious and racial divides and to return United States to that company of nations committed to human rights.

I do not know if his earlier life experience is sufficient for the challenges of the presidency that lie ahead. I doubt we know this about any of the men or women we might select. It likely depends upon the serendipity of the events that cannot be foreseen. I do have confidence that the Senator will cast his net widely in search of men and women of diverse, open-minded views and of superior intellectual qualities to assist him in the wide range of responsibilities that he must superintend.

This endorsement may be of little note or consequence, except perhaps that it comes from an unlikely source: namely, a former constitutional legal counsel to two Republican presidents. The endorsement will likely supply no strategic advantage equivalent to that represented by the very helpful accolades the Senator has received from many of high stature and accomplishment, including most recently, from Governor Bill Richardson. Nevertheless, it is important to be said publicly in a public forum in order that it be understood. It is not arrived at without careful thought and some difficulty.

As a Republican, I strongly wish to preserve traditional marriage not as a suspicion or denigration of my homosexual friends, but as recognition of the significance of the procreative family as a building block of society.

As a Republican, and as a Catholic, I believe life begins at conception, and it is important for every life to be given sustenance and encouragement. As a Republican, I strongly believe that the Supreme Court of the United States must be fully dedicated to the rule of law, and to the employ of a consistent method of interpretation that keeps the Court within its limited judicial role.

As a Republican, I believe problems are best resolved closest to their source and that we should never arrogate to a higher level of government that which can be more effectively and efficiently resolved below.

As a Republican, and the constitutional lawyer, I believe religious freedom does not mean religious separation or mindless exclusion from the public square.

In various ways, Senator Barack Obama and I may disagree on aspects of these important fundamentals, but I am convinced based upon his public pronouncements and his personal writing that on each of these questions he is not closed to understanding opposing points of view, and as best as it is humanly possible, he will respect and accommodate them.

No doubt some of my friends will see this as a matter of party or intellectual treachery. I regret that and I respect their disagreement. But they will readily agree that as Republicans, we are first Americans. As Americans, we must voice our concerns for the well-being of our nation without partisanship when decisions that have been made endanger the body politic.

Our president has involved our nation in a military engagement without sufficient justification or clear objective. In so doing, he has incurred both tragic loss of life and extraordinary debt jeopardizing the economy and the well-being of the average American citizen.

In pursuit of these fatally flawed purposes, the office of the presidency, which it was once my privilege to defend in public office formally, has been distorted beyond its constitutional assignment.

Today, I do no more than raise the defense of that important office anew, but as private citizen. 9/11 and the radical Islamic ideology that it represents is a continuing threat to our safety and the next president must have the honesty to recognize that it, as author Paul Berman has written, "draws on totalitarian inspirations from 20th-century Europe and with its double roots, religious and modern, perversely intertwined. . . .wields a lot more power, intellectually speaking, then naïve observers might suppose."

Senator Obama needs to address this extremist movement with the same clarity and honesty with which he has addressed the topic of race in America. Effective criticism of the incumbent for diverting us from this task is a good start, but it is incomplete without a forthright outline of a commitment to undertake, with international partners, the formation of a world-wide entity that will track, detain, prosecute, convict, punish, and thereby, stem radical Islam's threat to civil order.

I await Senator Obama's more extended thinking upon this vital subject, as he accepts the nomination of his party and engages Senator McCain in the general campaign “

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=27300

Pass The SAVE Act Now !

Last November, this blogger strongly endorsed the SAVE Act sponsored by Congressman Heath Shuler (D-NC) http://rightdemocrat.blogspot.com/2007/11/heath-shuler-proposes-save-act-for.html which is a true middle -ground solution to the problem of illegal immigration.

Efforts are now underway to bring this legislation to the House floor via discharge petition. Members of the public need to hold their representatives accountable and demand that they take real action on illegal immigration. We must insist that our House members sign the discharge petition and bring the legislation to an up or down House vote. Let's be heard !

Here is a summary of the legislation.

