The Russians, The Party, BOistan

Hillary’s dossier | Power Line:

https://patriotpost.us/articles/52074

There is a good deal of reading in those links, the bottom line is a sad one that we now have a bunch more proof for. "The Party" (TP-D) has been colluding with the "Russians" since WAY back ... even when they were the USSR.

The second link does a good job of some summary ...

• The Hillary Clinton "Russian Reset"
• BO cancelling missile defence for Poland
• BO assuring Medvedev on an open mike about "flexibility" after 2012 election
• BO laughing at Romney about the "1980's want their foreign policy back"
• BO trusting the Russians to enforce his "Red Line"
• Urainium One
• The DNC funded "Trump Dossier" 

As the second link closes with ...

America is facing an existential crisis, one where it appears the same institutions designed to provide law and order and national security are guilty of wholesale corruption — and possible treason. Either the Trump administration will root out the rot, or the electorate will be faced with the undeniable reality we live in a nation where “justice” consists of one set of laws for the rich and powerful, and another for everyone else. A nation where Congress conducts toothless hearings, those who should be investigated conduct the investigations, and utterly corrupt media censoranything inimical to their own interests and those of their ideological allies.

Absolutely no one can justify the sale of the main ingredient used in nuclear weapons to the Russians. Either the swamp gets drained — or the entire nation drowns in it.

Readers of this blog know this already -- 2016 was the Flight 93 Election, wether or not Trump can turn us back from BOistan is highly in doubt. The "double standard" is really TP vs non-TP. It wasn't that Weinstein was wealthy and powerful, Bill Cosby was that at one point too -- it was that although Harvey was safe as long as TP controlled ALL the levers --- Hillary Lost.

We live in such a corrupt tribal state that news that the DNC / Clintons funded the "Dossier" that kicked off the Special Counsel attacking Trump is not front page blaring headline news like Watergate, Iran Contra, or what Scooter Libby did or did not know about a "covert" CIA operative named Valerie Plame who drove into Langley every day and had her husband write Op Eds for major news outlets to maintain her "deep cover".

This ought to be flashing along the bottom of every screen on every network in BOistan!

After much pain — after much lying, Clinton style — the Washington Post reported on Tuesday evening that the Trump Dossier was commissioned by the smear outfit GPS Fusion at the behest of the Clinton campaign. It was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. 

Tom Perez, the current chairman of the Democratic National Committee wants it to be known that the DNC’s “new [post-election] leadership” (Perez and Minnesota’s own fast-talking hustler Keith Ellison) know nothing. They all sound like Mafia types. Nobody knows anything.

NOTE, the Washington F*ing Post is reporting this! The DNC has ADMITTED IT!

In the last two weeks we have found smoking guns proving that the Clinton Fund and the BO administration knowingly sold 20% of our urainium reserves to Russia for bribes and kickbacks, AND the DNC has ADMITTED that they colluded with the Russians to smear Trump!

Oh, and as a bonus, we now know for certain the IRS in fact targeted conservative groups for political reasons under BO.  That was always obvious to anyone that was awake though -- and the sleepers are not going to be concerned about it anyway. As long as they get their "free stuff" or stay on the Administrative State gravy train, why in the world would they care if the Administrative State is a weapon against those that disagree with it politically?

"Sauce for the goose" ...

But never mind -- nobody cares in BOistan. We are through the looking glass, down the rabbit hole and LOST IN SPACE! 90% of the public just knows what their tribe is, and "justice" is when their side wins!

We have indicted Manafort for "lying to the FBI and money laundering"? SERIOUSLY? We all know the Clinton Fund (Funds for Clintons) was a direct shakedown operation that amoung other things took 10's of millions DIRECTLY from Russian sources. How about being endicted for not even bothering to TRY to launder your bribes?

Here is Hillary lying under oath 3 times -- I'm sure that if we did a family compilation, we could find at least 10s of examples ... "I never had sex with that woman ..."

BOTH sides either follow the law or THERE IS NO LAW! Which is one of the mottos of BOistan.


'via Blog this'

Yanez, The Memory of America Fades

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448740/philando-castile-verdict-was-miscarriage-justice

In America, we had a court system that included "juries of our peers" and we honored that system because we agreed that was far more just than mob dscisions or some "pronouncement of the elite". In BOistan, everyone believes their opinion is "as good as the jury" who took 6 days from their lives to sit through testimony, then another 5 days to deliberate. They pull their favorite snippet from the proceedings and declare the jury wrong / racist / stupid / etc.

And even though any of us could be asked to sit on a similar jury, we assume we won't, and amazingly it is broadly OK to disparage the decision made by a jury of our peers, that was once cornerstone of America's legal system. That is what is shocking about the linked post above, it is from NATIONAL REVIEW, an ostensively conservative source, yet totally fails to understand that our criminal justice system is based on honoring a jury of our peers ... they cherry pick their "evidence", draw their conclusion, and decare "the jury is wrong", where in America, the jury was honored and RIGHT unless it could be overturned by new evidence / procedure.

