Representing 38% of all voters, white men represent the second largest block in the American electorate, after white females. It is these 97 million white males to whom the Republican Party owes it electoral success in five out of the last seven presidential campaigns.

The reason is simple: White males have abandoned the Democratic Party in droves. While the liberal media consistently depict the gender gap as a Republican liability, in fact, the gap has long worked to the advantage of the G.O.P. This media misportrayal is the subject of David Paul Kuhn’s recent book, The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma.

For years, the Democratic Party was stitched together by an unlikely amalgam of Catholics, blue-collar workers, and southerners. But in 1968 the Party imposed racial and sex quotas on its national convention delegations. It took only four years for the new-found coalition of feminists, Blacks, and ideological radicals to displace the union bosses and party hacks.

In the 1972 election the Dems pinned their presidential hopes on anti-war candidate George McGovern. But he was soon caricatured as the “candidate of the three As: acid, abortion, and amnesty.” Needless to say, Richard Nixon won in a historic landslide.

In 1976 Jimmy Carter campaigned on the basis of his military experience, religious faith, and business acumen. But on Inauguration Day the newly-elected Leader of the Free World nearly groveled in front of his audience: “your strength can compensate for my weakness, and your wisdom can help to minimize my mistakes.”

Seen as timid and ineffective, he was routed from office four years later by the ebullient Ronald Reagan, the former cowboy actor.

In 1984 the Democrats fielded Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro. By then working-class men viewed the Dems as effete mother hens. No surprise, Reagan won 525 electoral votes to Mondale’s 13.

The most hilarious moment of the 1988 campaign belonged to Michael Dukakis – that’s the day he donned a combat helmet and popped his head from the turret of an M-1 battle tank. And when a debate question failed to evoke even a hint of outrage about his wife Kitty being raped, his defeat was assured.

These Democratic candidates failed to exemplify the virtues of chivalry, strength, and grit. But it was president Bill Clinton who, embracing the radical feminist agenda, openly stiffed the male electorate.

During the first two years of his hen-pecked presidency, Bill handed over domestic policy to wife Hillary. In short order she installed Donna Shalala at Health and Human Services, Norma Cantu at the Department of Education, and Janet Reno at Justice. Soon thousands of poor fathers were being jailed for non-payment of child support, college men found their athletic teams disbanded, and the Violence Against Women Act was signed into law.

And while middle-class White Men were struggling to cope by stagflation and the extinction of millions of blue-collar jobs, the liberal-left lampooned them as hopelessly out of step with the gender liberation crusade.

No surprise that in the 1994 elections the “angry white male” came out of the woodwork and handed control of both houses of Congress to the Republicans. Steven Stark would later write in the Atlantic that “Bill Clinton’s Administration has, fairly or not, come to symbolize an attack on men and masculinity as ‘problems’ to be overcome.”

When New Age Sensitive Guy Al Gore launched his campaign, it didn’t help that he had to hire feminist Naomi Wolf to advise him how to become a “Beta male.” After Gore came out against gun ownership, George Bush won the white male vote by an astonishing 27% margin.

Author Kuhn reveals the outcome of elections hinges on whether the candidate projects an inward strength of character, conveys a rugged sense of self-sufficiency, and is strong on national security. With the Democrats widely viewed as the “mommy party,” the Republicans have a decided edge in this department.

And referring to an antipathy that modern liberals still refuse to acknowledge, Kuhn notes, “For some 40 years, phases like ‘the Man,’ ‘male chauvinist pig,’ ‘white male privilege,’ ‘dead white males,’ ‘angry white male,’ and the actions behind them have led to an entire vocabulary of blaming white men for the nation’s worst ills.”

Sizing up the current crop of Democratic candidates, Kuhn sees little hope. “The irony of the 2008 election is that Democrats have candidates who can win, but the party remains stuck in its passions rather than its pragmatism,” Kuhn concedes.

So as the 2008 presidential campaign comes into focus, will the Democrats stage an abrupt about-face and embrace the lessons of the past? Or will the Republicans continue to dominate in presidential politics?