SAVE Act of 2007

SECURE AMERICA WITH VERIFICATION AND ENFORCEMENT

Representative Heath Shulerʹs 3‐Part Plan to Stop Illegal Immigration

Title I—Secure Americaʹs Borders

• Increases Border Patrol agents by 8,000, utilizes new technology and infrastructure to secure the border and expands a specialized enforcement program called the ʺTunnel Task Forceʺ.

• Outlines provisions for recruitment of new agents and personnel through bonuses,student loan repayments, and other financial incentives.

• Creates a pilot program to increase aerial surveillance, satellite, and equipment sharing between the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to SAVEtaxpayer dollars.

Title II ‐ Work Authorization Verification for all Employees

• Expands the E‐Verify program and requires it for all employees over four years.

° E‐Verify provides employers with an inexpensive, quick, and accurate way to verify employee eligibility.

° E‐Verify already exists and has had tremendous success, but it currently is voluntary, which puts users at an economic disadvantage if competitors hire illegal aliens, and is only being used by a fraction of U.S. employers.

° Employees must provide an acceptable form of ID from a limited list. Employers receive verification in seconds.

• Closes the existing loopholes in E‐Verify to detect multiple people using the same social security number and to detect people using stolen identities.

• Sets timelines for the class and size of employers to enroll in E‐Verify and sets new employees apart from current employees.

• Requires information sharing between the Department of Homeland Security, the Social Security Administration, and the Internal Revenue Service.

Title III –Reduces Illegal Immigration Through Interior Enforcement

• Increases investigative abilities of ICE by employing more agents and training additional state and local law enforcement personnel.

• Expedites the removal of illegal aliens by expanding detention capacity and increasing the number of Federal District Court Judges.

• Implements a targeted media campaign to inform illegal aliens of new laws and penalties, while also informing employers of penalties for hiring illegal immigrants.

"Free trade" is a major cause of shrinking dollar

Writing in Friday's New York Times, Steven Weisman asks how low can the dollar go ?

"Battered by bad news and mounting fears over the American economy, the dollar plumbed new depths on Thursday, helping drive oil prices to record levels. The greenback traded at a new low of $1.56 against the euro, while oil prices settled at $110 a barrel. Early in the day, the dollar sank below 100 Japanese yen for the first time since 1995, but it ended the day slightly above that milestone."

"The dollar has been declining in value against the euro and several other currencies since 2002, slamming travelers to Europe and American consumers purchasing European goods. Politicians are deploring the weak dollar as a sign of American economic decline and influence."

"To make matters worse, many economists say that the problems of a sagging dollar are feeding off each other. As the dollar weakens, holders of dollars, especially those overseas, are aiming for better returns on their assets by diversifying their portfolios toward other currencies, sending the dollar into further decline."

Weisman notes that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson says "a strong dollar is in America's interest" and predicts the dollar will at some point "shine through" to regain value.

"But many experts scoff at Mr. Paulson’s pronouncements as happy talk. Warren E. Buffett, the financier, said recently that “the government can talk about how it’s in our interest to have a strong dollar,” but it is not following policies that would help."

"The trade deficit, he argues, means that “we force-feed a couple of billion dollars a day to the rest of the world” — namely to those countries that export to the United States."

"Lately the administration has been pointing to trade figures showing that the American trade deficit is declining. Exports grew more than 12 percent last year, and they grew more than 13 percent in the 12 months that ended in January. The trade deficit was more than 5 percent smaller for that time period as a result."

"Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez hailed the latest trade numbers as a reflection of improving American competitiveness. What he and other administration officials never say — indeed they have apparently been instructed not to say it — is that the improvement is a result of the dollar’s decline, which makes American goods cheaper."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/14/business/worldbusiness/14dollar.html?em&ex=1205640000&en=074808ada55d504b&ei=5087%0A

The article closes on an optimistic note. Weisman writes, "For all its problems, the dollar is still widely seen as the world’s safest currency." True, but for how long ? America cannot continue to run a huge trade deficit without facing the financial consequences.

