Throughout the years, I have met some interesting folks. I’ve met several famous politicians, governors, senators, congressmen, etc., I have also met some American Presidents as well, George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.  Bush the Elder I met when he spoke at my University in 1988.  I met Bill Clinton, the candidate, when I was having lunch at an Italian restaurant in Sunrise, Florida the Monday before Super Tuesday in 1992.  I met GW Bush at a fundraiser in 2003. I didn’t have my camera for Bush 41 or Clinton. I did photograph GW Bush and have some great photos of him (albeit on B&W film).

So today I got the opportunity to meet our current President, Barack Obama, during a fundraiser at the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach.  You bet I was going to take my camera there.  Interestingly enough, I had a special VIP pass which allowed me to have my picture taken with the President and I got to attend a small VIP dinner with 14 tables or so which included a speech by the President, and other important politicians with the Democratic Party.  I couldn’t pass up this opportunity. It was akin to being a scout for the Phillies in the Yankee locker room.

So I arrive at the hotel and hang out in the lobby for a while.  I see all the politicos walking in.  Then I see Dwayne Wade and say hello to him.  Minutes later, all the politicos there, certain local Congressmen all come by to get their photo with Wade.

Now to be able to go, you have to days in advance give the Secret Service your name, address, and ss#.  Well Cigar Mike had no trouble getting in.

So I sign in and give them my photo bag and gear which the security guy checked with me. I turned on my camera and showed him it was a camera and the pics I had on the card: a model I photographed last Saturday in the Glades and pics from Shenandoah. Interestingly enough, he lived near there and we started to chat about the snowstorm that hit the area last week when I was there.

I then am led down a hallway with three doors.  The door where the general cocktail reception will be held (these folks paid $500 per ticket and will get a short visit from the Prez); the door with the folks who had two stars on their tag (the big wigs); and then the folks who had the one star on their tag (the intermediate big wigs).  I was in the middle group.  In the two star group were the celebrities and the politicians.  The crème of the Dems: Nancy Pelosi, Congressman Wexler, Congressman Grayson, Congresswoman Wasserman-Shultz, Congressman Meek, Senator Nelson, and others. But all the attention was not on them, it was on Dwayne Wade, Alonzo Mourning, and Jason Taylor.  I wasn’t allowed in that room; but no big deal. The folks would walk into my room shortly thereafter to have dinner with the President.

I was bemused in the room by the folks there. Folks like Roy Black and his wife, and other big money donors.  I saw one guy who looked familiar to me too. I asked a friend of mine who he was. He tells me, “It’s Emilio Estefan.”  So Emilio was there too.  I also saw an interesting machine there. It’s called “Instant Replay” and they had a program on it called “Potus Only.” You press certain buttons on it and it plays “Hail to the Chief” or other tunes. Button on it said “Armed Forces” and then the different services. You press a button and an instant band theme from the armed forces too.

So a guy with the Presidential Detail comes in after about an hour and tells us to get in the photo line.  While in line, everybody walked in. Alonzo, JT, Wade, Pelosi, etc.  Then all these folks got out of the line to take pics of Jason Taylor.  He got more attention than Pelosi.  After 15 minutes or so, President Obama walks in and the photo line begins.  I stand there and talk to a bunch of friends, partners, and associates of mine, many who are Republican, and I note how ironic that here I am, Cigar Mike, in a line to have my picture taken with the President, with whom I disagree on nearly every policy.  A friend of mine, and a Democrat tells me, well “he is our President, politics aside.”   I told him, “I agree.”  While I disagree with him, he is the President and I will be respectful and take a photo with him.  I then think it’s funny cause I cannot imagine any liberal or other leftist even considering taking their picture with GW Bush and being respectful towards him.

