Sep 29, 2007

IRAN WAR POWERS: Cuomo Nails Democrats on Constitution; Sounds like Ron Paul

"You cannot amend the Constitution with persistent evasion....the Constitution is unchanged."

-- former Gov. Mario Cuomo, interview with Hardball

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.”

The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war [and] the power of raising armies. A delegation of such powers [to the president] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments. The separation of the power of declaring war from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.”

- James Madison, federalist co-author of U.S. Constitution

Listen to the entire video interview by Hardball Chris Matthews with Mario Cuomo. Cuomo rebukes the Congress, and in particular the democrats for lacking Constitutional integrity regarding war powers for both Iraq and now with the saber rattling toward Iran. Amazing, you would think it is Ron Paul speaking, and now the American people have two credible witnesses demonstrating that America is well into a Constitutional crisis ("since WWII" he notes, as Ron Paul does), and blatant violation of the sole constitutional law that ONLY CONGRESS HAS AUTHORITY TO DECLARE OR AUTHORIZE WAR, and that the "resolutions" are an illegal sham, and null and void by this supreme law. He also nails the Judicial branch, silent in this matter, while intervening in the original 2000 election of George W. Bush.

The Democrats, as well as the neo-republicans (hijacked by the neoconservative insurgents), have been complicit in thus undermining one of thee most critical elements of the U.S. Constitution, i.e. War Powers, which as Madison states above, then leads to taxes, debt, and the loss of individual liberties.

When will everyone put aside partisanship and the errors of BOTH parties, and wake up and insist that THE CONSTITUTION IS KING, NOT THE PRESIDENT, NOR CONGRESS, NOR THE JUDICIARY--and restore LAWFUL government instead of the present government anarchy!?

Sep 27, 2007

President Ahmadinejad meets Jewish rabbis in New York Equally Opposed to Israel and Zionism

You will not see this in the network or contracted news because it refutes the notion that Ahmadinejad "is Hitler" (as neocon sycophants in local and national talk radio claim) and that he "hates Jews". Opposing the tyrannical and rogue state of Israel is not the same as "hating Jews". Just ask these Rabbis, or those at, whose message is this:

Traditional Jews Are Not Zionists

Although there are those who refuse to accept the teachings of our Rabbis and will continue to support the Zionist state, there are also many who are totally unaware of the history of Zionism and its contradiction to the beliefs of Torah-True Jews.

You will not find any evidence of Iran waging a "nuclear holocaust" or genocide here. Just more proof of the absolute lies and deceit coming from both national and local sources to move the neocon agenda toward war with Iran. But you will not find the neoconservative Jews of the Bush administration, or other Zionists (including Christian Zionists, or talk radio hosts) associating with these Rabbis, because they do hate them.

Tuesday 25 September 2007 - 11:36
President Ahmadinejad meets Jewish rabbis in New York

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Monday afternoon met with a group of Jewish rabbis who gave him a silver grail as a sign of friendship.

The president is currently in New York to address the United Nations General Assembly.

The rabbis carried a placard which read, "I am Jewish not a Zionist."
A senior rabbi of the group said that they considered the visit to New York of President Ahmadinejad as an exceptional opportunity and would never forget it.

He referred to the Iranian president as a person who made a distinction between Jews and Zionists.

"You understand us and make a distinction between the violent behavior of Zionists and the religious beliefs of Jews," said the senior rabbi who called President Ahmadinejad "a pious man who is seeking to restore peace in the world and has humanitarian plans." Appreciating the rabbis for their gift, President Ahmadinejad said he was happy to visit them.

"All people in the world have now understood that Judaism is different from Zionism," said the president.

He added, "Zionists are a political group looking for taking advantage of the opportunities while Jews are the followers of the Moses who promoted peace and friendship."
President Ahmadinejad stressed that there was no disagreement between the followers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam as they all pray the same God and are brothers.

The president said the future belongs to the monotheist faiths and that liars would be eliminated.

He stressed that all followers of divine faiths were responsible to promote monotheism and defend peace, justice and brotherhood.
New York, Sept 25, IRNA

WHY DO YOU NEVER HEAR ABOUT THESE JEWS WHO PROTEST "ISRAEL" AND ZIONISM? WHO CONTROLS THE MEDIA? Well, not Torah Jews...only Zionist Jews. This is why Big Media supports "the war against terrorism" so-called, the neoconservative plan for a "new middle east". That is why the "liberal media" is supporting the same propaganda as the neoconservatives put out about Iran, while these Torah Jews meet with him.

Sep 26, 2007

Cheney Secretly Consulted with Israel about Bombing Iran to Spark War; Radical Neocon Presses Bush Privately

Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show it can bear discussion and publicity.
- Lord Acton

The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.
- Patrick Henry

Two sources on this very important news that will not make network media. Both of these confirm that there is in fact a conspiracy, secretive planning, led by Dick Cheney (member of the Project for New American Century) among the Jewish neoconservative Zionists, and Israel, to continue the push of their blueprint for a "new middle east" (Sept. 2000 blueprint), against Iran and Syria next, irregardless of the lack of evidence that either is a threat to the United States, or anyone else. Twisted quotes and rhetoric ("wipe Israel off the map") is used, complicitly with the Zionist controlled networks, to be a military statement instead of a political one disputing the legitimacy and oppressiveness of Israel. This is a lie as Ahmajinidad has plainly stated they have no desire for either a bomb or to start any wars.