Florian Jensen provides a summary of Warren's Buffett's plan to balance the trade deficit:

Buffett explains what a trade deficit is in layman’s terms…

“In effect, our country has been behaving like an extraordinarily rich family that possesses an immense farm. In order to consume 4 percent more than we produce — that’s the trade deficit — we have, day by day, been both selling pieces of the farm and increasing the mortgage on what we still own.”

"He goes on to explain why the US can spend like crazy……we can behave today as we wish because our past financial behavior was so exemplary…”

…and warns that it will be over - sometime.

“…our national credit card allows us to charge truly breathtaking amounts. But that card’s credit line is not limitless.”

AND he actually proposes a solution!

“We would achieve this balance by issuing what I will call Import Certificates (ICs) to all U.S. exporters in an amount equal to the dollar value of their exports. Each exporter would, in turn, sell the ICs to parties — either exporters abroad or importers here — wanting to get goods into the U.S. To import $1 million of goods, for example, an importer would need ICs that were the byproduct of $1 million of exports. The inevitable result: trade balance. ”

http://florianjensen.com/2008/03/09/warren-buffett-on-the-us-trade-deficit/

Our leaders in Washington should heed Buffett's advice and take action to restore sanity to America's trade policies.

Texas Democrats to form Gun Owners Caucus

Amendment II Democrats, a pro-gun rights Democratic group, will be organizing as a caucus at the Texas Democratic Party State Convention to be held this June in Austin. Democratic gun owners are hoping to win adoption of the following resolution which is being presented at party precinct caucuses around the State of Texas this evening.

Resolution in Support of the Second Amendment Rights of Law-Abiding Texans


Courtesy of Amendment II Democrats:
A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF LAW-ABIDING TEXANS

WHEREAS, in the case of US vs. Emerson, the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, on October 16, 2001, that "to give the Second Amendment's preamble its full and proper due there is no need to torture the meaning of its substantive guarantee into the collective rights or sophisticated collective rights model which is so plainly inconsistent with the substantive guarantee's text, its placement within the bill of rights and the wording of the other articles thereof and of the original Constitution as a whole," thus affirming that the "well-regulated Militia" enumerated in the Second Amendment does not restrict private ownership of firearms to collective state militias such as the National Guard, and

WHEREAS, in the same case of US vs. Emerson, the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals further affirmed that "the right of individual Americans to keep, carry, and acquaint themselves with firearms does indeed promote a well-regulated militia by fostering the development of a pool of firearms-familiar citizens that could be called upon to serve in the militia," and that "All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans," and

WHEREAS, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 contained provisions banning sales of numerous semi-automatic firearms to civilians based almost solely on an arbitrary list of safety features found on such firearms, and

WHEREAS, support by Democratic Party legislators for the firearms ban contained in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 has eroded support for Democratic candidates across America and exacerbated confusion in the general public concerning the stance of Democrats on gun legislation, and

WHEREAS, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that the provisions for the firearms ban in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 have had any measurable success in reducing violent crime rates within the United States of America since passage of the Act, and
WHEREAS, the firearms ban provisions of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 have been allowed to expire on September 13, 2004,

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Texas Democratic Party urges the Democratic Congressional delegation from Texas to draft and support legislation to reaffirm our commitment to protection and defense of the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, including the Second Amendment;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Texas Democratic Party urges the Democratic Congressional delegation from Texas to oppose attempts to enact or reauthorize any ban on the sale, transfer, and/or possession of semi-automatic firearms by law-abiding Texans.
Submitted to and Adopted by Precinct __ in __________ County, Texas, Senatorial District __ on March 4, 2008.
________________________________ Convention secretary

The Party Faithful: How and Why the Democrats Are Closing The God Gap

Amy Sullivan has a thought-provoking new book titled "The Party Faithful: How and Why the Democrats Are Closing The God Gap" (Simon & Shuster, 2008). As a political journalist from a Baptist background, Sullivan was appalled to hear a sermon at her hometown church about the incompatibility of being a Christian and a Democrat. Sullivan saw no such contradiction and explains that her political beliefs are, in fact, rooted in a Christian concern for the less fortunate. Citing examples of how Democratic leaders have overlooked and even snubbed religious voters in the recent past, Sullivan suggests strategies for how Democrats can effectively reach out to people of faith.