And then while there were a few folks in front of me zipping through the photo line, I could only think of the famous lines uttered by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, “We’re all part of the same hypocrisy.”  You see folks; there were people there who are as right wing as they come.  In fact, at GOP fundraisers, I’ve seen many Dems there too.  So I was asked by someone, “why are there GOP folks there donating so much money to the Dems?”  It’s simple folks. It’s called access.  You get access with only one thing – dollars.  In the true scheme of things,  there are no real political parties.  There is only money and access. They will take your money even if you give the same amount to the other side. And the more money you give, the more they will listen to you. It’s really amazing when you come to think about it.  They don’t really care about regular folks. No one does.  Unless that regular folk coughs up a few hundred grand or so.  So here I was, myself and my GOP friends, 5 feet away from Congressman Grayson.  You think he saw us as folks that want people to die? No. He saw us as folks that probably paid a lot of money to be there, so he was most friendly with others and us in line.  None of these folks are heroes. They are mere politicians.  No different from any other politicians. In fact, this Dem fundraiser was no different than the GOP fundraisers I’ve gone too.  They both had their share of women with excessive plastic surgery; bloated and balding men with lots of money; and young volunteers with the belief that these people are different from everybody else and that they are making a difference.  Sorry to burst your bubble folks. But only money is spoken here. I think 1.5 million dollars was raised at the dinner I attended for 100 seats at 15 tables. Do the math. Unless you have the money,  don't even think you could have a seat here.

At the dinner, which followed, a few others and myself went towards the real stars there, JT, Wade, and Zo.  We had our pictures taken with them and chatted up with them for a bit.  We were seated and then the politicians started their speeches. Senator Nelson and the head of the Dem. Congressional Committee all patting themselves on the back and telling everyone that with additional contributions, they intend on holding the current seats and gaining more seats in the Congress.  Wasserman-Shultz was there and introduced Speaker Pelosi who introduced the President.

I was snapping away of course and took about a few hundred images.  I will say that the President gave a speech without a teleprompter and was coherent.  He touted all he has done while in office and the legislation coming up. Then he notes that the GOP got them in the mess they are in and have no business criticizing their “change.” In the same breath, he then says that he welcomes a healthy opposition. But what do you expect? I was in their locker room. They say the same things about us that we say about them.  We’re all part of the hypocrisy; pure and simple.  It’s all about the money.  There were no moveon.org folks there, or radical leftwing bloggers.  Just folks with lots of money.  Interestingly enough, many of the Dems I spoke to all told me how much they dislike Pelosi and how bad she was for the party; all telling me that they need someone like Tip O’Neil who wasn’t so damn polarizing and a political hack.  But when she came out; they all applauded her and sang her praise.

After the President spoke, lots of folks took off leaving the untouched and quite tasty filet mignon on their tables to be thrown out. I asked one of the waiters there for a box saying I’d take it home. It was fantastic. I was told they were not allowed to allow food outside the Hotel for health reasons.  Great, I figure.  All these politicians who love to talk about the regular common man, who’d love to be able to eat a steak,  throwing their food away. Oy vay!

So you may ask, "Cigar Mike, why are you there and why do you shake his hand?"  Simple. I'm there cause I have connections and I will not pass up a photographic opportunity such as being able to photograph the President of the United States.  Why do I shake his hand? Well, he's my President, even if I don't agree with him and frankly, I wanted to show the leftist nuts out there that unlike them,  we can show respect for the President even if we don't agree with him. Their memories are too short, but we remember how they treated GW Bush.  But as they say, tomorrow it will all be history and I'll continue my fight to keep the Dems policies from becoming law by focusing on the real issues out there and not on the ridiculous like those birther folks that were across the street from the hotel.

It was my turn to meet the President and I told him “it is a pleasure to meet you, Mr. President.”  I shook his hand, he told me “thank you for all your help,” a photo was taken, and I was on my way as the next person got his turn to take his photo with the President.

You can see some of my images from the event here on Flickr.  And don't forget to check out my new photography website at MichaelPancierPhotography.Com.

Capital Hill © 2009 by Michael A. Pancier, All Rights Reserved

It’s been a while but I am glad to finally announce the debut of my photography website, Michael Pancier Photography.   Folks ask me all the time for prints and for my website. So thanks to fellow contributor and friend Claudia, who was kind enough to put it together for me, the website is now online.

I have many of my landscape, cityscape,  and wildlife images available with new ones going up from time to time.   Give it a whirl …

Enjoy and see you out in the field ....

Well infidels, I have returned. I went to Virginia in mid October to get foliage photos. This is what greeted me yesterday morning....Virginia is not supposed to get snow until November. I was in a winter wonderland out there. Yep, I got my winter shots in October. That's global warming for you.

Shot at Shenandoah National Park - Virginia.