Note the covert planning and discussion of Cheney with Israel, going around even President Bush and the Pentagon in contingency "war plans" or "scenarios". Cheney is the head of the neocons who developed the secretive Office of Special Plans to circumvent CIA and military intelligence, in order to lie and create disinformation to start a war with Iraq. The same stratagy is being used, but failing, so they are attempting to "provoke" war by any means possible. Note that Israel just DID BOMB SYRIA (something neocons like James Woolsey pushed a year ago, and this is the anniversary of the Lebanon bombing), violating their airspace and sovereignty, attempting to provoke war with Syria, which WOULD HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIED HAD SYRIA RETALIATED. There is no hard evidence the North Korea actually sent "nuclear components" to Syria for a bomb--only allegation and repetition as usual.


Cheney mulled Israeli strike on Iran: Newsweek
Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:06pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney had at one point considered asking Israel to launch limited missile strikes at an Iranian nuclear site to provoke a retaliation, Newsweek magazine reported on Sunday.

The news comes amid reports that Israel launched an air strike against Syria this month over a suspected nuclear site.

Citing two unidentified sources, Newsweek said former Cheney Middle East adviser David Wurmser told a small group several months ago that Cheney was considering asking Israel to strike the Iranian nuclear site at Natanz.

Podhoretz Granted Secret Access To Lobby Bush On ‘The Case For Bombing Iran’


Norman Podhoretz, the “patriarch of neoconservatism,” recently published a book entitled “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism,” staunchly supporting the Iraq war and pushing for war with Iran. In June, Podhoretz published a controversial piece in Commentary magazine titled “The Case for Bombing Iran.

The Politico reports today that President Bush has been listening to Podhoretz’s radical agenda, recently enlisting Podhoretz to discuss his views on Iran. In a meeting that “was not on the president’s public schedule,” Bush and Karl Rove “sat listening to Norman Podhoretz for roughly 45 minutes at the White House”:

Rove was silent throughout, though he took notes. The president listened diligently, Podhoretz said as he recounted the conversation months later, but he “didn’t tip his hand.”

“I did say to [the president], that people ask: Why are you spending all this time negotiating sanctions? Time is passing. I said, my friend [Robert] Kagan wrote a column which he said you were giving ‘futility its chance.’ And both he and Karl Rove burst out laughing.

“It struck me,” Podhoretz added, “that if they really believed that there was a chance for these negotiations and sanctions to work, they would not have laughed. They would have got their backs up and said, ‘No, no, it’s not futile, there’s a very good chance.’”

President Bush has loyally supported Podhoretz’s agenda in the past. In 2004, he bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom — the nation’s highest civilian honor — on Podhoretz, calling him a “fierce intellectual man” with “fine writing and a “great love for our country.”

Today, Podhoretz’s calls for bombing Iran are being echoed in the administration. According to Newsweek, Vice President Cheney considered a plan to allow Israel to conduct missile strikes against Iran “in an effort to draw a military response from Iran, which could in turn spark a U.S. offensive against targets in the Islamic Republic.”

Podhoretz has argued that “if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will…we’ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we’ve experienced so far look like a lovefest.” By enlisting Podhoretz’s advice, President Bush is demonstrating that there isn’t any idea too radical for him to consider.


Attack on Iran: the PR campaign picks up speed

The latest signal came from George Bush, warning of a “nuclear holocaust” if Iran gets The Bomb (despite an IAEA report that Iran isn’t as much of a threat as Bush claims). There can’t be any more provocative words than “nuclear holocaust” to justify the purported prevention of one. Nor can there be any doubt that, with such freighted language, combined with the accusation that Iran is arming insurgents and terrorists in Iraq and that a substantial portion of its army is a terrorist organization, the propaganda campaign to soften us up for The Announcement is accelerating or that an attack, whether it actually happens or not, is solidly in the works.

The New York Times headline put it mildly, not even mentioning Iran. The Guardian was somewhat less reserved. Even less so is Gareth Porter, who homes in on Dick Cheney and Joseph Lieberman as being behind the push for war with Iran......

..........It’s Juan Cole who pins the propaganda campaign down with this August 30th tidbit, a couple of times removed from the source, but then Cole is pretty reliable:

Barnett Rubin relays a message from a well-connected friend in Washington on the Cheney Administration’s plans to roll out a military confrontation with Iran in September. He writes at the Global Affairs blog:

” My friend had spoken to someone in one of the leading neo-conservative institutions. He summarized what he was told this way:

They [the source’s institution] have “instructions” (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don’t think they’ll ever get majority support for this–they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is “plenty.”


Sep 25, 2007

The Iran Nuclear Threat: "Erreoneous, Misleading, Unsubstantiated statements"

WMD--Words of Mass Deception are again being employed to march toward war with Iran, per the neoconservatives blueprint for a "new middle east", a blueprint published in September 2000. Will Americans fall for this again, as the propaganda surrounding Ahmajinidad's visit has dominated both news, specials and talk radio? WHO HAS BEEN PROVEN THE BIGGER LIAR, AHMAJINIDAD OR GEORGE W. BUSH SO FAR?

Here is a flashback of reports refuting that Iran is not even close to being a nuclear threat. But the media currently is no longer making this news public, and in fact, is parroting the propaganda of the neoconservative White House.


U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel

Paper on Nuclear Aims Called Dishonest

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September
14, 2006; Page A17

U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest" and offering evidence to refute its central claims.

Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements." The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.


Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb
U.S. Intelligence Review Contrasts With Administration Statements

By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; A01

A major U.S. intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years, according to government sources with firsthand knowledge of the new analysis.

The carefully hedged assessments, which represent consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies, contrast with forceful public statements by the White House. Administration officials have asserted, but have not offered proof, that Tehran is moving determinedly toward a nuclear arsenal. The new estimate could provide more time for diplomacy with Iran over its nuclear ambitions. President Bush has said that he wants the crisis resolved diplomatically but that "all options are on the table."


12 January 2006, 19:44 GMT

By Sarah Buckley and Paul Rincon
BBC News website

Iran has alarmed the international community by removing the seals at its nuclear fuel research sites - but experts say it is several years away from being capable of producing a nuclear bomb.