Christmastime evokes thoughts and memories of caroling, laughing with family, and reflecting on the true meaning of Christmas. The birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ.  What precious way to spend the holiday season than to listen to the many carols exalting and extolling our Lord and Savior?

Various songs heralding our Lord’s arrival, eggnog, candy canes, various spices filling the air…mistletoe, can you feel the warmth in the air?

“Have yourself a Merry Little Christmas…Let your heart be light…”, that carol conveys a sense of well-being. But that is not what is happening in our society. We should have a happy Christmas, not a stress filled one.

This time of year is truly a time to relax, not fret. A time to calm down and step back from the fray. We should avoid the hassles that come with this life and escape to allow the Lord Jesus Christ to refresh us, and, to put our focus on what really matters. 

Everyone does it…we get caught up in the non-essential part of life and forget to focus on the important. I’ve had to step back and allow myself a break from time to time. Then and only then will we be able to see the big picture and put priorities in place. It isn’t everyday run of the mill errands and problems that should grab our attention, but time with family and loved ones.

Material items don’t matter

The mad dash to the store to buy up the latest gadgets and technology isn’t what Christmas is about.  We are missing the point when we do that. The retail stores are taking advantage of this time as people rush to make sure that everyone on their list will be satisfied with material items come December 25th. No, our most precious gift that we can give to one another is ourselves. Our time. Our love.

The human being yearns for connection with loved ones.

As our economy remains uncertain these days (due to foreclosures and job layoffs), and there is mounting pressure on parents to make their kid(s) happy, we drown ourselves in worry and stress. That isn’t what the Lord Jesus Christ wishes for mankind.

We celebrate Christmas…a time when God comes in human form and LIBERATES His people from the stress of this world. He wants us to focus on HIM.

In the Lord Jesus Christ, you will find true Joy, you will find true Peace, you will find true Love.

As I’ve said, I have had to take some time off to put life into perspective. We all have our commitments.  But the main commitment we should make is to those who hold a special place in our heart. Jesus should be first…He is our first Love.

Then those who have had a wonderful impact on our lives, those who are close to your heart after the Lord….show those people…let those people know how much you love and appreciate them.

These are people who have made your life worth living.  

Can you now see how frivolous and silly it is to run after material items? The fun is not to be had in trying to beat someone to the latest sales during Christmastime. Why risk getting trampled to save a couple of dollars?

The lasting and pleasant memories are those memories that reflect the eternal. And material items are not eternal and they don’t last long.

People.

They are eternal beings.

The love of Almighty God is eternal. He sent His only Son, Jesus Christ, to rescue you…

Let’s remember that this Christmas.

*Joy to the World, the Lord is Come:

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/j/o/joyworld.htm 

*Have yourself a Merry Little Christmas:

http://www.the-north-pole.com/carols/have.html

Like you, I watched the O.J. Simpson trial and witnessed the aftermath at the local high school when the “not guilty” verdict was read. I saw firsthand the audacity and hypocrisy of the black students that went around slapping white students in the head and face, daring them to retaliate in any form. Are you outraged? I AM! I watched the riots in Los Angeles as a white truck driver was ripped out of his vehicle, beaten almost to death with a brick exploding on impact (literally) as it was deliberately thrown into his face.

Are you outraged? I AM!

I watched riots unfold in Seattle, Michigan, Ohio, etc., over the last several years when whites were targeted and violently attacked in the middle of the street with no help and no outcry from the black leaders or white communities.

Are you outraged? I AM!

I watched the assault on women in Central Park in 2000 when hundreds of blacks and Hispanics surrounded women in the park and began dousing them with water, then ripping their clothes off, and finally assaulting them in broad daylight while hundreds of their cohorts looked on & joined in!

Are you outraged? I AM!

