jadedmara's blog
Posted at 2:51pm on Jan. 20, 2008 [UPDATED w/Photos] McCain in South Carolina
By jadedmara
Go here for photos.
Alas, I'm not one of those cool press people who can file stories from anyplace, anywhere. I'm posting this after waking up from a marathon sleep after crashing down on my bed in my Triangle-area, NC home at 4am.
Weather
A few notes on the weather on Charleston on Saturday: it really wasn't bad for most of the day. It was drizzly, and walking around downtown Charleston wasn't fun, but driving to the polls wouldn't have been a problem. By nighttime, thankfully around the time polls were closing, it started getting colder and much ickier.
Posted in Archived — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:24pm on Mar. 4, 2007 Protecting Our War Memorials
By jadedmara
On March 17th, 2007, a group of war veterans will be gathering in Washington, D.C. to protect the Vietnam War memorial and other war memorials from descration by protesters at an anti-war rally being held that day adjacent to the Wall. The veterans are trying to prevent the recurrance of desecration that occured at a similar event in January.
Posted in Special Events — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:56am on Jun. 24, 2006 My father's solution for America
By jadedmara
I've been confronted with the notion that my father is the brown, Muslim, Paul Cella. Not exactly, of course, considering I strongly suspect my dad voted for Kerry. But he's been expressing notions that have me confronting my basic political beliefs.
It all began when we were, as usual, discussing the Iraq war. My father and I were both against the war, both for pragmatic reasons and not the McChimpBushHitlerCo conspiracy theories. However, we disagree on whether the war will work out in the end. He is negative on our chances. "The Iraqi people will never become democratic, and Iraq will never become a pro-American state," he said, "even though there are of course pro-American, pro-democratic Iraqis. It just won't work."
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (28) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:41pm on Jul. 26, 2005 Free Muslims meet with the Congressman Tom Tancredo
By jadedmara
I'm copying this email in full. Not much more can be said on my end.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:58am on Jul. 26, 2005 Tube Staff to Strike over Security
By jadedmara
The union said it would demand the introduction of guards on trains, more station staff and better emergency training and equipment including breathing apparatus for rail workers.
It is also seeking assurances that rail operator Transport for London will not reduce staff at rail stations or weaken fire safety regulations.
Ok, so I can sympathize. But, so, now the tube workers strike, there's no revenue to be made off the tube during the strike, and somehow the British government will be able to pay for stuff like a breathing apparatus?
Apparently this comes just a year after they striked over pay. I guess, being Europe, this shouldn't surprise me.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:45pm on Jul. 25, 2005 This is not a war against Islam
By jadedmara
Forgive me for reposting a comment as a diary. This is a topic that has been saddening me for a few weeks: namely, the prevailing view of Islam here at RedState.org.
I haven't posted a diary on this topic because I can't leave my emotion out of it. It's hard for me to not make this about myself, or my family, and to keep this a dispassionate response to some of the arguments I've seen on the site. Generally, RedState deserves better than that type of diary.
However, I give in. This is my 80% solution. I want to be heard. I want other detractors here to be heard also, not hidden in a larger story about nuking Mecca or the great divide.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (56) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:16pm on Jun. 22, 2005 Response from Senator Warner
By jadedmara
Most of this discussion is overcome by events, but I wanted to post the response I recieved from Senator John Warner (R-VA)'s office in regards to my letter about the judicial filibuster.
Dear Ms. _:
Thank you for contacting me to express your views about judicial
nominations, the filibuster, and the so-called "nuclear" or
"constitutional" option. I appreciate you making this effort and offering
me the opportunity to give you my perspective on these important issues.
Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution provides that
the President "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of
the Senate, shall appoint . . . Judges of the supreme Court, and all other
Officers of the United States . . . ." Thus, pursuant to the
Constitution, both the President and the United States Senate play a role
in the judicial nominations process.
In over a quarter of a century of serving the citizens of the
Commonwealth of Virginia in the Senate, I have taken my constitutional
responsibilities of providing advice and consent very seriously. In
considering a nominee, I look at many factors: character, professional
career, experience, integrity, and temperament for lifetime service on our
courts are all important. The opinions of the officials from the state in
which the nominee would serve and the views of my fellow Virginians are
also relevant. In addition, I consider whether the nominee is likely to
interpret the law according to legislative intent and precedent, as all
judges should, or whether he or she will improperly impose his or own
views from the bench as a judicial activist.
Considering these many factors, I believe that President Bush has
nominated many well qualified nominees to serve on the bench. While the
overwhelming majority of these nominees have been confirmed by the Senate,
unfortunately, starting in 2003, some Senators in the last Congress
resorted to using a rare procedural maneuver known as the filibuster to
prevent the full Senate from having up-or-down votes on certain nominees.