The authoritative, independent International Institute for Strategic Studies said this month Tehran is at least five years away from producing enough fissile material for a single bomb, and that 15 years was a more likely time frame.


Sep 24, 2007

Ahmadinejad vs. the Propagandists: We are against Terrorism, Zionism, Occupation, War; Bush says OK to Columbia U. Visit

Propagandist's Want to Control American's Perceptions--Desire Blind Acceptance

It has been quite a circus since last Friday. Amazingly, so many follow blindly, for the like to be associated with patriotism, even if it's premise is absolutely false. Allegations and lies have sustained the propaganda against Iran. Local talk radio, where today Agnello was joined by Kent Carper who made the most baseless claims and allegations about Ahmadinejad, (ingratiating himself again with the hosts who opposed him on gambling) has been absolutely stupid and foolish looking, signing banners and posters for the NYPD, who only refused for "security reasons" (not political) to permit a visit to Ground Zero, because the security effort would have been too monopolizing. (It was not to "stand up" against Ahmadinejad, per the press conference, for those who observe for themselves). IRAN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 and is only ACCUSED of being the "largest state sponsor of terrorism"--an outright falsehood, yet repeated (like WMD) by the administration. (Ground Zero is not the ''most hallowed ground', but the bloody war fields where American independence from King George was won, which freedoms are now being lost to another King George, and where the dissenting churches gathered to pray and resist the tyrannical British government and the Church of England who persecuted them. Overstatement is a hallmark of deceitful propaganda--i.e. "Hitler", "hallowed ground", etc.. No one cares about the 9/11 widows who want a new investigation of 9/11, who are persecuted--see video in right column).

Now the President of Iran gets to answer, but the propagandists are afraid to let him speak, for it might change Americans' perceptions. It is hard to hate someone who is willing to talk calmly with you--"a soft answer turns away wrath", which is Ahmadinejad's method to halt the antagonism.


It is clear just who is for peace, and who is for war. Ahmadinejad's only real threat is that he is able to reason and speak (if the translators will translate, and media let us hear) and refute the lies Americans are being told from the democratic jihadists, led by the neocon think tanks and (unofficial) "intelligence experts", and sycophant media, as well as the administration. Now if he were an "arrogant dictator" (like Bush who has expanded Executive power, and seized Martial Law powers for himself), why would he attempt to talk so openly, in denial of the accusations? To the contrary, secrecy is a mark of the Bush neoconservative administration, which avoids even Congress' and the Courts' scrutiny. The levels of credibility between the two governments is self-evident.

All the commotion has been a well-orchestrated propaganda effort (stirring "grass roots" through neocon media sycophants) to drown out what Ahmadinejad might say, his disbelief in the official fiction about 9/11 that led to wars, and that there is no credible evidence to believe that Iran will attack anyone, or wants a nuke. Like children on a kindergarten play ground that cover their ears and cry "blah, blah, blah", the propaganda machine has been fired up to shout down the President of Iran's visit and prevent Americans from listening, and paint him in the most demonic colors, while there is no evidence to prove the allegations, in order to further an "inevitable" road to war desired by the neoconservative administration for a "new middle east". Note that CBS plays the Zionist war-monger role, hardly "liberal", nor did Columbia University's dean who introduced him. None the less, the truth is coming out, and cannot be hidden. Words are more powerful than swords, and their only hope is that people will not READ or LISTEN to the entire interviews and speech for themselves, and thereby easily led. Here are some rough notes as a guide to investigate for yourself.

Remember from our earlier article, over 25,000 Jews live in Iran (as he also refers to) and practice their own freedom of religion and have representation in Parliament--thus refuting the accusation that he is "Hitler". There is no genocide in Iran of Jews or Christians, despite the neocon propaganda that "they want to kill Christians and Jews...they are plotting to kill us every day". If they do not do it in Iran, they do not do it outside Iran. Meanwhile the CIA is involved within Iran trying to provoke insurrection and revolution. How would American government react to that? Iranian President makes clear he is for peace, not war, and pleads for the Palestinians against the oppression of the Zionist regime, as well as for Iraqi's against U.S. occupation, denying they are involved at all, that they only want security for the region. So what is wrong with all that? Oh, but "the Iran hostage crisis" they say. What goes around comes around, the CIA overthrew the government of Iran, and was penetrating it again, and you expect people to not react to infiltrators? Do people really believe that incidents happen for no reason to the U.S.? It is beyond naive to think in such a stupid fashion.

Ahmajinidad: We are against Terrorism, Zionism, Occupation, War; U.S. is making false accusations

Ahmadinejad answers the propagandists, and the specially chosen CBS sycophant that plays the part of neoconservative interrogator rather than a journalist interviewing, respectfully, a foreign head of state. "You are a member of the media, not an American politician. You should be interested in the truth".

I. This CBS journalist violates the ethical laws of journalism, by playing a narrow role of accuser and interrogator, not unbias investigator of facts. (This reflects CBS Zionist agenda and control in support of wars in the middle east for Israel).
Consider, again, the following from the Society of Professional Journalists:

Seek Truth and Report It

Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.

Journalists should:

Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.

— Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to
give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.

Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.

Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.

— Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.

Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

— Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.


Here are some very rough notes taken from the interview, to highlight some impressions:

Regarding allegation of Iran supplying weapons to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq: American administration is making accusations that are not true. Why are you as a journalist accusing me instead of asking questions of your government? Iran has never invaded or occupied another country, unlike the U.S.. Iran has never sought to expand its territory, unlike Israel. We have no need for a bomb. "The countries that have nuclear weapons (U.S.A., Israel, etc) should destroy their stockpiles, instead of accusing others".