I watched as Hurricane Katrina devastated so many areas within this country, yet virtually only one group of people used a natural disaster as a catalyst to enable them to break the law with no fear of reprisal from the law, or any individuals. What you probably saw on the news was a homogenized version of what was really going on in the streets of New Orleans; you may have seen a quick peek at the looting (which is a sanitized way of saying “stealing”) “for survival’s sake,” but I’ll bet you didn’t see or even realize that whites were being targeted by the masses of blacks! I’ll bet you didn’t realize that little white girls and women were being beaten, gang raped, and murdered in the middle of the streets or dragged into abandoned homes. Anyone (including other blacks) that tried to stop these vicious and incomprehensible acts were killed or beaten. I’ll bet you didn’t know that supply trucks, aid workers, ambulances, etc.. were targeted and the drivers and passengers were beaten, raped, or killed all for the purpose of taking the supplies that were meant to help ALL of the victims in ravaged areas of New Orleans. I’ll bet you didn’t know that elite military units were sent in to “neutralize” rogue black thugs and gangs that were committing 100% of these audacious crimes with zero media coverage!

Are you outraged? I AM!

While Kanye West was proclaiming that our President “hates black people” he apparently overlooked the fact that there were lots of white people that were stranded as well (the reason you didn’t see more of them is because they were too busy helping others and not proudly stealing everything possible, and of course a large majority were hiding for obvious reasons). He also seemed to forget that according to statistics, black people are the ones who hate black people! After all, it’s not the evil white man that commits the overwhelming majority of crime within black neighborhoods. It’s not the evil white man that calls blacks “sell outs” or “white-wash’ or “Uncle Tom” when proper English replaces Ebonics, or fitted khakis and polo shirts replace Andre the Giant’s wardrobe, or if jazz or classical or country music is the preference over rap and R&B. It’s not the evil white man that is overrunning black neighborhoods with drugs, weapons & sexual depravity.

Are you outraged? I AM!

When Black people stage a march, rally or protest for any reason including blatant anti-white rallies in which the language is undeniably as offensive to whites as any Klan gathering would be to Louis Farrakhan, do you ever see white people rioting and destroying their own community, targeting, beating and or killing black people all due to their disagreement with the mere presence of blacks in a white neighborhood? It’s so ingrained in our minds as a Nation that it’s somehow not shocking or seen as hypocritical when we hear about blacks attacking whites for no reason.

Are you outraged? I AM!

Let’s examine the recent Neo-Nazi protest that took place in Ohio. (Let me stop here and emphasize that I TOTALLY condemn the Neo-Nazi organizations of this world, or any other group for that matter that preaches HATE against an entire race for any reason) The Neo-Nazi rally was there to speak out peacefully against the overwhelming black on white crime in this country that the media ignores. There was no violence threatened or implemented & no weapons were present, yet for some reason, almost on cue, hundreds of black residents within the community began throwing rocks at the protesters and the police, then proceeded to break into nearby buildings and business’s, stealing everything in sight, smashing anything of no value, and finally setting fire to the building. Can you imagine if that happened to the New Black Panther party if they were peacefully speaking out at the local trailer park? It would be national headlines for months, demonstrating “the continued hate and violence that whites subject blacks to within this Country.” But let’s all stay objective; you never see that type of behavior within a white neighborhood. Are you outraged? I AM! Then there’s the “Juneteenth” celebration, which is growing in popularity. This year, whites and non-blacks were targeted for merely being in close proximity to some angry blacks. In fact, one man was beaten to death by a mob of blacks that attacked him when his car accidentally bumped into a 2 year old black girl that was walking in the middle of the street along with hundreds of others. The child was not injured at all, but the man was stomped to death by dozens of bystanders.

Are you outraged? I AM!

And how about hate crimes? There’s a common belief among blacks and whites that whites are behind the bulk of hate crimes that are committed within this country. For example, when a black stripper recently reported that she had been raped by a group of all-white Lacrosse players from Duke University, the entire country jumped on the bandwagon, beating the drum of racial oppression in its highest form, accusing the young men as being “privileged savages” for taking advantage of this lovely young lady simply trying to make it in this country with such opposition around every corner. There were numerous rallies and protests held at Duke University led by some of their own professors, their peers (both black and white) and of course, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were ever-present. The State District Attorney flat-out accused these young men on National Television of being guilty and the entire country watched as the lives of these young men were torn apart without a trial, or one shred of evidence to substantiate the allegations.

Are you outraged? I AM!

