Just funny in its honesty. Get it now, it won’t be there in twenty years. From the National Review:
While engaging in the mundane task of gathering financial statements for a “secure retirement” meeting with my husband’s and my adviser, this Baby Boomer stumbled upon documented proof that our nation does not have the guts to confront one of its most serious economic problems. The realization came when I pulled from my files a document statement innocently titled, “Your Social Security Statement.” At first glance, the statement did not appear menacing. I was told I could expect to receive a benefit of “about $2,136 a month” upon reaching age 70 — which certainly seems like good news. But immediately I thought of a parallel of President Obama’s infamous Obamacare promise: “If you like your Social Security, you can keep your Social Security.”
Then, as if on cue, I saw an asterisk with the following message: The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2033, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 77 percent of scheduled benefits.
The California Superior Court has issued a narrow temporary restraining order preventing the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), a pro-life group, from releasing further undercover video footage taken of three top-level staff of StemExpress.
CMP is the organization behind the series of three videos released over the past three weeks exposing the alleged harvesting and sale of body parts from aborted babies by Planned Parenthood – body parts that are then purchased by StemExpress.
CMP has alleged that the fees paid by StemExpress to Planned Parenthood violate federal law prohibiting the sale and trafficking of human tissue.
While Planned Parenthood has claimed that the fees paid to them by StemExpress merely cover their costs, and fall within the bounds of the law, the video footage released so far has appeared to show Planned Parenthood employees seeking profit as part of the transaction.
In the most recent video, released Tuesday, a Planned Parenthood affiliate vice president was caught on video describing how the abortion organization can maximize profit. “I think a per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it,” Dr. Savita Sinde said of the aborted baby.
The Associated Press, which broke the news about the court order, reports that the undercover videos of the Stem Express staff were filmed at a restaurant in May.
It is unclear just how significant an impact the court order will have on the release of subsequent videos in the series. David Daleiden, the lead researcher with CMP, has said that at least nine more videos are slated for release.
So a legal undercover video that shows the monstrous manner of organizations dealing in dead baby parts gets a judge to side with those organizations against the truth based on…
What a great statement. And ask yourself who we cannot criticize without repercussions?
Plus, who we can mock and find great praise in doing so.
Shame on us. What in the heck are we thinking?
From Hotair about the newest video released. I can’t watch it. It makes my “Let’s just get a stick and beat them till body parts fall off” itch to start. Shame on us. Just shame. Maybe if they were dissecting lions?
The Center for Medical Progress released another in its ongoing series of undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s operations and trade in organ harvesting. Dr. Savita Ginde, the VP of PP’s Rocky Mountains group who appeared briefly in the previous video, echoes Deborah Nucatola in explaining how PP trains its technicians to adjust their procedures to maximize organ and tissue extraction — a violation of the federal law that allows such transfers in the first place. Ginde also discusses how to use language to obfuscate the obvious transaction taking place, the sale of specific organs for specific compensation.
“Putting it under ‘research’ gives us a little bit of an overhang over the whole thing,” Ginde remarks. “If you have someone in a really anti state who’s going to be doing this for you, they’re probably going to get caught.”
Ginde also admits on video that some of the organ harvesting takes place on babies delivered intact and potentially alive first, which would violate the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which went into effect in 2002. Note well that this contains disturbing imagery, starting at 8:40 in the video, much of which was included in the previous video, but some of which is new. Among the latter is the technician chorting, “And another boy!” It’s stomach-turning on many levels:
When 54 million babies are killed the only sound we hear from the Left is silence. But when an old slow lion named Cecil gets killed by a hunter, after being lured into the area by unscrupulous guides, the world explodes in anger.
So obviously, the problem here is the babies that are being killed, their bodies being sold off for profit need to be named Cecil.
Maybe that would make a difference to those on the Left.
Or maybe we should adopt their methods of abusing offenders and see how that goes?
BTW- side note on Mother Nature. Lions live 10-14 yrs in the wild. Cecil was 13. He was out the door soon. That is how it works. He was at the end of his life and it was taken by violence.
These babies haven’t had a chance to live their lives and they were violently murdered, but that’s okay?
The numbers are shocking. And even with what we do have, we know the government works hard to cover up crimes and links to limit the public perception that illegals are net negatives to our nation. They are net negatives is so many ways.