American government is engaged in psychological warfare, to incite war. Why should we go to war? There is no reason to do so. "I oppose the unilateral policies and bullying of the American administration". "I oppose the very idea of a bomb."

Interviewer asks what he likes about Bush. Ahmadinejad ask him what he likes in return. Interviewer says Bush is religious man, as he is also. Ahmadinejad: "What religion is that?" (Good and fair question). Questions Bush's religion. Does Christianity teach to kill people in other countries? Does Judaism? "You should not sit in dark rooms and hatch plots". What religion teaches that? (Why does the reporter defend Bush's religion? Is CBS "liberal"? Who is this "journalist"--what a shill! Bush is not a true Christian; he is a liar.)

This is a challenge to anyone who believes in freedom of conscience and thorough investigation to listen to the entire interview, instead of the propagandists who do not want you to. The Bible warns "thou shalt not follow a multitude to commit evil", and propaganda has been the means of stirring up "mob law", insurrections and revolutions, and cries for everything from "crucify him" to "war". Exercise your duty to examine everything for yourself, before you follow those with the microphones. GO THE THE LINKS YOURSELF...LISTEN FOR YOURSELF, TO THE ENTIRETY OF THE INTERVIEWS AND SPEECHES. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE, INSTEAD OF BLINDLY TRUSTING OTHERS.

60 MINUTES FULL INTERVIEW WITH AHMADINEJAD (watch all segments, after commercial breaks)



II. Ahmadinejad speech in Columbia University; his reply to the insulting introduction of the Dean. THIS IS A MUST HEAR, THE STUDENTS APPLAUDED AGAINST THE POLITICAL PREJUDGMENT PRIOR TO HIS SPEECH TO WHICH HE REFERRED. (CBS does not let us hear this entire speech, yet it lets us hear all of Bollinger's introductory accusations). Dean Bollinger's comments include accusations of Iran's executions of insurrectionists, yet it has been revealed that the CIA is involved within Iran to overthrow their government.

60 MINUTES FULL INTERVIEW WITH AHMADINEJAD (watch all segments, after commercial breaks)
PART II. See the Columbia Univ. address at same link.

Regarding Bollinger's accusations of Holocaust denial, the AP had these notes, along with others:
Ahmadinejad Questions 9/11, Holocaust -- He knows the official story to 9/11 is a lie and blame laid to justify wars of aggression into the middle east.

But Ahmadinejad went on to say that he was defending the rights of European scholars, an apparent reference to a small number who have been prosecuted under national laws for denying or minimizing the Holocaust.

"There's nothing known as absolute," he said.

Asked why he had asked to visit the World Trade Center site - a request denied by New York authorities - Ahmadinejad said he wanted to express sympathy for the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.

[Question: Why would he want to do that if he supports terrorism? In his interviews, he makes it clear he does not, and denounces it.]

Then he appeared to question whether al-Qaida was responsible, saying more research was needed.

"If the root causes of 9/11 are examined properly - why it happened, what caused it, what were the conditions that led to it, who truly was involved, who was really involved - and put it all together to understand how to prevent the crisis in Iraq, fix the problem in Afghanistan and Iraq combined," Ahmadinejad said.

...He (Bush) told Fox News Channel that if Bollinger considered Ahmadinejad's visit an educational experience for Columbia students, "I guess it's OK with me."

Quotes by Iran's Ahmadinejad
Sep 24 03:29 PM US/Eastern
By The Associated Press

Comments by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose remarks were translated from Farsi.

On a toughly worded criticism in the introduction by Columbia University president Lee Bollinger, who called him a "petty and cruel dictator":

I think the text read by the dear gentleman here, more than addressing me, was an insult to information and the knowledge of the audience here, present here. In a university environment we must allow people to speak their mind, to allow everyone to talk so that the truth is eventually revealed by all.

—On the Holocaust:

Why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with?

On Holocaust deniers:

My question was simple: There are researchers who want to approach the topic from a different perspective. Why are they put into prison? Right now, there are a number of European academics who have been sent to prison because they attempted to write about the Holocaust or research it from a different perspective, questioning certain aspects of it. My question is: Why isn't it open to all forms of research?

On Israel as a Jewish state:

We love all nations. We are friends with the Jewish people. There are many Jews living in Iran with security. You must understand that in our constitution and our laws and the parliamentary elections for every 150,000 people we get one representative in the parliament. For the Jewish community one-fifth of this number they still get one independent representative in the parliament. Our proposal to the Palestinian plight is a humanitarian and a democratic proposal. What we say is that to solve this 60-year problem, we must allow the Palestinian people to decide about its future for itself.

On nuclear research:

Some big powers create a monopoly over science and prevent other nations in achieving scientific development as well. This, too, is one of the surprises of our time. Some big powers do not want to see the progress of other societies and nations. They turn to thousands of reasons, make allegations, place economic sanctions to prevent other nations from developing and advancing, all resulting from their distance from human values and the teachings of the divine prophets. Regretfully, they have not been trained to serve mankind.

On 9/11:

Why did this happen? What caused it? What conditions led to it? .. Who truly was involved? Who was really involved and put it all together?

On executions of homosexuals in Iran:

In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that like in your country. ... In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have this.

Sep 23, 2007

Jerome Corsi: Bush Makes Power Grab; Authorizes Executive Power for Martial Law

We saw this article back then, May 23rd, but failed to post it. Dr. Jerome Corsi, interviewed on 58Live by Michael Agnello about a month ago about North American Union, wrote an article in World Net Daily, BUSH MAKES POWER GRAB.