America had a population educated enough in civics to understand that without respect for basic civil government and a legal system, anarchy or tyranny are the only possible outcomes.

Most of our population has no idea of what America even was. The idea of respecting ANY institution over their own "fresh off social media" meme level opinion simply never crosses their mind. They are "god", and they have an opinion, and with apologies to Baron Von Raschke, "that is all the people need to know".  I covered this lack of knowledge here. 

I do know that MPR really wanted this officers hide in the worst way. One comentator this week from one of the lefty schools in the twin cities (Hamline I think) felt that "the good of the community" should overshadow mere evidence here. They have been running excerpts from "74 seconds" a lot over the last 6 months. https://www.mprnews.org/topic/philandocastile

You get impaired on weed, go drive around with a kid in the car, get stopped, have a gun on your person, and then -- likely because of the impairment, fail to follow police orders relative to the gun EXPLICITLY and ... ??? Up to that point, the decisions are all yours, and you can take your time deciding the correct course.

I put myself standing outside that window, smell of weed reeking in nostrils, obviously stoned driver, says "I have a gun" and rather than leaving hands solidly on wheel in plain sight starts reaching in his pocket where I can likely see the gun ... what would **I** do?

I really can't imagine ANYONE that would not "fear for your life" -- do you shoot? I'm not sure that any of us know that answer for ourselves, and likely it will vary "depending on" a huge set of variables along the lines of ; do you miss the deer that jumps out? lose control? ??? ... the real "action" wasn't in "74 seconds", it was in 1 or 2 tops.

A courageous, and I think honest jury. One guy is dead, destroying another life more than it has been won't bring him back. Unless you believe that he needed to go to prison "for the good of the community". It has seemed peferectly clear all along that Yanez was forced by Castile's decisions into a split second life and death call. There is no reason for anyone, permit or not, to put an officer in that situtation and hope they decide to risk their sober life for your impaired one.

What TP ("The Party" TP-D) wants to happen is that cases like this give the State more power. No more jury trial -- "the State", meaning the Administrative State, decides what outcome best meets their current political, economic, social engineering, etc objectives. The very idea of a "Jury of your peers" is totally out of line with TP anyway. The sad thing is to see that even NR has forgotten what America was, and are willing to disparage the decision of the jury without even a moment to honor their sacrifice and the system. 

74 Seconds: The death of Philando Castile and the trial of Jeronimo Yanez |…

MPRNEWS.ORG

Not Being A Democrat Evidence of Criminal Intent

Preliminary thoughts on the “Comey memo” [UPDATED] | Power Line:

Last July, and again just early in May,  Comey told us that Hillary could not be prosecuted because he could not "prove criminal intent", the Democrats and the MSM cheered loudly.

“We could not prove that the people sending the information, either in that case or in the other case with the secretary, were acting with any kind of the mens rea — with any kind of criminal intent,” Mr. Comey said.

We all inherently know this to be true -- most of us have friends, or even personally had the experience of being pulled over for speeding or even DUI, telling the officer "I didn't intend to break the law" and the officer immediately expressing his apology for intruding on our lives and being sent on our way. Purity of intent is the all purpose get out of jail free card. I'm guessing that if you have a "Ready for Hillary" bumper sticker, officers likely never even pull you over.

In the past couple of days while the "Comey memo" and the "secret disclosure to the Russians" have filled the news, I've been struck by how "intent" has shifted. Let's assume that the felons leaking the information were "true D's" and 100% accurate with only the pure intent to destroy Trump, a case of obvious virtue.

But given that, how can we be so certain of Trump's intent in his no doubt honorably reported by felons "crimes"? It seems obvious --  he is an R. 

I believe we all understand that in BOistan, "intent" counts more than "rule of law", and not being a D is prima facia evidence of criminal intent, while being a D sets a high bar indeed as malice of intent must be proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt". For D's, setting up servers, deleting tens of thousdands of emails is not really "evidence" without being able to see into the very soul of the Democrat in question, so no crime can be prosecuted. Comey looked into Hillary's soul, saw "she was a good person", so he was able to put the investigation behind him.

Clearly Flynn is NOT a "good person", so any suggestion that he might be and thus would not have committed whatever crime the felon leakers assert he committed (again, we assume their motive is completely pure and honorable, so the fact of their felony in leaking is not really criminal) ... thus the mere suggestion that someone working in an R capacity is somehow a "good guy", is in itself "interference" -- it goes against the metaphysical truth of D=good, R=evil!

After all, BO endorsed Hillary for POTUS over a month prior to Comey ending the investigation after his boss, Loretta Lynchmob  met with Slick Willie on the plane in AZ. 

We seem to move ever closer to the point where not pledging allegiance to "The Party" (TP-D) and the POWER it represents is itself a crime! 