What if I told you a story about a young black couple that was recently carjacked at gunpoint by a group of white males who took the couple back to their place where they sodomized the man in front of the woman, then cut off his penis, shot him in the head and finally burned his body before dumping his body on the side of the road. As for the woman; she was gang-raped repeatedly over the course of several days by at least four men, then her breasts were cut off while she was still alive, then urinated on, then had bleach poured down her throat to erase the DNA evidence, then she was shot in the head and her battered body was then dismembered and stuffed into a trash can. Would you say this was a hate crime? Are you surprised to learn that this crime happened less than one year ago and received virtually zero media coverage? If the Duke Case made national headlines, how come this story didn’t make international headlines? Because it was a young white couple named Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian from Knoxville TN. http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/newsom.asp

Are you outraged? I AM!

It’s also interesting that if there’s even a whisper in the wind that there’s a potentially “All-White” establishment such as a school or college, golf course or country club, church or corporation, even a neighborhood, it makes national news with the arbiters of justice (Sharpton & Jackson) leading the charge and preaching the continued injustices being inflicted on the poor, neglected, and justifiably angry black community due to the hundreds of years of atrocities that continue to plague this Nation. And as these “humble ambassadors” of the poor, voiceless minorities, step into their $100,000 limousine, sporting their $8,000 Armani suits, $1,200 Kenneth Cole shoes and $50,000 Rolexes, they check their $600 PDAs to find out where the next injustice is being committed.

Are you outraged? I AM!

Meanwhile, the local Black Methodist church, across the street from the Black Entertainment Television studio, is hosting auditions for the upcoming Miss Teen Black USA and Miss Black America pageant. Of course, the turnout isn’t what they expected due to the Black College Reunion and the National Association of Black Journalists and the Black Entrepreneurs Conference that was going on the same weekend. And with Kwanzaa coming up, as well as Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Malcolm X’s Birthday, Juneteenth, Emancipation Day, Black History Month, African-American Day Parade, African-American Festival of Dance, Black Cowboy Parade, Black Poetry Day, Buffalo Soldiers Commemorations, Kuumba Festival, Pan African Film & Arts Festival, Rosa Parks Day, Black Gospel Awards, Umoja Karamu, United Negro College Fund Evening of Stars, meetings of the National Society of Black Engineers, National Conference of Black Mayors, Black Enterprise Entrepreneurs Conference, National Conference on Black Philanthropy, 1000 Black Men Annual Conference, Rainbow / Push Coalition Annual Conference, United Negro College Fund Annual Black and White Ball, Annual Black Executive Exchange Program, African American Heritage Festival, African American Business Summit…

Keep reading…

The National Association of Minority Media Executives, National Black Optometry Association Convention, National Black Arts Festival, National Black Chamber of Commerce Annual Conference, Natl. Assoc. of Black Hotel Owners, National Black Arts Festival, National Urban League Annual Conference, National Association of Negro Business and Professional Women’s Clubs, National Black Theater Festival, Organization of Black Airline Pilots, National Association of Black Journalists Annual Convention, Association of Black Psychologists Annual Conference, National Black Prosecutors Association, Annual Black Data Processors Association, National African American School Board Member Association Summit, Black Enterprise/Pepsi Golf & Tennis Challenge, National African American Insurance Association, National Black MBA Association, National Organization of Minority Architects, Afro-American Historical and Genealogical Society Annual Conference, National Alliance of Black School Educators 33rd Annual Conference, Annual Conferences of the National Society of Black Physicists.

Are you outraged? I AM!

Are you getting the hypocrisy yet? Let’s use an even playing field, let’s stop using the “African American” term which immediately conveys exclusivity and furthers the racial divide by constantly reminding everyone that “we’re not American” but “African” American and we demand that the white boy over there stop dissrespeckin’ us by referring to us as “black” cause me and my niggaz won’t stand fo’ such ignorance!

ARE YOU OUTRAGED? I AM! I AM… A BLACK MAN!

This just might be an alliteration maven’s wildest dream…

“Oprah to Join Obama on Campaign Trail in Early Primary States,” was the title of the Associated Press article of November 26.