This is the most amazing unilateral powers a U.S. President has ever usurped to himself, the full and complete power, without Congress' involvement, of Martial Law, whenever "necessary". What we are talking about is FULL DICTATORIAL POWER entirely hinged upon Bush's own judgment and presumptive authority alone. He goes on to show that the act is illegal, and that it entirely changes "continuity of government" line of succession to the NEW anti-constitutional offices of "Homeland Security"--by passing Congressional succession for this neo-Gestapo agency's head (i.e. Chertoff). Every American, regardless of party needs to read this. Republicans in particular now should see just how dangerous this President is, a virtual arrangement to entirely seize the entire government (and this could be claimed by a democrat in the Executive later, if it is sustained).

Here is Jerome Corsi's message in video, and then below in the original article:

Bush makes power grab

Jerome Corsi
Posted: May 23, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
[Title is linked to original at World Net Daily; republished here for educational purposes; Fair Use only].

President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement, on May 9 signed a directive that granted near dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency declared by the president.

The "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive," with the dual designation of NSPD-51, as a National Security Presidential Directive, and HSPD-20, as a Homeland Security Presidential Directive, establishes under the office of president a new National Continuity Coordinator.

That job, as the document describes, is to make plans for "National Essential Functions" of all federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal governments, as well as private sector organizations to continue functioning under the president's directives in the event of a national emergency.

The directive loosely defines "catastrophic emergency" as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

When the president determines a catastrophic emergency has occurred, the president can take over all government functions and direct all private sector activities to ensure we will emerge from the emergency with an "enduring constitutional government."

Translated into layman's terms, when the president determines a national emergency has occurred, the president can declare to the office of the presidency powers usually assumed by dictators to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over.

Ironically, the directive sees no contradiction in the assumption of dictatorial powers by the president with the goal of maintaining constitutional continuity through an emergency.

The directive specifies that the assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism will be designated as the National Continuity Coordinator.

Further established is a Continuity Policy Coordination Committee, chaired by a senior director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, to be "the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination."

Currently, the assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism is Frances Fragos Townsend.

Townsend spent 13 years at the Justice Department before moving to the U.S. Coast Guard where she served as assistant commandant for intelligence.

She is a White House staff member in the executive office of the president who also chairs the Homeland Security Council, which as a counterpart to the National Security Council reports directly to the president.

The directive issued May 9 makes no attempt to reconcile the powers created there for the National Continuity Coordinator with the National Emergency Act. As specified by U.S. Code Title 50, Chapter 34, Subchapter II, Section 1621, the National Emergency Act allows that the president may declare a national emergency but requires that such proclamation "shall immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register."

A Congressional Research Service study notes that under the National Emergency Act, the president "may seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens."

The CRS study notes that the National Emergency Act sets up congress as a balance empowered to "modify, rescind, or render dormant such delegated emergency authority," if Congress believes the president has acted inappropriately.

NSPD-51/ HSPD-20 appears to supersede the National Emergency Act by creating the new position of National Continuity Coordinator without any specific act of Congress authorizing the position.

NSPD-51/ HSPD-20 also makes no reference whatsoever to Congress. The language of the May 9 directive appears to negate any a requirement that the president submit to Congress a determination that a national emergency exists, suggesting instead that the powers of the executive order can be implemented without any congressional approval or oversight.

Homeland Security spokesperson Russ Knocke affirmed that the Homeland Security Department will be implementing the requirements of NSPD-51/ HSPD-20 under Townsend's direction.

The White House had no comment.

Sep 21, 2007

Conservative Pastor: "GIULIANI IS EVERYONE'S WORST NIGHTMARE"; Giuliani's Dance Before the NRA

"Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust be men of unexceptionable characters. The public cannot be too curious concerning the character of public men."

-- Samuel Adams

Make no mistake, Giuliani is not a conservative, but a neoconservative sycophant and a fascist, who will not uphold the Constitution of the United States, but usurp and overthrow it entirely using Executive "unitary" powers in a New York minute. Very liberal indeed. Amazingly, as far as his personal life, suddenly the most open critics of Bill Clinton have nothing to say or have become open apologists and pragmatists (including 58Live's Michael Agnello) brushing off Giuliani's "serial adultery" as if it has no bearing on principle, ethics, or trustworthiness, or an indicator of possibly also breaking trust or covenant with the American people. DOES CHARACTER MEAN NOTHING--even to "conservatives"? Besides, who wants a sometimes cross-dressing, pro-homosexual, lisping, Yankee Roman Catholic from New York City to represent America? Ethics and character, even religious beliefs(*), are subject to public review for they all reflect upon the mind and character of the man. This will just scratch the surface of Giuliani's character and positions, there are many more alarming connections and secret alliances, and business deals, that deserve public attention as well. (See Devvy Kidd's article for example, Rudy Rasputin Giuliani & Florida Anthrax).

(* Note on religion: Yes, if a man is a Mormon, Jewish or any other sect, his particular form and doctrine of religion, even of Christianity, can be weighed in the balance of private judgment as well, for belief is the mother of actions, and "faiths" are not all the same. Contrary to popular discussion "all faiths" do not make a man "moral", they only paint and white-wash the surface, often as public posturing. Recall that McCain, always Anglican, now claims to be an unbaptized "Baptist", which also raises questions of honesty. There is strong historical precedent from Colonial and early America as to why Roman Catholics in particular were shunned from being in positions of authority, considering that religious freedom of Baptists and Presbyterians in particular, as well as the Deist founders, were persecuted the most by that tyrannical and crusading "faith", which is why early America was almost exclusively Protestant. Catholicism historically has been a key element in Fascism--i.e. Nazi Germany and Italy--as well as other Inquisitional governments. This is NOT to suggest that candidates should be judged by denomination or outward profession alone ("no religious test of office"), which would be foolish and naive, for George W. Bush made plenty of outward profession inconsistent with his moral positions, doctrines, principles and behavior, which some of us observed from the start, but which the "religious right" fell for stupidly hook, line, and sinker, precisely per the crafty Rove's strategy to hoodwink a large voting block. Nothing is more deceitful and morally corrupt than flying "Christian" colors to get elected when it is pure craft and hypocrisy! Nothing is more antithetical to real Christian doctrine that "lying lips" or "feet that make haste to shed innocent blood" (e.g. 655,000 Iraqis), under the guise of "disarming a dictator" in a foreign country that poses no imminent threat. There is a Christian doctrine of "just war", historically believed and taught by Protestant reformers, contrary to Roman Catholicism's Crusades, that limits wars strictly within biblical principles--a "forgotten" and lost doctrine that Ron Paul has mentioned in debates as "America's greatest moral crisis". Unjust war is as murderous as abortion, even more so since it kills the already living, including women and children. Reformed and Calvinistic Christians in particular have increasingly been re-awakened to this lost doctrine and truth and as staunch paleo-conservatives are condemning the lies and propaganda of the neoconservatives' agenda, which planned these wars in advance, implementing them by Machiavellian craft).