But as Stalin pointed out-The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.
So let’s show some faces of the victims of the illegals.
At a Tuesday Senate hearing dedicated to the families who lost loved ones thanks to illegal aliens, Laura Wilkerson gave testimony on her youngest son Joshua’s horrific death while some in the silent audience wept.
Wilkerson called on Congress to place American lives and interests over foreigners, especially those illegally living in the country.
During the hearing, titled “Oversight of the Administration’s Misdirected Immigration Enforcement Policies: Examining the Impact on Public Safety and Honoring the Victims,” Wilkerson broke from her written testimony to deliver a dire warning.
“This was our family’s 9/11 terrorist attack by a foreign invader,” she said at the most pivotal point in her testimony. “It is going to take another life lost by a Senator, a Congressman, the President, even another of today’s heroes, someone from Hollywood before someone in a position moves on this.”
This is a good boy killed by a bad illegal. Here is your face.
“My son’s name was Joshua Wilkerson,” she began. “On November 16, 2010, he was beaten, strangled, tortured until he died. He was tied up, thrown in a field, and set on fire. His killer, Hermilo Moralez, was brought here illegally by his illegal parents when he was ten years old, so he fit the ‘DREAM’ kid description. He was sentenced to life in prison, which means it will be 30 years before he’s up for parole. He’ll be a 49-year-old man, who I don’t expect to be deported. And I just hope he doesn’t come to live in your city.”
Ms. Wilkerson’s son was murder by an illegal immigrant who, because he came to the country as a minor, would have qualified for Obama’s 2012 executive amnesty granted to illegal immigrant minors — or so-called DREAMers, whom Obama insists “belong here.”
Let’s just admit the the powers to be both in the media and business and government will never suffer what that mother has suffered. Their world is not our world. But the sad reality is the TYPE of Mexican coming here for good or ill motives is not who we want to be here.
They are by and large honest poor uneducated people (who we don’t want here), or they are criminals (who we don’t want here!). Covering up the criminal element by using the sad faces of the poor Hispanic families is like a Sarah McClachlan video! Sad puppy and kitten faces covering over the back room filled with rabid cur dogs!
Here are more. Not that it will make a difference today, there is just too much power and money involved.
Take the time and then ask yourself if you can support those who support this.
Good luck defending this if you can. But I don’t see how. If you all want to know how in the world Germans managed to look the other way while Nazis experimented on and tortured children, look no farther than Hillary and the Left’s defense of partial birth abortion and the newly revealed market for baby parts.
LOS ANGELES, July 21—A second undercover video shows Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Medical Directors’ Council President, Dr. Mary Gatter, haggling over payments for intact fetal specimens and offering to use a “less crunchy technique” to get more intact body parts.
It is similar to last week’s viral video showing PPFA Senior Director of Medical Services Dr. Deborah Nucatola admitting to using partial-birth abortions to get intact parts and suggesting a price range of $30 to $100 per specimen.
Gatter is a senior official within Planned Parenthood and is President of the Medical Directors’ Council, the central committee of all Planned Parenthood affiliate medical directors.
Actors posing as buyers ask Gatter, “What would you expect for intact [fetal] tissue?”
“Well, why don’t you start by telling me what you’re used to paying!” Gatter replies.
Gatter continues: “You know, in negotiations whoever throws out the figure first is at a loss, right?” She explains, “I just don’t want to lowball,” before suggesting, “$75 a specimen.”
Gatter twice recites Planned Parenthood messaging on fetal tissue collection, “We’re not in it for the money,” and “The money is not the important thing,” but she immediately qualifies each statement with, respectively, “But what were you thinking of?” and, “But it has to be big enough that it’s worthwhile for me.”
Gatter also admits that in prior fetal tissue deals, Planned Parenthood received payment in spite of incurring no cost: “It was logistically very easy for us, we didn’t have to do anything. So there was compensation for this.” She accepts a higher price of $100 per specimen understanding that it will be only for high-quality fetal organs: “Now, this is for tissue that you actually take, not just tissue that someone volunteers and you can’t find anything, right?”
As we’ve seen in the videos these people don’t see children as children, they see them at “things” to be killed and processed for profit. Remember, Planned Parenthood is a multi-billion dollar organization. That’s with “b” as in billions. One report shows over 54 million babies have been aborted overall.