From the publisher's website:

As late as the 1960s, religion was a decidedly nonpartisan affair in the United States. In the past forty years, however, despite abundant evidence that Americans care about their candidates' personal faith, Democrats have beat a retreat in the competition for religious voters and the discussion of morality, effectively ceding religion to the Republicans. Elections show that voters have gotten the message: Democrats are on the wrong side of the God gap.

With unprecedented access to politicians, campaign advisers, and religious leaders, Amy Sullivan skillfully traces the Democratic Party's fall from grace among religious voters, showing how the party lost its primacy -- and maybe its soul -- in the process. It's a story that begins with the party's ineffectual response to the rise of the religious right and culminates with John Kerry's defeat in the 2004 presidential election. Sullivan documents key turning points along the way, such as the party's alienation of Catholics on the abortion issue and its failure to emulate Bill Clinton's success at reaching religious voters. She demonstrates that there was nothing inevitable about the defection of values voters to the GOP and the emergence of the God gap: it was not just a Republican achievement but the Democrats' failure to embrace their own faith and engage religious Americans on social issues.

Sullivan's story has a hopeful ending. She takes readers behind the scenes of the Democrats' recent religious turnaround. She offers insight into the ways Democrats have reoriented their campaigns to appeal to religious voters -- including their successes at framing the abortion issue in less-divisive terms and at finding common ground with evangelical leaders and communities.
Timely, informative, and immensely thought-provoking, The Party Faithful is a tough and revealing analysis of the Democratic Party's relationship to religion and an essential primer for evaluating the outcome of the 2008 presidential election.

http://www.simonsays.com/content/book.cfm?tab=1&pid=586419&er=9780743297868

The Neglected Voter

Since the early 1980s, Republicans have won over a key voting block which was the backbone of the New Deal Coalition: white male voters. David Paul Kuhn presents an argument for how the Democrats can regain some of these voters. His new book is The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma published by Palgrave Macmllan. As Kuhn points out only 37 percent of white males voted for John Kerry in 2004 playing a critical part in his defeat and that midterm victories (1986, 2006) do not necessarily equal sustainable electoral success. Increasing the Democratic vote among white males is a logical part of any strategy for building a governing majority. http://www.whitemalegap.com/

Link to video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSvM1GlwQ3s

Lou Dobbs brings populism to talk radio

Popular CNN TV commentator Lou Dobbs will join the ranks of radio talk show hosts on Monday. The live feed for Dobbs radio show is on weekdays from 3 to 6 PM EST {listen live at http://www.loudobbsradio.com/} which will put the outspoken populist in direct competition with Republican propagandist Sean Hannity in many markets. Of course, Dobbs program will air at other times in some cities. Progressive talk radio station WZNZ 1460 in Jacksonville,FL http://www.1460.us/ will broadcast and stream Dobbs from 9 PM to Midnight EST each weekday. I am encouraged that a liberal-oriented talk station is airing Dobbs' talk show since he is sometimes labeled a right-winger by the forces of political correctness. Then again, the economic populism of Dobbs represents true progressivism.

A long-time CNN host, Dobbs holds a degree in economics from Harvard University. He is the author of the New York Times best-selling "War on the Middle Class" and a vocal opponent of illegal immigration, unfair trade policies and the outsourcing of jobs.

Sometimes a switch in broadcasting mediums does not work like Rush Limbaugh's attempt to prodcuce a television program back in the 90's but Dobbs style seems like a natural for talk radio. My prediction is that Dobbs will soon rival Hannity and Bill O'Reilly as a cable television and radio talk personality. The biggest challenge to Dobbs as a moderate populist is to break into air formats that are dominated by conservatives in most areas except for a few stations affiliated with the left-leaning Air America. Ed Schultz (not associated with Air America) is one of the few mainstream liberal radio talkers that is widely heard. And except for Dobbs, I cannot think of a single moderate talk radio show except for maybe Jim Bohannon. Many listeners are sick of hearing Republican National Committee talking points all day. It is about time for a little diversity of opinion on the radio dial.