As far as his political track record it's amazing how he can mention an oath to the constitution in one breath, but immediately forget it when suggesting policy. Oh yes, and he just "redefined" his position on the 2nd amendment before the National Rifle Association (NRA)! Words and promises are easily spoken during campaigns, but trust must be earned, and history is the best predictor of the future (something Willard Milton Romney is fighting as well).

He may have fooled some at the National Rifle Association, but here is what Gun Owners of America ("the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington"--Ron Paul) posted about Giuliani's gun record that no real West Virginia conservative would approve of:

Apparently, in Giuliani's America law-abiding citizens in large cities would not enjoy the same constitutional liberties as the rest of the country. Why? Are city dwellers not as trustworthy as country folks? Are metro-Americans not deserving of the right to self-protection?

Disarming citizens because they live in a high crime area is taking away the most effective means of self-defense from the people who need it most. Creating mandatory victims is no way to fight a crime problem.1

If Giuliani's gun control agenda was really limited 'only' to big cities, that would be disturbing enough. But the record shows that the Mayor continually tried to export his gun control agenda to the rest of the nation.

The new Giuliani of state's rights simply does not square with the Mayor of the '90s.

In 1993, before even being sworn in as mayor, Giuliani met with then-President Clinton at the White House to discuss national gun registration. Giuliani supported the Brady bill, which had recently passed, but argued that it didn't go far enough....

...This flirtation with federalism [i.e. his claim of "reform" to states rights] is merely a facade, however, for in the recent interview with Sean Hannity, Giuliani assured gun owners that he supports only gun control laws that are "reasonable and sensible." He then went on to defend his support of the Brady bill and the semi-auto ban, which are neither.

Fred Thompson has drawn attention to Giuliani's position on this, the conservative Fred Barnes called him "anti-gun" in a forum, and the neoconservative agenda appears to include disarming us (see our article about Gun Owners of America on the candidates), as much as trampling the rest of the Bill of Rights. What would Patrick Henry say to that?

Whatever Rudolph means when he talks about "rule of law" he is not referring to Constitutional rule of law, but one of pure, arbitrary force under the tyrant's plea of "safety and security". Giuliani's track record cannot be hidden, so look at it and remember that Patrick Henry said, "I do not know any other way to predict the future than by the past". We do not need Giuliani to "keep us safe from terrorists", a vague threat that does not hold up to the evidence but has served well a neoconservative tyrannical agenda to overthrow the Constitution, which defines our freedoms. Only a RINO would support Rudolph Giuliani.

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilised nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

-- Adolph Hitler

If Giuliani gets elected, "keep your powder dry".


He is a nightmare for conservatives, Christians, independents, constitutionalists, and for people the world over. Furthermore, Rudy Giuliani is a threat to freedom, constitutional government, the rule of law, traditional morality, and to national sovereignty and independence. As I said, Rudy Giuliani is everyone's worst nightmare.

-- Pastor Chuck Baldwin


By Pastor Chuck Baldwin

September 21, 2007

Former New York City Mayor and Republican Presidential contender Rudy Giuliani said this week that he was "liberals' worst nightmare." However, the truth is, Rudy Giuliani is everyone's worst nightmare.

That Rudy Giuliani is currently trying to cast himself as a conservative is beyond laughable--it is hilarious. This is a man who is unabashedly pro-abortion. He has been seen walking down Fifth Avenue with thousands of homosexuals demanding "gay rights." He himself is a cross-dresser. He has had numerous marriages and only God knows how many sexual affairs. He has been one of the country's most radical proponents of gun control. He made New York a sanctuary city for illegal aliens and is a strong proponent of amnesty for illegal aliens. As a prosecutor, his abuse of power and disregard for law are legendary. [Read]

In addition, Rudy Giuliani is a senior partner in the law firm that "represents CITGO, the oil company controlled by Venezuela's anti-American and terrorist-supporting ruler Hugo Chavez." Giuliani's law firm also acts "as the exclusive legal counsel for Cintra, the Spanish firm that has been granted the right to operate a toll road in the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) project."

(Please read Cliff Kincaid's entire column for more on Giuliani's shady and untoward activities)

Yes, my friends, the umbilical cord connecting the SPP, NAFTA Superhighway and burgeoning North American Union is also connected to Rudy Giuliani.

Yet, Rudy Giuliani wants people to believe that he is "liberals' worst nightmare"? Who is he kidding? Giuliani is a liberal. Actually, Rudy Giuliani is worse than a liberal. He is a liberal that likes to hurt people. I tell you the truth, Rudy Giuliani scares me far more than Hillary Clinton does. Far more. I'll say it right here: if the 2008 Presidential election comes down to Hillary vs. Giuliani, Hillary is the "lesser of two evils." That's how bad Giuliani is.