“Des Moines, Iowa – Oprah Winfrey will join Democrat Barack Obama again on the campaign trail, this time visiting the early contest states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, the candidate’s campaign said Monday.”

My first impression was to consider: “Is this Obama wagging the celebrity or Winfrey wagging the candidate?” Although Oprah Winfrey’s public relations schema allows for far more temporal latitude than someone running for President, and despite her already being able to retire hundreds of times over, her enterprises do live and die by public opinion. In the final analysis, if her life became uninteresting or sordid enough, her career would tumble groaning to the ground like a clay-footed bronze statue à la the one time sex kitten-turned psycho bovine, Britney Spears.

I could accuse the billionaire Winfrey, whom I believe has good intentions and has served to empower some people, of supporting Obama simply because he’s black, but that wouldn’t be fair. Were that true, she would have supported Alan Keyes in his presidential bids of 1996 and 2000, and would be supporting him now.

Oprah is supporting Obama because he’s a lefty, and probably because he’s charming and well-spoken. Brains have never been a prerequisite for the attaining of wealth, so I imagine she’s bought into the lies that many black Americans, successful and otherwise, have embraced. This includes supporting black leaders who are marginally ethical and borderline militants because whitey would have them back on the plantation in a New York minute if he thought he could get away with it.

Taking off on the campaign trail with Obama does seem like the perfect diversion and means by which Winfrey might defray the ongoing decidedly disadvantageous publicity that’s come her way of late due to the sexual abuse scandal at her $46 million Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls in Henley-on-Klip, South Africa (which she started with best friend and business partner Gayle King, editor-at-large for O, The Oprah Magazine). This truly repugnant mess involved a female matron at the school who allegedly abused seven school students, one as young as thirteen. So, having launched her investigation at the school and seeing that the appropriate charges were filed against the alleged perpetrator, she’s now refocused on getting Obama the nomination, which is far more sexy from a media standpoint than some dusty, nappy-headed Third-World schoolgirls getting groped.

Smart move.

Now, I’m not in any way attempting to minimize the suffering of Ms. Winfrey’s early life (her admitted childhood sexual abuse); that would just be low. I also think it’s unfortunate and perversely ironic that such a thing should occur at a school founded by a survivor of sexual abuse. However, Oprah is a powerful celebrity now, and her school debacle did make international headlines and did reflect on her, despite the fact that sexual abuse among black South Africans is as common as supper.

As I’ve mentioned before, Obama hardly needs to fear any (likely nonexistent) doctored photos of him with farm animals coming out of Hillary Clinton’s camp. Obama has serious weak spots where mainstream voters are concerned, the smoke-and-mirrors media hype apropos how he’s running away with America’s heart notwithstanding.

So having someone as well-heeled, popular and powerful in the entertainment industry as well as influential amongst millions of American television viewers couldn’t be better for Obama. He’s smart enough to know that his recent bump in the polls was just that: A bump, and a small one to boot. His timing at bringing Oprah on board couldn’t have been more perfect from a standpoint of keeping his momentum going. The stronger he can look by the primaries the better, especially if some of the unsavory aspects of the man’s affiliations that are already known begin to come to the fore.

Smart move – or was it..?

“American voters are not looking for a celebrity or talk show sidekick to lead them. Obama is an intelligent and thoughtful potential President, but Winfrey’s imprimatur is unlikely to convey those traits to many undecided voters.

“In that respect, Winfrey’s events might even be — dare it be said — counterproductive.” – Why Oprah Won’t Help Obama, Mark Halperin, Time Magazine, November 26, 2007

That’s the other side of the coin, of course. While Oprah is popular, admired and wealthy, she’s not “one of us” vis-à-vis the perception of the American voter, regardless of party affiliation. Like many celebrities, she’s lived on a vastly different plane of existence since she was a relatively young woman. One cannot understate nor comprehend the difference between the world of the uber-celebrity and the average American unless one has either been there or been in close and regular proximity to it.

Not to boast, but I have – and it’s very freaky. For all the criticism directed at the inordinate political influence celebrities can wield, Time’s Halperin just may be right. Pop culture devotees don’t decide elections.

