The Taliban Left, ObamaCare, Citizens United, The Confederate Flag, And The Rebel Yell

We’re against sending more American troops back into the Middle East because we don’t think it is a good investment and because Barack Obama is such a treacherous boob their lives would be lost. But there are times when we are all for sending in as many troops as necessary and for bombing the beards off the ISIS and Taliban Muslim creeps.

The moments when we are for nuking the bastards? Here:

The tomb of the prophet Jonah:

The Taliban destroyed beautiful Buddhist statuary. ISIS destroys Muslim shrines, historical sites, museums, and artifacts from the past. Many of these shrines and cultural sites are world heritage sites. It infuriates us to watch this cultural vandalism perpetuated by the Taliban and associated Muslim terrorist creeps such as ISIS.

We’re not surprised by this vandalism. It has happened before. It is typical for revolutionary movements to destroy monuments of the past and rename streets and cities. Soviet communists renamed Volograd to praise their leader and it became Stalingrad. St. Petersburg, the glorious rival to Paris, was named for its founder Czar Peter the Great, then Petrograd in 1914, then Leningrad to memorialize the Soviet leader, then back to St. Petersburg after the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1991.

Drunk with power French radical revolutionaries were not happy to rename just cities and streets. They renamed the calendar. They reorganized the hours of the day too. Nothing was too small for these loons to change:

The revolutionary system was designed in part to remove all religious and royalist influences from the calendar, and was part of a larger attempt at decimalisation in France (which also included decimal time of day, decimalisation of currency, and metrication). [snip]

By law, the beginning of each year was set at midnight, beginning on the day the apparent autumnal equinox falls at the Paris Observatory.

There were twelve months, each divided into three ten-day weeks called décades. The tenth day, décadi, replaced Sunday as the day of rest and festivity. The five or six extra days needed to approximate the solar or tropical year were placed after the months at the end of each year and called complementary days.

A period of four years ending on a leap day was to be called a “Franciade”. [snip]

Each day in the Republican Calendar was divided into ten hours, each hour into 100 decimal minutes, and each decimal minute into 100 decimal seconds. Thus an hour was 144 conventional minutes (more than twice as long as a conventional hour), a minute was 86.4 conventional seconds (44% longer than a conventional minute), and a second was 0.864 conventional seconds (13.6% shorter than a conventional second).

The days of the week became primidi, duodi, tridi, quartidi, quintidi, sextidi, septidi, octidi, nonidi, and décadi.

Months of the year went from the January – December model to a new system as well. Vendémiaire, Brumaire, Frimaire, Nivôse, Pluviôse, Ventôse, Germinal, Floréal, Prairial, Messidor, Thermidor, and Fructidor, became the florid new names for the months. British wits mocked with equvalient names for the months – Wheezy, Sneezy and Freezy; Slippy, Drippy and Nippy; Showery, Flowery and Bowery; Hoppy, Croppy and Poppy. The new names written by the revolutionary nuts did not last.

But such is the revolutionary impulse that common sense goes out the window as destruction of the past becomes their goal – and then on to their glorious future which eventually flops back to regret for what they destroyed.

That’s what is happening in America today.

There are calls to purge American history from history.

The National Cathedral in Washington is purging stained glass windows. The windows placed there to bring about reconciliation between those former members of the Confederacy and the victorious Union are now not history. Like Stalinist purges, they will be purged by the Taliban Left here in America.

The cause of this purge? One lone disturbed nut decided not to attack a college because of security there and instead went to a black church and killed nine Christians in prayer.

Immediately the black woman Attorney General vowed to dragnet the country and utilize all resources to catch the killer. The previous black male Attorney General applauded. The black male president too denounced the killings. The Indian-American South Carolina Governor also utilized all the resources of her state to catch the killer. All institutions of government at every level hunted the killer. The killer was rapidly caught.

Then came the madness. The killer had told his black friends of his plans to kill. They did nothing. The killer had told his white friends of his plans to kill. They did nothing. Well, some of the friends took his gun away temporarily but did not report this behavior to authorities. The killer was found to have taken pictures with the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia sewn onto a jacket. That meant an all out attack on the Confederate flag everywhere and on any memorial to anything Confederate. Then the madness got worse.

Christian haters such as Bill Maher cried crocadile tears and denounced “racist” America and “racist” symbols. Apple pulled Civil War games from their app systems because they displayed the Confederate flag. Totalitarian Stalinism and Stalinist purges from reality and from history became normal.

Was Dylann Storm Roof a racist? Probably, even though he had buddies who were black. Was Storm Roof part of an organized conspiracy to kill black people? Only if his black friends were in on the racist conspiracy. Was Storm Roof part of some institution that sought to advance racist ideology? No, unless his integrated drinking buddies belonged to a secret society we have yet to uncover.

Storm Roof did help a well organized group cause havoc. The group? The Taliban Left who race-bait for political profit.

A few years ago the Supreme Court ruled in the Citizens United case. We were surprised when we found ourselves in agreement with the Supreme Court. Why? Because in the course of the hearing at the Court, the Solicitor General (transcript HERE, page 30) arguing for the government made a horrific argument against the organization Citizen United:

“Citizens United turned on the question of whether the federal government could ban a non-profit corporation from producing a movie critical of former Senator Hillary Clinton and attempting to air it just prior to the 2008 Democratic primary.” [snip]

“During the first argument, the Court asked Ms. Kagan’s deputy whether the government had the power to ban books if they were published by a corporation, and if the books urged the reader to support or defeat a candidate for office. He said yes, the government could ban a corporation from publishing a book—even if it only mentioned the candidate once in 500 pages.” [snip]

“Not surprisingly, this contention prompted quite a bit of discussion among the justices. They wanted to be clear that that’s actually what Ms. Kagan’s office was proposing. So, to remove any doubt about their position, Ms. Kagan’s deputy said he wanted to make it, in his words, ‘absolutely clear’ that the government did, in fact, have the power to ban certain speakers from publishing books that criticized candidates. Justice Souter asked if that meant labor unions, too. Ms. Kagan’s deputy said that indeed it did.”

So shocked was the high court that they issued no ruling but instead ordered a rehearing in the next term (transcript HERE). At the rehearing then Solicitor General Elena Kagen herself appeared to try to defend the indefensible. She tried to back-peddle the book banning. But not enough, “But her fall-back position was that the same law gives the government the power to ban pamphlets, regardless of the First Amendment’s protection for free speech. This caused the justices to bristle again. One justice asked where, in Ms. Kagan’s world, does one ‘draw the line’?

Forced to choose between Hillary Clinton and the Constitution we will stand by the Constitution. Forced to choose between campaign finance reform and the First Amendment we will stand by the First Amendment. Forced to choose between politically correct speech and free speech we will stand by free speech.

In Citizens United the Taliban Left wanted government sponsored censorship. Censorship is always sold as “for the good”. But no. Government censorship is morally corrupt.

We supported the Citizens United decision because we are against banning of books – whatever the phony excuse. Now we witness Stalinist purges take place which rival Joe McCarthy. Many of these purges are now coming from the government, political leaders, and powerful corporations bowing to the mob.

Kevin Williamson wrote this week that the madness we witness are the last mad frenzies of the left:

If it seems to you that the Left has, collectively, lost its damned mind as the curtain rises on the last act of the Obama administration, you are not imagining things. Barack Obama has been extraordinarily successful in his desire to — what was that phrase? — fundamentally transform the country, but the metamorphosis is nonetheless a good deal less than his congregation wanted and expected. We may have gone from being up to our knees in welfare-statism to being up to our hips in it, and from having a bushel of banana-republic corruption and incompetence to having a bushel and a peck of it, but the United States of America remains, to the Left’s dismay, plainly recognizable as herself beneath the muck. Ergo, madness and rage.

We have seen an extraordinary outburst of genuine extremism — and genuine authoritarianism — in the past several months, and it will no doubt grow more intense as we approach the constitutional dethroning of the mock messiah to whom our progressive friends literally sang hymns of praise and swore oaths of allegiance. (“I pledge to be a servant to our president” — recall all that sieg heil creepiness.) There is an unmistakable stink of desperation about this, as though the Left intuits what the Right dares not hope: that the coming few months may in fact see progressivism’s cultural high-water mark for this generation.

Before yesterday’s ObamaCare decision (which we discussed in the comments) we could have agreed with Williamson. We’re not so sure now. The ObamaCare decision like the French Revolutionaries redefined words to a different non-meaning.

ObamaCare proved that words don’t matter in the law now. We are not a nation of laws now but a nation under men. The attempted book banning the Supreme Court once bravely prevented is now turned into Confederate flag purges. License plates with the Confederate flag were the first to go (another perverse opinion from the high court) in an opinion so twisted only the ObamaCare decisions top for absurdity. Thought crimes are now real real crimes and anyone who is fascinated by the grey side of the civil war must be purged. Where does it end?

Williamson might well be right, but he might not realize the depths of depravity the Taliban Left is capable of. Williamson has some other observations about the mad frenzy:

For the Left, it feels like time is running out. So it isn’t sufficient that same-sex marriages be legalized; bakers and florists must be locked in prison if they decline to participate in a gay couple’s ceremony. It isn’t sufficient that those wishing to undergo sex-change surgery be permitted to go their own way; the public must pay for it, and if Bruce Jenner is still “Bruce” to you, you must be driven from polite society. It isn’t enough that the Left dominate the media and pop culture; any attempt to compete with it must be criminalized in the name of “getting big money out of politics.” Not the New York Times’s money, or Hollywood’s money, or the CEO of Goldman Sachs’s money — just the wrong sort of people’s money. Every major Democratic presidential candidate and every Democratic senator is on record supporting the repeal of the First Amendment’s free-speech protections — i.e., carving the heart out of the Bill of Rights — to clear the way for putting all public debate under political discipline. [snip]

So is the brouhaha over the Confederate flag in South Carolina in the wake of the horrific massacre at Emanuel AME Church. For about 30 seconds, the political ghouls of the Left were looking to pick another gun-control fight, swooping in, in their habitually indecent fashion, before the bodies had even grown cold. But that turned out to be a dead end, since the killer acquired his gun after passing precisely the sort of background check that the Left generally hawks after a high-profile crime, regardless of whether it is relevant to the crime. We might have spent some time thinking about whether law enforcement was too lax in the matter of the murderer’s earlier encounters with them — the South Carolina killer had a drug arrest on his record but was able to buy a gun because he had been charged only with a misdemeanor. But the Left isn’t in any mood to talk about whether the cops aren’t being hard-assed enough. So, instead, we had a fight over a completely unrelated issue: the Confederate flag flying at the state capitol in Columbia. [snip]

I bear no brief for the peckerwood-trash cultural tendencies that led Fritz Hollings, then governor, and the rest of the loyal Democrats who ran segregation-era South Carolina to hoist the Confederate flag in 1962. My sympathies are more with John Brown than with John Calhoun. Yet Lost Cause romanticism was very much in fashion for a moment, and not only among Confederate revanchists; Joan Baez, no redneck she, made a great deal of money with her recording of “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” in 1971. About every third Western of the era had as its hero a conflicted Confederate veteran, his wounded honor and stoicism in defeat compelling him to roam westward in search of a new beginning.

Williamson is right to note the hypocrisy of the party that profits from Jefferson-Jackson dinners as opposed to the Republican Party that organizes around Lincoln dinners. But the more interesting question, is where does the purge stop? Will the Taliban Left, like French revolutionaries want to rename and destroy every memory of the Confederacy? Will Stone Mountain be blown up like Buddhist statures in Afghanistan?

In 2008 we wrote an Memorial Day article – Blue And Grey On Memorial Day. We posted a music video which displays the Confederate Flag. Is that now verboten Mein Fuehrer?

On the first Memorial Day in 1868 both Union and Confederate graves were treated to honors by the Union government whose soldiers died by tens of thousands on some days, in one battle. So we can’t celebrate Memorial Day anymore? We can’t play this?:

We diminish the Union triumph when we don’t acknowledge they faced the fearsome, mighty, worthy, formidable Army of Northern Virginia led by General Lee. Is it possible to discuss the Civil War without mention of the Confederacy? Can we discuss World War II without acknowledging the brilliance of Ernst Rommel?

The brave Southerners who fought and died to liberate Europe who did so to honor their grandpappies who died in the great Civil War on our shores – are we to assign them to oblivion and contempt too?

Just before his assassination, as crowds gathered at the White House to celebrate the Union victory, none other than Abraham Lincoln ordered, in the spirit of reconciliation, the band to strike up Dixie.

In some places Dixie is now banned and school mascots named “Rebel” put to pasture.

But the Taliban Left won’t remove the culprits they like, no matter how racist they were. Woodrow Wilson, a hero of the Taliban left was a racist of the first caliber. Let’s get rid of the monuments to this disaster of a president and rename the Woodrow Wilson centers and schools. Racist Princeton University honors racist Woodrow Wilson. Where’s the purge?

Robert Byrd, Grand Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan, has so many monuments and buildings named for him – when will he be purged by the Taliban Left?

Racist wanna be Redskin Elizabeth Warren? The Cambridge Cherokee? She’s a cultural vampire who should be sent to a reservation on Devil’s Island.

The Villiage of Whitesboro with their seal… well you have to read the story and decide yourself how far the foolishness should go.

Didn’t Franklin Delano Roosevelt tolerate a segregated army? Let’s get rid of that white supremacist too.

George Washington that slave owning cracka? Let’s carpet bomb Washinton, D.C. and the state that bears his name as well as all monuments and holidays that memorialize him. Ditto Thomas Jefferson, with CNN on the ban bus already.

Howard Dean wanted the votes of men with trucks and confederate flags. I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks. We can’t beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross-section of Democrats.