Any Christian who would vote for Rudy Giuliani needs to check out his or her salvation. And before a conservative could vote for Giuliani, he would have to surrender every conviction and principle he ever held.

As for the Republican Party, if it nominates Rudy Giuliani as its Presidential candidate next year, conservatism will be forever vanquished from the Party. George W. Bush has already just about destroyed conservatism within the GOP. A Giuliani nomination would finish the job.

Rudy Giuliani likes to paint himself as being tough on terrorism. The truth is, Rudy Giuliani is a warmonger. A Giuliani Presidency would mean an expansion of military interventionism and preemptive war like you can't imagine. One can call me what one wants, but I am warning the American people, just as Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Niemoller tried to warn the German people about Hitler: Rudy Giuliani is a monster. Anyone who is paying attention knows this is true.

For example, just two days ago, Giuliani urged expanding NATO to include Australia, India, Israel, Japan, and Singapore, along with "a whole group of others that we could put on that list." As originally designed, NATO's purpose was to counterbalance the former Soviet Union's influence in Europe. However, Giuliani wants to expand NATO into a "global body." He also said he wants to "redouble" the war in Afghanistan. He further said the U.S. should consider the possibility of a "large war with a nation state." So, could Giuliani be planning a preemptive "large war" with other countries? One can only wonder.

Furthermore, if anyone thinks that George W. Bush is obsessed with domestic spying and surveillance, just wait until Giuliani becomes President. You can count on him pressing his anti-Fourth Amendment and anti-Second Amendment agendas to the nth degree through all sorts of executive orders and signing statements.

You can also expect amnesty for illegal aliens to be quickly achieved under a Giuliani administration, along with the completion of the North American Union and NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, this will also be the case if Hillary is elected President, except that if Hillary is leading the charge, many will oppose it; whereas if Giuliani leads the charge, they won't.

This brings up the other thing that makes a Giuliani Presidency so dangerous: the total lack of resistance that rank-and-file conservatives (including Christians) have demonstrated when Republicans control the White House. Absent resistance from his own party and from grassroots conservatives, a Giuliani administration would be left free to perpetrate radical fascist and imperialistic policies completely unfettered.

Everything about Rudy Giuliani smacks of fraud, indecency, greed, and power-lust. Even the wave of 9/11, which Giuliani is riding to the Presidential election, is fraught with duplicity. In fact, New York City firefighters are so fearful their former mayor might succeed in his quest to become President that they came out against his candidacy in a dramatic video. I urge all my readers to watch this moving video presentation. See it here.

Yes, Rudy Giuliani is a nightmare all right. But not just for liberals. He is a nightmare for conservatives, Christians, independents, constitutionalists, and for people the world over. Furthermore, Rudy Giuliani is a threat to freedom, constitutional government, the rule of law, traditional morality, and to national sovereignty and independence. As I said, Rudy Giuliani is everyone's worst nightmare.

© 2007 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, "Chuck Baldwin Live" This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet and newspapers.

Hoppy Kercheval pays respects to the Constitution; What about Other Republicans?

"You ought to be extremely cautious, watchful, and jealous of your liberty; for instead of securing your rights you may lose them forever. If this new Government will not come up to the expectation of the people, and they should be disappointed -- their liberty will be lost, and tyranny must and will arise...

-- Patrick Henry, anti-federalist speech, 1788

Finally, someone in the media, albeit late, gives the Constitution some attention regarding Constitution Day. His testimony here is surprisingly frank and if it is reflective of the general public (steeped in sports and entertainment trivia, as well as superficial opinions and public sound bites) then it reveals generally 1) ignorance of the Constitution that is rooted in illiteracy, and 2) open disdain for the Constitution when it is used by those who swear to defend and uphold it as supreme law--i.e. elected officials.

Only two Congressmen at the federal level are noted for carrying a pocket copy of the Constitution, and more importantly making use of it in legislation and speeches, and they are, as Hoppy also reveals, Senator Robert C. Byrd and Representative and now presidential candidate Ron Paul. Note how the new republicans, the "establishment" treat them both, and you will see how the Constitution is held in contempt, while it is the supreme law to which all other legislation must be subordinate.

Shelly Moore Capito needs to read the Constitution, and make use of it, when reviewing legislation, instead of bowing to the arbitrary, although sometimes correct, pressures coming from party loyalty or talk radio which largely ignores this guide. It is interesting to note how BOTH democrats and republicans pick and chose which parts of the Constitution to uphold, or which legislation or policies to apply it to. BOTH are inconsistent and no administration in modern time has been as "liberal" with the Constitution as Bush government (see articles this week). Both represent "insurgents" against this law book of the official established government of the
U.S.. Our previous articles on Constitution Day have already demonstrated just some of the abuses of the Bush administration (by authors who denounced the Clinton administration as well) which has already become one of the most renowned in U.S. history for circumventing, resisting, and obfuscating the Constitution since the likes of Lincoln, Wilson, and Roosevelt. We have been witnessing under post-9/11 Bush government, under the tyrant's "plea of necessity", the final overthrow of Constitutional government toward a fascist system where the Executive is no longer equal and separate branch, but a Super-power "unitary" Executive that desires to break the bonds of restraints the Constitution clearly places on it. AMERICA IS IN A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS SINCE 9/11. Republicans will rue the day that they legislated these powers for Bush when they could very well later be used by Hillary Clinton!

Both democrats and republicans, at the state and local levels, need to abide by it as well. Note that we have quoted a key article of
West Virginia's constitution above, which commands the State to maintain "constitutional continuity of government" at the state level, particularly from federalization. Passing the bill against REAL ID is not an option, but required by West Virginia's constitution, as well as imitating the City of Huntington's outlawing the USA PATRIOT ACT, along with over 400 state and local municipalities nationwide that have passed resolutions against it.