Speech by President Teddy Roosevelt made at the Grand Canyon, Arizona, on May 6, 1903:

"In the Grand Canyon, Arizona has a natural wonder which, so far as I know, is in kind absolutely unparalleled throughout the rest of the world. I want to ask you to do one thing in connection with it in your own interest and in the interest of the country - to keep this great wonder of nature as it now is.

I was delighted to learn of the wisdom of the Santa Fe railroad people in deciding not to build their hotel on the brink of the canyon. I hope you will not have a building of any kind, not a summer cottage, a hotel, or anything else, to mar the wonderful grandeur, the sublimity, the great loneliness and beauty of the canyon.

Leave it as it is. You can not improve on it. The ages have been at work on it, and man can only mar it. What you can do is to keep it for your children, your children's children, and for all who come after you, as one of the great sights which every American if he can travel at all should see.

We have gotten past the stage, my fellow-citizens, when we are to be pardoned if we treat any part of our country as something to be skinned for two or three years for the use of the present generation, whether it is the forest, the water, the scenery. Whatever it is, handle it so that your children's children will get the benefit of it."

Lot's of things which have been annoying me lately, but I'm not gonna dwell on it. So I'll talk about something I like instead today. Thanks to the technology we have today, i.e., Apple iPhones, I've downloaded the entire Ken Burns National Park Documentary to my phone so I can watch it from my daily trek on the treadmill. Someone here the other day had lumped TR with some of the worst Presidents we've had. I'm certain that person was confused with TR's nephew and/or was grossly misinformed about what a great President TR was. Among his greatest achievements was his support of the Antiquities Act whereby Congress gave the President the Power to create National Monuments and also his support for the National Park. He loved to hunt and fish and hike in the American Wilderness. His steadfast to the money changers of the day made it possible that generations after him and after me will be able to enjoy the view in the photograph I posted above. These national parks belong to us and the nation. They are a place we can get away from the mundane views and simply suck it in. Photos do not do these places justice.

I saw the Grand Canyon for my first time this year in my 40's. I took my ten year old son to see it too. I'll return no doubt and simply hope to see it in the same condition I saw it where the only changes would be made by God Himself. The vistas of the National Parks cannot be improved and we are fortunate that great men and women made it possible that we have these parks today; it truly is an American invention and one of the best ideas we as a nation could have come up with. A sign of true Democracy. These are places where the hand of man is minimal and at best unseen.

Since 2007, I made it a goal of mine to visit as many national parks as I can. Besides the Everglades which is in our backyard and is a place all of us in South Florida must visit and protect, I've been lucky to visit Death Valley, Grand Canyon, Canyonlands, Zion, Bryce, Arches, and Acadia National Parks. This weekend I'll be headed to the pristine lands enjoyed by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson in what is now called Shenandoah National Park in Virginia. I'm talking my 5 and 10 year old as well. It will be the 4th National Park I will have visited in 2009. And my list is pretty large still. I have so many on my list that I have trips planned into 2011 and beyond.

So hopefully I'll have some interesting images to convey to you upon my return next week from the Blue Ridge Mountains and hopefully I'll have some autumn colors to give you. If you're a videophile nut, get the National Park series on Blue Ray and see it. If you have kids, see it with them. Then make plans to take your kids to one or more of America's National Parks. Everything you need is right here in the USA. And as you stand before these great vistas that we find in our National Parks, you can thank a lot of people, but you should give a special thanks to TR; who was a real man who enjoyed the outdoors, who hunted and fished, who hiked and rode horseback through the wilderness as compared to those who would rather spend their time playing golf and taking their Lexus SUV's to the wine bar.

I would love for anyone on the left, especially the buttmunches like Rep. Grayson to tell me, under which provision of the U.S. Constitution does Congress have the power to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance?

Here's the text of the U.S. Constitution.

And while sadly, the bill being voted on in the Senate Finance Committee is not available for the public to read (transparency), here is the chairman's mark up report.