'via Blog this'

Fauxcahontas Gets a Timeout

‘Nevertheless, She Persisted’: How Senate’s Silencing of Warren Became a Meme - The New York Times:

Somebody eventually needs to let the left know that rules are not created to protect the strong. Yes, yes, Fauxcahontas and all sorts of women's rights folks are very proud of their ability to ignore rules, propriety, tradition, etc. Jezebel in 2 Kings thought taking on the strong without any rules was a great idea -- she ended up being eaten by dogs.

Even the common turncoat McCain had the following to say:

“You don’t insult — whether it be from a letter, or from a message from God, or on golden tablets,” said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona. “That’s the rules of the Senate.”

"The Party" (TP-D) seems in a mood to put pussy hats and vagina outfits up against big guys with assault rifles wearing cammo, while proudly screaming "NO RULES"!

Whatever blows their skirts up I guess.

'via Blog this'

Due Process And Other Words That Don't Matter

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436725/orlando-massacre-political-response?utm_source=NR&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=June17Goldberg

A post-American column worth reading. If Goldberg fully understood the words that even he is saying his cause would be #NeverHillary rather than #NeverTrump. His own column makes the case -- at least Trump would be opposed! 

In a world where there is no truth and no agreed principles, words indeed do not matter -- only POWER matters, which is what BO uses constantly. What he clearly means is that HIS words matter -- more than the Constitution, more than the Bible, and clearly FAR more than those who have been declared "persona non grata" by "The Party" (TP-D).

Let’s start at the top. President Obama once famously said (more than once, actually), “Don’t tell me words don’t matter.” Fast-forward to this week, when in a tantrum of biblical proportions, the furious president said . . . words don’t matter. Responding to complaints from Donald Trump and others that he won’t say the words “radical Islamic terrorism,” Obama huffed, “Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. This is a political distraction.”

"Due Process" which means that there must be a known and "fair" process before a citizen can be deprived of their rights under what used to be the American Constitution. Now Senators care nothing for those words that don't matter in the face of raw power.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) thinks the constitutional requirement for due process is “killing us.”

When words don't matter, there is no truth but that which power demands be given service. "Due Process", that which was the basis for any right of free men needs to be done away with. Who is at fault for this latest killing"? According to TPs paper of record, the NY Times, "Christians and Republicans".

“While the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear,” the New York Times editorialized, “it is evident that Mr. Mateen was driven by hatred toward gays and lesbians.” “Hate crimes don’t happen in a vacuum,” added the Gray Lady (I’m referring to the Times, not Clinton). 

“They occur where bigotry is allowed to fester, where minorities are vilified and where people are scapegoated for political gain. Tragically, this is the state of American politics, driven too often by Republican politicians who see prejudice as something to exploit, not extinguish.”  

The killer was a registered Democrat. The source of his hatred was not the Christian Coalition but radical Islamism. He stated this motivation clearly during the shooting and for months prior. He reportedly also considered attacking that notorious gay hangout Disney World. Would we be hearing about the pernicious, right-wing, anti-cartoon-character climate if he’d opted for that target?

When territory is ruled by a single party, the ONLY thing that matters is THE WORD OF THE PARTY! The fact that the killer was Islamic and trumpted his allegiance to ISIS **DURING** the killing does not fit the TP narrative, so it is discounted -- "Republicans, Christians, guns" ... those are the problem, and if you do not buy that, you need to get your mind right! 

La Raza Vs The Boy Scouts

Judges Can Belong To La Raza But Not The Boy Scouts | The Daily Caller:

It is extremely easy to see how at least millions of Americans will pull the lever for Trump on no other basis than they are completely fed up with the lying manipulation of our "elites".

The article points out that the judge Trump has criticized is a member of La Raza -- a pro-illegal immigration and anti-white / America group. But even supposedly "conservative" Republicans don't take the time to point that out.

OTOH, when the Scouts prohibited gay leaders, judges could not associate with them in California.

We have no laws, no borders and no country -- it is increasingly hard to even read the news, let alone care about it.

'via Blog this'

Arrest Louis C. K., Campaign Finance Law

In-kind political contributions from celebrities should be regulated like cash donations:

Louis C. K. is doing a fundraiser for de Blasio -- Louis typically gets $500K - $1 million for an appearance.

It is impossible to see how Louis C. K.’s donating his only major asset — his celebrity — to the cause of Bill de Blasio is anything other than an in-kind contribution. And, given that Louis C. K.’s ordinary rate (between $500,000 and $1 million minimum for U.S. appearances) far exceeds the legal limit on contributions to mayoral campaigns, it is difficult to see why this should be legal while other in-kind contributions valued at the same level are forbidden. Why should $1 million worth of photocopying be verboten while $1 million worth of high-value celebrity fund-raising is hunky-dory?

So why does Louis not get arrested like Dinesh D'Souza did?

We know this answer, de Blasio is a DEMOCRAT! If we didn't have laws on the books to criminalize political activity that opposes "The Party" (D), we would have this.

I am a First Amendment absolutist and a free-speech absolutist. I think Louis C. K. should be able to say what he likes, where he likes, how he likes, on behalf of whatever candidate he likes. But I also think the same thing about Charles and David Koch, Exxon, and Charles C. W. Cooke.

