/ /

==> August 2008

Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-TX): Giving Inmate Terrorists More Opportunities (GITMO) Act of 2008
July 30, 2008

As a form of protest of the United States Supreme Court's recent decision — in Boumediene v. Bush — U.S. Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-TX), on July 24, 2008, introduced a Bill entitled the "Giving Inmate Terrorists More Opportunities (GITMO) Act of 2008."

While no one surely believes that this Gohmert's bill will even be given the courtesy of any discussion in Nancy Pelosi's House, simply standing alone, "on the table" in the House of Representatives, Gohmert's GITMO Act of 2008 makes a powerful statement about the Supreme Court's continuing efforts to undermine the legitimate powers of the Executive to prosecute the War on Terror.

HR 6615 IH


2d Session

H. R. 6615

To provide for the transport of the enemy combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington, DC, where the United States Supreme Court will be able to more effectively micromanage the detainees by holding them on the Supreme Court grounds, and for other purposes.


July 24, 2008

Mr. GOHMERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned


To provide for the transport of the enemy combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington, DC, where the United States Supreme Court will be able to more effectively micromanage the detainees by holding them on the Supreme Court grounds, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


    This Act may be cited as the ‘Giving Inmate Terrorists More Opportunities (GITMO) Act of 2008’.


    Congress finds the following:

      (1) The United States Supreme Court issued an opinion styled Boumediene v. Bush on June 12, 2008.

      (2) Justice Anthony Kennedy, in the court’s majority opinion, held that foreign terrorism suspects held at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba have constitutional rights to challenge their detention in United States courts.

      (3) This is an obvious effort on the part of the Supreme Court to micromanage the detainment and disposition of detainees in the War on Terror who are dedicated to destroying innocent people and the American way of life.

      (4) The United States Supreme Court clearly needs increased opportunity to oversee the handling of the enemy combatants, as it has seen fit to take a greater role in managing the Global War on Terror, which is a duty previously exercised by the Executive Branch.

      (5) There can be no better way for the United States Supreme Court to exercise its new self-appointed war powers than to house the prisoners whom it has taken a greater role in overseeing.


    (a) Transportation- The Secretary of Defense shall immediately transport all enemy combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington, DC, where the United States Supreme Court shall hold the prisoners on the Court grounds, confined by adequate fencing.

    (b) Shelter on Supreme Court Building Grounds- The Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the majority opinion in Boumediene v. Bush, is directed to provide shelter for the detainees outside the United States Supreme Court building, but on the building grounds. The Secretary of Defense shall provide guards to watch over the prisoners and shall implement a system to ensure that the prisoners receive the appropriate amount of food and water. Should the detainees need the use of restroom facilities, they shall use the facilities inside the United States Supreme Court building. The Chief Justice, if the Chief Justice so chooses, may perform the duties of Justice Anthony Kennedy under this subsection.

    (c) Guard Duty- If any of the nine Supreme Court justices desire at any time to stand guard over the prisoners, or to provide the prisoners with their meals or water, or both, then the justices shall be permitted to perform these functions whenever they want.


    If either the Secretary of Defense or any justice of the Supreme Court refuses to carry out their duties under this Act, then their respective department or court shall receive funding for the next fiscal year at half the level of funding appropriated for the current fiscal year, or until such time as the Supreme Court no longer desires to micromanage the prisoners who have sworn to destroy our way of life.


New Additions to the Archives: Ronald W. Reagan
July 29, 2008
The following are among addresses recently added to the Library, and are highly recommended:

1961  :  Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine  -  Excellent exposition by Reagan on freedom and liberty, and the dangers from ever-expanding government, in the context of congressional efforts to socialize medicine.  (Listen to .mp3 audio)

October 27, 1964  :  A Time for Choosing  -  Reagan discusses his political genesis from Democrat to Republican; his views on conservatism; and the upcoming presidential election, and his support for Barry Goldwater.

November 10, 1977  :  Whatever Happened to Free Enterprise?  -  Address given at Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan.

July 17, 1980  :  Republican Presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech  -  Joe Louis Arena, Detroit, Michigan.  (Listen to .mp3 audio)  (View .wmv video)


Sen. Tom Coburn: Taking Apart Harry Reid's Gluttonous Omnibus Spending Bill
July 28, 2008
Senate floor speeches are a dime a dozen.  Few are worth listening to when they are delivered.  Fewer yet are worthy of preservation.  And only a handful of those merit study.  Here is one that merits very close attention.

Last Tuesday (July 22, 2008), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) delivered what amounts to an indictment of the big-spending, business as usual practices of the Harry Reid Senate.  Reid (D-NV) loosed upon the wallets and bank accounts of this nation a monstrosity of an omnibus spending bill — the "Advancing America's Priorities Act" — consisting of 398 pages spanning 35 separate spending bills, creating $11.3 billion in new spending, with no spending offsets, which were supposed to accompany new spending under new Democrat "principles" after the November '06 elections.