Notwithstanding the fact that I challenge anyone who knows the law to tell me what enumerated power applies here. (I know what power the Congress is attempting to use, but it's weak. But let's see if all these folks out there (kind of like the ones who don't know who is paying for those checks they're getting) have a clue), here is what this bill will propose:

Beginning in 2013, all U.S. citizens and legal residents would be required to purchase coverage through (1) the individual market, a public program such as Medicare, Medicaid, the Children‘s Health Insurance Program, Veteran‘s Health Care Program, or TRICARE or through an employer (or as a dependent of a covered employee) in the small group market, meeting at least the requirements of a bronze plan, or (2) in the large group market, in a plan with first dollar coverage for prevention-related services as recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force – except in cases where value-based insurance design is used and cannot have an unreasonable annual or lifetime limit coverage or a maximum out-of-pocket limit greater than that provided by the standards established for HSA current law limit in order to meet minimum creditable coverage. Exemptions from the requirement to have health coverage would be allowed for religious objections that are consistent with those allowed under Medicare, and for undocumented aliens. An individual enrolled in a grandfathered plan would be deemed to have met the responsibility requirement.

In order to ensure compliance, individuals would be required to report on their Federal income tax return the months for which they maintain the required minimum health coverage for themselves and all dependents under age 18...

Now you know this is to require most young people to purchase insurance. And what if they don't? The answer will lead you to the hint to the answer to the question above.

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax of $750 per adult in the household. This per adult penalty would be phased in as follows: For 2013, $0; $200 for 2014; $400 for 2015; $600 in 2016 and $750 in 2017.

The excise tax would apply for any period for which the individual is not covered by a health insurance plan with the minimum required benefit but would be prorated for partial years of noncompliance. The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed. No excise tax will be assessed for individuals not maintaining health insurance for a period less than or equal to three months in the tax year. However, assessed excise taxes for those not insured for more than three months include the entire duration the individual was uninsured during the tax year.

Non-compliance with the individual responsibility to have health coverage shall incur no criminal penalty; and neither civil penalty nor interest shall accrue for failure to pay such assessment in a timely manner. Collection shall be limited to withholding of federal payments due.

What does the Constitution say?

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;

Interesting huh? Now what is interesting as well is, if you don't get insurance, you have to pay an excise tax. If you don't pay the tax, under this plan, the only thing the government will do is garnish any tax refund check you may coming to you. Now why is this important folks? You see for this plan to work, everyone has to buy into the system. There's no teeth to enforcement (granted, the power buttressing the legislation is weak too), so this means the plan will not be adequately funded.

So where is the money going to come from? And what's even more amusing, this plan will not insure everybody. So you have a massive overhaul; costing gazillions of dollars, which barely changes anything vis a vis coverage from the current situation. Sounds futile no?

Well....I look forward to a healthy exchange of ideas .....

© 2009 by Michael A. Pancier, All Rights Reserved
Bahia Honda State Park - Florida Keys

Enjoy ....

© 2009 by Michael A. Pancier, All Rights Reserved

Just taking a break from the daily political crap. Here's a pic I took last week in midtown.

Happy Columbus Day. Of course I can't figure out how if his last name was Colon, how the heck did they end up with Columbus?

Interesting article in today's WSJ by Democrat Lanny Davis on the Honduras situation where he points out the idiocy of Obama and his Chavez dupes about their refusal to recognize the new freely elected government in Honduras following the November 2009 election:

What's made the situation even more intractable is that the U.S., the OAS and the EU have strongly suggested that they will not recognize the results of the upcoming Nov. 29 presidential elections. They took this position without taking into account that the electoral process is supervised, pursuant to the Honduran constitution, by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. The tribunal is thoroughly independent of the executive branch led by Roberto Micheletti.

These policy decisions have produced an ironic and embarrassing scenario: The U.S. is apparently unwilling to recognize free and fair elections in Honduras with international observers; this at the same time it is about to recognize the president of Afghanistan, who was elected in what is now seen as a fraudulent electoral process.

He points out to an interesting situation which seems like a reasonable compromise, but which would be contingent on the following:

1) a moratorium on all prosecutions of political crimes, which was interpreted to apply both to accusations against Mr. Zelaya and those responsible for deporting him

2)  the resignation, after the election, of Mr. Micheletti

3) renunciation by Mr. Zelaya of his intention to be restored as president;

4) the succession, as provided by the constitution, of a caretaker president between election day and inauguration day.

Makes sense, but it seems like no one is willing to compromise.  And even in the case that there is no compromise, Mr. Davis notes the following that hopefully our Nobel Winning Prize President should take heed:

But given reports from yesterday's discussions of continued intransigence by both parties, this seems overly optimistic. If Mr. Zelaya refuses to "resign" or renounce his intention to be restored, which is a distinct possibility, one would hope that the U.S. and other nations of the OAS and EU would no longer feel compelled to insist on his reinstatement. They should then recognize the election of the new president, and the crisis would truly be over. Honduras would be restored to its rightful role as a stable constitutional republic and loyal ally of the U.S.

