Politics: October 2006 Archives

Terrorist lawyer who smuggled messages sentenced. She should have gotten life for her flagrant abuse of the civil rights system of this country. Every lawyer who violates the law like her is one more endangerment to the civil rights of all of us.

"If you send her to prison, she's going to die. It's as simple as that," defense lawyer Elizabeth Fink had told the judge before the sentence was pronounced.

That's her lawyer. She has to say that. I don't know about hoping she's correct, but I have no sympathy for traitors, particularly traitors who abuse the civil rights that have evolved to protect us all from government abuse.



Here's her crime:

Stewart and other defendants carried messages between the sheik and senior members of an Egyptian-based terrorist organization, helping spread Abdel-Rahman's call to kill those who did not subscribe to his extremist interpretation of Islamic law.

In other words, she helped a terrorist we had already caught continue to lead his followers. Just a little violation of ethical guidelines. Probably wouldn't have aided in the murder of more than a few thousand people.

Stewart, in her letter to the judge, said she did not intentionally enter into any plot or conspiracy to aid a terrorist organization. She believes the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks made her behavior intolerable in the eyes of the government and gave it an excuse to make an example out of her.

Unless she's suffering from multiple personality disorder, this is a lie, and the latter half is paranoid delusional as well. "Poor little me! Just because I'm guilty is no excuse to prosecute!"



She could have gotten thirty years. She should have gotten life without parole. She didn't even get 30 months. If I'm ever guilty of anything, I hope they "persecute" me like that.



Don Surber has more.



Stop the ACLU also has some thoughts worth reading.



Captain's Quarters:

Stewart wants to play the patsy. However, patsies don't spend the lengthy time between her conviction and her sentencing appearing at numerous left-wing anti-war rallies, undermining the war effort and claiming to have been persecuted. Patsies don't tell crowds that they would do the same thing all over again under the same circumstances. The only saps involved in this case come from the multitudes who bought that story, and they're about to discover how gullible they've been.

Which last thought wins the "Wishful Thinking" of the Day Award, but the rest is spot on debunking of some boldfaced lies.

At this point in time, it's looking like Democratic control of the House after the midterms is the likely outcome. Not assured, but likely. Now, it's not like this is a Good Thing; it's not. But let's put it into perspective: The midterms that happen in an incumbent's sixth year are historically a party's electoral low point. The party in the White House loses seats in the midterms. The opportunity for gains happens in the Presidential Elections. When the Republicans gained seats in 2002, it was the proverbial blue moon in politics. Politically, losing the House is about as minimally damaging as practical in American politics.



Now, here's the rub: This puts the Democrats in power sharing mode. Suddenly, they have to become responsible for policy. Furthermore, they will have more outlets to make fools of themselves. Put Pelosi and Murtha in the two top spots in the House, and the American public will get a lot more tired and a lot more disgusted with them, than they did with Hastert or Gingrich. It's like reading Democratic Underground - amusing so long as it's just hot air, but if the American people have to pay attention, they will want it to stop. Furthermore, the 2008 elections are likely to see a shift such as we haven't seen since World War II. If the Donkeys keep talking - and acting - like they have recently, they will have two years in the spotlight to alienate the public. I think that if the Republicans hold both chambers, we might see Hillary as President. If the Democrats win the house in 2006, I think people will be so disgusted with them that Hillary will lose badly in 2008 (as the Republicans take back Congress as well) even if she does score the nomination, clearing the way for a Dukakis, Dean or Kerry clone in 2012, and the death of the Democratic Party, at least as we know it. See the Whig disintegration, number of other realignments. Christians used to be a Democratic constituency. Blacks used to be Republican. The current Democratic coalition is right at the verge of its ability to hold together and be competitive nationally. The bias in the national press and media has become so blatant that clear non-partisans are noting the uneven treatment. This is not the action of a secure governing coalition; it's the actions of a coalition that's metaphorically punching out of its weight class. The Republicans are much closer to the center of society today, if only because they are afraid to offend the average centrist. But the Democratic coalition is going to have to start attracting new groups to stay competitive nationally, and frankly, I see Republicans taking various minority groups away from the Democrats before I see Democrats taking christians or business folk, let alone small l libertarians. Yes, the current Republican platforms don't have much to offer libertarians - but the Democratic ones promise to actively torpedo libertarian policy aims, such as school choice among many others.



I don't regard Democratic control of the House as a done deal yet, and I'm still hoping it doesn't happen. Not because I'm enamored of the Republicans. But I'm not insane enough to vote Cthulhu for President, and I'm not going to hope the Democrats win control of Congress, either. I've been known to echo the aphorism about knowing the advantages of the two party system, while wishing it weren't these two parties. The fact that the Republican party is in no way worthy of admiration does not alter the fact that the Democrats are intellectually bankrupt, blindly partisan, and doing their best to sabotage the best interests of the country. The lesser of two evils is still the lesser of two evils. I'm not so far gone in annoyance at what amounts to larcenous conduct that I'm willing to vote in obstructionists who would have the country commit suicide to aid in their larceny. And that is the choice in front of us.