Get rid of racist Confederate flag pole Howard Dean.

Louis Farrakhan, friend and neighbor of Barack, a known race-baiting racist and anti-Semite wants the American flag itself, the stars and stripes, downed.

At the New York Post the target is Gone With The Wind. A black woman for the first time won an Academy Award for that movie but what the Hell, the Taliban Left wants it banned.

Let’s have a ban on Martin Scorsese’s The Last Waltz which features The Band at their farewell concert sing The Night They Drove Ol’ Dixie Down.

Ban the co-racists on The Last Waltz – Bob Dylan, Paul Butterfield, Neil Young, Emmylou Harris, Ringo Starr, Ronnie Hawkins, Dr. John, Joni Mitchell, Van Morrison, Muddy Waters, Ronnie Wood, Neil Diamond, Bobby Charles, The Staple Singers, and Eric Clapton.

The Taliban Left is on the march. The Taliban Left will win. Unless it is resisted. With a rebel yell:


130 thoughts on “The Taliban Left, ObamaCare, Citizens United, The Confederate Flag, And The Rebel Yell

  1. This song, an answer to Neil Young’s “Southern Man” will have to be banned soon and the musicians sent to reeducation camps:

  2. TY Admin for recognizing them for who they are and voicing it. Where this is going to lead, I do not know.

  3. I heard some of Ostalin’s pontifications today, bragging how he had changed this country forever. And all I could think of was Putin’s alleged remark about how dealing with him was like playing chess with a pigeon who shits all over the chess board, then dances around announcing himself the winner.

  4. profound and on point Admin…

    the party has been taken over by control freaks…Hillary needs to come to her senses and stop promising more of the same…

  5. lorac
    June 26, 2015 at 2:07 am

    Lu4Puma –

    What do you suggest people do with their investments? Are there any countries that seem relatively safe? Or do you suggest moving investments to “cash” (what is that called, it’s not actual cash in your hand or your bank, it’s still with the (investment company?), but it isn’t touched if the market collapses (it also doesn’t grow).

    lorac, I am totally unqualified to give you any real financial advice. There is nowhere your wealth is safe when your government is out to take it from you.

    The zero interest rate policies are intended to force you out of your cash positions into more risky business. Right now the riskiest is the stock market. It is due for a crash. It is totally manipulated right now, but if they do not take a 10-20% adjustment they may lose control later and have a bigger crash. The market dynamics are not rational and most closely follow the rules of a game of chicken. The FED plays interest rates off against the corporations that threaten crashes with stock sell offs.

    This was a black Friday for the Chinese stock market. It appears to be crashing. Watch next week. There can be ripple effects.

  6. I have an answer to the problem.

    The next president should enter into a treaty which abolishes the Supreme Court—so long as Roberts is chief justice.

  7. This was a black Friday for the Chinese stock market. It appears to be crashing. Watch next week.

    There can be ripple effects.

    I no longer worry about such things.

    I am out of the market.

    And Messiah Obama will protect us.

    From those ripple effects.

    He will blame it on those white men.

    And big media will trumpet what he said.

    As we lead the whole lot of them to the guillotine.

  8. I am all for letting Bibi handle Iran,

    And letting ISIS handle the J Street crowd.

    Out with the good air: remove our troops

    In with the bad: those left wing delusionals.

    Then again, I must confess . . .

    I am a sucker for a happy ending

  9. admin
    June 26, 2015 at 6:53 pm

    “Concern over the economy is the highest I’ve ever seen,” top GOP pollster Ed Goeas told the moderate Republican Ripon Society. He said 72 percent are worried about an economic downturn.

    Every day I get these sudden loud bells announcing what the stock market did today, courtesy of msn.

    This is part of their terror campaign.

    If they really believed it was possible to commodotize and monetarize out future

    Then these loud wake up calls every hour would be superfluous.


  10. Tom Fitton @ Judicial Watch

    Here is my statement on the King v. Burwell ruling:

    [Thursday’s] Burwell decision is an affront to the rule of law and constitutional self-government. No federal judge has the power to rewrite the law, which is what the majority did today in Burwell. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kennedy, Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan took part in an unconstitutional power grab every bit as unlawful as President Obama’s rewrite of Obamacare. None of these justices have the constitutional power to rewrite major components of Obamacare in order to “save it.” Ironically, the majority cites the corruption of the passage of Obamacare as an excuse for the judiciary’s own corrupt, nonsensical fix of the same law. Congress still can vindicate its power and uphold the rule of law. This terrible decision has no binding effect on choices by Congress to defund President Obama’s despotic rewrite of the law and prevent the IRS from unlawfully providing insurance subsidies. And, of course, the impeachment power still remains for executive branch officials who won’t obey the law. The Court makes a policy pronouncement, all evidence to the contrary, that “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them.” The justices in the majority ought to have the honesty to run for Congress if they want to write rather interpret law. Our republican form of government is weakened when the president and six Supreme Court justices disregard federal statutes in favor of their own policy choices.

    And yesterday also saw more contortions by justices trying to justify writing into law the notion that we peons practice “unconscious” discrimination and racism, an intellectual absurdity which does nothing but empower the race hustlers both in and out of government who see racism when none exists:

    [Thursday’s] Supreme Court “disparate impact” decision in the case of Texas Department of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project is confused and, as the Court did in its Burwell decision, endorses the Executive Branch’s radical racial rewrite of our federal housing law. The Obama administration unlawfully changed federal housing anti-discrimination law to prohibit practices that result in a disparate impact on minorities. In fact, the law prohibits actions only taken because of race, not actions that happen to disproportionately impact certain races. Unfortunately, this judicial activist decision further enshrines the intellectually impoverished concept of race into the law, it furthers a culture of racial and ethnic politics in American public life, and perpetuates racial and ethnic resentment and intolerance in American society. In fact, the only way to treat the troubled concept of “race” in the law should be to absolutely prohibit its use as a basis for making decisions affecting individuals or groups. Conveniently, such a prohibition is precisely what the Constitution already requires. And, as Judicial Watch has alleged and as Justice Thomas implies in his dissent, the Obama administration corruptly influenced the Supreme Court’s consideration of this issue and has tainted today’s ruling.

  11. Justice Scalia bitch slaps the worm Chief Justice with this memorable quote:

    “The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.”

  12. “A judicial victory doesn’t automatically translate into a political victory, let alone a policy success.”
    Robert E. Moffit

    June 26, 2015
    Printer-friendly version

    America’s Obamacare Nightmare Is Just Beginning

    Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could continue to subsidize health-insurance coverage through, the federal exchanges. An ecstatic President Obama declared that Obamacare is “here to stay.”

    No, it’s not.

    A judicial victory doesn’t automatically translate into a political victory, let alone a policy success. Once they’ve quaffed their celebratory champagne, the president and White House staff will need to suit up and get ready to play some hard-nosed defense.

    Here’s why…


    On Obamacare, John Roberts helps overthrow the Constitution [snip

    The most durable damage from Thursday’s decision is not the perpetuation of the ACA, which can be undone by what created it — legislative action. The paramount injury is the court’s embrace of a duty to ratify and even facilitate lawless discretion exercised by administrative agencies and the executive branch generally. [snip]

    Roberts writes, almost laconically, that the ACA “contains more than a few examples of inartful drafting.” That is his artful way of treating “inartful” as a synonym for “inconvenient” or even “self-defeating.” [snip]

    Exercising judicial discretion in the name of deference, Roberts enlarges executive discretion. He does so by validating what the IRS did when it ignored the ACA’s text in order to disburse billions of dollars of subsidies through federal exchanges not established by the states. [snip]

    Thursday’s decision demonstrates how easily, indeed inevitably, judicial deference becomes judicial dereliction, with anticonstitutional consequences. We are, says William R. Maurer of the Institute for Justice, becoming “a country in which all the branches of government work in tandem to achieve policy outcomes, instead of checking one another to protect individual rights. Besides violating the separation of powers, this approach raises serious issues about whether litigants before the courts are receiving the process that is due to them under the Constitution.”

  14. Admin has covered every aspect of this for us, and with grateful hearts, we gather here.
    I tried to watch local news at 6, but the second story in was this one, so I could not stay. But I did just return so I could provide here another consequence of Barack’s Rosa Parks + MLK moment in history:

    Controversy Surrounding Union County [PA] Parade
    LEWISBURG — A Civil War re-enactment group that carries a Confederate Flag in public events has withdrawn from a parade in Union County after coordinators asked that it not be displayed.
    The controversy over displaying the Confederate Flag has grown since last week’s murders at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina.
    The Union County Veterans Fourth of July Parade draws crowds of around 25,000 people. But this year some people say they are boycotting the parade because of the parade committee’s decision to ban Confederate Flags.
    Jeff Swanger of New Berlin is a member of a Civil War re-enactment group that carries the Confederate Flag in public events.
    He and his group have participated in the Union County Veterans Fourth of July Parade in Lewisburg for six years. They recently decided to pull out of the parade after Swanger got a phone call from someone on the parade committee.
    “He said, ‘I really would like you guys to come to the parade,’ he said, ‘but I don’t want you to carry the flag in the parade,’” Swanger said.
    Swanger is talking about the Confederate Flag — something he says is part of their re-enactment uniforms.
    “You have this symbol that means something to the Confederacy that is a very important symbol that needs to be shown,” Swanger said.
    The ban on the Confederate Flag caused controversy among people who believe it should be shown during the parade.
    The parade committee responded by saying, “While we certainly acknowledge the historical and educational significance of the Confederate Flag, we do not want to detract in any way from the veterans we are honoring in this year’s parade. We feel with the recent events in South Carolina that it is too complex of an issue at this time.” snip
    The parade kicks off Saturday at 10 a.m. and goes down Market Street in Lewisburg rain or shine.
    There will be a fireworks display Friday night in Lewisburg.
    The theme of this year’s parade is honoring our Vietnam veterans.

    THEY DON’T want to detract in any way from veterans?????
    Gettysburg National Park book shop initially stated it would continue selling the confederate flag, but just 24 hours later has pulled back from the decision.

  15. Like him or not, he is a force to be reckoned with.

    Our friend Jim Carville has told us this—the most remarkable Republican to come along in 30 years, so he said

    Do not count him out

    When he says Roberts has hidden his prevarications behind legalese, you can be quite sure many will agree with him

    If Roberts wants to legislate he should resign from the court and run for office

    Ironically, in this alleged effort to save the Court’s reputation he has managed through his lies to sully and squander it.

  16. Politically, Obama had counted on this law being struck down, so he could blame the Court, and drag the republicans through the dirt as they tried to fix it, and get off the hook for the damage it is doing to the nation. None of this happened. The tar baby remains in his lap. And that is why his reaction to the decision has been somewhat subdued. He tries to sell this as a victory for the American people while nearly 2/3 of them hate the law, and do not trust Obama. The political victory here is illusory. The result is counterproductive. The damage to our constitutional system is irreparable—thanks to Roberts.

  17. This is not judicial activism. This is judicial nullification of the law, and the welfare of the American People. And Roberts do this why? Tell me again. To protect the reputation of the court. Far from protecting that reputation, he has made a mockery of it. The Supreme Court as it stands today is nothing more than a Kangaroo Court. When the three branches conspire with each other and with big business the end result can only be one thing: tyranny and oppression.

  18. wbboei,

    He told us why. He did it to protect the insurance markets and big pharma. The first time, one could wonder if he was influenced by public pressure. Not this time.

    That, or they are under death threat from Ostalin.

  19. wbboei
    June 26, 2015 at 9:56 pm

    Like him or not, he is a force to be reckoned with.

    I really wish he was for real, but there is something not right about him. But I feel that way about most Republicans. There is something missing in their whole philosophy. Like, they do not generally have a plan for the unfortunate, but for them to go and die. It is like they do not have good integration between the left and right sides of their brains. Of course, that could be true of the Dems too, it is just the dominance of the other side of it.

    But I would rather Cruz than the Jedidiah Dough Boy. But he does not rate over Trump, to me.

    Trump Up! Cruz needs a little more Trump.

  20. Thank you, Administrator. This is a much needed and excellent article. We feel heart sick tonight about the hatred of the “Taliban” style left as well as the those on the right who use their own people as well as others for cheap political gain. Slavery was horrible and should never have happened well over a century and a half ago. We well remember 1964, Civil Rights and The Great Society “benefits”.

    So where will it all end? Should we demand reparations because our ancestor came home from the Civil War to find that his house and crops had been burned, the animals slaughtered and wife and daughters raped by the Union Army as they marched across the South? Should my husband’s family make demands because hie ancestor, in his 70’s and blind, was murdered by the Iowa Yankees because his ancestor would not tell them where the one cow they had left was hidden…their supply of food was taken, crops burned and the family needed the cow to provide milk for the children when there was little food. Oh, and by the way, NONE OF THESE ANCESTORS OWNED SLAVES AND NEVER HAD.

  21. I’ve often wondered what kind of human has defaced things like the Egyptian Sphinx…now I know.

    Murderers and thieves, idiots and evil men.

  22. Fu@k those aholes that try to make southerners feel like less than Americans.

    May they rot in Hell.

  23. I wanted to cross-post my comment I left on UppityWomen tonight:

    This was really amazing to me to the point it brought a tear to my eye but at the same time I also had this thought cross through my mind. Wouldn’t it be great to light up the White House in red, white and blue on Memorial Day and Veteran’s Day? Those who serve in our armed forces serve in a manner no one in the Congress, Supreme Court or White House serves. They serve ALL the people of this nation at the expense of their own lives. Just my 2 cents on a night I am feeling grateful to be an American.

