This will be brief. The federal courts have absolutely no constitutional authority to make rulings on gay marriage. DOMA was unconstitutional and so is any decision by the federal courts.The laws of marriage are solely the responsibility of the states and the people.
I don’t know if Travis County, Texas has a flag or not, but either way they should consider creating one with a hammer and sickle with a red background. After all, that would be very appropriate for a county with officials who use the power of the legal system to punish political enemies. The two statutes, Texas Penal Code, Sect 39.02 and Sect 36.03 that Perry was indicted under clearly do not apply to his actions.
As in the Hutchinson and Delay cases, this case will end in another embarrassment for Travis County. Bailey was found not guilty after only minutes of deliberation, and Delay’s conviction was overturned by an appeals court that issued a judgement of acquittal. Liberals are very simply communists without the ability to murder their political enemies, so they do the next best thing….send’m to jail.
The response by blacks in Ferguson, Missouri is just another call by a bunch of racists who demand justice for Michael Brown by demanding a lynching for the white cop who killed him, even before the facts come out…he’s white, so he’s guilty is their belief. They are demanding this in typical black fashion by destroying the property of those who had nothing to do with the Brown killing, and they wonder why blacks are stereotyped by the other races, and why so many blacks are in prison.
Well not so fast you racists for do you remember the Duke lacrosse team? Whatever injustices some white persons committed against some black persons in the past has nothing to do with the officer involved in this shooting. There is no grandfather clause that makes all whites living today guilty for the actions of whites who came before. Everyone deserves justice in this whole sorry episode, and we have a race industry in high gear that isn’t interested in justice. If the Officer killed Brown unnecessarily, then he should go to jail, but destroying the personal property of those who had nothing to do with Brown’s death certainly is an injustice, and is a scene fit for the movie “Jumanji.”
They want all the facts to come out about the officer, but want to suppress the facts about Michael Brown. In particular the fact that he committed a strong armed robbery of a convenience store. They didn’t want this video shown because it shows that Brown was not a little saint. He in fact was a man, a man looking for trouble, and the release of the strong armed robbery video is extremely important in showing Brown’s state of mind and also that he in fact was not a saint.
Obama has ignored his responsibility to protect the legal citizens of the United States from the invasion of illegal aliens from the south. He has fostered a policy of allowing illegal entry into the United States from the south, but now wants to claim that the law prevents him from immediately sending the recent invaders back home, pronto. So, he wants to ignore the law in order to allow such invasion to occur and up to the point that he can, then claim sanction of the law that prevents him from correcting his previous ignoring of the law. In a nut shell he allowed the illegal activity to occur until it became legal—how handy.
Actually, the law in question does not even apply to this recent invasion. The children who are part of this recent invasion are not here because of trafficking of any sort. They are here because they think they will be allowed to stay once here, and who can fault them for thinking in such a way, after all Obama has encouraged it.
Secondly, many of these so-called children are not of the teddy bear age group who came crawling across Mexico after mommy and daddy strapped a bottle and spare diapers to their backs and sadly embraced as their youngster scurried off into the sunset, but are of the give “me my gun so i can meet up with my MS13 pals” age. Also, from much of the video I have seen, many of these unaccompanied children are in fact adults. I guess they are classified as adult children.
So the tactic goes this way. Liberals talk about this invasion as if it is nothing but a bunch of poor little unfortunate babies who constantly cry for their mommy and daddy. Then say any who oppose the invasion are evil child eaters.
The answer is very simple……send’m back. They have no right to be here, and we real Americans have no responsibility to allow them in. If they want in, they can apply for entry via the immigration system like many others have done before them. The immigration system is broken, but only because the laws are ignored, except of course those laws that can be incorrectly invoked in order to facilitate invasion.