On a side note, our leaders, who most supported abortion, complain there aren’t enough workers in America, not enough tax payers, so we have to import them. However, if we had not killed those 54 million and let them grow up, educate them, and then employ and tax them, would we not have solved our immigration problem? And saved the lives of 54 million Americans? Just a thought.
However, spend some time with the video and the one prior to it. Then ask yourself again, seeing the big collective yawn by our leaders and our citizens, how the Germans looked the other way. It was simple, they deemed the Jews and others non-human. Just as the Planned Parenthood and their supporters deem unborn babies.
Is this not a person.
It is really that simple. And ghastly. And owing our enemies of the past an apology. I guess we were not enlightened enough.
There is a lot of commentary to be had here. First, there is no reason this kid should be dead. But he is, and I wish the best for his family.
But, why is he dead is the question. And what does this mean in a big picture?
I’m one for irony. A sort of Greek tragedy. Here we have a liberal, white, young man who was an aide to Jim Hines, who is listed as a fairly liberal congressman for Connecticut. But we pretty much know the person who is Kevin Sutherland. A nice guy, a true believer, a person who thinks things can be different. None of those things are bad, but unreal, and by pushing policies forward that end up creating violence, the irony is this violence was visited on him by the very subject I’m willing to bet he defended more than once- thug crime.
A man was murdered in a Washington, D.C. Metro subway train in broad daylight Saturday afternoon.
Kevin Sutherland, a 24 year-old white male active in liberal politics, was stabbed to death by Jasper Spires, an 18 year-old career criminal Black male, in an attempted robbery according to police.
The murder took place around 1 p.m. on a train car as it pulled in to the NoMa Gallaudet U Metro station in Northeast Washington. Sutherland was pronounced dead at the scene.
The subway line at that point and the station are above ground. The Fourth of July is one of the busiest days for the D.C. Metro system as hundreds of thousands of people travel to the Mall for the fireworks and other events celebrating the Nation’s birthday.
What is also interesting this the sheer number of people who stood there, while Spires wielded a TWO INCH blade and watched Spires stab and kick and then stab again the helpless Sutherland. Worse, Spires then robbed some other people and fled.
But the people on the train called police and held the dying man’s hand so there is that I guess.
What we have here is several points:
One, thugs kill everybody. They are the rabid dog liberals try to excuse that will rip the neck out of the same liberals, who will again excuse them. A vicious circle I would refuse to enter.
Two, Sutherland couldn’t defend himself because that’s not the world he believes in. He believed in that other world, run by a wizard. That got him killed.
Three, and this is the worst. Ten people watched the suspect, who was simply not that big, repeatedly kick and stab the victim…and did nothing. Ten to one, and they did nothing.
The killing undercuts a half-dozen leftist talking points, and shows the hypocrisy redolent in the outrage expressed by politicians (like President Obama), race baiters like Al Sharpton, and countless media elites.
Two days before murdering Sutherland, Spires was arrested by D.C. cops for violently attempting to rob another man, and assaulted police as they tried to take him in. Had he been killed by police in that incident, the recent high school grad, who also briefly attended a private college in North Carolina, would no doubt been treated by the press and the President like Martin, Brown or Freddy Gray up the road in Baltimore, as a promising young man who became a tragic victim of the police war against young black men. But Spires appears to have been uninjured by police despite his combativeness and small (5’5”) stature. Local prosecutors then reduced charges and the police released him. Spires stopped by a D.C. police station and picked up his personal belongings from that arrest shortly before killing Sutherland. Not only does this demolish the idea that police are out to get guys like Spires, it demonstrates just how lax the justice system is about dealing with violent criminals, whatever their race.
Spires was armed with a small folding knife, similar to that carried by Freddy Gray. In that case, Baltimore officials went out of their way to excuse Gray from carrying the knife, as if such things in the hands of repeat criminals hardly mattered. After all, knives don’t kill, guns do.
Not only do thugs kill people, people kill people by letting thugs get away with it.
Had they jumped him, somebody would have been cut, probably not that bad, and they could have stomped him into the ground before the police got there, simply making the statement I see more and more every day.
But they didn’t.
No more PC. No more excuses. No more violence. Our leaders have encouraged violent people to act out even more, excusing their uncivilized behavior. It will be up to other citizens to put a stop to that.
