Brian Altenhofel's blog

Back when they were peddling this bill, Congress and the Obama Administration insisted that the individual mandate was not a tax.  However, they are now calling it a tax in their legal defense against the onslaught of lawsuits against it due to violations of the Commerce Clause.

Congress and Obama called the Commerce Clause claim "frivolous", yet now the government is claiming that the individual mandate is no longer an exercise of power under the Commerce Clause, but rather as a power of Congress to tax.  This goes directly against what they kept telling us.  Tell me, who is really surprised?

From the Denver Post:

A federal judge in Denver has ruled that the Stolen Valor Act is "facially unconstitutional" because it violates free speech, and he dismissed the criminal case against Rick Strandlof, a man who lied about being an Iraq war veteran.

U.S. District Judge Robert E. Blackburn issued his decision Friday and rejected the prosecution's argument that lying about having military medals dilutes their meaning and significance.

The case is United States v. Strandlof. I know that many will not agree with the Judge's decision, and consequently my opinion. I wholly agree with the decision here especially with the facts of the case.

(I apologize for previously referring to the Privileges OR Immunities clause as "Privileges AND Immunities". I went to public-k skool. You'll see why I apologize later.)

Prior to the introduction of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Bill of Rights applied only to the Federal government. The Fourteenth Amendment brought about the idea of "incorporation" of the Bill of Rights against the States.

Purists, that is those who believe that the Fourteenth Amendment (and others) is an absurdity, argue that the Fourteenth Amendment itself is against the idea that the founding fathers had for our Constitution.

From CNSNews.com:

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded $181,406 this year to a researcher at the University of Kentucky to study how cocaine enhances the sex drive of Japanese quail.

...

NIH spokesman Don Rabolvsky said that the research has value because many cases of HIV/AIDS are spread through drug-related sexual behavior.

Wow.  (Although, that's nothing compared to this.)

I've watched "For Liberty" multiple times, and I must say that it really needs to be available in the Documentary section on Netflix.  According to the "For Liberty" website, Netflix needs to hear from you in the next step of the content acquisition process.  You can call Netflix at 1-866-716-0414, or post on their Facebook wall.

According to an article from Time Magazine, a U.S. attack on Iran appears to be back on the table.  Not surprisingly, the commenters over at Huffington Post are already calling it another war by George W. Bush.  Someone needs to ask them how it smells in there.

Oklahoma State Treasurer Scott Meacham announced today that Fiscal Year 2010 showed the largest decrease in revenue in state history.  Meacham did say that "all signs point toward better times ahead."  Obviously, he is very short-sighted.

Why do I say that?  Because the budget (is that what they really call that mess?) for 2011 relies upon nearly a billion dollars in funds that are only available that one time.  That means that we are already facing a $1 Billion deficit for 2012, and we have barely even gotten into 2011!

And if State Question 744 passes, you can add another billion dollars to that deficit.  Who elects these people?

In United States v. Skoien, the 7th Circuit upheld the prohibition of possession of firearms for citizens charged with a misdemeanor of domestic violence.  The majority opinion cited Heller and McDonald.

On page 4 of the majority opinion, the Court offered the following interpretation of Heller:

“...the Second Amendment creates individual rights, one of which is keeping operable hand-guns at home for self-defense. What other entitlements the Second Amendment creates, and what regulations legislatures may establish, were left open. The opinion is not a comprehensive code; it is just an explanation for the Court’s disposition.”

A friend of mine has a surveying blog.  He doesn't post much, but when he does it is usually pretty interesting.  Here's an excerpt from his latest about the survey mortgage inspection that is done when you purchase a house in Oklahoma:

[Administrative Code] requires the following language to appear on the face of the report:

“…it is not to be relied upon for the establishment of fence, building or other future improvement lines..”

“The accompanying sketch is a true representation of the conditions that were found…”

According to the McCarville Report, the City of Chicago's new gun ban is in defiance of the recent rulings in McDonald and Heller.

It permits people to have guns inside their homes but forbids them from taking their firearms outside, even onto the porch, into the yard or the garage.

It also calls for prospective gun owners to take a class and receive firearm training. Chicago residents must leave the city to buy guns because the ordinance prohibits gun sales in the city.

I have not read the ordinance, so I may change my position later.  But if these paragraphs from the post are true, then it does not necessarily defy the Supreme Court.