If there’s a wrong way to run a state, California has figured it out. It is a train wreck of a progressive laboratory. And while Dems on the right coast idolize these failures and package them as progress, they are anything but.
Articles tagged as
US Supreme Court
A Free Speech Case or a School Overreach Case?
Is this a Free Speech Case or a School Overreach Case? Kind of both. Under the guise of Free Speech, a School Board is about to get their buttocks reddened by a policy that students (your kids) are THEIR kids 24/7/365.
Do Your Reps Oppose Freedom of Speech?
There are several NH Republican state reps that are promising to vote against a bill that would repeal an unconstitutional law. The law allows private businesses to declare up to 25 feet of the public sidewalk and street as a no-free-speech zone, giving these private businesses control over public property.
BOOM! NINE MORE STATES Join Texas Lawsuit Against PA, MI, WI and GA For Unlawful General Election!
Earlier today, I posted an article regarding the lawsuit Texas filed on Monday evening against PA, GA, MI and WI for their unconstitutional election processes. At the time of the posting, 8 states had joined the lawsuit; Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota. As of now, NINE MORE STATES have … Read more
Watch CNN’s Jake Tapper Skillfully Challenge Biden’s Deputy Campaign Manager Regarding the Supreme Court Appointment Process
Most of the time the MSM covers a story regarding the presidential campaigns, they appear to parrot the narrative of the Democrat party. That appears to be especially true of CNN.
Can You Hear Heads Exploding? – “I am nominating Ted Cruz as my newest US Supreme Court Justice”
“I am nominating Ted Cruz as my newest US Supreme Court Justice.” Sen. Cruz is actually is on President Trump’s next list for replacement Justices. Wouldn’t that be a kicker!
Joe Biden Says He Would Nominate Barack Obama to the US Supreme Court
Even if you are not a fan of making New Year’s resolutions, this might be a good time to start. Resolve to ensure we never have a president who would nominate Barack Obama to the US Supreme Court. Joe Biden just said, he’d do that.
Gay Marriage And The Supreme Court: What Will Follow?
Using the word “gay” as a euphemism for homosexual is fine I guess. But I’ve always thought a word like “fabulous” might have been better. Sure would be a lot easier to tell your parents, “Mom, Dad: I’m fabulous! And my friends are fabulous, too! — Michael Greer
As I pointed out in my September 2012 post, “The Gay Marriage Report Card,” Gay marriage is current law in eight states. Five States have as law, “civil unions.” Thirty-one states maintain constitutional amendments banning gay marriage or recognizing marriage as between a man and a woman.
The Gay Marriage advocacy constituency is still very small when juxtaposed against the larger society. That should not denigrate friends and loved ones who include themselves under the tent of the Gay community. But facts are inconvenient things as hard and cold as they might seem. Why is that important?
Skip Murphy, the Free State Project, and President Obama. Well damn….
Skip Murphy just asked me this: “Well, it seems that Obama is coming out swinging against the Supremes. Blogosphere is all atwitter about it. Mr. Lawyer, Tim – what’s your take on his baiting the Supremes to declare it unconsitutional?”
Dammit. I foolishly rose to the bait. Here’s what I said in response:
DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE YOU UNDER SURVEILLANCE?
“We are rapidly entering the age of no privacy, where everyone is open to surveillance at all times; where there are no secrets from government.” —Justice William O Douglas
Perhaps some will read this and the knee-jerk reaction might be, “Oh, there goes one of those tin-foil-lined hat rants again…Like the government doesn’t have anything better to do than watch, “me.” Perhaps on some level, thinking of the government having citizens under surveillance harkens back to Soviet-style citizen oppression, much less being an inefficient and wasteful use of valuable resources. This issue, however, focuses on the incidental happenstance of average citizens and the likelihood of being caught up in something few contemplate or even envision.
You’re watching the news and a story about bombs and explosives airs and part of the interview features some law enforcement mouthpiece claiming, “The bomb was constructed from instructions readily available on the internet…and materials bought at local hardware and home goods retailers…” You have never given thought about building a bomb, much less how to build one. So, being bored you grab your laptop and Google, “How to build a bomb” Sorting through the various hits the topic garners, you spend all of ten minutes searching and reading. All you really want to know is if the claims made have any credibility.
545 People Are Responsible For The Mess, But They Unite In A Common Con
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”~Plato, Ancient Greek Philosopher
Charley Reese retired July 29, 2001. Who was Charley Reese? He was a columnist, serving 30 of those years at the Orlando Sentinel. Characterized best by his plainspoken manner and conservative views, he was with the Sentinel from 1971–2001, serving as a writer and other such editorial capacities. King Features Syndicate distributed Charley’s column, which published up to three times a week.
On February 3, 1984 Charley originally published the column below. This column additionally republished as his final column. Rightfully so and despite being 27 years removed from its orignal publish date, it is no less relevant.
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
Email doodlings – a back and forth with Jeff Chidester on Kelly Ayotte – part 2
The response back from Jeff was this:
Skip, you and I will always be buddies. And how did I know you would kick the ball.
Let’s not forget, that those on the other side of the argument say the same thing. The key is to get more people involved in understanding the role of the judiciary.
I agree with your points, and they illustrate the root of our Constitutional ‘evil.’ Not enough ‘everyday’ people understand the Constitutional dilemma we are in. Bork got screwed because the new media did not exist, and the ‘Constitutional Renaissance’ had not occurred yet.
Remember, the same process that provides for the confirmation of a justice is also the same one for Ambassador and ‘Ministers and Counsels,’ but when was the last time you heard of an Ambassador getting slammed, and why isn’t a Czar considered a Counsel? The process is flawed at all levels;
A LAWYER WHO WILL INTENTIONALLY MISLEAD A FEDERAL COURT JUDGE…
…is not a good person to elevate to the U.S. Supreme Court. From NRO via Powerline and RedState, it appears that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan personally had false language inserted in a document that was calculated and utilized to deceive a federal court judge during litigation. If it is true, it is a clear violation of the ethical canons of the legal profession. You don’t lie to judges in order to obtain an advantage in litigation. Every lawyer has a sacred duty of candor and truth toward the courts, and takes an oath not to lie to them. (For instance, here’s part of the oath of admission to the Florida Bar: "I will employ for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to me such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and will never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement of fact or law.")
Why would Kagan do such a thing?
“An act unbecoming of an American…”
I am SO with Newt on this. I’ll bet that every crackpot cause under the sun was given free reign in Kagen’s world, otherwise. She doesn’t belong on the Supreme Court because of this alone. And not for nothing, but where are those that decried Harriet Miers’ lack of judgeship duties now? Oh that’s right– they’re … Read more
Want To Buy A Bridge?
Some liberal talking heads are already toeing the narrative that Elena Kagan is a little bit conservative. That she could (possibly) shift the court to the right. Really? Hardly. This narrative is deployed to impress upon the disinterested, distracted, or dumbfounded that any opposition by the right to her nomination is evidence of just how right wing … Read more
Obama on picking a Supreme Court Justice: Yikes!!
Good ‘ole Justice Souter. He’s just sticking it to liberty and the Constitution right to the bitter end. He couldn’t retire, say, 200 days ago. Oh no– he does it right at the start of the reign of Obama. "What’s so bad about that, Doug? Obama won. He SHOULD get a crack at this." … Read more