C.S. Lewis had the most spot on quote I think I have ever heard.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I think this quote sums up a great deal the liberal mindset, but I think it does leave out something else. It is apparent to me that Liberals possess a god complex. Why do I say that? Well, Liberals believe that they can engineer the perfect economy which will end the unequal distribution of income. They believe they can create an economic system controlled by the Federallies that is capable of herding the trillions of economic decisions that over 300 million Americans make on a daily basis to the corral of economic fairness. No human, or group of humans are capable of such an endeavor.
Liberals also believe they can alter the currents of the skies and the tides of the seas. They attempted to scare everyone with the notion of global warming in order to implement their freedom and pocket book robbing environmental policies, but they ran into a big problem - there was no global warming. They were then forced to change the scare from global warming to climate change. By changing the scare tactic to climate change they were then actually freer to blame everything on it. They have blamed climate change for forest fires, too much snow, too little snow, too much rain, too little rain, low temperatures, and high temperatures. I remember a few years ago that there was a drought going on in Florida I believe, and a few hundred miles away there was flooding in the Mississippi River basin which of course according to our liberal gods was the result of climate change. They actually believe that the climate can discriminate so drastically between areas so close.
Liberals like to think of themselves as the great thinkers, logical and scientific, but are the first to ignore the most important way to learn…….history. Liberals live their pathetic little existence here on earth and presume to know what normal weather is. They ignore the fact that the world is millions of years old and has had periods that were warmer and periods that were much colder than now. When it comes to the economy they ignore the fact that no country, no government, no group of persons, and no person have ever engineered and managed an economy with success. All such endeavors have been complete failures.
The Liberal god complex very simply is an infatuation with eugenics. Climate eugenics, economic eugenics, and abortion.
I don’t know if he is or isn’t. What I do know is that what he said wasn’t racist – he was factually incorrect. Any person who knows anything about the family life of slaves knows that there was none. Slave families were torn apart with no more thought than was given to taking a calve from its mother. Bundy’s comparison of the two eras of black families would not work even if slave families were as he stated. The overriding point Bundy was trying to make was not about the slave family, but about how far too many black families today have become slaves of the government. That was the correct side of his point.
In the end, this doesn’t change how tyrannical the federalies response was to his disobedience in regards to his refusal to pay them for grazing rights. He said he will gladly pay the state of Nevada for the rights, just not the federalies. I did hear on Hannity’s radio show one Nevada state legislator say that the county where all of this occurred actually purchased the grazing rights from the federalies in the 90′s.
The latest FDA food labeling decision regarding food labeling is unconstitutional. The federal government has no authority to force food retailers to include nutrition labeling on their products. This overreach by the federallies is another example of how this country is becoming a fascist tyranny, and indicative of how Obamacare will be a complete failure.
The lawsuit being filed by the Obama administration against S&P for their ratings of colateralized debt obligations is a perfect example of a tyrannical administration looking for scapegoats, and looking to score political points. It is a sad situation that in a country like ours that the legal system is used in the same way as that of communist countries……. to victimize others for political gain.
Obama, like all tyrants will use whatever power he has at his disposal to destroy our freedoms in order to implement his vision of fairness. He doesn’t care about the results of his tyranny. He only cares that he believes it to be fair. Everything he talks about doing he always adds the word “fair” or some such word. He tries to sound so reasonable when he talks about stealing our freedoms, but closer analysis shows that Obama, like all tyrants is a smooth talker, but if you really listen to what he says, you will realize he is full of it, and full of himself.
His constant denegration of those he dislikes is an affront to the very system that created the greatest country on the planet – at least up to now, and until he gets done with it. This lawsuit is not an attempt to place blame for the housing meltdown, it is an attack on free market economics and our very freedoms.
Lately, there has been a lot of discussion about Lincoln, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the Civil War. He is proclaimed a hero, decisive, the man who saved the United States of America. I used to believe those things also without putting any thought into it – It was just a given for me. I however, have since changed my mind completely. I would say 180 degrees completely. Lincoln has moved from the top of my Best President list, to the very bottom. I can no longer deify a man who is responsible for the deaths of 600 to 700 thousand human beings. The maiming of hundreds of thousands more, the destruction of families, lives and property. We just drive by these numbers like fence posts. We see them, but pay them no mind.