Anyone that takes even a TINY amount of time to look at "campaign finance" and "money in politics" knows that what is the problem from the ruling TP perspective is CONSERVATIVE money in politics! The only reason laws have been put on the books is to make it possible to put people like D'Souza in jail if TP desires. Louis C. K. is completely free to provide an in-kind donation of $500K-$1 Million to TP, in fact he is great guy in the eyes of TP for doing so! (surprise, surprise)

In California, if someone is accused of "coordination" with "outside spending groups", they are "Guilty until proven innocent" in direct violation of UN human rights law, to which the US is a signer.


'via Blog this'

Criminalizing Politics, Dinesh D'Souza

Dinesh D’Souza avoids jail time, gets five years of probation for campaign finance violation - The Washington Post:

D'Souza's real crime is being a conservative. He has written books and done movies critical of left wing policies and politicians -- most prominently BO and Hildebeast.

"Campaign Finance laws" are simply laws to criminalize opposition to "The Party" (TP-D). The entire government bureaucracy and the vast majority of the legal system are controlled by TP. The idea of them "prosecuting" a Democrat for some campaign finance "infraction" isn't even in their imagination. The only campaign finance infraction a Democrat could possibly commit is NOT RAISING ENOUGH MONEY!

We live in a country run by and for TP -- so those that are willing to oppose TP need to be punished. How else will they get their minds right?

'via Blog this'

No Mules Allowed

National Review:

I think Jonah went all "Pharisee" relative to Trump, so I have been miffed -- but I still love him. Usually he is truly "above the issues" in a religious / philosophical sense, not the narcissistic sense of BO -- I believe what our funders intended was for Americans to LIVE and spend most of their mental energy "above politics" in that religious / philosophical sense -- opposing teams in the NFL, not Shia and Sunni seeking to exterminate the other.

This paragraph especially hit me  (it is in reference to the Billy C defense of his crime bill and spat with BLM):

One fun consequence of all this is that Bill very well could turn out to be a liability for Hillary, which would be kind of hilarious given that Hillary would be just another left-wing activist lawyer were it not for her husband. She rode her Arkansas mule all of the way to the White House gates only to see the sign reading, “No Mules Allowed.”

I stand in awe of how much and how well Goldberg writes -- I liked this as well:

There’s a natural human tendency to think that because you can’t stand the other guy -- or gal -- he or she must therefore be your ideological opposite. The Brown Shirts and Red Shirts weren’t philosophical antipodes, they were Coke and Pepsi fighting for the same slice of the radical market by changing their recipes ever so slightly. Bill Clinton, as president, wasn’t that left-wing and Richard Nixon wasn’t that right-wing. But their enemies started from the assumption that any political opponent we hate this much must have a wholly different ideology from us. And when your enemies hate someone on your “side,” that causes you to embrace your guy even more.

My theory is that when we had RELIGION that was a real actual part of life, if the person you hated was in the church, you were absolutely required to at least fake that you didn't hate them -- and for the good of your soul, even ACTUALLY love them! Even if they were your ENEMY you were admonished to do the same!

We could have a few "ideologies" running around in our heads, but we KNEW that "this is ideology and THIS is RELIGION" -- one is temporal, one is eternal, we don't mix them up because that would be HERESY and that is VERY BAD.

Today,  "The Party" (TP-D) is the combination church/state. It's "encyclicals" -- sometimes actual "law", created lawfully by Congress, but increasingly "fiat" from the executive, some alphabet bureaucracy or the SCOTUS reading "penumbras"; increasingly MUST be obeyed by those who seek to maintain the good graces and favor of TP.  Thus "men in the women's bathroom" becomes a totem that must be bowed and scraped to by ALL. Gay "marriage" must not be just tolerated, it must be CELEBRATED by all -- or jobs will be lost, travel will be cut off, nay,  the infidels who disagree will be banished and purged from the Holy Church of TP!

On the right there is no such power as TP currently. The "Republican Party" is ill organized and has extremely poor "coordination" with the media that calls itself "conservative". Indeed, TP has declared it "illegal" for there to be "coordination" on the right, and in fact has declared that if so accused they are "guilty unless they can prove themselves innocent" in violation of UN human rights law!

Thus we have had "purity" issues for a LONG time as Jonah points out. Hoover, Nixon, W ... he could go MUCH farther. Even the sainted Reagan was far less doctrinaire than a BO on the left. The little history of W the "arch conservative" is painfully funny. I actually think LESS purity is better in this case -- as long as we don't lose track of who we are.

The whole thing is worth a read -- his left/right discussion is worth a refresher. If you haven't read mine on that I think it is decent as well.

'via Blog this'

The Wages Of Philosophic Incoherence

The scary illogic of pro-life - The Washington Post:

As I argued last week, if abortion is murder, then Trump was right about penalties for women having abortions. If it is not murder, then it ought to be legal.