The filibuster is a Senate procedure defined as an extreme dilatory
tactic used to obstruct or prevent action. Under Senate rules, a
filibuster can only be defeated if at least sixty Senators vote in support
of a motion to invoke cloture - a motion to defeat the filibuster and end
debate.
In my view, systematic party-led filibusters of judicial nominees are
wrong. I generally believe that nominees who enjoy the support of the
majority of Senators ought to receive up-or-down votes. Accordingly, in
the last Congress, I participated in an all-night Senate session to try to
break the judicial filibuster within the framework of our existing rules.
Regrettably, our effort was not successful.
Since then, it has been suggested that Senators should employ a mechanism
commonly referred to as the "nuclear" or "constitutional" option in an
effort to ensure that all judicial nominees receive up-or-down votes.
Under this proposal, the Senate essentially would change its rules to
ensure that judicial nominees could not be filibustered. While rule
changes in the Senate usually require the concurrence of at least 67
Senators, this option would only require a simple majority vote.
As supporters of the "nuclear" or "constitutional" option considered
utilizing this extraordinary procedure, I intentionally withheld
expressing how I would vote on it in order to encourage the Republican and
Democratic leaders to come to a mutually acceptable solution for the
consideration of judicial nominations. However, once it became clear that
the Senate leadership would not be able to reach such an accord, I then
worked with a bipartisan group of thirteen other Senators to craft such a
solution. In my view, bipartisan consensus was necessary to break the
impasse on judicial nominations in a way that paid respect to the
Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision of the United States Senate.
Under our agreement, signatories committed that future judicial nominees
will only be filibustered in extraordinary circumstances. I take this to
mean that the kind of systematic party-led filibusters we saw again and
again in the last Congress will no longer occur in the current 109th
Congress. In return for this commitment, Senators who signed the
agreement also committed not to support the so-called "nuclear" or
"constitutional" option so long as filibusters on judicial nominations
only occur in extraordinary circumstances.
In my view, our Constitution and the history, traditions, and rules of
the Senate are very clear: while nothing explicitly guarantees judicial
nominees an up-or-down vote in the Senate, the use of the filibuster in an
attempt to prevent such votes has historically been very rare. Our
agreement pays respect to these facts, and if the spirit of the agreement
holds, the vast majority of judicial nominees will receive up-or-down
votes while future judicial filibusters will once again be very rare.
Finally, while some have claimed that the "nuclear" or "constitutional"
option, if successful, would have guaranteed an up-or-down vote for every
single judicial nominee, this is simply not the case. While such an
option would have, if successful, eliminated filibusters on judicial
nominations, the fact of the matter is that throughout history Senators
have used a variety procedural tactics other than the filibuster to
prevent the full Senate from considering certain judicial nominees. In
fact, according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, since
1945 approximately 200 judicial nominations have not received up-or-down
votes in the United States Senate. These other procedural tactics would
have remained untouched by the "nuclear" or "constitutional" option.
In my view, the agreement on judicial nominations reached by 14 Senators
will do far more to ensure that a large number of judicial nominees
receive an up-or-down vote all the while paying respect to the
Constitution and to the history, traditions, and rules of the Senate.
While it is not a perfect agreement by any means, it is one based on
mutual trust, respect and good-faith.
Again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
John W. Warner
United States Senator
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:10pm on May 17, 2005 My Letter to Senator Warner
By jadedmara
Senator Warner:
I am a lifelong Virginia resident who is troubled by reports of a compromise deal in the works that would result in six Republicans Senators to vote against the constitutional/nuclear option regarding the recent Democratic filibuster. I, like many others, respect the history and importance of the filibuster as a tool to fight significant battles in the Senate. However, I likewise believe that the filibuster is a tool to be used for legislation, not for judicial confirmations.
Sir, if you are one of those who is tempted to advocate a compromise in this instance, I'd like to point out that the battle over the current judicial nominees is just a precursor to eventual Supreme Court nominations. I fear at this point, the filibuster is NOT being used in extreme cases; it appears that objectionable judges are those that are against Roe v Wade or who hold the constructionist view of upholding the Constitution. I do not believe that this is a case of people of faith being under attack, but I do believe that this is a case of minority views rising up and holding all others to be extreme or intolerant.