My $50 is with Obama continuing to follow the Hugo Chavez position of not recognizing a freely elected government.  Mr. Davis' article can be found here.

A fantastic article on the Tersites blog about Cuban Punk Rocker Gorky's trip and performance in NYC. This is very poignant:

La gente entró hasta llenar la sala. Enrisco, organizador del evento, hizo la presentación. GA comentó con sorna que Enrisco había escrito aquel texto en cinco minutos… lo cual explicaba todos sus errores. La gente se rió —sobre todo Enrisco—, y a partir de ahí el personaje de la noche pareció sentirse más cómodo en su piel. Uno de los primeros inquisidores le preguntó a GA que cómo era posible que no lo hubiesen fusilado por escribir “la canción esa del comandante”. “¿Aquí se puede decir pinga?”, preguntó GA, antes de proceder a responderle. Y, extrañamente, con esa grosería se adueñó de un público que en su mayoría jamás había escuchado música punk ni a Porno para Ricardo.

Read the entire article here.

I'm at the beach to shoot the sunrise and an occasional model .... the joys of living in South Florida ....

It was only a matter of time with these wankers in control of the government .... and look whose name pops up again....

By Fabiola Moura

Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Legislation to end a ban on Americans traveling to Cuba has enough support in the U.S. House of Representatives to win approval by year-end, said Representative Sam Farr, a California Democrat.

The bill to let U.S. citizens resume travel to the Caribbean island except in times of war or cases in which they face imminent danger has 181 votes in the House and needs 218 to pass, said Farr, a co-sponsor of the legislation. The plan is backed by travel groups such as the United States Tour Operators Association and the National Tour Association and human rights groups such as the Washington Office on Latin America and has been helped by President Barack Obama’s election, he said.

“It is believed we can get to this before the end of the year,” Farr, 68, said in an interview in New York. “We haven’t had a policy about Cuba. We’ve had policies about getting votes in Florida and Obama changed that by getting those votes.”

The U.S. ended restrictions on Sept. 3 on Cuban-Americans travel and money transfers to relatives in Cuba. The new rules also allow U.S. telecommunications companies to provide service in Cuba for mobile telephone, satellite radio and television. Exceptions to the 1962 trade embargo on communist Cuba include $500 million per year in agricultural exports, Farr said.

“If you are a potato, you can get to Cuba very easily,” he said. “But if you are a person, you can’t, and that is our problem.”

Pressure

Obama is under pressure from Latin American leaders to end the trade embargo to help improve relations in the region. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will ask Obama to end the embargo during the United Nations General Assembly this week, spokesman Marcelo Baumbach said Sept. 17.

Obama announced in April he would lift travel limits for Cuban-Americans visiting family in Cuba. At the same time, Representatives Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Mario Diaz-Balart, both Florida Republicans, issued a statement that the president had made “unilateral concessions to the dictatorship” that would “embolden it to further isolate, imprison and brutalize pro- democracy activists.”

Cuba’s former President Fidel Castro, who handed power to his brother Raul Castro last year, called on Obama to completely lift the trade embargo.

White House officials have said there are no plans to lift the embargo. At the same time, the administration is undertaking a full review of policy toward Cuba with the goal of advancing “the cause of freedom” in the country less than 100 miles (160 kilometers) from the coast of Florida, Daniel Restrepo, a special assistant to Obama, said in April.

March Proposal

A group of House and Senate lawmakers proposed in March ending restrictions to allow all U.S. citizens and residents to travel to Cuba. Farr said the legislation, known as the “Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act,” also has enough votes to clear the Senate, where Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, and Republican Senator Michael Enzi of Wyoming introduced the legislation.

“There’s a lot more openness in the Congress,” Geoff Thale, program director in the Washington Office on Latin America, said in an interview in New York. “Support is building. The travel industry and business community are not just formally in support but actively engaged. That’s why I think we’re going to see a difference.”

Senator Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat who is of Cuban descent and sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, has vowed to fight the easing of travel restrictions.