The Constitution is not infallible and not inspired, and it is not to be worshipped superstitiously as a mere rite of passage or "shibboleth" to take public office. BUT IT IS THE LEGITIMATE LAW BOOK OF THE GOVERNMENT, AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH, SUPERIOR IN AUTHORITY TO ANY PRESIDENT, CONGRESS, OR JUDICIARY, WHICH THEY ALL ARE REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OATH TO "DEFEND AND PROTECT". THE CONSTITUTION IS KING, NOT THE PRESIDENT, NOR THE CONGRESS, NOR THE JUDICIARY. This is the law book of the legitimate government against which any other form or laws to the contrary are an "insurgency" and "revolutionary" by definition. (This history of American government changes is precisely that, a history of numerous "soft" revolutions, the Civil War being a "hard" revolution to democratic majority rule
). The only way to change these laws is by amendment. Congress cannot legislate away or around, despite their erroneous thinking, these laws of their own accord. Supreme Court Justice John Marshall (Marshall University's namesake) state in no uncertain terms:

"A legislative act, contrary to the Constitution, is not law".

By this means the public can see, unless they are illiterate, that the USA PATRIOT ACT, REAL ID, the Dept. of Homeland Security and a host of other innovations (e.g. Federal Reserve, Income Tax, Social Security, executive orders, "war powers", etc.) that can be traced back to the first major overthrow of it at the Civil War by Lincoln's centralization of power (violating the rights of the State's who formed the federal government) have been erected in opposition to the Constitution, and represent a constantly changing, "evolving" and growing federal government that has usurped power and become a Leviathan. The ultimate end of a Homeland Security government is fascism under either physical or electronic martial law, which is why all the emphasis on surveillance and ID cards on the pretext of 9/11.

The most important presidential race of our time (subject to the usual manipulation and control matrix) could not be more crucial to restoring the Constitution. Ron Paul stands as a counter-insurgency against the train of usurpations and abuses that threaten now in post-9/11 Bush government to become a complete tyranny, the end of which will be not only the loss of state's rights, but individual liberty as well. We have posted many articles in attempt to show how the 2008 Presidential candidates stack up ACCORDING TO THE RULE OF LAW BY THE CONSTITUTION, and also contrasted the NEOCONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN's laws, philosophy, and policies to demonstrate the open rebellion and insurgency they represent against the legitimate Constitutional government of the United States. The political axiom we observe is this: PARTY LOYALTY BLINDS THE PUBLIC TO CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS. Party loyalty becomes the enemy when it places PERSONS or PARTY as more important than PRINCIPLES. Party loyalty blinds people to objective analysis because it requires absolute UNITY even in the face of error, mistake, or even downright deceit, as we have observed.

If the Constitution continues to be trampled, there will be no more liberty in truth (but everyone on an electronic leash under the all seeing eye of Big Brother) and "no man will be able to buy and sell unless he have the (federal) mark".

Hoppy Kercheval: The Constitution deserves deep respect

AT one time in my life, when I saw. Sen. Robert Byrd reach into his breast pocket and pull out a copy of the U.S. Constitution, I would roll my eyes.

"Oh no, here we go again," I would mutter.

You see, I came late to the Constitution. I don't think I ever took more than a passing glance at it until a few years ago. I can remember once angrily dismissing a caller to Talkline who was trying to quote the Constitution to me.

My anger, as often turns out, was rooted in ignorance.

So I started reading more about the document and began to slowly discover the lesson every citizen should know, but often does not: The Constitution is, as George Washington called it, "the guide" for America.

Washington added, by the way, it was a guide "which I will never abandon."

Monday was Constitution Day in America. The media hardly noticed. After all, O.J. was in trouble again.

But Congress passed a law in 2004, at the urging of Sen. Byrd, requiring schools that receive federal funding to teach about the Constitution on or about Sept. 17, commemorating the date it was signed.

If you're just picking up a copy of the Constitution for the first time, you may wonder what all the fuss is about. Frankly, not every part of the Constitution gives you goose bumps.

For example, Article One, Section five reads, "Each House (of congress) shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same."

It's good that somebody is taking notes on what the House and Senate are up to, but where's the underpinning of our democracy?

That's found in the amendments, particularly the Bill of Rights -- the first 10 amendments that were not ratified until 1791, four years after the Constitution.

I suppose only a geek would have a favorite amendment, but I confess to being a fan of the First:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This simple, direct sentence codified critical protections for Americans from their government. In one stroke, we received a guarantee that the government could not pass a law telling its citizens what church to go to, what to say, what to print or where to gather.

Sure, over the years courts have defined and redefined some limitations on the freedoms, but we have generally rigorously guarded those protections.

The other nine of the original 10 also extend rights and protections from a potentially invasive government -- guaranteeing to the American people the right to bear arms, protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, a series of protections in court proceedings, on and on.

And, importantly, the 10th Amendment, which says the federal government has only those powers assigned to it by the Constitution; the rest belong to the states.

That amendment, though you may hardly recognize it in practice today, was designed to limit the reach of the federal government.

I don't hear too many federal politicians today talk much about the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. I suspect that's because this founding guide of ours tells the government what it should not be doing at a time when politicians -- encouraged by large segments of the population -- are constantly talking about what more the government should be doing.

The Constitution, like the Declaration of Independence, is the definitive statement about the fundamental principle of our democracy -- the authority of government depends on the consent of the governed. And the authority extended to the government is limited.

So now when Sen. Byrd whips out that worn copy of the Constitution, as his eyes narrow and his voice rises as he begins quoting from the document that defines America more than any other, I pay attention.

Kercheval is host of TalkLine, broadcast by the MetroNews Statewide Radio Network from 10 a.m. to noon Monday through Friday. The show can be heard locally on WCHS 580 AM.