liveonearth: (Luke Skywalker et al c light sabers)
The use of combat drones overseas divides Congress, but not in the usual partisan way.

Supporters of the “war on terror” in both parties tend to support the use of unmanned aircraft that often try to assassinate terrorism suspects. But libertarian Republicans have teamed up with civil liberties-backing Democrats to oppose the drones.

Now, the partisan trenches have been crossed by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D – Ohio, and Rep. Ron Paul, R – Texas, in order to force the administration to release its legal justification.

The two mavericks who are leaving Congress at year’s end have introduced a resolution of inquiry — legislation that is used to compel specific documents from the administration, and must be considered by the committee of jurisdiction, or on the House floor, within 14 legislative days.

Since the legislation was introduced on November 28, it could come before the House this year, which means that the administration will be forced to turn over the legal justification it uses for the strikes, including any memos from the Office of Legal Counsel.


SOURCE
http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=159916
liveonearth: (Default)
It's going to pass because Kucinich signed on. I've become more amenable to it myself though I still chafe at being required to purchase insurance from any provider. In the current version of the bill I will be coerced to pay a private insurer. But at least Obama is going to strip away some of the tax advantages of insurance companies. Even out the playing field as it were. At this point I hope they get the government insurance "public option" plugged back in, to further strip away the power of the insurance companies. I know it's very unlibertarian of me, but I am a compromiser for the greatest good for the greatest number of people. So mote it be.
liveonearth: (Default)
OK, I was provoked to search around a little bit because [livejournal.com profile] gavin6942 says he can't support Ron Paul because of his position on the writer's strike. He said Dr Paul actively tried to stop the strike. I haven't found any evidence yet for this. Dr Paul agreed to an interview on The View rather than abstaining from it to support the strike. I am certain that he supports the rights of the writers to strike. He supports everyone's right to unionize. It appears that his appearance on Jay Leno was also during the stike. So the claim is that Dr Paul is against the writers because he interviewed during the strike. And the desire is that he abstain from making television appearances to support the strikers.

Frankly, the writer's strike is far less important to the future of this nation and to the writers themselves than the other issues under consideration. This seems to me to be an example of an individual identifying with a small group whose cause is more important than the greatest issues of our times. A job is a job. A government is a government. A nation is a nation. A planet is a planet. Which is more important?

I understand and support Ron Paul's choice to accept opportunities for media exposure during this crucial time, even with the chance that writers may not see the big picture and may choose to paint him as their enemy because of it.
some links )

Profile

liveonearth: (Default)
liveonearth

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
1819202122 2324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 25th, 2025 01:59 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios