Justice Brought to Awlaki

This morning we received news that Anwar al-Awlaki was killed by a CIA drone in Yemen.

Already there are those who are condemning this act of justice as a violation of Awlaki’s American civil rights. They argue that he should have been tried for treason and brought to justice that way.

I agree, if he had been arrested. In fact all traitors are, like any other citizen afforded the rights to trial by jury. That is a good thing.

So, if this is the case, how can I support the work of David Petraeus and the CIA?

Despite the fact that Awlaki was a United States citizen from New Mexico this death was not punishment for crime. This death was not because he was a traitor.

Awlaki was targeted by the CIA because he was an enemy combatant in a war. And congress authorized this conflict against the organization Al-Qaeda.

Whether you agree with the War on Terror, there are battles and casualties. This man should have (and likely would have) received a proper trial if he was arrested. He would have been charged for high treason. But he put himself into the war as an enemy combatant.

It is not a constitutional crisis. He put himself there, and died on a battlefield of this strange war.

All involved in this small victory ought to be commended. (Except, of course Awlaki)

-Jeremiah Lorrig

THE HERMAN CAIN!

Alright, what's going on? This guy who went from a nobody and a longer than long shot came from nowhere and dethroned the Powerhouse Governors Romney and Perry (combined) to win last weeks P5 Florida Straw Poll.

Then Monday we saw shock headlines from Zogby showing that Cain had leaped to the lead.

Then this morning we were shocked again by headlines showing Cain polling within 5 points of Obama.

Now, just breaking, a FOX News poll has him diffidently in the top tier.

Romney 23%
Perry 19%
Cain 17%
Gingrich 11%
Paul 6%
Huntsman 4%
Bachmann 3%
Santorum 3%

Who is this guy? The first I heard of him was his tea party speeches. I don't know anyone who has spoken at as many tea party events as he has.

Then he came to speak at a presidential candidate forum for homeschoolers that I helped organize. One of the things I had to do was write the bio to be used when he was introduced. He's never been elected before by a vote of the people, but his record is still impressive.

He worked for the navy as a professional mathematician (don't ask me what that means...). Then he entered the business world. There he climbed the ladder like a fireman. He worked for a half dozen restaurants as a business executive before he finally took the reins of a dying company, Godfather's Pizza. As CEO he turned things around and it recovered remarkably.

After that success apparently everyone wanted him on their board of directors because he had to shed a huge number of boards before officially stepping into the ring and running for president. One of the boards he served on, by the way, was a Federal Reserve board. I imagine that the Ron Paul people will not like that, but he really understands finances.

Finally, he took a shocking foray into healthcare when he took on HilleryCare back in the nineties. In fact, he took on President Clinton on national TV (and won):


It would be nice to have someone this smart handling the national debt.

For the last several years Cain has been a conservative talk radio host in Atlanta.

Edit: You can find a summery of his policy positions, here. (HT: Andrew)

If someone asks you who THE HERMAN CAIN is, now YOU know.

-Jeremiah Lorrig

QUOTE OF THE DAY

QUOTE OF THE DAY: 'I gave fear up for Lent this year." - Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.

"Something you don't have in common."

I was notified by Obama's campaign that there are 347 people in Leesburg VA (the town where I live) who have given money to his campaign. They also told me that I am not one of those people. They are trying to guilt me into sending money! The subject line of the email was "Something you don't have in common." I guess they might want to know about a few other things I don't have in common with people who give him money...

Dear Mr. Obama,

I don't like how you are bankrupting America! Stop being irresponsible with the money you take in taxes before you ask me to send you the rest of my money for your campaign.

Regards,

Jeremiah

---

From: Jim Messina, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 12:42 PM
To: Jeremiah Lorrig
Subject: Something you don't have in common

Jeremiah --

Here's something you don't have in common with 347 other supporters of this movement who tell us they live in your area.

That many of your neighbors have decided to own a piece of this campaign by making a donation of whatever they could afford. For some, that meant just $5. For others, it meant $100 or more. But each had their own personal reason for giving.

Our records show that you aren't one of the 347 people in Leesburg, VA who have stepped up for 2012. Now's your chance to change that.