Philip Peters, a vice president and Cuba expert at the Lexington Institute, a public policy research group in Arlington, Virginia, said proponents of the bill may succeed in winning congressional approval as public opinion grows among Americans that U.S. rules on Cuba aren’t in line with much of the country’s foreign policy.

‘Good Shot’

“They’ve got a good shot,” Peters said in an interview. “Certainly right now they’re in striking distance and they’ve got plenty of time left in the session.”

Ending the travel ban may lead as many as 1 million Americans to visit the island every year, Lisa Simon, president of the National Tour Association, known as NTA, said in an interview. It would also help push forward talks on human rights issues, Thale said.

“We’ve had a policy for 50 years of isolating Cuba and it hasn’t done anything about the human rights situation,” Thale said. “I don’t think there is some magic solution. I don’t think ending the travel ban will cause Fidel to say let’s have elections, let’s release all the political prisoners tomorrow. What it will do is open the process of dialogue.”

Obama’s administration has been showing a “gradual relaxation and diplomatic opening” toward Cuba, Thale said. He cited the government’s decision to reinitiate talks on migration and direct mail, and also to put down the billboard operated by the U.S. government outside its special interests section in Havana, which he said often displayed anti-Cuba messages.

Many times you hear El Presidente and the Congress saying that their Obamacare requirement that everyone have health insurance or pay a tax is like having auto insurance. Poor analogy Mcfly.  Auto insurance requirements are regulated by the States.  While the states may have the power to do this,  not so fast when it comes to the federal government.

Congress' powers are limited.   Good article in the WSJ on how the new health care reform out there is more likely than not unconstitutional. Here's an excerpt:

The elephant in the room is the Constitution. As every civics class once taught, the federal government is a government of limited, enumerated powers, with the states retaining broad regulatory authority. As James Madison explained in the Federalist Papers: "[I]n the first place it is to be remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects." Congress, in other words, cannot regulate simply because it sees a problem to be fixed. Federal law must be grounded in one of the specific grants of authority found in the Constitution.

These are mostly found in Article I, Section 8, which among other things gives Congress the power to tax, borrow and spend money, raise and support armies, declare war, establish post offices and regulate commerce. It is the authority to regulate foreign and interstate commerce that—in one way or another—supports most of the elaborate federal regulatory system. If the federal government has any right to reform, revise or remake the American health-care system, it must be found in this all-important provision. This is especially true of any mandate that every American obtain health-care insurance or face a penalty.

The Supreme Court construes the commerce power broadly. In the most recent Commerce Clause case, Gonzales v. Raich (2005) , the court ruled that Congress can even regulate the cultivation of marijuana for personal use so long as there is a rational basis to believe that such "activities, taken in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce."

But there are important limits. In United States v. Lopez (1995), for example, the Court invalidated the Gun Free School Zones Act because that law made it a crime simply to possess a gun near a school. It did not "regulate any economic activity and did not contain any requirement that the possession of a gun have any connection to past interstate activity or a predictable impact on future commercial activity." Of course, a health-care mandate would not regulate any "activity," such as employment or growing pot in the bathroom, at all. Simply being an American would trigger it.

Health-care backers understand this and—like Lewis Carroll's Red Queen insisting that some hills are valleys—have framed the mandate as a "tax" rather than a regulation. Under Sen. Max Baucus's (D., Mont.) most recent plan, people who do not maintain health insurance for themselves and their families would be forced to pay an "excise tax" of up to $1,500 per year—roughly comparable to the cost of insurance coverage under the new plan.

But Congress cannot so simply avoid the constitutional limits on its power. Taxation can favor one industry or course of action over another, but a "tax" that falls exclusively on anyone who is uninsured is a penalty beyond Congress's authority. If the rule were otherwise, Congress could evade all constitutional limits by "taxing" anyone who doesn't follow an order of any kind—whether to obtain health-care insurance, or to join a health club, or exercise regularly, or even eat your vegetables.

Read the whole article here.

Land Ruling - Rhodes v. Macdonald

As I've written in earlier posts,  if you're gonna win the war, you cannot waste it by picking stupid battles wherein you're throwing rocks and bottles against targets of no significance.  You have to use your heavy artillery and go after battles where we are right and have the authority to support our position.  If you have the facts and the law behind you, you will prevail.  Not so in these cases which all they do is weaken our position.  This is a fringe argument with no legal basis. I've said it all along. I said it last year when the first lawsuit was filed.

