September 2010
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Aug		Nov »
	1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30

Archive for September 2010

Sunstein, Respected Legal Scholar (By Whom???)

29. September 2010 by Satire V.

This video should tell you all you need to know about why Dems are bad for America:

I have transcribed Sunstein’s remarks for you below.

“Let me explain the division among Conservative legal thinkers. Some Conservative legal thinkers, thinkers like Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas think that the Constitution means what it originally meant. That means that we should understand the document by going into a kind of time machine and capturing the public understanding of the public that ratified the document a century, or more than a century ago. So that is a very distinctive approach would involve quite radical changes in our existing Constitutional understandings, and Justice Thomas is entirely clear on that. He’s voted to overrule the Supreme Court’s own precedents over twenty times. On the other hand there are other Conservatives who are not in favor of going in the time machine, but who are skeptical of Liberal judicial activism in a way that would involve narrow, cautious, literally conservative rulings. So Chief Justice Rehnquist was often a different – very different kind of Conservative from Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, though he voted with them. Justice O’Connor was strikingly different than Justice – was is – strikingly different from Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia in the sense that Justice O’Connor likes stability and she doesn’t – she likes nudges, she doesn’t like earthquakes. And when Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas asked for large scale movements in the law, especially when they asked for attacks on what the democratic branches did in the interest of recovering the original understanding; Justice O’Connor was not with them. So this is a big split between literal Conservatives and those who believe that the Constitution’s best interpretation is very dramatically different from what we now have.”

Notice that he doesn’t refer to Conservative Constitutional scholars as scholars. Conservative are merely “thinkers” in his mind (such as it is).

He is clearly espousing his idea that the Constitution should be reinterpreted to mean what Judges, and specifically liberal Judges want it to mean. That we shouldn’t go back (we can do this just fine without a time machine, moron. Historical documents exist) to the original understanding of the Constitution. The Constitution was a contract between the States and their peoples that existed when it was ratified. All States that have followed signed on to this existing contract. It isn’t living and breathing any more than your mortgage agreement or employment contracts, Sunstein.
This “living and breathing” interpretation is pure idiocy for a number of reasons.

I already stated that the Constitution amounted to a contract between the States. This contract was an agreement concerning limitations on the Federal government, and to some extent relations between the individual States. You don’t change contracts without renegotiating the terms. That is the purpose of the amendment process. Doing so without limitations leads to either anarchy or totalitarian rule by the party in power.

Allowing a small group of unelected persons to “interpret” the Constitution to find rights not included, to find ANY Federal authority not spelled out, and to change laws at a whim is very bad business and not intended by the ratifiers. What will you do Mr. Sunstein, when these interpretations don’t go your way? What happens if Conservatives are in power for many years and appoint their own life long partisans? Will your tune change then? The Constitution must be looked at in it’s most literal form to prevent abuses by any side. Conveniently for Conservatives, most believe in the original view. Maybe that is why we know we are on the side or right in this.

A constitution not viewed as literally and originally as possible could just as soon not exist to begin with (and could soon cease to exist). Without limitations on government, the government is all-powerful. An unrestricted government can do whatever it wants to with you, your property, and even your life. Welcome to monarchy.

The offense taken by Sunstein that Justice Thomas might “vote” to overrule previous Supreme Court decisions is not surprising. This is not based on some respect for precedent, only liberal precedent. Overturning mistakes made by previous Supreme Courts is part of the responsibility of the Court. Failing to do so would be a violation of their oaths.

Does Sunstein interpret liberal Supreme Court rulings overturning laws at all levels as “attacks” on the democratic branches? I doubt it. Although I would guess he meant “Democratic” not “democratic.”

Why shouldn’t we have large-scale movements? We should always immediately move as far as it takes to put the law back in line with the original intent and meaning of the Constitution. We have been moving toward Marxism in increments, we need to move back in leaps if we want our Republic to survive!

In the end Mr. Sunstein, you are a Constitutional idiot. There is no other way to describe those who believe as you do, and who don’t understand that the constitution of any country must be taken very seriously for that country to survive in it’s intended form. The form of government our Constitution intended is by far the best ever conceived of, and neither you nor activist courts will be allowed to “interpret” it out of existence.

Posted in Retruthing the Debate | Print | No Comments »

Nogales NM Mayor Indicted

29. September 2010 by Satire V.

I checked 5 stories on this one. By the third, I knew he had to be a Dem because there had been no mention of Party affiiation. Guess what? I was right!