  24. How I learned to stop worrying and love ISIS?

    A Washington elite accustomed to

    Adjusting reality by manipulating the narrative

    Is now confronted with counter forces

    Who are stronger, more violent and less democratic

    Than even they are

    Whether it be ISIS,

    Chinese hackers,

    Iran’s nuclear ambitions,

    Or the galaxy of the scandals that blight this administration

    The Washington elite really has only one response:

    Deny everything


    Unleash their bloggers, and–

    Double down on their failed policies

    That created the problem in the first place.

    They will continue to do this forever or

    Until things fall apart,

    In Africa, Europe or here

    As early as July 4 according to some reports

    It being futile to argue with these elites

    All we can do is wait for this to happen

    And ponder the significance of the catchline

    Of that old Peter Sellers movie

    This will go on until it cannot go on longer

    If the elites were the causalities no one would care

    It is the innocent people we must worry about.

    Obama and his cohorts in big media

    Are the true enemies of the American People

    Those who contend otherwise suffer from wilful blindness

    Apropos of my earlier comment about

    The infinite capacity of human beings for self deception

  25. Their reaction of the Washington cartel

    To Snowden was desperate, hyperbolic and bordeline insane

    In essence, they demanded that he be tracked down like a dog and placed in a cage was revealing

    When all he ever really did was give the public information they had a right to have

    About the nefarious activities and plans of the elites

    As Camus observed, the welfare of the people is always the alibi of tyants

    Thus it is hardly surprising that those words echoed by big media and government officials

    Formed the basis of their pro forma response to what he says

    And even if this were empirically true, which it is not, who in their right mind would ever believe them

    Only those who believed that if you like your doctor you can keep him

  26. New England’s hidden history
    More than we like to think, the North was built on slavery.

    (Brian Stauffer for The Boston Globe)
    By Francie Latour

    September 26, 2010

    In the year 1755, a black slave named Mark Codman plotted to kill his abusive master. A God-fearing man, Codman had resolved to use poison, reasoning that if he could kill without shedding blood, it would be no sin. Arsenic in hand, he and two female slaves poisoned the tea and porridge of John Codman repeatedly. The plan worked — but like so many stories of slave rebellion, this one ended in brutal death for the slaves as well. After a trial by jury, Mark Codman was hanged, tarred, and then suspended in a metal gibbet on the main road to town, where his body remained for more than 20 years.

    It sounds like a classic account of Southern slavery. But Codman’s body didn’t hang in Savannah, Ga.; it hung in present-day Somerville, Mass. And the reason we know just how long Mark the slave was left on view is that Paul Revere passed it on his midnight ride. In a fleeting mention from Revere’s account, the horseman described galloping past “Charlestown Neck, and got nearly opposite where Mark was hung in chains.”

    When it comes to slavery, the story that New England has long told itself goes like this: Slavery happened in the South, and it ended thanks to the North. Maybe

    we had a little slavery, early on. But it wasn’t real slavery. We never had many slaves, and the ones we did have were practically family. We let them marry, we taught them to read, and soon enough, we freed them. New England is the home of abolitionists and underground railroads. In the story of slavery — and by extension, the story of race and racism in modern-day America — we’re the heroes. Aren’t we?

    As the nation prepares to mark the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War in 2011, with commemorations that reinforce the North/South divide, researchers are offering uncomfortable answers to that question, unearthing more and more of the hidden stories of New England slavery — its brutality, its staying power, and its silent presence in the very places that have become synonymous with freedom. With the markers of slavery forgotten even as they lurk beneath our feet — from graveyards to historic homes, from Lexington and Concord to the halls of Harvard University — historians say it is time to radically rewrite America’s slavery story to include its buried history in New England.

    “The story of slavery in New England is like a landscape that you learn to see,” said Anne Farrow, who co-wrote “Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited From Slavery” and who is researching a new book about slavery and memory. “Once you begin to see these great seaports and these great historic houses, everywhere you look, you can follow it back to the agricultural trade of the West Indies, to the trade of bodies in Africa, to the unpaid labor of black people.”Continued…

  27. For the sake of full disclosure, the grim future posited above was drawn from the latest offering by Richard Fernandez, whose wisdom, insight and proven ability to read the tea leaves, connect the dots, and see the deeper logic of current events, is second to none.

  28. People & Events
    Race-based legislation in the North
    1807 – 1850

    Resource Bank Contents

    To the fugitive slave fleeing a life of bondage, the North was a land of freedom. Or so he or she thought. Upon arriving there, the fugitive found that, though they were no longer slaves, neither were they free. African Americans in the North lived in a strange state of semi-freedom. The North may had emancipated its slaves, but it was not ready to treat the blacks as citizens. . . or sometimes even as human beings.

    Northern racism grew directly out of slavery and the ideas used to justify the institution. The concepts of “black” and “white” did not arrive with the first Europeans and Africans, but grew on American soil. During Andrew Jackson’s administration, racist ideas took on new meaning. Jackson brought in the “Age of the Common Man.” Under his administration, working class people gained rights they had not before possessed, particularly the right to vote. But the only people who benefited were white men. Blacks, Indians, and women were not included.

    This was a time when European immigrants were pouring into the North. Many of these people had faced discrimination and hardship in their native countries. But in America they found their rights expanding rapidly. They had entered a country in which they were part of a privileged category called “white.”

    Classism and ethnic prejudices did exist among white Americans and had a tremendous impact on people’s lives. But the bottom line was that for white people in America, no matter how poor or degraded they were, they knew there was a class of people below them. Poor whites were considered superior to blacks, and to Indians as well, simply by virtue of being white. Because of this, most identified with the rest of the white race and defended the institution of slavery. Working class whites did this even though slavery did not benefit them directly and was in many ways against their best interests.

    Before 1800, free African American men had nominal rights of citizenship. In some places they could vote, serve on juries, and work in skilled trades. But as the need to justify slavery grew stronger, and racism started solidifying, free blacks gradually lost the rights that they did have. Through intimidation, changing laws and mob violence, whites claimed racial supremacy, and increasingly denied blacks their citizenship. And in 1857 the Dred Scott decision formally declared that blacks were not citizens of the United States.

    In the northeastern states, blacks faced discrimination in many forms. Segregation was rampant, especially in Philadelphia, where African Americans were excluded from concert halls, public transportation, schools, churches, orphanages, and other places. Blacks were also forced out of the skilled professions in which they had been working. And soon after the turn of the century, African American men began to lose the right to vote — a right that many states had granted following the Revolutionary War. Simultaneously, voting rights were being expanded for whites. New Jersey took the black vote away in 1807; in 1818, Connecticut took it away from black men who had not voted previously; in 1821, New York took away property requirements for white men to vote, but kept them for blacks. This meant that only a tiny percentage of black men could vote in that state. In 1838, Pennsylvania took the vote away entirely. The only states in which black men never lost the right to vote were Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts.

    The situation in what was then the northwest region of the country was even worse. In Ohio, the state constitution of 1802 deprived blacks of the right to vote, to hold public office, and to testify against whites in court. Over the next five years, more restrictions were placed on African Americans. They could not live in Ohio without a certificate proving their free status, they had to post a $500 bond “to pay for their support in case of want,” and they were prohibited from joining the state militia. In 1831 blacks were excluded from serving on juries and were not allowed admittance to state poorhouses, insane asylums, and other institutions. Fortunately, some of these laws were not stringently enforced, or it would have been virtually impossible for any African American to emigrate to Ohio.

    In Illinois there were severe restrictions on free blacks entering the state, and Indiana barred them altogether. Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin were no friendlier. Because of this, the black populations of the northwestern states never exceeded 1 percent.

    African Americans also faced violence at the hands of white northerners. Individual cases of assault and murder occured throughout the North, as did daily insults and harassment. Between 1820 and 1850, Northern blacks also became the frequent targets of mob violence. Whites looted, tore down, and burned black homes, churches, schools, and meeting halls. They stoned, beat, and sometimes murdered blacks. Philadelphia was the site of the worst and most frequent mob violence. City officials there generally refused to protect African Americans from white mobs and blamed blacks for inciting the violence with their “uppity” behavior.

    African Americans and their white allies did not simply sit back and accept Northern racism; they responded to it in a whole range of ways. Black people founded their own churches, schools, and orphanages. They created mutual aid societies to provide financial assistance to those in need. They helped fugitive slaves adjust to life in the North. Blacks and whites working together took legal measures to try to prevent the erosion of black rights and to protest against new restrictions. African Americans held a series of national conventions to decide on a collective course of action. Combined with these actions was the constant effort to end slavery, to protect fugitive slaves, and to save free black people from being kidnapped and sold South. Some states even passed Personal Liberty Laws to counteract federal legislation such as the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. These protected fugitives and guaranteed some rights to African American citizens of that state

  29. Admin: It seems to me that the elites are moving to extinguish all memory of the founding principles of this nation, its Christian foundations, etc. and imposing in their stead and place a secular religion which has more in common with Orwell, than the golden rule, and fits neatly into the globalist agenda. The rapidity with which they have set aside law and custom and changed people’s minds on issues like gay marriage, calls to mind the question Sir Thomas Moore posed to his son in law Roper after he admitted that he would cut down every tree in England to get at the devil: when the laws were all down Roper, where you go for protection when the devil turned back on you? In due course, many of the same people who applaud the desecration of our constitution this week by Roberts and his co conspirators, may find that this kind of arbitrary, capricious and untethered decision-making process cuts against them in some future context. And when they do, I will have no sympathy. Then as now, my response will be fuck’em.

    Let me quote back to you the words you offered since they have not only the ring of truth to them—they embody it:

    “A few years ago the Supreme Court ruled in the Citizens United case. We were surprised when we found ourselves in agreement with the Supreme Court. Why? Because in the course of the hearing at the Court, the Solicitor General (transcript HERE, page 30) arguing for the government made a horrific argument against the organization Citizen United:

    “Citizens United turned on the question of whether the federal government could ban a non-profit corporation from producing a movie critical of former Senator Hillary Clinton and attempting to air it just prior to the 2008 Democratic primary.” [snip]

    “During the first argument, the Court asked Ms. Kagan’s deputy whether the government had the power to ban books if they were published by a corporation, and if the books urged the reader to support or defeat a candidate for office. He said yes, the government could ban a corporation from publishing a book—even if it only mentioned the candidate once in 500 pages.” [snip]

    “Not surprisingly, this contention prompted quite a bit of discussion among the justices. They wanted to be clear that that’s actually what Ms. Kagan’s office was proposing. So, to remove any doubt about their position, Ms. Kagan’s deputy said he wanted to make it, in his words, ‘absolutely clear’ that the government did, in fact, have the power to ban certain speakers from publishing books that criticized candidates. Justice Souter asked if that meant labor unions, too. Ms. Kagan’s deputy said that indeed it did.”

    So shocked was the high court that they issued no ruling but instead ordered a rehearing in the next term (transcript HERE). At the rehearing then Solicitor General Elena Kagen herself appeared to try to defend the indefensible. She tried to back-peddle the book banning. But not enough, “But her fall-back position was that the same law gives the government the power to ban pamphlets, regardless of the First Amendment’s protection for free speech. This caused the justices to bristle again. One justice asked where, in Ms. Kagan’s world, does one ‘draw the line’?”

    Forced to choose between Hillary Clinton and the Constitution we will stand by the Constitution. Forced to choose between campaign finance reform and the First Amendment we will stand by the First Amendment. Forced to choose between politically correct speech and free speech we will stand by free speech.

    In Citizens United the Taliban Left wanted government sponsored censorship. Censorship is always sold as “for the good”. But no. Government censorship is morally corrupt.

    We supported the Citizens United decision because we are against banning of books – whatever the phony excuse. Now we witness Stalinist purges take place which rival Joe McCarthy. Many of these purges are now coming from the government, political leaders, and powerful corporations bowing to the mob.”

  30. The South has a racist past. That’s an undeniable and shameful fact. But the effort by Obama, Holder, progressives and the left-wing media to re-fight the Civil war has done more to undo the progress made in terms of race relations than can be put into words. Many, many whites in the South have worked side by side with blacks to improve race relations and to overcome the problems of the past. Some efforts in this regard have been organized group or community efforts. Others have been individual and personal – living life each day extending respect to fellow humans – regardless of color. Teaching our children to do the same.

    My guess is that most of the progressive elite who are so quick to call us Southerners all “RACIST” have NEVER been down here to witness blacks and whites collaborating on civic committees, holding fundraisers to improve our schools, attending church together, attending funerals of each other’s loved ones, or bringing the standard casserole held together with cream of anything soup and Velveeta cheese to the home of an opposite race friend, co-worker, neighbor, fellow church member, etc. whose loved-one has died.

    Obama and the progs don’t want race relations to improve. They want to believe that racial hatred is wide-spread and alive and well. It serves their agendas and it makes them feel morally superior. They are happy in their delusions. Screw ’em.

    Posted below are some statics from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a pro-civil rights group created in the 1970s.


    The Southern Poverty Law Center

    Founded by civil rights lawyers Morris Dees and Joseph Levin Jr. in 1971, the SPLC is internationally known for tracking and exposing the activities of hate groups. Our innovative Teaching Tolerance program produces and distributes – free of charge – documentary films, books, lesson plans and other materials that promote tolerance and respect in our nation’s schools. 

We are based in Montgomery, Ala., the birthplace of the modern civil rights movement, and have offices in Atlanta, New Orleans, Miami, Fla., and Jackson, Miss.

    Information on hate groups in the US:

    Active U.S. Hate Groups

    The Southern Poverty Law Center counted 784 active hate groups in the United States in 2014. Only organizations and their chapters known to be active during 2014 are included.

    All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.
    This list was compiled using hate group publications and websites, citizen and law enforcement reports, field sources and news reports.
    Hate group activities can include criminal acts, marches, rallies, speeches, meetings, leafleting or publishing. Websites appearing to be merely the work of a single individual, rather than the publication of a group, are not included in this list. Listing here does not imply a group advocates or engages in violence or other criminal activity.

    The “Hate Map” on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website indicates the number of active “hate groups” in each state in the US. The number includes white racist groups, black racist groups, anti-Muslim groups and others. The names and hate target of each group is specified so it’s a simple task to determine how many anti-African American groups there are in each state. Just click on the state then scroll down to view the names of the groups.

    A few examples:

    In New York there are 44 active hate groups

    South Carolina – 19 hate groups

    Pennsylvania – 38 hate groups

    Mississippi – 22 hate groups

    Illinois – 21 hate groups

    Alabama – 18 hate groups

    Massachusetts – 13 hate groups

    Louisiana – 15 hate groups

    Ohio – 27 hate groups

    Georgia – 28 hate groups

    California – 57 hate groups

    Arkansas – 20 hate groups

  31. Re my own comment June 26, 2015 at 9:34 pm, the local ABC station maintains the link regarding ReEnactment group quitting a big parade, but made no reference to it in the 5 AM broadcast just over.
    If there’s anyone here, other than myself, who needed a refresher course on the US and slavery, I offer two links.

    From BBC on the origins of slaves coming to America, it starts with:

    African Slave Owners
    Many societies in Africa with kings and hierarchical forms of government traditionally kept slaves. But these were mostly used for domestic purposes. They were an indication of power and wealth and not used for commercial gain. However, with the appearance of Europeans desperate to buy slaves for use in the Americas, the character of African slave ownership changed. snip

    Regret I do not have the capability to thumbnail it for commenters here.

    I also found this:
    “The majority of African slaves were brought to British North America between 1720 and 1780. (Average date of arrival for whites is 1890)”
    and other interesting statements which soothed a conscience rubbed raw by Obama – like most of the slaves coming to the Americas went to places other than what would become the US

    I’m unfamiliar with the source of this info:
    www dot
    altho a quick look at “About” gave it the appearance of credible.

  32. There is incredible significance in Hillary Clinton’s story about her Mother’s abuse and the way she responded to it. Yes, we are under attack from the people who are supposed to be looking after our interests. Our representatives no longer represent us and there is a concerted effort to break down the rule of law. The message is that we need to find someone else who will look after our interest and that person in her. You will have to make your own decision about it you believe her or not. I am still watching.

    Our problems are not from within the country, although it exists within our system. This is a global effort by the elite to control the world under their centralized governance. It is a kind of combination of their global domination agenda and incompetence. Here is an interesting perspective on the dynamics:

    When the free money is gone and that faith disappears, then we will have an epic catastrophe on our hands. The globalists within the Fed know this, and they want this – at least , they want a controlled version of this. The elites NEED the fall of the current U.S. system exactly because this will make way for the rise of what they often term the “great economic reset.” This reset is the next stage in the plan for total global economic centralization.

    I know this sounds like conspiracy theory, but it is happening now. Not that it is what will happen, but a pretty good description of what is driving the insanity we see today. That is why we have Ostalin running up the national debt and attacking the rule of law. He represents the enemy within. All the things we dreaded he was as we watched his election and re-election. And yes, what we saw in the Democratic Primary in 2008 was as bad, or worse, than we thought it would be.

    They have their plans. The populous must decide. There will be no free world under one governance. There are those who say globalism is a failure and nations are retuning to sovereignty. But now we have this TPP and efforts to force more globalization. The struggle between good and evil is eternal. Get ready for the trials.

  33. Is Michelle Obama still alive? The last posting on her Facebook page is from February 2013. Do they have her tied up and gagged in the basement somewhere? Or is she busy spending the taxpayers money buying shoes?

  34. I want someone who stands up for all of America, the South as well as the North, tired of all these politicians, Hillary included, willing to cut the heart out of our Great, and woefully divided, Nation.

  35. Lu4PUMA

    June 27, 2015 at 9:09 am

    The struggle between good and evil is eternal.

    This is true. Evil’s assault on the good – the destruction of America – is the underlying cause of all this. Israel and America’s destruction is its goal. It’s all there in front of everyone, and always has been. Only a willful fool won’t see it.

  36. gonzotx,

    Likewise. That is what Trump is about. His campaign is so important regardless of the outcome. He needs to get in the dialog. Just a few zingers to maybe wake some people up. The issue is that of a sovereign nation or a globalized one.

    That is why we need to watch these “pro-trade” DINOs and RINOs and this TPP thing is so scarey. They are intentionally destroying the middle class for a reason. Not just greed. The TPP and TAA have just about completely disappeared from the news. There is not one iota of info on how they finally decided to fund the TAA. Initially, they were going to rape Medicare, then it was supposed to be funded by fines or taxes on small business. Not one word on how that finally came out.

  37. reespirit
    June 27, 2015 at 5:29 am
    They forgot to include the new black panthers, the NAACP, and last, but surely not least, themselves.

  38. Southern Poverty Law Center, a pro-civil rights group created in the 1970s.
    Which was long after the Civil Rights Act was passed, twenty years after Brown vs. Board, 100 years after the Slaughterhouse cases which gave us the incorporation clause were decided.

    After the heavy lifting was done by others along comes Morris Dees, a pompous guilt ridden southern lawyer, picture Bill Moyes with a law degree and an afro to scarf up on the scaps, and make himself filthy rich in the process. He made it his business to chase skinheads to get at the property they had, and by then it was like shooting ducks in a barrel. After he could find no more obvious villains he turned on white people as a group, and his pronouncements favoring illegal immigration and other destructive practices gave new life to his organization. Speaking generally of all such organizations, they begin with a mission, and once that mission is achieved, they do not just fade away like old soldiers. On the contrary, they expand their mission, so they can go on making money and troubling the living stream. Years ago, there were traces of an interview with Mo by a reporter who had the audacity and bad manners to visit his palatial estate which closely resembled Coleridge’s description of Xanadu, where he found the race baiter languishing in his wealty. Sort of like the palatial estate now owned by Obama’s spiritual advisor, replete with surveillance cameras and accomodations worth of a prince. I find people like Dees, Jerry Wright and their race baiting fellow hustlers to be as incongress to the brain as, to quote Raymond Chandler, a tarantula on a slice of angel food cake—there’s your slice metaphor Henry. But it does leave you with one question which points to the unfairness of life, even among the self anointed: how can it be that Sharpton is engaged in the same game—Milton Bradley has a game on it called Poverty Pimp, and has nothing to show for it except polarization, riots and forgiveness from the IRS. It must be the fault of the white man, and on that explanation, all three of them would agree. So would CNN.

  39. wbb, you won’t hear me defending the SPLC or Dees. The pursuit of justice has not always been the primary interest of either the organization or the man, though both would claim otherwise.

    I referenced the SPLC specifically to call attention to the fact that despite what the progressives and the media would have the country believe, the South does not have the market cornered on racial prejudice and racially motivated violence. There are hate groups in every state in this union – 44 in New York, alone. And, African Americans are the object of hatred of a significant number of these groups in states across this country. .

    I don’t own a Confederate flag. Have never owned one. Have no interest in owning one. It’s meaning to me is strictly related to heritage and history. The Confederate flag is a symbol, and the meaning attached symbols of all kinds is based on individual, personal belief and perception. Some may see it as a symbol of racism. To others it merely represents a symbol of the shared history of a region. Some who despise it presume it symbolizes only slavery and represents only hatred of whites against blacks. I would imagine those who do so have little actual knowledge of South and Southern culture.

    The progressives proclaim their disdain for and their condemnation of this flag loudly and frequently. At least that’s straight forward and honest – even if based on ignorance. They are less open about their disdain of the American flag, but they hold animosity for this symbol, as well. We’re all familiar with the picture of our so-called president refusing to salute the American flag. We in the South know that the far left consider us to be ignorant sub-human cretins. They have been saying so for generations. It requires no courage to publicly condemn the South and Southerners – no one is going to raise much hell about it. It’s politically correct to so. Barack and his followers have been quite open about their negative opinion of Southerners.

    What may not be as apparent to regular Americans of every other region of the country is that the far left feel the same about you. They may not be as vocal about it – that would take some courage, cost the far left candidates some votes. They’re not as open about it, but they don’t think much of regular (gun-toting, xenophobic, Bible-thumping, etc.) Americans either, and they really don’t think much of the American flag.

  40. The “Hate Map” on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website
    They purport to be thorough in their identification of hate groups, yet they neglect to mention the most conspicuous hate group of them all—the political class, whose actions demonstrate a hatred for the country as a whole. This palpable oversight invalidates their entire map. As a matter of fact, they can take their map and shove it up their ass. Who are they to say what a hate group is? The black caucaus is a hate group. Move-on is a hate group. And, yes, I shall not scruple to say that HuffPo is a hate group. But they are not mentioned. Which begs the most important question of all: how do I get off the HuffPo email mailing list. I have tried MacAfee, Windows Defender, Norton and every other anti virus program the market has to offer. Nothing works. HuffPo is like AIDS, Herpes and condominiums in a soft market: impossible to get rid of. Therefore the first thing I do is delete their incoming missiles with a deleted not read tactic. But that is annoying and labor intensive. Surely there is a better way. Unfortunately, I for one have not found it. And more is the pity for that.

  41. the far left feel the same about you (about Obama). They may not be as vocal about it – that would take some courage, cost the far left candidates some votes. They’re not as open about it, but they don’t think much of regular (gun-toting, xenophobic, Bible-thumping, etc.) Americans either, and they really don’t think much of the American flag.
    Well, free, its back to Tallerand: treason is a matter of dates.

    They may hate their messiah now, but they loved him in 2008 and they feted him in 2012.

    And the only reason they hate him now, assuming they really do, is because they may not be in charge come 2017.

    And they know what comes around goes around.

    That said, I have tremendous respect for the honest men of the left who saw through him from the beginning.

    I would be comfortable with them in my foxhole any day of the week.

    But the rest of the left, meaning the careerists, the haters, the dupes and the useful idiots deserve what they will get.

  42. Trump will have a field day on August 6:

    Jeb Bush has a new problem: John Roberts

    The former Florida governor suddenly finds himself called to answer for the chief justice appointed by his brother.

    Jeb Bush is always facing nagging questions about the Bush family’s political legacy. Now he’s got another: John Roberts.

    With conservatives up in arms over Roberts’ role in preserving Obamacare, Jeb Bush suddenly finds himself called to answer for the chief justice appointed by his brother, George W. Bush. And not just Roberts — Jeb is also taking flak for David Souter, the liberal justice appointed by his father, George H.W. Bush.

  43. wbboei
    June 27, 2015 at 3:34 pm
    The “Hate Map” on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website
    They purport to be thorough in their identification of hate groups, yet they neglect to mention the most conspicuous hate group of them all—the political class, whose actions demonstrate a hatred for the country as a whole. This palpable oversight invalidates their entire map. As a matter of fact, they can take their map and shove it up their ass. Who are they to say what a hate group is? The black caucaus is a hate group. Move-on is a hate group. And, yes, I shall not scruple to say that HuffPo is a hate group. But they are not mentioned. Which begs the most important question of all: how do I get off the HuffPo email mailing list. I have tried MacAfee, Windows Defender, Norton and every other anti virus program the market has to offer. Nothing works. HuffPo is like AIDS, Herpes and condominiums in a soft market: impossible to get rid of. Therefore the first thing I do is delete their incoming missiles with a deleted not read tactic. But that is annoying and labor intensive. Surely there is a better way. Unfortunately, I for one have not found it. And more is the pity for that.


    I don’t disagree with your assessment, wbb.

    A sentence or two in my 12:54 post may be poorly worded and unclear. By “you” I meant regular middle and working class white Americans in regions outside the South. It goes without saying that the far left detest white Southerners and presume us all to be inbred cognitively-challenged racists. They freely acknowledge their disdain for the South, with impunity.

    They really don’t think much of white moderates and conservatives from other regions of the country either, but they don’t publicly disparage and condemn them. Still, the antipathy the progs feel for these regular Americans and for the American flag is no less real than their stated antipathy toward the South and the Confederate flag.

  44. I went to visit a friend of mine who is a great golfer. He has a dog named bear. Bear thinks he is a retriever, but is really more of a ratter. A retriever sees the big picture, and knows when to chase the quarry and when to get out of the way. A ratter fixates on what is in front of him and does not move. As a result, when we go to hit a golf ball Bear closes in and gets hit in the teeth. Sometimes, he catches the ball. Most times he gets hit. And when we are done, he sits on the ground, stares, and begs you to continue the game/

    The elites treat the American People like ratters. They want us to see only what they decide to put in front of us and ignore the big picture. Big pictures are for big minds–like theirs, so they tell themselves. And with the collapse of our foreign policy and the tanking of our economy, you can see where those big minds have taken us, namely, half way to hell.

    I have heard at least four explanations for why Roberts (and to my amazement Kennedy) chose to eviscerate the Constitution last week. Some say he did what he did to protect the reputation of the court. That suggestion is counter intuitive. When he violates the constitution to protect the court, it does not protect the court’s reputation, it sullies it. Some say that Obama had something on him. I am sure that is true, but I cannot prove to you what it is. It could simply be the threat of bad publicity, or it could be something personal. But whatever it may be, it is not legitimate. Some say that he does not want to be the one to say no to what the political class wants to give people. In other words he does not care to be the skeleton at the feast. That is all fine and well.

    But as I see it, the most likely explanation for his treason can be found in who and what he is. He is a RINO–as RINO as it gets, he was appointed by W at the suggestion of Jebediah. He sees himself as part of the governing elite, and he construes his own role as Chief Justice to advance the gloablist agenda, rather than to do the honest work of a judge. He worries that as a judge, he has neither the power of the purse or the sword, and he defers to those who do. He has no respect whatsoever for the American People. None.

  45. Very tough week, albeit, not unexpected. Roberts was never going to undue ACA. As far as gay marriage, I don’t have an issue with it, just the folks in the privaye sector who will be sued by my fellow barristers for gender discrimination.
    Most disturbing was Obama’s phony “spontaneous” singing of “Amazing Grace”.

  46. ADMIN: Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch claims that Obama brought unlawful undue influence to bear on the Supreme Court to ignore the evidence and decide the Obamacare case, and the other case this past week his way. He says that the dissenting opinion of Justice Thomas alludes to this. I have not been able to find the dissent by Thomas in those cases, to see what light if any it sheds on the real motivations behind these unconstitutional decisions and the breach of judicial oath which they embody.

    Admin: can you find that dissent and see what he is talking about. It may be worth investigating–and drawing attention to. It is reasonable to assume that Scalia knows what it is, which is why he took on Roberts and Kennedy as fiercely as he did. Indeed, it may be something repugnant to the interests of justice. In searching for that explanation, we should disregard the tripe peddled by the political class, that Scalia is a sore loser, a hot head, etc.. His eloquence is typical. His level of rage is unprecedented.

    In sum, my bullshit detector tells me this: there is more to the story than they are willing to disclose. And, what we do not know can and most likely will hurt us. The political class believes they are safe, but the truth is no one is, any more than the elites were safe from the plague in Poe’s short story The Mask of Red Death.

  47. “And, as Judicial Watch has alleged and as Justice Thomas implies in his dissent, the Obama administration corruptly influenced the Supreme Court’s consideration of this issue and has tainted today’s ruling.”
    Admin: this is the passage I was referring to, from an email I received from Tom Fitton earlier in the week.

  48. Admin: a headline today read: ISIS is destroying the past to control the future.

    That is EXACTLY what the left is doing right here right now to the symbols of our history, and national heritage.




    Obama, ISIS, they’re all the same.

  49. And anyone who tells you they are barbarians and Obama is not are fools.

    Beheading is not his thing–so they say.

    Okay, fine, so what is “his thing”–you racist for presuming to question the messiah

    Thank you for the compliment.

    His thing is surveillance, IRS audits, influencing judges, lying, extorting money.

    Beheading of a different kind.

  50. When I said the globalist agenda, what I am referring to is the vision of companies like GE, and UN bureacrats like Canadian oil billionaire Chairman Mo, author of the RIO treaty and business partner of Soros in the global warming scam designed to promote their business venture of the green energy exchange. Chairman Mo was positively sublime in his condemnation of the white middle class. Such eloquence from a douche bag like him makes you jaw drop in a flood tide of admiration. Saving the world is the highest stage of Hubris—the heroin of illegal drugs. Still he is free to believe that he is the savior, just as that fabulist Brian Williams is perfectly free to believe that he was with the Union army at the Battle of Shilo, or Red Mike Edson (USMC first marine raider batallion) at Guadalcanal, or is Captain Jinx of the Horse Marines. It only when the start acting on those illusions that we should become nervous. Take it away Brian:

  51. Spot on Wbboei…we see it right before our very eyes. Never thought this would happen in my lifetime.

  52. Ever the ratter, Chairman Mo made his billions as an industrialist exploiting the environment for oil is now keen to save the environment as a UN official and partner of Obama’s godfather Soros, by exploiting the middle class. Once a ratter always a ratter. Or just a rat. If he wants to take his case to China, then perhaps I will believe him. But don’t hold your breath.
    The Epistle of Chairman Mo on A Post Industrial Society and The Need for a New World Order

    “Economic growth is a disease. The United States and its western allies have developed and benefitted from unsustainable patterns of production and consumption which have produced a global crisis. The current life styles and consumption patterns of the middle class involve high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen foods, reliance on fossil fuels, air conditioning, electric appliances, and suburban housing ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE. All of this must change, to save the planet.”

    Good stuff. You can see where Obama’s wife gets her material.

  53. Thanks,jbstonesfan, for posting Elvis’ American Trilogy. It’s one of my favorites…gives me goose bumps every time I hear it

  54. Mine too, Southern Born. I hope they don’t try banning “Dixie” or other songs about the South.

  55. What is unsustainable is the gluttony of the global elite. GE has given up their a large portion of their business and is currently surviving on ZIRP, buying back their own stock. And what has been revealed is that what they are sucking off the middle class is not going to global society, but into their pockets to maintain their gluttonous existence.

    Liars and looters, the lot of them.

  56. Well now HWC. What do you think of your boy Rove now?

    An exclusive excerpt from a new book by 2016 GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)96% obtained by Breitbart News, shows that Cruz detailed how GOP establishment operative Karl Rove told him he thought former President George H.W. Bush was “too old” to have good enough judgment to make endorsements on his own.

    Cruz’s new book, A Time For Truth: Reigniting the Promise of America, goes on sale this coming Tuesday, June 30. In it, according to a summary document also obtained by Breitbart News, Cruz doesn’t disappoint—breaking tons of news and walking through his backstory and how he got to where he is. He focuses on what he thinks needs to happen to reinvigorate the United States, end back room deals in Congress, and get the U.S. government back to what it’s supposed to be doing: Representing Americans nationwide.

    That’s why Cruz exposing Rove so harshly is significant. Rove has become something of a symbol of everything wrong with Washington—the face of those back room deals and the donor class, doing things not because they are the right thing to do, but because the wealthy donors want them done. In this particular instance, Rove is no different.

    The revelation about Rove in Cruz’s new book occurs as Cruz describes running for Attorney General of Texas in 2009 and 2010 and meeting with the elder former President Bush—whose son George W. Bush was also a former president, having just wrapped his second term in the White House— to seek his endorsement for the Attorney General race.

    “Karl had found out about my meeting with George H.W. Bush and called me on the phone,” Cruz writes. “He was irate, demanding, ‘What in the hell do you think you are doing?!’”

    Cruz noted that Rove was “in the process of helping raise money for the George W. Bush presidential library in Dallas,” and that “Texas donors were giving the Bushes tens of millions, including major donors who were supporting the Dallas state rep who wanted to run for attorney general,” so those donors “were now berating Karl.”

    “Well, Karl,” Cruz writes he responded to Rove on the phone. “I was just doing what you suggested when we met. Going out and getting support.”

    Cruz was referencing an earlier meeting he had with Rove, the former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, about a potential run for a higher office than the one he currently held: Solicitor General of Texas. “He advised that I should stay on the job as solicitor general, keep building my record, and find opportunities to systematically build political support for a future run,” Cruz wrote of what Rove told him in that meeting. “It was good advice, and I tried hard to follow it.”

    Rove, in response to Cruz’s comments in their phone conversation about how his meeting with the former president of the United States was exactly what he told Cruz to do earlier, replied: “Yeah, well I didn’t think you were going to get support from 41.”

    Cruz then wrote that Rove implied he didn’t think the elder Bush was competent enough to make decisions for himself anymore.

    “He suggested that the elder Bush was too old to have good judgment anymore,” Cruz wrote. “I was offended by that characterization and knew from my visit with 41 that it wasn’t remotely true. As Karl continued to yell at me, I responded calmly, ‘Look, I got my start in politics working for Bush 43 and for you… What would you like me to do?”

    “Return the check,” Rove replied, according to Cruz’s book.

    “Well, I can’t do that,” Cruz responded. “We already deposited it.”

    “I pointed out that under Texas’s election law, we had to list the contribution on our ethics disclosure report,” Cruz wrote, noting that Rove “paused for a few seconds.”

    “All right, fine,” Rove told him. “Then I want you to do nothing whatsoever to draw attention to it.”

    At that point, Cruz writes, Rove threatened him:

    And then he pulled out the hammer. He implied that if I made any news about Bush 41’s support, then Bush 43 would endorse my opponent and come out publicly for him—a threat that was fairly striking given that I had devoted four years of my life to working as hard as I could helping to elect Bush and serving in his administration.

    I always wondered whether Karl had the authority to make these threats on behalf of the former president—he certainly acted like he did. In any event, the last thing I wanted to do in running a fledgling campaign in Texas was to get on the wrong side of Rove and the second President Bush.

    So, Cruz agreed not to draw attention to the George H.W. Bush endorsement. “Fine,” he replied to Rove. “We’ll do nothing to draw attention to it.”

    Cruz wrote that Heidi, his wife and potential future first lady, depending on what happens in the 2016 elections, was furious with this whole situation: “When I hung up the phone, I turned to Heidi, who’d been listening to the whole conversation,” Cruz writes. “She was trembling, and visibly angry. At Karl. And at me, for caving in.”

    “You know what?” Heidi Cruz said to Ted. “This is what’s screwed up about the Republican Party. Why the hell should the Republican nominee for attorney general in Texas depend not on their qualifications, but on who the donors are to the Bush presidential library?”

    Shortly thereafter, Cruz writes, the former President George H.W. Bush sent him a quote and press release to announce his endorsement of Cruz’s campaign. But Cruz ordered his staff to get rid of it.

    “A couple of hours after my conversation with Rove, we received an email from Bush 41’s office,” Cruz writes. “They had approved the draft endorsement we had sent, an unbelievably effusive statement from George and Barbara Bush calling me ‘the future of the Republican Party.’ I was grateful yet again. It was difficult to imagine that Bush 41 was unaware of the consternation that his endorsement would cause Rove.”

    Nonetheless, Cruz told his staff to “take our draft press release announcing the endorsement and throw it in the trash.”

    “We then informed Bush 41’s office that I was immensely thankful for the support, that it meant so much to Heidi and to me, but we weren’t going to release a statement,” Cruz writes. “We didn’t want to anger Karl or 43. The former president’s office said he understood.”

    Cruz eventually dropped out of the bid for Attorney General when then-Attorney General Greg Abbott decided to run again. He had not been planning to run again, but Abbott then decided not to give up his office, so at that point Cruz backed out of the race. Abbott, of course, is now the governor of Texas—and Cruz would go on a few years later to become a national conservative rockstar in the United States Senate.

    This excerpt from Cruz’s book is sure to cause division in Bush world, as a third Bush–former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, 41’s son and 43’s brother–seeks the White House in 2016, running against Cruz in the Republican Primary.


    First off, plenty of Mexican illegals have been accused and found guilty of rape. Because it runs counter to a narrative designed to pack the Southwest with Democrats, the same media that manufactures a rape crisis in our university system, buries actual rapes committed by these Democrats-In-Waiting.

    What Donald Trump said about illegal aliens and rape and crime was not untrue, far from it. Trump’s sin was saying What Must Not Be Said; and saying it fearlessly.

    Naturally, then, Trump must be destroyed by the mainstream media. Unfortunately for them, the media made just one mistake: they forgot that Donald Trump isn’t the usual-usual Republican who rolls over like a whipped puppy every time the media piles on.

    Univision was intended to be the tip of the spear in this attack, and now it is Univision on defense. Moreover, it is Univision that is losing.

    Univision was sure that if it publicly and loudly dropped Trump’s Miss Universe organization, including the beauty pageant, that the boldness of such an act of public shaming would put Trump on defense, and possibly implode his campaign. This was Jorge Ramos and Univision going straight for the kill-shot.


    Donald Trump didn’t build an empire and forever alter the skylines of major cities throughout the world by rolling over every time an anti-American leftist like Jorge Ramos takes a shot at him.

    We are now witnessing Trump doing what he should be doing (what he did so effectively to Neil Young) — what no Republican ever does: Trump’s not only fighting back, he’s fighting back smart, and doing so in a way that is exposing Univision as the left-wing propaganda machine it is.

    First Trump banned Univision and its employees from his properties; he then loudly and publicly accused Univision of being in bed with the corrupt Mexican government; he is now threatening to file a defamation suit against Univision president Alberto Ciurana for comparing the real estate billionaire to a terrorist who murdered nine people in cold blood last week.

    In other words, Trump is fighting like Univision, like a Leftist — fearlessly and to win. And it certainly helps that in this case he has the truth on his side. Better still, Trump is using the controversy to his messaging advantage. He’s not just exposing and damaging Univision — a long-term enemy of the Republican Party, he’s using the publicity to get the truth out about the problems covered up by our media surrounding our porous Southern border.

    And now there’s a chance Univision could lose the option to host a Republican forum. Fox has a Spanish language network, that’s the place to go, not into whatever traps Ramos and Univision have planned.

    The media is correct, the Republican Party does have a “Donald Trump problem,” but not the one they describe.

    By actually fighting and fighting smart, Trump is not just showing the courage the Republican party lacks, he’s displaying leadership and competence. You might not like or agree with Trump, but you had damn well better respect him.

    Competence and leadership are crucially important in a presidential campaign. Hillary Clinton understands this. For all her flaws and scandals, Hillary knows that if she looks confident and like a leader through it all, she can win the presidency despite her serial-corruption.

    In large part, McCain and Romney lost because they allowed themselves to constantly be put on defense. And after being on defense for weeks, they would eventually surrender to take the pressure off. They looked weak and feckless — like men who could never handle ISIS or Putin. This doesn’t just turn off fence-sitters, it keeps some of your base at home.

    Democrats have figured this out. This is why they accused Romney of killing a woman. Sure, it was shameless and a lie, but it kept Romney on defense and the base loved it. The accusation might have been a completely fabrication, but it was a competent fabrication.

    Like the Democrats, Trump has figured out that the public will forgive you for being wrong but they will never forgive you for looking weak.

    If the GOP can’t handle Trump, how in God’s name will they handle the Clinton machine backed by the media in a general election?

    Kissing the backside of Jorge Ramos and Univision is not the road to the White House — it is the path to a trap.

    The candidate who understands this can win. The ones who don’t will be eaten alive in 2016.

    Better we find out now before pouring all our energy and time into yet another milquetoast loser.

  58. By actually fighting and fighting smart, Trump is not just showing the courage the Republican party lacks, he’s displaying leadership and competence.

    It does make one feel vindicated and heard and satisfied to see and hear Trump being truthful, tough, consistent, and confident. I hope he keeps it up.

    As far as actually being a president, though, I’d like to know he has another side. One that doesn’t have to respond to every slight (he doesn’t seem able to ignore personal insults), one who can carry on more delicate negotiations without any threats of using his immense power to wipe the other out, one who doesn’t tweet as he does (it would seem very petty and unpresidential). I’d like to know that he can sometimes behave with tact, and that he can be in the presence of someone else, particularly someone who also has power or perhaps is just famous, without feeling a need to self-promote and prove he is “better”.

    In other words, not everything is a competition, not everything needs to be at “full blast”. There are certainly times when you “negotiate” that you don’t have to deprive the other of their sense of integrity, warranted pride, etc. A lot of times in deals (maybe not in the corporate world (?), but in serious world negotiations) you try to work for something that both sides feel is a win.

    I’ve seen people on tv who know Trump say that he isn’t just what you see on tv. So it would be nice to see that sometime – not just the showman lol

  59. From Legal Insurrection:

    A recent WSJ poll found that 31% of the republican primary voters were open to supporter the presidential candidacy of Carly Fiorina.

    This represents a significant 14% jump in her polling numbers in only the past three months!

    As Fiorina’s prospects rise, so do her chances of being included in the top tier Republican debates, and she’s campaigning aggressively for that opportunity.

  60. Roberts is a “fixer”. A servant, flunky, hireling. That he was appointed by the elite of the elites, a Bush, at the time of the opening of the chief justice, is SOP. He has changed masters as time marches on and for what reason doesn’t matter. What Roberts doesn’t understand is that “fixers” are interchangeable, replaceable or become plain old obsolete especially if they get spotted as Roberts has now. Jeb! will be ragged on because their guy didn’t stay their guy which points to weakness. A couple of new justices replacing some of the ancients and Roberts is nobody again. This will be part of the Republicans campaign in 2016 and Roberts gave them plenty to run on. Unless this was the plan which is entirely possible.

  61. Yes. indeed, the Republicans are desperate to have Fiorina in the debates. They think she will be able to attack Hillary in ways men cannot. So she is surely being lifted up and promoted even with polls. I’ve read several articles about their fear that with Trump entering the race she might get knocked down to the second tier and not be to able to be an aggressive attack dog on the televised debate stage.

    Once Fiorina has served her purpose of attacking and supposedly getting the “female vote”, we shall see how supportive all the Hannity, WSJ and the RNC types are of her for president or VP. Hopefully Trump will tell it like it is in this situation. The media is surely doing all they can to promote her.

  62. Admin: here are some insights from Richard Fernadez on the end game perpetrated by the Left:

    The West is filled with millions of lone wolfs capable of random violence.

    They are the product of a multi-decade campaign to deliberately empty people of their culture; to actually make them ashamed of it.

    They were purposely drained of God, country, family so they could be stuffed with the latest narrative of the progressive meme machine.

    The Gramscian idea was to produce a blank slate upon which the Marxist narrative could be written.

    Too bad for the Gramscians that the Islamists are beating them to the empty sheets of paper.

    And they are better at it too.

    Maybe the old Bolsheviks could have given ISIS a run for its money, but today’s liberals have declined from their sires. George Orwell observed the takeover of hardcore Bolshevism by the periphery in the 1930s.

    The first thing that must strike any outside observer is that Socialism, in its developed form is a theory confined entirely to the middle classes.

    The typical Socialist is not, as tremulous old ladies imagine, a ferocious-looking working man with greasy overalls and a raucous voice.

    He is either a youthful snob-Bolshevik who in five years’ time will quite probably have made a wealthy marriage and been converted to Roman Catholicism;

    Or, still more typically, a prim little man with a white-collar job, usually a secret teetotaller and often with vegetarian leanings, with a history of Nonconformity behind him, and, above all, with a social position which he has no intention of forfeiting.

    This last type is surprisingly common in Socialist parties of every shade;

    In addition to this there is the horrible–the really disquieting–prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together.

    One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.

    The good news is there are no more Stalins left. The bad news is that the PC set have replaced them.

    Sheepdom in man is the product of conditioning, to remake what was once, in the words of Richard Connell, The Most Dangerous Game.

    Now, when the wolves stalk through the sheepfold everyone waits for the Someone though he is nowhere to be found.

    What is to be done?

    The first task is to start gathering a circle of friends who live within walking distance of your home. Four people — a handyman, a nurse or doctor, an ex-cop or soldier and a strongback for preference — will do.

    Your second task is to support the causes you care about. Volunteer at your church or club. If you have no club, start one. Donate to your favorite website. If you don’t have a favorite, find one or go online yourself. Buy the book of an author you admire.

    And switch off the damned telescreen.

    Otherwise you’ll finish up alone, lonely and afraid — desperately waiting for

    Someone to tell her what to do — even if that Someone is ISIS.

  63. Yes. indeed, the Republicans are desperate to have Fiorina in the debates. They think she will be able to attack Hillary in ways men cannot.
    I am so beyond worrying about Hillary at this point.

    It is the country that I worry about 24-7.

    Unlike 2008 Hillary no longer speaks to me and my values.

    But that does not mean I will support the Republican Party.

    Because they too have shown their true colors.

    I doubt the Republicans are “desperate”.

    They are too insular, complacent and too corrupt to be desperate.

    They are incapable of standing up for the American People.

    The aftermath of 2014 proved that to a fare thee well.

    And they destroy those in their ranks who seek to help us, e.g. Trump, Cruz, Carson etc.

    The danger Carly presents to Hillary is she undermines the year of the woman meme.

    Also, she gives other women the courage among their peers to not vote for Hillary.

    The way to counter this is to come clean and move to the middle.

    But that would mean taking on Obama, and she will never do that.

    The candidate who does that successfully stands an excellent chance of winning.

  64. If it were 2008, I would not post video clips of Republicans. My focus then was the same as yours. Electing Hillary. I believed she could help bring back the prosperity of the 1990s, after Bush had us embarked on a dead end. After seeing her carry Obama’s water, and pursuing an Obama III platform, my interest in her has waned, and, at the same time, my concern to the future of this country has heightened. That is why I post other points of view which if we are honest with ourselves, and ignore identity politics, are more congruent with our values. I think Carly’s statement of unlocking the potential of people is different from Hillary’s statement that she will use government to help the people who are invisible. It is like the Christian paradigm of making people self reliant rather than placing them on the dole where they are controllable by government because they are dependent on government, and are not free. Its parable of teaching people to fish rather than just giving them fish. One of my neighbors was an army officer in World War II, he was highly decorated, and he fought against Irwin Rommel. After the war, he became friends with Rommel’s son who became mayor of Stuttgardt and based on that connection, he set up the first Mercedes Benz dealership in the United States, Phil Smart. He became wealthy, and as he did, he gave that money away to charitable causes. Every year he would dress up as Santa Claus and made frequent visits to Children’s Hospital to tend to dying children. He was a fixture at his alma mater Roosevelt High School, and he would appear as a speaker in a colonel’s uniform with was as distant to the eye as a civil war uniform. I asked him what leadership was about. He told me leadership was not about rank, privilege, wealth, all the things we are brought up to believe are important. He said leadership is about only one thing: service to other people. Every politician talks about that. But how many of them live up to that obligation?

  65. Southern Born
    June 28, 2015 at 8:18 am

    I agree Southern, Fiorina is just another female pawn like Feathers4brains…all bun and no meat. Not a snowballs chance in Hell of winning the Primary, and Fiorina will able to attack Hillary on a personal level that men not dare to cross the line. She is playing the alligator in the mote. Fiorina is never going to live in the WhiteHouse (castle), but she is hoping that by chewing off one of her legs, Hillary will fall to her political death.

    Talk about a Rethug fairy tale.

  66. The Problem and the Solution

    Did I mention my political acumen is nil? I just do not “get” people. But I have always been good with number system. This is an interesting article from Zero Hedge, who are not fans of Hillary. But they do critique the current system quite well and shed some light on just how deep we are buried. Here is one interesting article with lots of numbers that I understand:

    …Then of course there’s all the Clash of the Titans between two political dynasties, the heir apparent of the Bush crown versus the Clintons for the right to take over as titular head of a tenuous global anarchy of 1,826 billionaires, 67 of whom own half the assets of the entire world, the one percent whom politicians bow to more than the other 99% of America’s citizens…

    So, from this perspective, the job of the President is to manage billionaires. I guess we know why the middle class has been looted and all branches of our government corrupted, but it is hard to accept just how completely that has gone. And it would infer that Ostalin was installed in 2008 to prevent the reset that would have changed out the billionaire pool to more productive, competitive individuals. The ZIRP POTUS, destroying workforce participation and the middle class and running up $10 Trillion in National Debt.

  67. This past week witnessed a megapoltical change in our system. We no longer have a democracy and the people have been reduced to the status of subjects. I am as pessimistic as Andrew McCarthy that things will go back to the way they were before. A friend of mine sent me an email with a clock measuring the days, hours and minutes until Obama’s term expires. The implication is that on January 2017, the nightmare will end. Nothing could be further from the truth. Now that Roberts and his fellow progressives have forsaken the judicial role in favor of a legislative one, the promise of lifetime appointment is unsustainable. Their term in office must be limited, as that of every legislator is. What’s more they should be forced to campaign for office. Here’s McCarthy’s take which begins with a hat tip to the sheer hypocrisy and cynicism of Mr. Roberts–which is off the richter scale.

    “But this Court is not a legislature!!!”

    Chief Justice John Roberts actually published that sentence in his same-sex marriage dissent on Friday . . .

    a mere 24 hours after his maestro’s performance in the Supreme Court’s legislative rewrite of the Affordable Care Act —

    formerly known as “Obamacare,” but now etched in memory as “SCOTUScare,”

    thanks to Justice Antonin Scalia’s withering dissent.

    Roberts’s denial that the Court legislates is astonishing in its cynicism:

    In saving SCOTUScare, the chief justice not only usurped Congress’s law-writing role with gusto; he claimed the powers, first, to divine legislative purpose from its contradictory expression in legislative language, and, then, to manufacture legislative ambiguity as the pretext for twisting the language to serve the contrived purpose.

    It takes cheek to pull that off one day and, on the next, to inveigh against the very thought of it.

    Already, an ocean of ink has been spilled analyzing, lauding, and bemoaning the Supreme Court’s work this week:

    1. a second life line tossed to SCOTUScare in just three years;

    2. the location of a heretofore unknown constitutional right to same-sex marriage almost a century-and-a-half after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment; and–

    3. the refashioning of Congress’s Fair Housing Act to embrace legal academe’s loopy “disparate impact” theory of inducing discrimination.

    Yet, for all the non-stop commentary, one detail goes nearly unmentioned — the omission that best explains this week’s Fundamental Transformation trifecta.

    Did you notice that there was not an iota of speculation about how the four Progressive justices would vote? There was never a shadow of a doubt. In the plethora of opinions generated by these three cases, there is not a single one authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, or Sonia Sotomayor. There was no need. They are the Left’s voting bloc. There was a better chance that the sun would not rise this morning than that any of them would wander off the reservation. There was not an iota of speculation about how the four Progressive justices would vote. (My Note: they are mere rabinical automotons with as much give and take as a scottish terrier watching a rat hole)

    It is simply accepted that these justices are not there to judge. They are there to vote. They get to the desired outcome the same way disparate-impact voodoo always manages to get to discrimination: Start at the end and work backwards. Guiding precedents are for the quaint business of administering justice.

    In the social justice business, the road never before traveled will do if one less traveled is unavailable.

    But there’s a problem. Once it has become a given that a critical mass of the Supreme Court is no longer expected, much less obliged, to do law, then the Court is no longer a legal institution.

    It is a political institution.

    That is where we are. We should thus drop the pretense that the Court is a tribunal worthy of the protections our system designed for a non-political entity — life-tenure, insulation from elections, and the veil of secrecy that shrouds judicial deliberations. If the justices are going to do politics, they should be in electoral politics.

    If John Roberts is going to write laws on the days when he isn’t posing as powerless to write laws, if Anthony Kennedy truly believes the country craves his eccentric notion of liberty (one that condemns government restraints on marriage 24 hours after it tightens government’s noose around one-sixth of the U.S. economy), then their seats should not be in an insulated third branch of government.

    They should be in an accountable third chamber of Congress.

    If, for old times’ sake, we want to maintain some harmless vestige of the charade, then let them keep wearing their robes to work — for at least as long as they can persuade voters to keep them in these jobs.

    Let’s dispense, though, with the fiction that their judgments are the product of legal acumen rather than sheer will.

    Today’s Court has been called “post-constitutional.”

    That’s accurate, but it’s not complete.

    Its latest rulings are post-law.

    The SCOTUScare case, King v. Burwell, was not a constitutional case at all; it was a straightforward matter of statutory interpretation. What made it ostensibly straightforward was the law: a statute that says, “an Exchange established by the State,” cannot possibly mean “an Exchange not established by the State.” If we were a nation of laws, such a case would never make it to the highest court in the land. But we are a nation of will, the will of a determined political movement, so the law never had a chance.

    The Supreme Court is not unique in being captured by progressives.

    It is a lagging indicator, its crush of late-June edicts reflecting what’s become of the political class of which it is now very much a part.

    The president rules unilaterally and in contravention of the laws. Half of Congress applauds, the rest shrugs and says there is nothing to be done.

    The elements of the progressive agenda the political branches don’t feel safe implementing are delegated to anonymous bureaucrats in the administrative state.

    The courts are there to finish the job, to give any mopping up the aura of legal rigor.

    But none of it is about the law, or even expected to be.

    That time is gone.

    — Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

    Read more at:

  68. Andy’s point is the Supreme Court is no longer a legal institution, it is purely a political one, and as such it should forfeit its right to life time tenure and stand for public elections. Otherwise, the public is disenfranchised, and the nation succumbs to the whim and caprice of a bevy of Platonic guardians, advancing the progressive agenda, which aims to consolidate despotic power in Washington. In the words of that old confederate monument: a tyrannical and oppressive federal government.


    Ed Schultz: Purge of Confederate Flag is ‘Desecration’ of American History

    You know, I understand the effort to remove the Confederate flag from state capitols in the South and anywhere else in this country. There’s no doubt about it that it sends the wrong message. But at this point, I asked the question, is it overboard? And I don’t understand the attempt to erase American history as if it’s going to change our course as a nation. It’s not.

    The desecration of our nation’s history, I think, is dangerous and I think it’s unproductive. American history and our roots as a nation needs (sic) to be, number one, understood. It needs to be properly interpreted. It needs to be taught. And at a level, I think, it needs to be respected to be put in its proper context to the recognition of what has developed our great nation and how we have moved forward.

    Now what that flag represented at the time is no longer relevant in modern-day society. It’s no longer relevant to our moral compass. It’s no longer relevant to who we are as a country. And I think it’s display in public places, number one, is misplaced and it should be corrected and it is being corrected. But to erase the roots of our country serves no purpose for future generations. There’s now a big discussion about, what are we going to do with statues that are inside the United States Capitol? I think you can make the case that the Capitol is a museum because of all the incredible historical events that have happened in our Capitol, and it is a part of our national discussion about where we have been.

    And so, I think it serves no purpose to this country for future generations if we’re going to totally rewrite the history books and I see an avalanche starting with the removal of the Confederate flag. We have to do this in a smart way.

  70. Another thing that can be done is Congress could begin stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction to decide certain cases.

    Civil disobedience is yet another options.

    There are megapolitical solutions as well, things I do not want to think about.

    One way or another, this assault on our freedom and liberty of the American People must not go unanswered.

    The brazen actions by the court undermines its legitimacy:

    As Justice Scalia powerfully explained, Hubris is sometimes defined as o’erweening pride; and pride, we know, goeth before the fall. . . . With each decision of ours that takes from the People a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we move one step closer to being reminded of our impotence.

    Nearly 50 years ago, my Constitutional Law professor said something on the question of impotence. He said the Supreme Court is wise to tread lightly because they have neither the power of the sword (referring to the executive branch) or the purse (meaning congress). Let us therefore say that Justice Roberts and Kennedy, as well as the progressive justices, have thrown caution to the wind, and time will tell where it lands.

    Read more at:

  71. If you torture the evidence enough, it will confess to anything.

    Constitutional torture is an art, and Chief Justice John Roberts has emerged as its Andy Warhol: an impresario who will put his name on anything.

    The main difference between our elites and their Iranian counterparts is that the Iranians take their sharia rather more seriously than we take our constitutional law:

    John Roberts’s opinion in Burwell wasn’t just wrong — wrong can be forgiven — it was embarrassing, craven, and intellectually indefensible.

    Antonin Scalia was right to let him have it with both barrels, but he’d do better to resign from the Supreme Court — it is difficult to see how an honorable man could be associated with it.

    At this point, we know more than we did a week ago.

    We know that the Court’s liberals are going to vote one way,

    We know that some of its conservatives will probably vote another, and-

    We know that that John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy will, if the goblins in their heads are sufficiently insistent, ratify whatever Starbucks-customer consensus exists for 80 miles on either side of Interstate 95.

    That the chief justice went one way on health care and another on marriage tells us nothing at all about the law or the Constitution:

    It tells us about John Roberts.

    And that is the problem.

    Read more at:

  72. The main difference between our elites and their Iranian counterparts is that the Iranians take their sharia rather more seriously than we take our constitutional law

    That’s scary….

    That the chief justice went one way on health care and another on marriage tells us nothing at all about the law or the Constitution:

    It tells us about John Roberts.

    And that is the problem.

    I get that in the healthcare law, they clearly said something said what it didn’t (and they even ignored the videos which showed its architect explaining the trickery, and that the subsidy threat was meant to get every state to play along).

    But what would have been the right thing with gay marriage? Maybe working for a constitutional amendment, as was done with women’s equality?

  73. John Roberts told us why he ruled for Obamacare. He did not want to upset the markets. He said it plain. Now, someone needs to just look at his financial disclosure report to know he should not be on the bench. Judicial Watch has alot of these on file for people because it is an intimidating process to request the FDR of a judge who has been assigned your case. Roberts has one there from 2009.

    I ran in to this system about 10 years ago and they are CORRUPT. The complaint system is useless. I got banned from filing judicial misconduct reports in the Fifth Circuit after the second complaint where I listed violations of codes of conduct for the judges that ruled on my case.

  74. I cannot get what happened last week off my mind.

    How lucky for the ignoranti that it never entered theirs.

    They are just glad SCOTUS did not take away their high cost low value Obamacare insurance.

    There is an x factor here.

    Roberts is a Jebediah man.

    He has always been a squirrel.

    The only new thing we learned about him

    Is that he is a deranged one

    Kennedy is a different story

    A competent jurist for so many years

    But now this . . .

    I think they were subjected to undue influence

    As Justice Thomas writes

    Remember, this is the same Administration

    That tapped Sharyl Attkisson’s phones

    Tells whistle blowers that they will “fuck them over and put them in a cage”

    If they speak to reporters.

    Question: would an administration that behaves in that manner

    Threaten a Supreme Court judge with whatever it had on him?

    Roberts decision is internally inconsistent.

    Kennedy’s decision was entirely out of character.

    We cannot say for sure.

    But the law of probability suggests that something very wrong went down.

  75. Judicial Watch also believes that undue influence was exerted on Justice Roberts.

    By an administration with a proven track record of extortion.

    To produce a set of decisions which benefit Obama and defy common sense.

  76. It’s no longer relevant to who we are as a country.
    That begs the ultimate question.

    Who are we as a country?

    I doubt very much that we can agree on that.

    The differences are not longer reconcilable.

  77. wbboei,

    I am telling you, this is not a recent development. It escalated with the election of GWB and the reformation of monopolies. That was the ExxonMobil merger and the day of the multinational corporation arose. Laws were changed so that judges could declare summary judgments. Why were there no riots in the streets when the people no longer had a right to a trial by a jury of their piers???? They could even hold special interests in the business of parties in the case. It is not surprising that a Bush judge just did whatever the hell he wanted to. It has been going on for some time, just not on this scale.

    The Bush’s are mad as hatters. Too many generations removed from the reality of life. That we could even consider Jeb. What does that tell you????

    We need massive reform. The China Chairman is having his corruption investigations. We need to start ours.

    The courts are as corrupt as the legislature and the executive branch.

  78. A couple years ago, Thomas Crowne wrote an article that reveals the corruption of the big media-Obama cartel. A rich democrat donor got a needed organ. The baby daughter of a poor democrat died. And big media covered up the whole schabang. This is the world of Obama. It is also the world of the future, because this weed had grown deep roots on the bench, and elsewhere.

    It is the corruption and politicization of every aspect of our health system in one story.

    It is the powerful beating the people.

    It is someone’s baby girl dying because he has not given Democrats money, and a 61 year old trial lawyer getting extra chances.

    A rich Democrat worked the system and broke the rules to have a chance at life.

    A not-rich, not-Democrat is publicly told to just die already.

    A real press would dedicate whole reporting desks to this.

    If John McCain or Mitt Romney was President today, HHS would be under constant assault (and rightfully!) for potential cronyism.

    Yet the national papers with the most investment in covering the Federal Government won’t even look at this.

    That is the danger of liberal bias.

    The press is not the fourth branch of government, despite pretensions to the contrary.

    But it is vital to a functioning government.

    The media — regardless of political preference — should be asking basic questions:

    Which agencies have done terrible, corrupt, wasteful and despicable things and haven’t admitted it?

    Which Congressmen have pulled strings for donors and broken the law? If we had a truly free press, these stories would drive coverage — and more importantly, reporting — for a year if not more.

    It is a government that works by breaking its rules for the powerful.

    But a press that sees liberals as the good guys, and government as justice personified, can’t see this when their side is the powerful.

    Now, this is made worse because media watchdogs are too close to those they cover by class and ideology. But they’re not robots. We’re not Marxists. We know that class and even ideology can be put aside.

    Yet they won’t.

    Liberal media bias is about small people crushed under a leviathan while the great and the good ride high on its back.

    It is about small stories that add up to a giant, sickening picture being systematically ignored.

    It is about the failure of people who think the First Amendment was crafted for their personal use not bothering to exercise it.

    Someone’s baby girl will either die because she didn’t give to Democrats; or won’t, because she was the rare one whose father worked the system to shame the powerful.

    How many others of the weak will suffer while the powerful who gave to the ruling party prosper? And will we ever hear about it?
    Spoilers: We won’t.

  79. Capital controls have been instituted in Greece with bank and markets closed Monday. The Bank of China reduced interest rates again and it will be interesting how the markets do when they open tomorrow. I would guess we will see some hit on our markets.

  80. wbboei,

    GOD, grant me the serenity
    to accept the things
    I cannot change,

    Courage to change the
    things I can, and the
    wisdom to know the difference.

    Living one day at a time;
    Enjoying one moment at a time;
    Accepting hardship as the
    pathway to peace.

    Taking, as He did, this
    sinful world as it is,
    not as I would have it.

    Trusting that He will make
    all things right if I
    surrender to His Will;

    That I may be reasonably happy
    in this life, and supremely
    happy with Him forever in
    the next.


  81. I wonder if we should stop sitting around waiting for Hillary to let us know if she is going to save the world. Maybe we should be making her a “to do” list and look ahead for the possibility of things getting better.

    #1. Fix the Healthcare Nightmare
    #2. Close the borders.

  82. Lu4PUMA
    June 28, 2015 at 7:30 pm
    Whatever helps you make it through the night.

    However, my sense is that we can turn this thing around.

    But that will never happen with an establishment candidate.

  83. Lu4PUMA
    June 28, 2015 at 6:54 pm

    I am telling you, this is not a recent development. It escalated with the election of GWB and the reformation of monopolies.
    It began after the fall of the Soviet Union, and The End of History narrative, as I have said many times.

    But the main culprit is Obama.

    He was the bait and switch candidate.

  84. The courts are as corrupt as the legislature and the executive branch.

    By the stringent ethical standards that govern the judicial branch vs. the lax ones that govern the others, particularly with respect to conflicts of interest, they are more corrupt. This assumes I am reading Roberts right. If I am reading him wrong, then he has to be the stupidest man to ever sit on the Supreme Court. Harry was asked about Justice Tom Clark. He replied Tom is a nice guy . . . but he is also a dumb son of a bitch. Tom gave the commencement speech at my law school graduation. Truman’s assessment was not wide of the mark. But as dumb as Tom was, he never legislated one day, and the next day maintained that the Court must not legislate. And he never gave multiple mutually exclusive excuses for why he desecrated the Constitution—first it was to protect the reputation of the court, next it was to protect insurance market, god know what his excuse will be next week. It is a moving target. And it suggest an alternate theory for why Roberts violated his oath of office, namely stupidity, or in the timeless prose of give em Hell Harry, Roberts, like Tom Clark is a dumb son of a bitch.

  85. By some cruel coincidence, while everyone was celebrating victories on really important issues like transfats, transgender and alternative marriage the world has suddenly had a conniption.

    Aside from the perils the Guardian cited, there is ISIS, China’s economic troubles and the growing tension in the South China Sea. While awaiting Someone to fix things or bail them out, the Greeks are reduced to wondering what comes next. The BBC has a one-word German term for the Greek financial system. Kaput.

    Almost to cap off a hexed week a 3rd resupply mission to the International Space Station blew up shortly after launch.

    If this week wasn’t so momentous it would be calamitous.

    The “triumphs” of the last two weeks have been largely symbolic and artificial.

    But the offsetting setbacks have disturbingly been altogether too spontaneous and worse, inevitable.

    The former have been achievements of campaigning. The latter have been failures in governance

    A series of atomized events, each seemingly harmless by itself can suddenly be fused by a spark into something wholly unexpected.

    Don’t trust the narrative.

    Trust the physics.

    Those who put their faith in campaigning instead of competence should remember Stein’s law:

    ”If something cannot go on forever, it will stop”

    And and Murphy’s Law:

    ”Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong”.

    Those two edicts will overrule any law that human beings care to enact.

    Politicians pretend the Narrative can solve everything.

    But in actuality arithmetic always wins.

    It’s not even close.

  86. I think Hillary has made it very clear where she stands on Obamacare and illegal immigration.
    I believe strongly in a not for profit universal healthcare system and abhor forcing Americans into the overpriced substandard gravy train for Pharma and the big insurers, but this is what Hillary now supports.
    I abhor her support of illegal immigration and her disrespect for our immigration laws.
    I continue to read this site for the interesting analysis and the variety of news sources that are posted. However, I no longer support her candidacy and with each day the chances that I would vote for her diminish. My best hope right now is on Trump. If you live in NY, you know that there is a lot more to the man than you see in some of his clips.
    He expresses so much of what I believe. He’s a competent and visionary manager, a hard worker and has raised some fine children…..all qualities I admire.

    At this point I would also vote for Scott Walker before Hillary. I see no good choices except Trump at this point.

    If those Americans who came out strong in 2012 to vote against Ocare and illegal immigration have a horse in the race in 2016 and come out strong again in 2016, then Hillary will be defeated. As Admin has written, she is putting all her eggs in the Obama coalition basket and has abandoned centrists and the middle of the country.

    Hillary has no one to blame this time except herself. She has taken extreme positions. She is strongly supportive of an unpopular divisive president who doesn’t even poll at 50%. She will be the Bush / Obama 4th term…..all so sad. She is not offering anything new, not showing a vision of a better America.

    I can only hope that there are enough Americans who still want to preserve the values and aspirations of this once great country. However, we rank something like 27 or 29 out of some 33 developed nations in the percentage of people living in poverty. Opening our border with no controls and absorbing millions of poor and uneducated from south of the border only makes the problem worse, accelerating our pitch toward third world nation status.
    My husband and I have tried to save for retirement in a decade of almost 0 interest and a risky market. The costs of basic necessities and health care has gone through the roof as jobs and work opportunities have been lost. And we both have post graduate degrees.
    We live in an area so swamped with illegal immigrants that we pick up a lot of the costs in doubled school taxes, less access to Doctors, higher costs for police and code enforcement etc. Our local high school is now more that 50% Hispanic. They can no longer field a football team. Despite the fact that I see soccer as a far healthier sport, there were some local boys who were counting on football scholarships to attend college who lost that opportunity.

    If we want to become a Spanish speaking country shouldn’t we have had the opportunity to vote as a nation on that? Oh, that’s right, we did. Our politicians, Hillary included, have just ignored the will of the people.

  87. Perhaps it is a good thing that Trey Gowdy’s true partisan Republican nature is becoming evident so we will no longer be fooled by him into thinking he is the real deal. He sounds like “son of Ken Starr” to me! I’m so done with him.

  88. Panic.

    DOW drop a shocking 150 point on bad news from Greece.

    According to big media.

    MSN give me a loud pop up so indicating.

    Well, fuck you, and your efforts to engender false panic.

    Call me when it drops 1000 points.

    Otherwise, don’t bother me.

  89. totally disgusted
    June 29, 2015 at 9:24 am
    I do not disagree.

    The problem is simple and straightforward for those with eyes to see.

    The establishment gives us a choice of personalities, as opposed to a choice in policies.

    The elites reserve the right to say what the policies are.

    And we are fed a steady diet of Kimmie, Katkin–used to be Bruce, and the ultimate victory of the Stonewall riots.

    This substitution of the cult of personality for the sober task of governing is what we have.

    It is a formula for disaster.

  90. Alito

    Alito gives it up in the first paragraph:

    The question in these cases, however, is not what States should do about same-sex marriage but whether the Constitution answers that question for them. It does not. The Constitution leaves that question to be decided by the people of each State.

    It’s the 10th Amendment argument we’ve all been looking for. Along for the ride comes the procreation and “purpose of marriage” argument:

    Adherents to different schools of philosophy use different terms to explain why society should formalize mar- riage and attach special benefits and obligations to per- sons who marry. Here, the States defending their adherence to the traditional understanding of marriage have explained their position using the pragmatic vocabulary that characterizes most American political discourse. Their basic argument is that States formalize and promote marriage, unlike other fulfilling human relationships, in order to encourage potentially procreative conduct to take place within a lasting unit that has long been thought to provide the best atmosphere for raising children. They thus argue that there are reasonable secular grounds for restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples.

    It is far beyond the outer reaches of this Court’s authority to say that a State may not adhere to the understanding of marriage that has long prevailed, not just in this country and others with similar cultural roots, but also in a great variety of countries and cultures all around the globe.

    As for the rights of individual dissent, Alito wastes no time saying what many conservatives are thinking:

    Today’s decision usurps the constitutional right of the people to decide whether to keep or alter the traditional understanding of marriage. The decision will also have other important consequences.

    It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy. In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.

    Perhaps recognizing how its reasoning may be used, the majority attempts, toward the end of its opinion, to reassure those who oppose same-sex marriage that their rights of conscience will be protected. We will soon see whether this proves to be true. I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

    Alito does a good job tying the concepts of federalism to the rights of conscience that he believes have been threatened by today’s ruling:

    The system of federalism established by our Constitu- tion provides a way for people with different beliefs to live together in a single nation. If the issue of same-sex marriage had been left to the people of the States, it is likely that some States would recognize same-sex marriage and others would not. It is also possible that some States would tie recognition to protection for conscience rights. The majority today makes that impossible. By imposing its own views on the entire country, the majority facilitates the marginalization of the many Americans who have traditional ideas. Recalling the harsh treatment of gays and lesbians in the past, some may think that turnabout is fair play. But if that sentiment prevails, the Nation will experience bitter and lasting wounds.

    Alito rejects the majority’s creation and imposition of a new right and, above all, laments the breakdown of restraint exemplified in the majority opinion.

    I do not doubt that my colleagues in the majority sincerely see in the Constitution a vision of liberty that happens to coincide with their own. But this sincerity is cause for concern, not comfort. What it evidences is the deep and perhaps irremediable corruption of our legal culture’s conception of constitutional interpretation.

    Most Americans—understandably—will cheer or lament today’s decision because of their views on the issue of same-sex marriage. But all Americans, whatever their thinking on that issue, should worry about what the majority’s claim of power portends.

  91. Southern Born
    June 29, 2015 at 9:29 am

    Perhaps it is a good thing that Trey Gowdy’s true partisan Republican nature is becoming evident so we will no longer be fooled by him into thinking he is the real deal

    Actually, he is pretty ineffectual.

  92. Finally, some good news:

    “Kerry reportedly caves on inspections of Iran nuke facilities.”

    Now the RINOS and DINOS can huddle together and ratify this toxic settlement.

    Old Blood and Gutts . . . I mean

    Old Spice and Bad Body Odor—Bob Corker.

    Can cave in to Obama.

    The sooner that happens

    The sooner we can get them off the stage

    Thus allowing Bibi to solve the Iran problem.

  93. Harry Reid was born in Searchlight, Nevada, the third of four sons of Harry Vincent Reid, a miner who committed suicide with a gunshot to the head in 1972, when he was 58, and Harry was 32 years old, and Inez Orena (Jaynes) Reid, a laundress.[4][5] His paternal grandmother was an English immigrant from Darlaston, Staffordshire. Reid’s boyhood home was a shack with no indoor toilet, hot water, or telephone.[4][6] Since Searchlight had no high school, Reid boarded with relatives 40 miles away in Henderson, Nevada to attend Basic High School,[4] where he played football, and was an amateur boxer.[7] While at Basic High, he met future Nevada governor Mike O’Callaghan, who was a teacher there and served as Reid’s boxing coach. Reid attended Southern Utah University, and graduated from Utah State University where he double majored in political science and history.[8] He minored in economics at Jon M. Huntsman School of Business.[9] He then went to George Washington University Law School earning a J.D. while working for the United States Capitol Police.

    Reid has also been criticized for several potentially self-enriching tactics. In 2005, Reid earmarked a spending bill to provide for building a bridge between Nevada and Arizona that would make land he owned more valuable. Reid called funding for construction of a bridge over the Colorado River, among other projects, “incredibly good news for Nevada” in a news release after passage of the 2006 transportation bill. He owned 160 acres (65 ha) of land several miles from the proposed bridge site in Arizona. The bridge could add value to his real estate investment.[42] A year later it was reported that Reid had used campaign donations to pay for $3,300 in Christmas gifts to the staff at the condominium where he resides;[43] federal election law prohibits candidates from using political donations for personal use. Reid’s staff stated that his campaign attorneys had approved this use of the funds, but that Reid would personally reimburse his campaign for the expenses. Citizens United filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission to investigate the matter.[44]

    A series of investigative reports in the Los Angeles Times[45][46][47][48] suggested that Reid had introduced legislation and imposed pressure on regulatory agencies to advance the business interests of his close friend Harvey Whittemore, a Nevada attorney-lobbyist who contributed heavily to Reid’s campaigns and leadership fund and who employed Reid’s son Leif as his personal attorney. With Reid’s help, Whittemore was able to proceed with construction of a $30 billion planned golf course development, Coyote Springs, a project heavily criticized by environmental groups for reasons including its projected effects on several endangered species.[49][50]

    In 2006, the National Republican Senatorial Committee tied Reid to Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal by pointing out he had “received more than $50,000 from four tribes with gaming interests between 2001 and 2004 after they hired Abramoff”. Reid denied any wrongdoing, and media reported that the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group, had produced an analysis showing a general increase in the amount and number of contributions by Indian tribes since the late 1990s.[51][52]

    During the summer of 2012, Reid said during an interview with The Huffington Post that he had received information from an unidentified investor in Bain Capital that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney did not pay any taxes for 10 years.[59] The accusation was repeated on the Senate floor by Reid on August 2, 2012.[60] On the following Sunday’s political morning talk shows, several Republicans disagreed with Reid.[61] According to CBS News, Romney stated, “Let me also say, categorically, I have paid taxes every year — and a lot of taxes. So Harry is simply wrong.”’s Truth-O-Meter rated the accusation as “Pants on Fire!”[6

    Reid was elected to the Gaming Hall of Fame in 2001. Reid (who was raised agnostic) and his wife (who was born to Jewish immigrant parents and grew up in Henderson) converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints while he was a college student.[4

    On January 1, 2015, Reid was injured while exercising in his home when a piece of equipment he was using reportedly broke, causing him to fall. As a result, Reid suffered broken ribs, broken facial bones and was at risk of permanent vision loss in his right eye.[86] On January 26, 2015, Reid underwent surgery to remove a blood clot from his right eye and repair facial bones.[87]

    At the time Harry was attacked by the equipment in the work out gym, Harry’s brother showed up at a hospital with facial injuries similar to those inflicted by Harry by the deranged gym set. The inside story was that the brother had been in a fight with a family member. An ex-boxer. Not being a conspiracy nut myself, I would prefer to believe that the brother was attacked by a guy set as well. Ocam’s razor strikes again.

    This biographical sketch bears on the question of Harry’s Leadership, and suggests in part why he is the most hated man in Washington. Yet there he is. And even after his loss of the Senate, he remains the leader of his congressional delegation, just like Pelosi. They were not retained for their competency, or for their success. Thus the explanation must lie elsewhere. Most likely their survival is due to purely donor related considerations. Harry is a jack Mormon. That is one point in his favor. Point two: He represents the Las Vegas casino owners–with the obvious exception of Steve Wynn.

  94. cORRECTION: Not being a conspiracy nut myself, I would prefer to believe that the brother was attacked by a GYM set as well.

  95. Excerpt from Ted Cruz’ book on his year clerking at the Supreme Court:

    The whole thing is an interesting read. Scalia always hires one liberal law clerk because he likes to debate differing views.

    By the time I arrived to interview with the chief to become his law clerk, in 1995, he had already begun to usher in the so-called federalist revolution, which restored some of the historical deference toward the authority of sovereign states.

    I soon learned why Rehnquist spent so little time interviewing his law clerks. He was one of the most brilliant human beings on the planet. He could have done the job with his eyes closed and without a single assistant.

    I met him in his spacious chambers at the back of the Supreme Court Building, right behind the courtroom. A tall man with thinning black hair, long sideburns and oversize glasses, he ambled up and offered me a chair. The chief wore big wide ties with floral patterns and Hush Puppies.

    With his first question, I knew that my recommendation strategy had paid off. “You know, I’ve got two recommendations here from Charles Fried and Alan Dershowitz,” he said, in his deep, gentle voice. Rehnquist knew as well as anyone how diametrically opposed the two men were. He had a slight grin. “So, I wonder, how on earth is that possible?”

    “Maybe one of them was confused,” I said. He laughed.

  96. …so now NBC has “fired” Trump…

    anyone not saying even a word the Left or Illegal Immigrant supporters do not like will not be tolerated

    unbelievable that a man speaking in his own country, exercising his “free speech” in the USA and stating his own opinions is denied and punished…

    yet, Black Panthers, Farrakhan, illegal immigrants can say anything they want with total freedom…

    …something is very wrong with this picture…

  97. I wonder whether, at the end of the day, the problem with the RINO isn’t as old as the Old Testament axiom that a man cannot serve two masters. I mean the whole charade they play, posing as populists ready willing and able to stop Obama, which morphs into elitists and accomodationists to the corrupt one and their donors once they are voted in can be explained only in those terms. There is no coherent philosophy which explains what the do. It is so much like Roberts—one day he legislates from the bench and the next day he deplore judges who legislate. There in nothing coherent in the RINO. Nothing. So if they see themselves as the heir apparent when Obama limps out of office, they may find that the distrust that this nation feels for that serial liar also envelops them, and cause the base to challenge them in the primary, and cast them adrift in the general election. That will be my philosophy moving forward.

  98. Speaking of philosophies moving forward, there is also this:

    “Should the entire American Left fall over dead tomorrow,

    I would rejoice, and order pizza to celebrate.

    They are not my countrymen;

    they are animals who happen to walk upright and make noises that approximate speech.

    They are below human.

    I look forward to seeing each and every one in Hell.”—-Thomas Crown

    That is my philosophy moving forward from today.

Comments are closed.