In movies such as “The Silent Scream,” the antiabortion movement has for years provided gory and inaccurate details of the pain and violence of an abortion. So, if abortion is the violent murder of a human being, why not follow this twisted logic and punish women for having one? We don’t hold the perpetrators of any other violent act harmless unless they are insane or acted in self-defense, and the antiabortion movement hasn’t argued women who have abortions fall into either category.

While consistency is never an issue when the LEFT takes positions, they are very good at pointing out inconsistency from the right, and we ought to thank them for that. To be inconsistent is very human, but that doesn't make it "right", nor possible to sweep under the rug and still live morally and consistently.

The treatment of prostitution might be a model, only abortion is even LESS "victimless". In the old days, only the prostitute was prosecuted ( I see them as the abortionist ), but the "John", the customer was not. Today, there are sanctions against both parties. I could see the penalties for women seeking and obtaining abortions as similar to those for men who make use of prostitutes.

At least that is a place to begin a discussion. The left is correct, there is no way to philosophically hold the position that abortion is a form of murder, but the person who hires the killer (the woman) receives no sanction  from the state.



'via Blog this'

BO Made Protesting Trump Illegal

Protesting Donald Trump is Now a Federal Crime - Hit & Run : Reason.com:

There is irony, then there is irony so rich that it defies description -- the punchline, HR 347, signed into law by BO in 2012 makes it felony with up to 10 years in prison to "disrupt" events where someone under Secret Service protection is speaking!!

What might be a surprise is the fact that quietly and right under our noses in 2012, Congress nearly unanimously passed H.R. 347 (a.k.a. the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act) which makes it a federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison to "willfully and knowingly" enter a restricted area or to engage in "disorderly or disruptive conduct" that in any way impedes "government business or official functions." 

Signed into law by President Obama, this supposed tweak of a pre-existing law effectively criminalized protest of any person under the protection of the Secret Service, a select group which includes both major parties' front-runners for the presidential nomination. During the general election, the nominees of both parties are automatically assigned Secret Service protection, but Hillary Clinton, as a former first lady, is entitled to a Secret Service detail for the rest of her life, and Donald Trump has had a detail assigned to him since last November.

One has gotta love this! Every time I've been at any sort of Republican event that isn't just a local thing that isn't in the news, there have been protesters, picket lines or hecklers.  If you wanted to attend, you needed to not be intimidated. The left has a LONG history of using violence and intimidation to shut down speech that is not in agreement with them and to get their way.

This is a testament to the lack of interest in free speech in this country by BOTH political parties and a pretty good testament to why we may actually NEED Trump! I'm very surprised that BO signed this one -- he must have assumed that since the left controls the judiciary, cases from that side would just get thrown out.

Probably another asset to one party rule like the IRS. Prosecute the opposition if they demonstrate, make sure your thugs get a pass.

Want to bet how many of the felons protesting at Trump rallies get jail???

'via Blog this'

Franken Endorses Sucker Punch At Trump Rally

Trump followers defend the sucker punch: ‘Just a little poke on the beak’ - The Washington Post:

Way back in 2004, the (embarrassingly) current sitting Senator from MN, Al Franken, body slammed a heckler at a Howard Dean rally.  ... oh, never mind, no story there! (nobody made any deal about it then either -- Franken bragged about it!)

I can't imagine that Al would not be consistent on this, right?

A little contrast here. Some 78 year old guy punches a 26 year old guy at a Trump rally -- BIG deal in the media!

The reason they manipulate us is because it works! (generally)

Rule of law and consistency are how people live in peace -- either Franken and the 78 year old guy are right, or they are wrong when law and consistency hold sway.

When "The Party" and "situational ethics" hold sway, then "might is right" -- by ballot, by bully, by bullet, it is all just POWER!



'via Blog this'

Revulsion for Scalia, Priceless!

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/29/antonin-scalia-looking-backward

I can imagine articles similar to the linked being written for Jesus after the crucifixion. "He mostly failed ...".  Given the direction of the country, I suspect they are right about Scalia, but God will provide the ultimate determination of that as well!

Antonin Scalia, who died this month, after nearly three decades on the Supreme Court, devoted his professional life to making the United States a less fair, less tolerant, and less admirable democracy. Fortunately, he mostly failed.

I thought this was rich ...

His revulsion toward homosexuality, a touchstone of his world view, appeared straight out of his sheltered, nineteen-forties boyhood.

It turns out that when tested on a PET scan, even people that SWORE they were "perfectly OK" with homosexuality were betrayed by their own brains displaying "revulsion". From a Darwinian POV, it is hard to imagine something less "adaptive" to the species, so from a scientific POV, that our our brains would be  so wired is anything but a surprise. Not surprising from a created POV either! So Scalia was human -- and admitted it, which is VERY unpopular today! Lying about even what your basic cells believe is the price "honor in the modern moral cesspool

But it was in his jurisprudence that Scalia most self-consciously looked to the past. He pioneered “originalism,” a theory holding that the Constitution should be interpreted in line with the beliefs of the white men, many of them slave owners, who ratified it in the late eighteenth century.

Let's beat up on those dead white guys -- oh, and certainly trash what they bequeathed to us!  We are doing a hell of a job -- whatever they name the post-BO wasteland, it isn't "America"!

To be laid to rest after dying peacefully on a hunting trip at 79 and to have your Son preside at your funeral! It just doesn't get any better than that! I can think of nobody more richly deserving.

Oh, to have the kinds of enemies that wrote this column? PRICELESS!

Scalia Spectacle

Scalia, the Senate and the Media: A time for hypocrisy | Fox News:

We have no respect for even the dead -- be they babies torn from their mother's womb, or great jurists that come along only once ever few decades. Scalia was a mind and a spirit so far above the "average" that all those scurrying about braying nonsense about "replacing him" are cast in clear light as mental pygmies!

There is no "replacement" for Scalia! There wasn't for Reagan, for Churchill, for Einstein, or for other such giants. An infinite God gifts us with a few great men, and when they pass, we need to have a reasonable time to bless the gift and mourn the loss. We live in a fallen world that is temporal because it is fallen. Scalia understood that -- in his very soul. The most important thing that happens here is infinitely less important than  anything that happens in the spiritual realm! I wrote a bit about Scalia here, and there is a link in that post to an excellent interview with him. One little quote from that interview ...

Isn’t it terribly frightening to believe in the Devil?
You’re looking at me as though I’m weird. My God! Are you so out of touch with most of America, most of which believes in the Devil? I mean, Jesus Christ believed in the Devil! It’s in the Gospels! You travel in circles that are so, so removed from mainstream America that you are appalled that anybody would believe in the Devil! Most of mankind has believed in the Devil, for all of history. Many more intelligent people than you or me have believed in the Devil.

I'm not sure that the interviewer was convinced that there were currently or certainly in the past, any people more intelligent than him. Maybe Einstein -- but that is probably just a sop to false humility. It is left wing dogma that "all are equal" -- removal of standards and hierarchy enables them to replace all the wonderful complex relationships of family, friendship, community, nation and religion with raw unmitigated power. A day listening to NPR is enough to convince anyone with a shred of faith in God left that the Devil is alive and well and having a field day!

Where do Republicans get such ham handed disgusting politicians as Mitch McConnell? Kentucky I guess. He needed to say something nice about Scalia, that was all. Let BO make the first move! Sure, I'd assume that he will nominate someone too far left to be a replacement that a Republican controlled Senate should accept. SUPER ... drag out the confirmation hearings and reject them in "August"! Then it WILL be too late!

I got to listen to a lot of NPR yesterday. When a nation has been destroyed it has no memory or attention span. I must have heard the "precedent" of Justice Kennedy being confirmed in an election year 20 times. I maybe heard the name Bork twice, but it wasn't connected with the Kennedy confirmation. The Democrats owned the Senate and they forced Reagan to accept a very moderate justice that is now a "swing vote" after rejecting Bork in one if not THE battle that soured politics in the US to it's current sorry state. I answered my own question -- we get guys like McConnell because we have made politics into the most dishonorable profession possible!

The nations memory goes as it is destroyed because memory becomes tragic and painful. When a Republican is making a nomination -- even when they are in control in the Senate, the media spends much time and ink on the extremely important issue of "balance in the court" and "no litmus tests" and the CRITICAL importance of "Stare Decisis" (precedent). For NPR and the NY Times, these STRONG principles are most holy when a Republican is making a nomination!

Yesterday it was made clear multiple times that BOTH Hillary and BS would demand that any nomination they made would absolutely vote to overturn Citizens United!

Well, we got no class, and we got no principles ! Perhaps we need to replace the old national anthem with this ... more appropriate to what we are now!

'via Blog this'

Coordination, Burden of Proof

The NYT Just Disappeared A Devastating Obama Admission:

Public Radio and based on FB posts from liberals, "The Party" (TP-D) spent some time this past week on the horrors of the Citizens United SCOTUS ruling and "Big Money" on politics. Most horribly of all,  "coordination".  In CA they passed a new law that makes "political coordination" a "crime" in which if you are charged, the burden of proof is on YOU to "prove you are innocent".

The regulation effectively shifts the burden of proof in cases of suspected coordination from the government to the candidate or outside spending committee.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article39362607.html#storylink=cpy

Naturally, NPR was all in favor of this "marvelous idea" -- with nary a concern that it violates one of the most basic principles of justice -- "the presumption of innocence"!  The NPR assumption is that since the vast majority of the government bureaucracy and legal system is all left leaning, the constant coordination of all types that TP operates with will continue, and they will be able to jail conservatives trying to achieve a tiny fraction of the total coordination that TP uses every day!

Certainly a VERY "good idea" for TP! (it happens to break one of most basic of human rights, but TP!)

The linked NYTs article is just a TINY example of MSM / TP coordination. In an interview with NYT, BO declared:

In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments.

This came out this past Thursday, but the NY Times quickly realized that this didn't really look that good for their guy BO, so the linked article shows the litany of changes they went through to get "on message". Nice to have our nations supposed "paper of record" daily coordinating activity with TP don't ya think?

  The original headline of the column that included the embarrassing quote was:

“Obama Visiting National Counterterrorism Center.”

By the time they had removed the offending quote and went through a few revisions, the headline read:

“Assailed by G.O.P., Obama Defends His Response To Terror Attacks.”

At least when you are member of TP, you are NEVER "assailed by the New York Times"!! ... In fact, articles and even headlines are tuned to put you in the best light possible and any opposition in the worst light possible! BO erroneously thought that he needed to "watch more cable tv", when "in fact" (as reported by the NYtimes), it was all the fault of the GOP all along!

If you have an R next to your name, having to raise money from outside groups is a "crime" for which you are GUILTY until you "prove yourself innocent" -- and we all know that proving a negative is a lot of fun. ( please PROVE you are NOT a space alien!)

We already know that "consistency is not an issue", but one might think that with the frequency that the left cites the "UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights", they MIGHT find it interesting that they suddenly find it an excellent idea to apply the exact INVERSE of article 11 to their "political enemies"!

Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

The US is a supposed signer to these accords -- no word yet on the likelihood that NPR and CA are going to be prosecuted under the UN for violation of "basic human rights" ... oh wait, we can only assume that a conservative is like "fetus" just not really human, basically "deplorable"  ... and we know what that means!

'via Blog this'

CC Vs Gay "Marriage", Water and Granite

D.C. Chief of Police Won’t Issue Concealed Carry Permits… So, Why Isn’t SHE Thrown in Jail? | The PolitiStick:

The left wears away the rule of law like water wears away granite.

For YEARS we have been seeing the 2nd Amendment infringed on by government officials at all levels with no outcry from the left dominated media at all. In fact, officials who refuse to follow the LEGAL opinions of the court are treated as HEROES! I say "legal" because in Heller, the SCOTUS by a thin 5-4 margin merely upheld the plain language of the Constitution, in Obergefell vs Hodges (gay "marriage" ruling), the SCOTUS found an entirely new "right" to gay "marriage" in a Constitution that doesn't even mention marriage at all!

Creating a legal right to gay "marriage", or changing the clear text of the Constitution require Constitutional Amendments in a nation ruled by law. That is not the nation we live in.

In Heller the court merely ruled that the 2nd amendment says what everyone knew it said for 200 years. If the 2nd amendment was to actually be amended to say that "Only citizens in the US Armed Forces or official police forces may carry weapons" one could legally remove the arms from the citizenry and still have military and police forces with weapons. But if Heller had been found against the plain text of the Constitution, then any group that DID retain the right to bear arms would need special political authorization.

The OPTIMUM for the left is another SCOTUS decision overturning Heller that sets a precedent saying that citizens have no Constitutional right to bear arms, thus allowing differential treatment for "special groups" (military, police, government agencies, certain private security agencies .... ???) driven by political power.

The right wants EQUAL PROTECTION under LAW, the left wants CONTROLLED RESULTS under POLITICAL POWER because that allows them to dole out political favors which increases their political power. Our national arguments often come down to equality of opportunity and treatment under law applied to ALL, vs equality of results as mandated and determined by political POWER.

Law vs Power.

The idea of America was to radically reduce the power of politics -- allowing personal freedom, individual virtue, religion, individual work ethic, local organizations, business and entrepreneurship to thrive and create the greatest nation in the history of the world made up of individual free men. Naturally, the left, the power of tyranny, has hated the Constitution from the start -- so they attack it by all means possible, slow wearing constantly and nuclear strikes when possible.

If the left, already with very near complete control of the legal system which is no longer founded on a written Constitution can dole out the power of armament as it sees fit -- a future arm of "The Party" can issue a decree that "TP leaders in good standing can carry arms" -- but opposition would be unarmed of course. By this path a single party gains total control of a nation.

We live as boiled frogs in a TP / media thought controlled environment where MANY sheriffs / police chiefs / local bureaucrats  have refused Concealed Carry permits -- a basic right guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment and further codified by state law. Here in MN, when the CC law passed, country and city officials finding ways to subvert the law were in very good standing with left wing media outlets like MPR.

"Consistency is not an issue" is one of the most powerful weapons of Lucifer and the left. The ability to deal in radically differential treatment depending on the issue and clouding the minds of people so they are unable to connect issues to see plain violation of any semblance of equal treatment under the law keeps the vast majority in a state of darkness.

We are still at the stage where "the truth is out there" -- it CAN be discovered, exposed, and understood, but it now takes HARD WORK. We have slipped to where this kind of reporting and writing becomes more and more rare -- when it is gone,  the masses shuffle under the lash of tyrannical evil and wonder "How could this happen here?".

'via Blog this'

The Rule of Five, Dropping The Torch

A Question For Those Who Celebrate the Gay Marriage Decision | Power Line:

When there is no remaining Constitution, there can no longer be any surprise at any usurpation of power by any branch of government. The SCOTUS has long ago given up it's standing as the interpreter of the written rule of law. Their legitimate power flowed from the Constitution -- now they have destroyed that document -- the total conjuring of a "right" to any form of marriage being just the latest example.