This judge is a conservative judge appointed by George W. Bush.  He's not some sappy liberal.  To win the war against the socialist pricks in the government right now,  we have to speak the truth,  use the law, and be loud.   If you get attacked you then have the weapons to fight back.  If you dwell on frivolous UFO type theories,  you will never get out of the fox hole and they will win because you were not focused. If folks want to associate with the types that file this lawsuit, go ahead. You will have no credibility on the matters that count.

Just my 4 1/2 cents.

It's Constitution Day infidels.  The only thing I have sworn allegiance to in my life to protect.  The document which became the backbone for our nation came to life in this Hall, during a scorching summer.  It's brilliance is unmatched. It wasn't perfect; compromises had to be made.  Amendments had to be added.  But it's brilliance is still unmatched especially in its day.

As I walked by this building during my recent trip there,  and it was pretty hot that day, I could only imagine what our founding fathers had to go through to give us a nation.  And even after the document was drafted,  it was an ordeal to convince the state legislatures to pass it.  But for geniuses such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison,  we may never have become the nation we are today.  I strongly suggest you folks read Hamilton by Cernow and James Madison and the Struggle for the Bill of Rights. It was ironic that the main opposition against the Constitution was from folks such as Patrick Henry and George Mason who feared that giving the federal government too much power would lead to the elimination of individual rights.  Henry fought Madison tooth and nail in the Virginia assembly insisting that without a Bill of Rights,   the people were at the mercy of the federal government.  Madison and Hamilton insisted that it was not necessary since the only powers the federal government had were those enumerated in the document.   The Constitution was approved by a narrow margin in Virginia.  Interestingly enough,  Madison was elected to Congress and one of his first legislative achievements was in enacting legislation to propose a Bill of Rights to be voted upon by the States and thus added as Amendments to the Constitution.   Madison himself realized that even though the powers of the federal government were limited and enumerated,   only through a bill of rights would the people be guaranteed the freedoms and the government could be kept at check.   Another interesting tidbit that most folks don't realize is that until the Civil War and the passage of the 14th Amendment,  and later Supreme Court precedent acknowledging this fact, the Bill of Rights only applied to the Federal Government and not the individual states.  Through the 14th Amendment it is now that the Bill of Rights applies to the states and its subdivisions.

This document is the cornerstone upon which our Republic is buttressed and so few have taken the time to read it or study it.  It truly is brilliant.  We must protect it.

In my photo, you see the statue of George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention.  He kept silent for the most part, but his presence was crucial.  He added credibility to the process.  Washington was our greatest President of all time.   First he had no one to follow as an example. He had to set it.  He was the only revolutionary in world history who had absolute power and voluntarily relinquished it.   His brilliance is unmatched.  And yet, very few read about the real Washington.  I suggest His Excellency George Washington and 1776 as two of the most definitive biographies on him and his decisionmaking.

I end my post today with this quote from Dr. Benjamin Franklin, who also sat within the hallowed halls of Independence Hall while the last members were signing the Constitution:

Doctor Franklin looking towards the President's Chair [George Washington],  at the back of which a rising sun happened to be painted, observed to a few members near him, that Painters had found it difficult to distinguish in their art a rising from a setting sun. “I have,” said he, “often and often in the course of the Session, and the vicissitudes of my hopes and fears as to its issue, looked at that behind the President without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting: But now at length I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting Sun.”

A special thanks to our friend Claudia4Libertad for being such a great host in her birthplace and taking me to this shrine of liberty.

El Museo Cubano rinde homenaje a Olga Díaz Pancier.

Participan Tania Martí y Armando Terrón.

Dirección musical, Alfredo Munar.

Jueves 10: 7:30 p.m. Koubek Center de la Universidad de Miami, 2705 SW 3 St. (305) 529-5400.

If you are in the area, stop on by.

It's Labor Day and the only laboring I will be doing today will be behind a grill as I prepare my world famous brisket and my BBQ chicken (shicken if you're from Louisiana)

I'm in a good mood given that we all managed to eliminate one communist thug from the government. Here's a sunrise shot from the Grand Canyon.

Enjoy your day folks. This is the last day of summer vacation for most....

For a change of pace, here's a photo I took at Meteor Crater Arizona just outside Winslow (such a fine place to be).