Sir, I do not consider myself to be a social conservative, although I am a conservative nonetheless. Although I am strongly pro-life, I will be content with the overthrow of Roe v Wade so that legislatures in individual states can decide as opposed to the activist elite on this issue. Compromising on the filibuster issue, or voting against the constitutional option, will put us down a path in which an anti-Roe or constructionist Supreme Court Justice will never be nominated. We are the majority party now, and we have played by the rules. I urge you to not allow the Democratic Party to suddenly change those rules.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 4:56pm on Feb. 18, 2005 Another year, another Ashura
By jadedmara
Tomorrow's Ashura observance marks the holiest day for Shias throughout Iraq and throughout the world. Attacks against Shia worshippers in Karbala, Najaf, and Baghdad last year killed over 170 and have been linked to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Given continued jihadist desires to target Shias and the symbolism of mass casualty attacks against Shias on Ashura, the potential for such attacks tomorrow remains high.
What to expect tomorrow from Shia worshipers:
1. Mourning observances typically commence in the early morning and are at their peak during the time of Asr prayers in the afternoon, when Imam Hussein is said to have been martyrd.
2. Shia mosques throughout Iraq will likely be overcrowded with services involving an emotional recounting of the historical day's events, mourners walking outside in procession (many in the procession may even beat their chests with their hands to show their grief) enactments of the final battle that took place on Ashura, and an evening observance discussing the hardships that would befall the women and children followers of Iman Hussein.
What we have seen thus far today: a car bomb exploded outside a Shia mosque in Iskandariya, south of Baghdad. At least seven people killed. No claim for the attack thus far. A suicide attack against Shias participating in a procession to the al-Khadimain mosque in Baghdad. At least 15 people killed. No claim for the attack thus far. Two suicide attackers target a Shia mosque in Baghdad's western sector. At least two were killed. No claim for the attack thus far. A rocket fired in NW Baghdad in the direction of a Shia mosque. At least one person killed. No claim for the attack thus far. Car bomb against a Shia mosque NE of Baghdad. At least 13 people killed. Zarqawi's group denies responsibility, claiming the patrol they were targeting "just passing by."
When Ashura came around last year, Zarqawi still had not formally allied with Usama bin Laden. One point of contention in the alliance is that UBL is not in favor of targeting Shia; however, he has made the concession to targeting Shia in Iraq. Nice of him. I still find it interesting that we haven't seen any formal Al Qaida in Iraq claims of responsibility for today's attacks.
Nevertheless, be warned of the potential of US and Iraqi lives being lost tomorrow.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:34am on Nov. 3, 2004 "Undecided" states' roundup
By jadedmara
CNN:
Ohio
Iowa
New Mexico
NBC:
New Hampshire
Wisconsin
Iowa
New Mexico
Nevada
FOX:
Wisconsin
Iowa
New Mexico
Nevada
CSPAN:
Iowa
New Mexico
Ohio
ABC:
Ohio
Iowa
New Mexico
Wisconsin
Daly Thoughts predicted:
Iowa and Hawaii as too close to call
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:22am on Sep. 15, 2004 Lisa Marie Cheney for Congress
By jadedmara
A quick diary entry in response to our recent call for donations. I have just donated $100.02 to Thune (and am about to chip in a 2nd round of donations to DeMint and Coburn).
I also urge our new readers to consider donating to Lisa Marie Cheney , running for Congress in Virginia's 8th District. Although she is not a RedState endorsed candidate, she, like Thune, is running against a deep seated incumbant ...and, like Thune, holding her own pretty well.
See polling results from 10 August
Incumbant Jim Moran is a particularly undeserving little man, from making allegedly anti-Semitic comments that earned him the emnity of fellow Democrats to being dubbed part of Congress's criminal class by Capitol Hill Blue because of his violent ways to corruption .
More of his weird violent tendencies include an episode in which allegedly tried to choke an 8 year old child whom he suspected of stealing his car.
Patriots for Bush has given us some highlights of his career:
* In 1998, Congressman Moran accepted a $447,500 home-refinancing package that consolidated his mounting debt (after having hypocritically railed against others on the House floor who have debt problems) at an unusually low interest rate. At the time, the Congressman was supporting a bill pushed by the loan company.
- In 1999, Congressman accepted an open-ended $25,000 loan at below-market interest rates from lobbyist Terry Lierman. Five days later he became a cosponsor of a bill to help Lierman's company.
- Congressman Moran received contributions from a notorious supporter of terrorism, Abdulrahman Alamoudi, who, at a protest in front of the White House, declared his support for terrorist groups Hamas and Hizbollah. Even after Hillary Clinton returned his campaign contribution, Moran publicly defended the terrorist supporter. Under pressure, he later agreed to give back the contribution.
- The Congressman also took and initially defended contributions from other supporters of terrorism, several of whom are implicated in the recent raids by the U.S. Customs Service on the Saar Foundation, Safa Trust, and International Institute of Islamic Thought, for funding global terrorism. On October 31, 2002, he agreed to return these contributions as well.