General Keith Kerr IS a general! Our purpose here at Newsbusters is to chronicle and expose the leftist media bias that infests their coverage of the news, that is true. But, I feel compelled to also urge that our efforts be as true and guided by integrity as possible. I want to take a case that many on “our side” are taking up, claiming that it is an example of media bias and leftist “lies.” Unfortunately, it is not a good hook upon which to hang our hat because, while it may be a confusing issue, it is not an example of any bias and if we insist on making this an issue it will make us look petty and uninformed. This is the case where people are claiming that the “gay CNN general” is not really a general. In fact, if his rank is that of general in the State forces, he is and can properly be called a general everywhere he goes.

General Keith Kerr was the Hillary Clinton campaign operative that CNN planted in the GOP debates last month. There has been raised some confusion on his “real” rank. Yes it is true that his official U.S. Army rank was never higher than Colonel. It is also true that he held the rank of General in the Army of the State of California and it is also true that he has no battlefield experience.

Here is part of his bio on SDLN:

Brigadier General Keith H. Kerr entered the U. S. Army as a Private at Fort Ord, California, on 21 September 1953. After completing basic and advanced training, he served with the 513th Military Intelligence Group in Germany during the Cold War. Upon release from active duty, he continued to serve in the U. S. Army Reserve and was commissioned a First Lieutenant in June 1960.

He retired from the U. S. Army Reserve in 1986 with the rank of Colonel and was commissioned in the California State Military Reserve (California National Guard) on 15 March 1986, where his assignments were Inspector General and later, Chief of Staff. He was appointed Commanding General, Northern Area Command, CSMR, with headquarters at Alameda Naval Supply Depot, Alameda, CA and promoted to Brigadier General on 21 February 1991. He held this position until reassigned to State Headquarters on 31 July 1995. General Kerr retired on 1 June 1996 after 43 years of service to the United States and the State of California.

Now, here is the thing folks. Kerr is rightfully called a general despite that his official Federal rank was never higher than a Colonel. It is true that he was not a General in the U.S. Army, it is true that his rank of general is only a State rank, and it might be true that he cannot officially wear his state rank of general outside the state of California. But, again, he is still a general.

There are at least two examples that everyone will be familiar with that will explain this fact. One from history, and one from current practice.

General George Armstrong Custer — example #1

George Custer was addressed as General from the time he became one of the youngest generals of the civil war until his rather untimely death at the battle of Little Bighorn. But, he was never officially more than a Lt. Colonel in the US Army. His rank of general was what they then called a “breveted” rank. That meant, he had the title, the duties and the respect of the position, but he never had the actual, official rank. The rank of general for George A. Custer was honorary and temporary. He attained it because of the need for someone to fill the role in a time of war and it was also bestowed for his exemplary work on the battlefield. But it was never made permanent.

Still, Custer was galled general for the rest of his life.

William Jefferson Clinton (and all ex-presidents) — example #2

Have you ever heard an interviewer address Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton as “Mr. president”? It might rankle you — but then the very fact they ever were a president should rankle any true American — but it is proper to call these men “Mr. president.” They were presidents, after all.

Highest position attained

Now, here is the reason Custer was always a general, even as his rank was never official, and why Clinton is still addressed as “Mr. president.” It is the practice of respectful, proper etiquette that a person should always be addressed by the rank and/or title of his highest station attained in life, even if he no longer holds that position. It’s just a matter of respect for the position, if not necessarily the person in question.

Conclusion

So, this means that calling Keith Kerr a general is a proper way to address the man, even if it isn’t an official Federal U.S. Army rank. We don’t have to respect the person to respect the position. That is why we still call Clinton “Mr. president” and why Lt. Colonel George Armstrong Custer was called general until that fateful day on the plains. It might be an ages old practice, but it isn’t one we should break just to make political points.

Now, outrage is a good and necessary thing. It helps us direct and marshal our forces to resist an enemy. But when we use our outrage it must be for real and legitimate reasons lest we become like our enemy. So, I would like to warn everyone that calling Keith Kerr a colonel only makes us look small and not very informed. There is no conspiracy here. Let this one go.