As large as this crater is, it still isn't big enough to hold all of the bullcrap being spewed from the left today. Ciao Infidels, I'm outta here to smoke some cigars and torture the enemy.

[Photo of Philadelphia Skyline taken during my photo walk of the City with Babalu's own and Philly local Claudia4libertad.]

Imagine this folks: Black and Hispanics who wish to exercise their right to vote, are greeted at the polls by 2 armed members of the KKK who say they are just there trying to make sure there is no funny business. Voter intimidation? Yes. Violation of voting rights act? Yes. Deserving of Prosecution? Yes. So let's flip it around. Two armed members of the Militant Black Panther Party standing in front of the polls so as to intimidate non-blacks. Voter intimidation? Yes. Violation of Voting Rights Act? Yes. Deserving of Prosecution? Of course. So what does Attorney General Eric Holder do in the Black Panther case where the government was about to get default judgments against the militants? (BTW, a default means the government wins automatically). He mysteriously dismisses the charges. Yes, this is from the same dude that had no qualms about sending in the troops against unarmed Cuban Americans, but who will not lift a pinky about prosecuting a blatant and egregious example of voter intimidation. This article by John Fund in the WSJ nails it on the head and merits attention. This my friends is egregious and worse than the firing of attorney generals under W. But is there outrage from the left? Are the leftwing bloggers and Puffington Host folks calling for an inquiry? Answer? Nope. The little pelosis are just too busy blaming Conservatives for everything that goes wrong in the world. What do you expect from such wankers. Here's the article in its entirety.

Holder's Black Panther Stonewall
Why did the Justice Department dismiss such a clear case of voter intimidation?
By JOHN FUND

President Obama's Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.

The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)

One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"

In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice's request to support its lawsuit.

When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default. Instead, the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that's already illegal under existing law.

There was outrage over the decision among Congressional Republicans, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division—especially after it was learned one of the defendants who walked was Jerry Jackson, a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and a credentialed poll watcher for the Democratic Party last Election Day.

Then the Washington Times reported on July 30 that six career lawyers at Justice who had recommended continuing to pursue the case were overruled by Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli—a top administration political appointee. One of the career attorneys, Appellate Chief Diana Flynn, had urged in an internal memo that a judgment be pressed against the defendants to "prevent the paramilitary style intimidation of voters" in the future.

Justice spokesman Alejandro Miyar says the dismissal was "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law." But Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.), has been asking for more information. Assistant Attorney General Ronald Welch, for example, claims in a July 13 letter to Mr. Wolf that charges against the New Black Panther Party itself were dropped because there wasn't "evidentiary support" to prove they "directed" the intimidation. But Mr. Wolf notes in a letter sent to Justice that one defendant, Black Panther Party Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, said on Fox News just after the election that his activities at the polling station were part of a nationwide effort. Mr. Shabazz added that the Black Panther activities in Philadelphia were justified due to "an emergency situation."

Mr. Wolf's demands that Justice make the career attorneys on the case available for questions have been rebuffed. He also wants the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings. A spokesman for House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers was noncommittal as to whether any hearing would be held.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights voted on Aug. 7 to send a letter to Justice expanding its own investigation and demanding more complete answers. "We believe the Department's defense of its actions thus far undermines respect for rule of law," its letter stated. It noted "the peculiar logic" of one Justice argument, that defendants' failure to show up in court was a reason for dismissing the case: "Such an argument sends a perverse message to wrongdoers—that attempts at voter suppression will be tolerated so long as the persons who engage in them are careful not to appear in court to answer the government's complaint."

The commission noted that it could subpoena witnesses and documents if Justice doesn't better explain its actions.

President Obama needs to clear the air. As a former law professor who specialized in voting rights, he is aware of how important even-handed application of the law is to election integrity. In 2007, then-Sen. Obama introduced a bill to protect Americans from tactics that intimidate voters. It also increased the criminal penalty for voter intimidation to five years in prison from one year.

"There is no place for politics in this debate," he testified before Mr. Conyers's committee in March, 2007. "Both parties at different periods in our history have been guilty in different regions of preventing people from voting for a tactical advantage. We should be beyond that."

One way to get there is for Mr. Obama to insist his Justice Department reinstate the Black Panther case or provide a full explanation for why it was dropped.