While the pork and druken spending contained in Reid's current omnibus bill is nothing new — $17 million for ape safety, $12 million for a greenhouse, and $1.5 billion for the DC metro — Sen. Coburn's speech provides an excellent tutelage in the constitutional limitations of government, and the frightening nature of out-of-control Congressional spending.

I want to spend a little bit of time this evening talking about motivations, talking about a realistic assessment of where we are and then merge those two things with some of the actions that myself and others in the Senate are doing.

One of the things we all know but we do not like to talk about is the significant, unsustainable course our country is on. Numbers can be really boring, but they are not boring when you apply what is going to happen to our children and grandchildren.

This first chart I have in the Chamber shows Government spending as a percentage of GDP. It has gone higher than that at times of war in the past. But here is where we are today at 2008. We are right around 20 percent. These are not my numbers. These are Government Accountability Office--these are the Medicare and Social Security trustee numbers. If we do not start doing something about wasteful Washington spending, about reform of waste, about elimination of fraud, about duplication of programs--2 or 3 or 20 doing the same thing, none of them doing it efficiently--what is going to happen to us under our current policy is that by 2038 we are going to have 35 percent of our GDP spent by the Government.

Well, what does that really mean? What happens to us when 35 percent of everything we produce comes to the Government and the Government deals it back out? Well, what it really means is less liberty. What it really means is less freedom. Because what it does is it takes the resources of Americans out of their pockets and out of their families and transfers it to a government bureaucracy that then mandates how dollars will be spent.

These numbers are not disputable. Nobody will dispute this is the roadmap we are on. As shown on this chart, this is where we are going. What happens is, the results of that become a markedly lower standard of living for our children and grandchildren. As we look at that, we see other things that are happening to us that are very harmful. As a matter of fact, they are affecting us greatly right now.

The debt held by the public--that is debt that is exclusive of the money we have stolen from Social Security, from Federal employees' retirement funds, from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and from about 60 other trust funds the Government continually steals excess money from and spends but does not recognize the debt--that is exclusive of all this. This is the debt that is out there that people have actually bought: T-bills or Treasury notes or Treasury bonds. About a third to 40 percent is now held by foreign governments.  (More -->)


Welcome to the Conservative Wilderness
July 28, 2008

The Conservative Wilderness is an effort by like-minded, conservative thinkers, who have come to believe/realize that they have been abandoned by the ostensible home of conservative leadership in this nation: The Republican Party.  Over time, the Republican Party has changed so dramatically in its purpose and vision, that it no longer serves even the basic purposes of conservatism: the limitation of governmental power over individuals, and the maximization of freedom and liberty for the People of this nation - both as guaranteed by our Constitution.

Here in the Conservative Wilderness, we yearn for the clearcut, steadfast and honest conservatism of Ronald Reagan.  We admire and are inspired by the true-blue, never-say-die conservatism of Rush Limbaugh.  And we seek leaders who place the guiding principles of true movement conservatism above the pure acquisition of poltical power for its own sake.

If you are one of us, you already know it!

If you're not sure, let us help you find your way — while we try and help those lost out in the wilderness, find their way back to true conservatism.


Drudge Report
Free Republic
Hot Air

CNS News
FOX News
FrontPage Magazine
Jewish World Review
National Review
Opinion Journal
Real Clear Politics
Sweetness & Light
Washington Times

Ace of Spades HQ
Captain's Quarters
Mona Charen
Victor Davis Hanson
David Horowitz
David Limbaugh
Little Green Footballs
Michelle Malkin |
Dick Morris
Pajamas Media
Power Line
Debbie Schlussel
Talking Points Memo
Walter Williams

Glenn Beck
Ann Coulter
Mike Gallagher
Sean Hannity
Laura Ingraham
Mark Levin
Rush Limbaugh
Michael Medved
Dennis Prager
Michael Savage

Accuracy in Media
BBC Watch
ChronWatch/SF Chron
Culture & Media Inst
Editor & Publisher
Eye on the Post/WP
Honest Reporting
Media Report/LA Times
Media Research Center
Olbermann Watch
Radio Equalizer
Rather Biased
Times Watch/NYT

American Rhetoric
American Verse
Digital Book Index
E-Text Center
Humanities Text Init
Internet Public Lib
Library Index
Project Gutenberg

October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008

ABC News
BBC News
CBS News
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
Christian Sci. Monitor
Los Angeles Times
NY Daily News
New York Post
New York Times
Philadelphia Inquirer
USA Today
U.S. News
Washington Post

1st Headlines

Alta Vista
Catholic News Serv.

MyWay News
News Now
PR Newswire


Accuracy in Academia
Amer Enter Institute
Cato Institute
Center Indiv Freedom
Claremont Institute
Eagle Forum
Heritage Foundation
Hoover Institution
Landmark Legal Fnd
Natl Ctr Pub Pol Res
Project 21
Rutherford Institute

Campaign Finance
Campaign Money
Cong Record
Discover the Nets
Federal Register
GPO Access
Project Vote Smart
Roll Call Votes


Add to Technorati Favorites

Add to Technorati Favorites