Moran is also known for other problems, in addition to his ethics:
- In 1995, Congressman Moran threatened to slug another Congressman on the House floor. Also in 1995, Moran physically assaulted a Congressional colleague as the two were walking out of the House chambers. In 1990, when he first ran for Congress, he threatened to punch his opponent. In a more recent incident, a witness reported seeing the huge Congressman carrying a second-grade child in a choke hold into the center. According to the child's attorney, Moran was using obscenities with the child when he brought him into the center. In another incident, Moran's wife called police to their home after being pushed by her husband.
- Congressman Moran has a long history of being indifferent and, at times, downright hostile, toward America's democratic ally, Israel. In a speech to the American Muslim Council, a group that has supported terrorism against Israel, Congressman Moran made the outrageous statement that "Mr. Sharon is coming to Washington this week... He's probably seeking a warrant from President Bush to kill at will with weapons we have paid for." On several occasions, Congressman Moran has taken to the House floor to deride Israel and even blame the Israeli government for Palestinian acts of terrorism. On other occasions, he blamed his reckless statements on "pandering" and "lack of knowledge" of the Middle East.
For crl2027's initial RedState post recounting of Jim Moran's foibles and the chances of Lisa Marie Cheney, click here
For a district that is generally known as the bastion of liberalism in Red Virginia, it definitely is quite interesting - although nonconclusive - that Jim Moran has only a 1:1 favorable to unfavorable identification level, and that 69% of those that view him unfavorably are dissatisfied enough with him to vote Republican - with half of that group being Democrats and independents. Importantly, only 28% say they'd re-elect Moran regardless of who ran against him - a key indicator, putting him near the bottom for an incumbent Member of Congress.
Click Here to donate to Ms. Cheney ...and don't forget to add $.02 as a RedState reader.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:07pm on Sep. 11, 2004 Strange Dealings in Indiana
By jadedmara
Outlet Radio and others, notably Boi from Troy broke this story a week ago:
In a stunning display of dirty politics, the Indiana Democratic party has been caught in a regrettable game of gay-baiting. Local activists have learned the Indiana Democratic Party sent emails attempting to alert Republican lawmakers and conservative groups of efforts to court the LGBT vote by Republican Gubernational candidate Mitch Daniels.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:50pm on Aug. 30, 2004 Shrock Resigns - VA-02
By jadedmara
Promoted From Diaries
US Representative Edward Schrock (R- VA-02) resigned today from his re-election race this afternoon. The Virginian Pilot story on his withdrawal cited his press release: "In recent weeks, allegations have surfaced that have called into question my ability to represent the citizens of Virginia's Second Congressional Distict...After much thought and prayer, I have come to the realization that these allegations will not allow my campaign to focus on the real issues facing our nation and region."
The story mentioned that those allegations remained unspecified. However, many in the blogging world are quite aware of what those allegations are.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 10:10am on Aug. 25, 2004 Murkowski wins Alaska Primary
By jadedmara
92 % of precincts reporting
Murkowski : 38,361 votes (58 %)
Mike Miller: 24,516 (37 %)
Wev Shea: 2,480 votes (4 %)
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:44am on Aug. 25, 2004 Richard Reid's sentencing
By jadedmara
I know we don't usually like just posting remarks-in-full, and this is from December 2003. However, everyone should hear what this judge had to say.
Ruling by Judge William Young U.S. District Court.
Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say.
His response: After admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his "allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah," defiantly stated "I think I ought not apologize for my actions," and told the court "I am at war with your country."
Judge Young then delivered the statement quoted below, a stinging condemnation of Reid in particular and terrorists in general:
January 30, 2003 United States vs. Reid. Judge Young: Mr Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutive with the other. That's 80 years. On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years consecutive to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 for the aggregate fine of $2 million. The Court accepts the government's recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines. The Court imposes upon you the $800 special assessment. The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further.
This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and just sentence. It is a righteous sentence.
Let me explain this to you. We are not afraid of you or any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is all too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. Here in this court, where we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as individuals. As human beings, we reach out for justice.
You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist...And we do not negotiate with terrorists.
We do not treat with terrorists.
We do not sign documents with terrorists.
We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.
So war talk is way out of line in this court. You are a big fellow. But you are not that big. You're no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist, a species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders. In a very sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and where the TV crews were and he said you're no big deal.
You're no big deal.
What your counsel, what your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today?
I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing and I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know.
It seems to me you hate the one thing that is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose. Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom. They carry it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom. So that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely. It is for freedom's sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf and have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges.
We are about it. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bare any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms. Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure. Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done the very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.
See that flag, Mr. Reid? That's the flag of the United States of America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag stands for freedom. You know it always will.
Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »
