Americans of a certain age will recognize Molly's weekly jousting with Fibber. I was reminded of it this week when Justice Scalia asserted his 8th Amendment privilege against being required to read the 2,700 page ObamaCare bill in order to determine what should be excised and what should be retained. It was funny and the court's audience laughed. If you think about it though, it's not really a laughing matter.
Do think about it: two thousand seven hundred pages of fine print law in one bill. I'm pretty smart; learned to read decades ago; studied literature and philosophy in college and, later, went to law school. My everyday work requires me to read, read, read. Pleadings, statutes, cases, letters, contracts and more. But I promise you I could not read and understand a two thousand seven hundred page law. Nobody can. In fact, nobody does. Famously Pelosi said we have to pass the bill in order to find out what's in it. Other congressman concurred and nary a one has stood up and said: "I read the bill; I understand the bill." You can be sure Hussein Obama has never read the bill either.
So, who has?
Lobbyists; the special interst boys and girls on K Street; staffers lurking in Congress who, for money and more, make sure that their pet supporter's codicils are somewhere in those two thousand seven hundred pages that nobody has read.
Anyone else?
Yup, but just not yet. Faceless and endless bureaucrats will pore over the law down through the years and exert whatever pressure they can find therein to impose the then-current administration's policies on you, Dear Reader and your children down through the end of this once-free Republic.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012
SCOTU and The Trojan Horse
As a working lawyer, I seldom deal with Constitutional issues. They rarely arise in business litigation or divorce cases. Much of what I learned in my Con Law classes is rusty or forgotten. Nonetheless, I have followed the Supreme Court arguments on ObamaCare but more with a political than a legal interest.
The whole business got me thinking of the Commerce Clause, which for years has been the Congressional rationale for its ever-expanding encroachment into the nooks and crannies of American's lives. The Founders, those dead, white, Christian men who wrote the greatest constitution ever devised, were so clever. You see, whilst the entire thrust of the Constitution is to deny government power by limiting it to those powers enumerated within the Constitution's four corners, those crafy craftsmen snuck in the Trojan Horse known as the Commerce Clause which, with lawyerly penumbras emanating when needed, could be used to set agricultural subsidies or mandate health care insurance for all. Beware of Founders bearing gifts.
Always life has tipping points and, this past week, one was seen and heard by all. In shock and awe by this mandate, the court stood athwart the colossus and said: Enough already. We're co-equal here; you may play within the rules but we get to say what those rules are. And this is not a rule we recognize. We're going to consider this rule over here in SCOTUS. And, in a couple of months, we'll give you all our Opinion.
Seriously, Ms. Pelosi.
The whole business got me thinking of the Commerce Clause, which for years has been the Congressional rationale for its ever-expanding encroachment into the nooks and crannies of American's lives. The Founders, those dead, white, Christian men who wrote the greatest constitution ever devised, were so clever. You see, whilst the entire thrust of the Constitution is to deny government power by limiting it to those powers enumerated within the Constitution's four corners, those crafy craftsmen snuck in the Trojan Horse known as the Commerce Clause which, with lawyerly penumbras emanating when needed, could be used to set agricultural subsidies or mandate health care insurance for all. Beware of Founders bearing gifts.
Always life has tipping points and, this past week, one was seen and heard by all. In shock and awe by this mandate, the court stood athwart the colossus and said: Enough already. We're co-equal here; you may play within the rules but we get to say what those rules are. And this is not a rule we recognize. We're going to consider this rule over here in SCOTUS. And, in a couple of months, we'll give you all our Opinion.
Seriously, Ms. Pelosi.
Hussein and Other Blacks
Black Panthers offer $10,000 for the head of George Zimmerman and Hussein Obama says not a single word about these bounty hunters. Eric "My People" Holder says nothing even though he's in charge of the Department of Alleged Justice. Hate-mongers Sharpton and Jackson rant; black pundits everywhere are in full hue and cry. All this is supposedly about the police not yet arresting Zimmerman as their investigation is incomplete. Not really.
What it's about is to make sure black voters remain convinced the world is out to get them so that they do not defect from their political plantation and vote to re-elect Obama in November while, simultaneously, increasing the visibilty and prestige of the race-hustling types such as Sharpton.
The liberal media is beside itself as usual, screaming about white-Hispanic murders of blacks without one mention of crimes by blacks on whites which are far greater both absolutely and relatively.
We are seeing, again, how illiberal liberals truly are; how twisted, small and deformed their social thinking is. We are also seeing further division among races which is surely leading to a white/Asian political party, perhaps Republican, perhaps not, but surely in process.
What it's about is to make sure black voters remain convinced the world is out to get them so that they do not defect from their political plantation and vote to re-elect Obama in November while, simultaneously, increasing the visibilty and prestige of the race-hustling types such as Sharpton.
The liberal media is beside itself as usual, screaming about white-Hispanic murders of blacks without one mention of crimes by blacks on whites which are far greater both absolutely and relatively.
We are seeing, again, how illiberal liberals truly are; how twisted, small and deformed their social thinking is. We are also seeing further division among races which is surely leading to a white/Asian political party, perhaps Republican, perhaps not, but surely in process.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Justices and The Mandate
Now that the arguments are done, the waiting and guessing begins. Will Kennedy side with the President and retain his aura of the swing-vote with the DC elite? (inside the court, Kennedy is referred to as "Flipper")Will Scalia be consistent and vote as he did in another recent commerce clause case? And Roberts. Will he do whatever the rumor-monger wants to tout. All over DC and the high-brow media these speculations about what might tilt those justices are amok.
Interestingly, at least to me, there is one set of speculation one never hears: Nobody, but nobody, ever questions how Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor will vote. Everybody knows that the liberals will vote one-way and one-way only: a party line vote all the way.
Interesting how everybody simply knows that the liberal, democrat justices are not at all ever swayed by argument. They always vote liberal when the issue is politically charged. Liberals always do. They are closed-minded and we all know it. That's why nobody even thinks about how a liberal will vote. They know.
How liberal is that?
Interestingly, at least to me, there is one set of speculation one never hears: Nobody, but nobody, ever questions how Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor will vote. Everybody knows that the liberals will vote one-way and one-way only: a party line vote all the way.
Interesting how everybody simply knows that the liberal, democrat justices are not at all ever swayed by argument. They always vote liberal when the issue is politically charged. Liberals always do. They are closed-minded and we all know it. That's why nobody even thinks about how a liberal will vote. They know.
How liberal is that?
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Low Esteem of Black Male's Life
As part of the black politician's exploitation of the shooting of Trayvon Martin, Demcrat Black Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver said that the death was emblematic of the low esteem in which a young black man's life is held. He's right. Young, black males are substantially more likely to be murdered than young, white males.
Cleaver's problem is that almost always, those young, black males are murdered by guess who?
Young, black males.
Congressman Cleaver is doing the usual black thing: blaming everyone and anyone else for what is a black problem. Whites rarely kill blacks; blacks kill blacks.
Cleaver's problem is that almost always, those young, black males are murdered by guess who?
Young, black males.
Congressman Cleaver is doing the usual black thing: blaming everyone and anyone else for what is a black problem. Whites rarely kill blacks; blacks kill blacks.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
The Primary Is Secondary
It, the Republican primary race, is over and Romney will be the nominee, Louisiana's results notwithstanding. The Republican party will nominate an unpopular RINO, who is the intellectual and political godfather of socialized medicine in the United States and who has never been re-elected to any office held.
Mr. Romney's source of primary delegates is founded on states which neither he nor any Republican is likely to win against the incumbent. It is useless for a Republican candidate to spend a nickel to try to win California's electoral votes as my home state will vote for a dead Democrat over any Republican. That is a fact exercised in Illinois every election, presidential or not. It is smart primary politics to work those useless electoral states as they do count for the convention nominating process. But no Republican candidate will obtain a single California, Illinois, Vermont or Massachussets electoral vote, not one.
Romney will be a dreary candidate against the more cool, media-backed incumbent. He's a pretty-boy with a perfect 10 resume. That's why he's unliked: he's too perfect, he's all resume; he gives no vibes as to understanding the general electorate. I think that's because he doesn't understand the general electorate: he sees people as various statistical cohorts which needs to be managed. McCain was a better candidate than Romney will be including the fact that McCain had Sarah with him to liven up his mortuary appearance. Romney will have none of that. And we know how that worked out.
Nevertheless, Romney is very consistent. He will do what he has historically done best: he will lose.
Mr. Romney's source of primary delegates is founded on states which neither he nor any Republican is likely to win against the incumbent. It is useless for a Republican candidate to spend a nickel to try to win California's electoral votes as my home state will vote for a dead Democrat over any Republican. That is a fact exercised in Illinois every election, presidential or not. It is smart primary politics to work those useless electoral states as they do count for the convention nominating process. But no Republican candidate will obtain a single California, Illinois, Vermont or Massachussets electoral vote, not one.
Romney will be a dreary candidate against the more cool, media-backed incumbent. He's a pretty-boy with a perfect 10 resume. That's why he's unliked: he's too perfect, he's all resume; he gives no vibes as to understanding the general electorate. I think that's because he doesn't understand the general electorate: he sees people as various statistical cohorts which needs to be managed. McCain was a better candidate than Romney will be including the fact that McCain had Sarah with him to liven up his mortuary appearance. Romney will have none of that. And we know how that worked out.
Nevertheless, Romney is very consistent. He will do what he has historically done best: he will lose.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Liberal Logic
George Zimmerman, the person who shot the boy who looked like Hussein Obama's putative son, is universally described as a white male in the mainstream media. Seldom is his picture displayed. The reason is that he is clearly not a Euro-white male: he is a Latino, an Hispanic. Sadly for the Sharptons, Jacksons and other racist rabble-rousers, that truth does not fit the narrative they're selling.
To a liberal, that Zimmerman has a white father and a Peruvian mother is enough to make him the white killer of a black man.
Following that liberal logic leads one, ineluctably, to the conclusion that Hussein Obama, who has a Kenyan father and a white mother is our 44th white president.
To a liberal, that Zimmerman has a white father and a Peruvian mother is enough to make him the white killer of a black man.
Following that liberal logic leads one, ineluctably, to the conclusion that Hussein Obama, who has a Kenyan father and a white mother is our 44th white president.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Abortion on Television
Did you ever wonder why an abortion is never shown on television? We see re-enactments of murder, rape and mayhem. We see real death, disasters and destructions in news programs. But we never see an abortion. Why?
An abortion, the "procedure" as its proponents call it would, if seen, end abortions once and for all. Imagine the Obama abortion, the one in which the doctor errs and the baby is not killed during the "procedure" but is alive and outside the womb. Obama, with others, voted to permit the doctor to kill the born child without penalty.
How can anyone do that? Only a gutless politician could vote that way for his own election. No decent person would consider it; it is murder to be sure. Yes, it is: the intentional killing of one human being by another is murder.
Think about it; picture it in your mmind. Then ask yourself why it has never been shown on television.
An abortion, the "procedure" as its proponents call it would, if seen, end abortions once and for all. Imagine the Obama abortion, the one in which the doctor errs and the baby is not killed during the "procedure" but is alive and outside the womb. Obama, with others, voted to permit the doctor to kill the born child without penalty.
How can anyone do that? Only a gutless politician could vote that way for his own election. No decent person would consider it; it is murder to be sure. Yes, it is: the intentional killing of one human being by another is murder.
Think about it; picture it in your mmind. Then ask yourself why it has never been shown on television.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Romney's Electability III
Once again the inevitable Mitt Romney falls far short, capturing something less than a third of the Republican primary voters. We've said right along that he's a cold fish, plastic and unlikeable. (See Older Posts) Romney is simply not a leader in the electoral sense. It's more than clear that he's very intelligent, has led an exemplary life and is a lot better than Hussein Obama. But it's not enough. If you can't get more than a third of your friends to vote for you, how can you secure votes from the undecideds and the democrat voters?
You can't - and that is the issue. Newt is, finally, sounding that tocsin. It's way past time for the Republican Grandees to note that that bell tolls for them as well. If nominated, Romney will not win the election as Republicans will not come out and vote for him in the enthusiastic droves that Hussein engenders in blacks, Mexicans and food stamp voters, including lottery winners. That's the ball game.
You can't - and that is the issue. Newt is, finally, sounding that tocsin. It's way past time for the Republican Grandees to note that that bell tolls for them as well. If nominated, Romney will not win the election as Republicans will not come out and vote for him in the enthusiastic droves that Hussein engenders in blacks, Mexicans and food stamp voters, including lottery winners. That's the ball game.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Feministas
As noted in my prior post, I rarely comment on feminism but Gloria Allred's newest blather is worth noting as it's just so much obvious bs. Her latest clarion call is a demand that the Florida prosecutors arrest Rush Limbaugh for violating some state law prohibiting defamatory statements against women. Limbaugh is a Florida resident.
There are major legal impediments with Allred's braying. First, the law is unconstitutional as it offends the eqaul protection clause of the Constitution. You can't have a law like that which applies to females only. I now assume that Allred is okay with rules unfair to men on their face; it's just women who can't be treated unfairly. It's okay to be unfair to men. It's a bit like affirmative action: repayment for historical (and hysterical) wrongs.
Another major legal problem is that Limbaugh's remarks are simply not defamatory in the legal context. They are opinions; they are hyperbole and a reasonable person would interpret them that way. Such are constitutionally protected speech. Sorry Gloria; this time you're up the wrong tree. But she's looking for publicity, not a conviction. And our compliant press is not simply ignorant but incurious. They will let any liberal say anything but nitpick the conservative to death.
The lesson here? Democrat liberal loudmouths get wide-spread exposure from the press even when it's obvious that what they say is wrong. No lawyer would shout this except secure in the knowledge that there will be no blowback from a press which would love to see Limbaugh taken down/
There are major legal impediments with Allred's braying. First, the law is unconstitutional as it offends the eqaul protection clause of the Constitution. You can't have a law like that which applies to females only. I now assume that Allred is okay with rules unfair to men on their face; it's just women who can't be treated unfairly. It's okay to be unfair to men. It's a bit like affirmative action: repayment for historical (and hysterical) wrongs.
Another major legal problem is that Limbaugh's remarks are simply not defamatory in the legal context. They are opinions; they are hyperbole and a reasonable person would interpret them that way. Such are constitutionally protected speech. Sorry Gloria; this time you're up the wrong tree. But she's looking for publicity, not a conviction. And our compliant press is not simply ignorant but incurious. They will let any liberal say anything but nitpick the conservative to death.
The lesson here? Democrat liberal loudmouths get wide-spread exposure from the press even when it's obvious that what they say is wrong. No lawyer would shout this except secure in the knowledge that there will be no blowback from a press which would love to see Limbaugh taken down/
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Speaking of Feminism
I rarely do feminism blogs but this Fluke thing is beyond rational thought. Can you image the cojones Fluke must have to ask someone else to pay for her personal pleasure? Why not ask the dude she's with to cover (no pun) the cost or, better, to bring his own condom(s)? Why does she even need contraception? Is she a high-risk taker so as to have mucho sex but not mucho safe sex? Please say it isn't so.
If this new useful idiot of the left is having safe sex, i.e., sex with a guy wearing a condom, she has no need for contraception. If she's not having safe sex, she needs to attend safe sex classes. Such are a bit like traffic school where everybody knows how to drive but forgot to follow the rules and got caught. Maybe, a trip to her doctor would be in order?
Who should pay for that? Not me. Maybe you, Lefty.
If this new useful idiot of the left is having safe sex, i.e., sex with a guy wearing a condom, she has no need for contraception. If she's not having safe sex, she needs to attend safe sex classes. Such are a bit like traffic school where everybody knows how to drive but forgot to follow the rules and got caught. Maybe, a trip to her doctor would be in order?
Who should pay for that? Not me. Maybe you, Lefty.
Experiment in Feminism
Let's try this on for size. Our feminist friends are large on women having rights equal to men. Logically, that would mean that in their ideal world, women and men have equal rights. Okay?
Man tells wife: "I'm outta' here Fatso." Shortly thereafter, a judge says: "You may be outta' there but you're also going to be out some bucks in spousal support. You made a deal and you broke it. Breaking a contract has consequences. Pay up." Okay?
Wife tells hubby: I'm outta' here BetaBoy." Shortly thereafter, a judge says: She may be outta' there but you're also going to be out some bucks in spousal support. It's public policy. Pay up." Okay?
"Fair is fair" said the fair feministas.
Man tells wife: "I'm outta' here Fatso." Shortly thereafter, a judge says: "You may be outta' there but you're also going to be out some bucks in spousal support. You made a deal and you broke it. Breaking a contract has consequences. Pay up." Okay?
Wife tells hubby: I'm outta' here BetaBoy." Shortly thereafter, a judge says: She may be outta' there but you're also going to be out some bucks in spousal support. It's public policy. Pay up." Okay?
"Fair is fair" said the fair feministas.
Starve The Beast
In California, our governor, democrat Jerry Brown, is huckstering his new form of tax-increase proposals lauded and egged-on by the liberal California press. Einstein's cliche about insanity being repititious is applicable here. Why would any rational person give more money to the California legislative machine which is composed of those who got California into its financial morass in the first instance?
Unless and until Brown has a reasonable answer to that, he can shove his proposals into the back-room from whence they came.
It is also obvious that the same question should be posed by fiscally responsible candidates for office at every level. Why candidates don't just state the obvious is beyond me. Another charge is equally obvious: the U.S. Senate has failed to pass a budget in almost 3 years. That's years, Reader. How can a citizen vote for a candidate responsible for that irresponsibility?
Unless and until Brown has a reasonable answer to that, he can shove his proposals into the back-room from whence they came.
It is also obvious that the same question should be posed by fiscally responsible candidates for office at every level. Why candidates don't just state the obvious is beyond me. Another charge is equally obvious: the U.S. Senate has failed to pass a budget in almost 3 years. That's years, Reader. How can a citizen vote for a candidate responsible for that irresponsibility?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