Lawmakers in Washington need to be alarmed and alert as they consider the nominee to be the next attorney general.  From an objective external perspective the United States Department of Justice seems to be adrift and to be quickly losing its way in the routine prosecution of ordinary transnational crime. 

A clear consequence of this loss of compass is that the DOJ is systematically undermining the extradition treaties and bilateral international relationships, painstakingly built over the last century, that are the foundation for the critical campaign against globalized, non-terrorist related crime.

It has not always been this way.  The United States has been instrumental in the creation of many international conventions upon which the international rule of law is founded.    Some analysts point to the morally corrosive effect of the 1992 United States Supreme Court decision in United States v. Alvarez-Machain, as a point when the U.S. began to lose its way. 

This ruling reaffirmed that a US Criminal Court has jurisdiction to try a person
who has been brought before it even if by forcible abduction from a sovereign foreign state and without compliance with the applicable bilateral extradition treaty and the domestic law of that state. 

Others point to the fact that the DOJ has actually embraced and adopted the Alvarez-Machain doctrine as a matter of its own enforcement policy which now explicitly
authorizes front line United States Attorneys to consider using such extra legal means for obtaining the return of a wanted foreign person to the US, even in non-terrorist cases, albeit subject to approval from the Washington Department of Justice Office of International Affairs.  Whatever the cause, the result of this policy has been an appalling trail of destroyed good will and undermined confidence.

Consider the record from a Canadian perspective.  In April 2001, in United States v. Cobb, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a judicial stay of procedings of a U.S. extradition application on the grounds of abuse of  process because U.S. law enforcement officials made statements to the media threatening that unless Mr. Cobb waived extradition and voluntarily returned to the United States for trial steps would be taken to ensure that upon his eventual return to the U.S. he would be placed in a particular prison setting where he would be exposed to homosexual rape.

In April 2002, in United States v. Licht, a Canadian Superior Court Judge stayed another US extradition request, again on abuse of process grounds, because a civilian DEA agent had illegally entered Canada in order to further a drug investigation of Mr. Licht contrary to Canadian law.

More recently, on September 14, 2006, in United States v. Gavin Tollman, another Canadian Superior Court judge stayed yet another US extradition request as an abuse of the Canadian legal process because the involved AUSA had induced Canadian officials to help to obtain Mr. Tollman¹s removal from Canada without first complying with the Canada-US Extradition Treaty.  The judge found a course of deliberate and egregious misconduct and that the AUSA in question had been deceptive and disingenuous.

Then consider matters from a United Kingdom perspective.  In a remarkable
decision issued on June 28, 2007, in United States v. Stanley Tollman, a
British judge dismissed a U.S. extradition request as unjust and oppressive.
He also made explicit findings that the same AUSA as in the related Canadian
case, Stanley Okula Jr., had given untruthful evidence during the course of
the UK extradition hearing itself.  This is the same prosecutor who was
singled out by a Manhattan District Court Judge as having been economical
with the truth in his judgment in the high profile KPMG case.

International mutual legal assistance premised upon the mutual respect of
sovereign nations and animated by the aspiration to the international rule
of law is the necessary precondition to the fight against transnational
crime of all types.  Yet the commitment of sovereign nations to mutual legal
assistance, like the reputation of an individual, is hard won but easily
lost.

On the eve of confirmation hearings for the next attorney general of the
United States Congress ought to ask some essential questions.  How has the
Department of Justice so strayed from its mission that a single AUSA could
earn the enmity of three independent judges, in three different countries,
in three separate cases?

Has this particular AUSA, been disciplined for his misbehaviour?  How can the DOJ allow a single prosecutor to harm extradition relations with two of the USA¹s greatest allies and trading partners? Will those in Congress charged with selecting the next chief law officer of
the greatest and most powerful nation in human history ensure that the
candidate selected is committed to re-establishing a culture within DOJ that
reasserts respect for the sovereignty of nations, the vitality of treaties
between sovereign nations and to the international rule of law?

It does not overstate to assert that we are at a tipping point in human affairs.  Congressional leaders should make no mistake; history and the international community will judge them by their choice.