We have no Constitution, so there is very little reason to have a SCOTUS at all -- and as the leftward slide continues at greater and greater speed, we are nearly certain to see them totally ignored by a "progressive" president, rather than just attacked during a SOTU address as they were in 2010.

The linked article asks the simple question: "If you like the current ruling on gay "marriage", what if they had decided the opposite 5-4? (that gay "marriage" was UNconstitutional)?

Since there is no "right", nor prohibition to any kind of marriage in the Constitution, the country that used to be America would have worked it out on a state by state basis democratically -- as it was doing. The court could have just as easily ruled that gay "marriage" was not Constitutional and stopped it everywhere. Would these people putting up rainbow colors all over be as happy then?

When you give your power away, you give it away! It is GONE -- for some reason people don't realize that when they see the sovereign acting in concert with their "happy idea of the day". They stand and cheer that the state by state democratic process has been usurped. Confident that things will always go their way as "law" becomes a distant to non-existent idea. Where there is no law, there is no predictability of life -- when I was married 30 years ago, the idea of gay "marriage" was as far off as the idea of marrying your sister, parent or dog is today. Given the absence of written law, there is no reason to expect that anything on that list, nor things not imagined today would be a "right" 30 years hence.

As an aside,  "libertarians" applauding 5 people in robes ability to shut down the democratic process in states makes one question both the sanity and basic intelligence of such people. How can any sentient person call themselves a "libertarian" and call it "liberty" when 5 people in robes take the right to democratic action away from 330 million?

Scalia said it best “Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court.”

We are no longer a "united" states -- when the rule of law is abandoned, then power is all that counts. We need a new nation -- perhaps the Red States can form such. The old nation is now something else than America -- the "Socialist States" or "Progressive States".

The torch of liberty has been dropped.

'via Blog this'

Your Raisins Or Your Life

Review & Outlook: Raisins in the Sun - WSJ:

The US has a "raisin reserve" -- also avocados, kiwis, apricots and who knows what else. It goes back to the 30's -- the time before last when we slipped steeply socialist (the last was the '60s). Now is the age of BO socialism -- BOcare being the biggest slide.

The article is well worth a read, the summary is that a couple in CA decided since they sold their raisins direct, they were not subject to seizure of part of their crop by the feds. The Feds disagreed, and now the case is going to the SCOTUS -- but it is obvious the Feds got worried while they were looking at this, so they tried to pull some legal shenanigans to keep their "raisin train" and no doubt avocado, apricot, etc gravy trains with positions, kickbacks, conferences, etc intact.

If it wasn't so damned sad and disgusting, it would be funny.

As Justice Antonin Scalia put it, so it's "your raisins or your life, right? . . . you don't have to pay the penalty if you give us the raisins." No, Mr. Palmore explained. "They have to give the raisins . . . It's not a choice." Which is why the Justices should find these takings to be unconstitutional.

Here! Here!

'via Blog this'

Thou Shalt Not Covet (Scalia)

In Conversation With Antonin Scalia -- New York Magazine:

The man is crazy intelligent and crazy direct. I shall not covet his gifts! (keep repeating)

It is long, but very very well worth the time. For me, his discussion on Heaven, Hell and the Devil is the best part. The reporter is shocked that an intelligent person would believe at all, let alone ADMIT that he believes. One of the benefits of lifetime appointment!

Other than that part, I loved this:

Had you already arrived at originalism as a philosophy? 

I don’t know when I came to that view. I’ve always had it, as far as I know. Words have meaning. And their meaning doesn’t change. I mean, the notion that the Constitution should simply, by decree of the Court, mean something that it didn’t mean when the people voted for it—frankly, you should ask the other side the question! How did they ever get there?

Indeed, if words don't have meaning, why bother to write anything down?

'via Blog this'

BO Assassination of Americans "Troubling"

Killings Pose Legal and Moral Quandary - WSJ.com:

The "far right news outlet" WSJ seems to be "troubled" by BO killing a US citizen in a foreign land with no judicial review at all. Golly.

I'm old enough to remember a time long ago and far away in the evil W administration where even tapping a phone WITH FISA court review was a TERRIBLE destruction of our Constitutional rights!! 

Back then the MSM/left were some mighty strict Constitutionalists.

Now BO can KILL a US citizen with no attempt at capture and trial. Just go ahead and blast them??? Presidential power as judge, jury and executioner of US citizens. These are the same people that are against the death penalty even after a full scale trial and years of appeals, because "there is never 100% proof someone is guilty", but they are completely UNtroubled by BO whacking this guy?

Yes, I know, my own maxim of understanding the liberal mind "Consistency is NOT an issue!!!" ... but each new proof of that frankly unbelievable maxim gives me a little shiver. Our elites suddenly discover that  no law and no limits on power is nothing that they have concern over!

All hail BO! 

'via Blog this'