Let’s look at it in today’s terms. The population of the United States is a little over 300 million. Which is about 10 times the population in 1860, so all we need to do is multiply the war numbers times 10. I dare you to try to just drive by these numbers. 6 to 7 million dead. Several million maimed and wounded, hundreds of billions of property damage. Now, how many of you would be ok with this level of destruction if 17 states decided to secede. Is it so important to you for others to think like you, that you would condone this destruction.
When the Civil War is discussed, it is mostly around the subject of slavery. The war however, was not fought over, or because of slavery. The war was fought over and because of secession. But, wasn’t secession illegal and traitorous? The very simple answer is, No. Secession was constitutional in 1860, before 1860 and is constitutional to this day. No where in the Constitution is secession prohibited to the States. This country was founded on an act of secession, when our forefathers seceded from the British empire. I guess it’s a good thing Lincoln wasn’t around then, for he most certainly would have been a loyalist.
Lincoln should have never resorted to military force to bring the South back into the Union. Much of the South was poor and backwards, and they would have seen the North leave them behind economically. Their destiny was to be united with the North. He should have used diplomacy only, and let time work to bring the seceding states back. During this time, the Constitution could have been amended outlawing slavery, which the seceding states would have to agree to in order to be re-admitted to the Union. I believe that the seceding states would have returned in time, and if they didn’t, that would be their decision, their right of self-determination…not Lincoln’s.
Believe it or not, since the very beginning of this great republic there have been those who have desired to transfer as much power as possible from the states and individuals to federal politicians and judges. Starting all the way back to Hamilton’s unconstitutional bank where he made the argument to Washington that the new federal government had the authority to regulate the economy, making the bank constitutional, when in fact no such authority existed. Washington then consulted Jefferson about the bank idea. Jefferson stated that the bank was not an enumerated power, nor was it necessary and proper to carry out any of the enumerated powers, so therefore was unconstitutional. Jefferson’s understanding of the constitution was spot on, while Hamilton’s was wrought with amnesia for he had completely forgotten all about that war of independence thing a few years earlier and the reasons for it.
It’s very, very disturbing to me to hear so-called constitutional thinkers talk about the constitution in such haphazard and even reckless ways. They, just like those before them have turned the constitution into a mishmash of mangled words where up means down and left means right. They have reduced the constitution to a handful of meaningless phrases that completely distort the meaning of various parts of the constitution. Phrases such as the “general welfare ” clause, which is not a clause about general welfare, but instead a clause about taxation, how they are raised and what they can be spent on. Another distortion is the term “necessary and proper” also known as the “elastic” clause. which many seem to think this clause is there as some kind of catch-all. This clause, however only allows congress to do those things that are necessary and proper to carry into action powers that are listed in the constitution such as purchasing battle ships for the navy. The navy is a listed power, but buying battleships is not. Another famous distortion is the “supremecy clause” and the notion that all federal laws are supreme…….this could not be further from the truth. Two very important words that are never mentioned in the abbreviated version are “pursuant to”. In order for any federal law to be the supreme law of the land, it must be made pursuant to the constitution, which means it must be constitutional.
Another “Supreme” distortion is the doctrine of incorporation by which it has been contrived that the Bill of Rights applies not only to the federal government, but state and local governments, public schools and anything else the courts wish to apply them to. The United States Constitution applies only as described therein, and the state constitutions apply to the state governments and the other government entities such as counties, cities, and towns.
The United States Constitution does not require a law degree to understand, although it does require several readings and some research. The only correct reading of the Constitution is a literal reading for it actually requires very little “interpretation.” A literal reading of it, however, presents one major problem to those with devious motives toward it. It will give them few, to no avenues for such efforts.
God save the United States Constitution!!!!