Make a donation of $5 or more today to support the campaign before the critical September 30th deadline.

Here's why you should join your neighbors in supporting this campaign: We've been running the numbers, and with hundreds of thousands of individual donors across the country -- we are now well on our way to a million people.

In the 2008 campaign, it took us more than a year to reach that milestone. This time around, we could cross it as soon as October -- just six months after the launch of the campaign.

Between now and then, we have an important fundraising deadline.

Our opponents have significant operations on the ground in key battleground states, full-time candidates without day jobs, and a lot of media attention to fuel their campaigns.

President Obama has you. And when you're building a grassroots organization from the bottom up, the first person gets the next one involved. And the first 347 provide the foundation and inspiration for the next 347.

Support the campaign before the deadline, and bring us closer to one million donors -- give $5 today:

https://donate.barackobama.com/One-in-a-Million

Thank you,

Messina

Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

4 Republican Candidates Stand Up for Parental Rights

Candidates at the Republican Presidential Debate bring Parental Rights to the forefront.

Purcellville, VA, September 8, 2011: Republican presidential candidates take a strong stand for parental rights in California at the Reagan Library.

Last night’s MSNBC/Politico debate was a spirited and passionate discussion but homeschoolers ears perked up when the candidates engaged in a lively discussion of parental rights. Bachmann, Romney, Santorum, and Perry all stood with parents on the issue of parental rights.

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann was the first candidate to raise the issue of parental rights saying, “What I am very concerned about is the issue of Parental Rights.” She then asked, “Should the federal government control these areas or should parents and localities control these areas?” Former Governor Mitt Romney following Bachmann’s lead was very clear, “I believe in parental rights and parental responsibility for our kids.”

Former Senator Rick Santorum, homeschool father of seven, underlined that parental rights should never be put on the government chopping block. He even addressed specific government policies dictating parents’ actions and differentiating himself from Perry by asking, “How about instead of having an opt out [option for parents] having an opt in [option]?”

Bachmann referenced the 2007 HPV debate declaring, “It is wrong for government whether it’s state or federal government to impose on parents what they must do to inoculate their children. This is very serious. And I think it is very important again that parents to have that right [to make health and education choices for their children].” Santorum agreed saying, “How about Parental Rights being more important than State’s rights?” Confronted with Bachmann’s jab, Governor Rick Perry replied that he not only believes in parental rights but also made sure that his controversial policy reflected that. “We offered an opt out—I don’t know what is stronger for parental rights then having that opt out.”

In the end, Bachmann summed up the feeling of the debate, “We have the best results when we have the private sector and the family involved, and we have the worst results when the federal government gets involved.”

Here are the highlights of the exchange.

Questioning Faith

It is election season again (and yes, I plan to break down the Republican candidates again soon like I did last time, so look forward to that).

But right now, I want to bring a TIME magazine article to your attention.

It is called Articles of Faith: What Journalists Should Be Asking Politicians About Religion. In the article Amy Sullivan lists her Ten Commandments for what kind of questions journalists should ask people running for office.

Here is a quick glimpse:

1. Be relevant. You can ask: "1) Would your religious beliefs have any bearing on the actions you would take in office? and 2) if so, how?
2. Focus on policy questions. That's what matters.
3. Personal belief questions don't matter unless it will impact their policies.
4. Don't try to make them accountable to everything that anyone around them (or who supports them) says. Allow for degrees of separation.
5. But, ask about the Jeremiah Wrights. Those who have clearly impacted the candidate are fair for questioning.
6. But, even though it is fair game, make sure you understand the context. i.e. is it normal in the context of church or theological community.
7. Know what the language means. i.e. If they feel called to do something that doesn't mean that they have had a direct message from God to take over America.
8. Know the difference between their cultural language and code words that they may use to win supporters.
9. Stop using the word "devout" it doesn't mean anything. Be more specific.
10. Be consistent and don't discriminate.*

*Note: all of this is my trying to distill it down, if you want more clarification, read what she wrote.

So, what do you think of these rules? Do you agree? What would you add?