See the story here.

Posted in Corruption Watch | Print | No Comments »

Finally, Something Good For Detroit!

13. September 2010 by Satire V.

Monica Conyers has reported to prison to begin serving her sentence. See Detroit News article here.

My only question (OK it’s a two-parter):

Who actually believes that John Conyers didn’t know what his wife was up to and who was driving his kids to school, and why hasn’t he been prosecuted?

Maybe DOJ is just Holdering out for more evidence.

Posted in Corruption Watch | Print | No Comments »

I Didn’t Do It For You.

13. September 2010 by Satire V.

Over the years I have heard many current military members and veteran’s say something like this when confronted with leftists expressing their views:

“I, and my fellow veterans, fought for your right to express your views and to keep this Country free so that you always have that right!”

I served 20 years in the United States Army. I served our Country in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. I spent long months away from my family. I didn’t do it so that leftists could express their ideas.

Mind you, I did swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. As such, I fought to defend this great Nation against the kind of political stupidity and freedom suicide that the left engages in. I fought to defend the best system of government ever created by men on this Earth. Nothing that the left believes in is compatible with our system or our Constitution.

If you believe in our Constitution, and that it was and is a binding contract between all the States in this Union; If you believe in the right of each man and woman to enjoy the fruits of their labor, and give to those they wish to; if you believe in the rule of law, not the rule of lawyers; if you love your Country and believe that it is the greatest force for good; then I say to you:
I did it for the Constitution and the Nation, and by extension I did do it for you.

So, those of you on the left (as you don’t fit into the above group), I didn’t do it to defend your ideas. I certainly didn’t do it to give you the freedom to dismantle the greatest Country on this planet. I didn’t do it so that you could portray everyone you disagree with as hate-mongers, racists, and extremists. I didn’t do it to give you the freedom to change a working “experiment” in Democracy over to a proven failure of Socialism/Marxism/Communism. In short:
I didn’t do it for you.

Posted in Things Obama Doesn't Understand, Retruthing the Debate | Print | No Comments »

Cuyahoga County Corruption (Say that three times fast)

13. September 2010 by Satire V.

You would probably have to say it many more times than that! See the Democrat Party statement here:

This is part of the statement. Don’t drink while reading unless you enjoy spit-takes.

“On August 10, I called upon Mr. Russo, along with Mr. (Jimmy) Dimora, to resign their offices in light of the ongoing allegations. Our party will not tolerate any office holder who has used their public trust for their own financial gain or benefit.” (emphasis mine)

Really?? The Democrat Party will not tolerate such things? Since when? The statement was apparently issued on 9/10/2010. I guess this means we should expect sweeping changes in what Dems will tolerate from their own from now on.

Thank goodness, and about time.

Posted in Corruption Watch, Its Only Hypocrisy If The Right Does It | Print | No Comments »

Martinez Hides Behind His Robes

3. September 2010 by Satire V.

William Martinez appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 10th, 2010. Follow up questions by Senators Sessions and Coburn asked straightforward questions of Martinez regarding his many questionable affiliations. See this post. Martinez uniformly refused to answer any question. He did provide responses, but no answers to the actual questions he was asked. All of Martinez’s responses either invoked attorney-client privilege, or stated that he would follow the existing Supreme and Circuit Court precedence.

If his answers are accurate representations of his intent, why do we need him? An unsophisticated piece of software could do what he proposes are his only options, to rule either in keeping with the 10th, or with the Supremes. I’m pretty sure my dog could do this.

Do anyone (obviously not the liberals that recommended him, Bennett and Udall) believe that he will not base decisions on his personal politics? I certainly don’t. The organizations he is associated with are radical. For those who missed it before, here is a short list:

Amnesty International
ACLU of Colorado
Colorado Public Radio
Greenpeace, USA
Human Rights Watch
International Rescue Committee
Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund
National Legal Aid and Defender Association

Each of us need to write or call our Senators and ensure that they are aware that we don’t want any more activist, leftist, anti-Constitutional, anti-Federal judges on our courts. These types of judges have caused enough destruction, and have taken away enough liberty. Confirmation of Martinez would be one more step down the long dark hallway of statism.

Don’t let this nominee hide behind his robes. Insist that your Senators bring his beliefs out into the open for all of us to see.

Posted in Its Only Hypocrisy If The Right Does It | Print | No Comments »