This guy- someone who brings nothing of value to America.
Can we say we “smell” the arrogant violence on him? Do you think he cares about anything beyond his own immediate gratification?
Killed this guy.
His “crime?” Believing in the wrong reality.
Who meant no one any harm.
One wonders what his last thoughts were while he saw the black face over him stabbing him over and over. Could it have been, “Maybe I was wrong?”
Update: I watched the interview with the parents of the girl who was killed in San Fran. They are really nice people, typical liberals from the west coast, as was the girl. I think the father is starting to understand NOTHING occurs in a vacuum. And I’m sure he’s not very happy with the way the Sheriff out there is whining like a little girl about how HE is being targeted. Now that guy IS the quintessential liberal moron, but who likes the power of government, IF he is the power of course.
Bad dude, doing bad things by allowing other bad dudes to do bad things- all for politics.
My kids give me grief about my harping about politics, but truth is nowadays politics is impacting everything. We have crossed the Rubicon.
Kate is alive if any one of the bad liberal policies aren’t followed. It is that simple.
There are two articles you can read that will vindicate in large part Trump’s ill spoken comments. Let’s put PC and political games aside and ask the question he is asking. “Who are these people walking across our borders?”
For the most part, they are these people, the Mexican lower class Mexico doesn’t want or need.
But, for all its history, Santo Domingo is very poor. Most residents are subsistence farmers. Homes are modest. Women scrub their wash over rocks at communal basins.
For generations, policy-makers have debated, what makes poor people poor? Is it the simple fact of not having enough money, or is it the choices they make, the way they live? A pioneering program here in Mexico is trying to fight poverty with both approaches by giving the poorest Mexicans cash and by trying to change the way they live.
Started 12 years ago by the Mexican government, the program, called Oportunidades — or Opportunities — gives a small subsidy every other month to poor mothers, like Santo Domingo resident Sixta Orcasita.
But there is a catch, one that separates Oportunidades from traditional welfare plans. Orcasita and millions of mothers like her across Mexico must first sign a contract to raise healthier, better-educated children.
Orcasita has six children. Both she and her husband, Eraclio Bello, never made it past grade school. To get their cash, they must keep their youngest children, 15-year-old Karina and 13-year-old Alex, in school. They must also bring them in for regular checkups at the health clinic.
And Sixta Orcasita must participate in monthly nutrition classes, so she can cook healthier meals for the family. Attendance is monitored, and the monthly allotment of cash, about $60 for each child, plus a monthly food stipend, will be quickly pulled if mothers fail to get their children to school or clinic. The goal is to break the cycle of poverty.
Santiago Levy, now with the Inter-American Development Bank, came up with the so-called conditional cash plan.
SANTIAGO LEVY: These families were trapped in a — in some kind of an intergenerational mechanism, by which parents were poor, children were poor, and the next generation were also poor. The kids were so poor, they had to be picking coffee in the fields, and they couldn’t go to school.
And they didn’t go to school. And then, when they were adults, they couldn’t get a good job. And if they couldn’t get a job, they would be poor, and then their children would have to work to help support the family, and on from generation to generation.
RAY SUAREZ: It’s a cycle Karina and Alex’s father wants to end. Bello’s first four children dropped out of school. Now he wants the cash from Oportunidades to keep his youngest children out of the fields.
ERACLIO BELLO: I hope they continue studying and get ahead. I’m prepared to help them any way I can. And I hope they make a better life for themselves than I have for myself and that they are better prepared for life than we were.
RAY SUAREZ: To sweeten the pot, Oportunidades pays the family more money each year Karina and Alex move into a higher grade and increases allowances for school supplies.
SANTIAGO LEVY: The amount of money that the kid brings into the household matters for the household. So, in a way, you are not really providing additional income. You are changing the source of the income. What you are saying is, your kid will be equally valuable to you if he’s in the school, as opposed if he is in the street begging for money.
RAY SUAREZ: Of the 185 children in Santo Domingo, 108 of them are enrolled in Oportunidades. Nationally, more than 25 million people, one-quarter of the population of Mexico, are enrolled.
This program works better than our welfare program because it is PEGGED to performance, not just mere existence. However, we still see them coming here because our welfare is frankly lower hanging fruit, and we are more secure- unless you are in a highly concentrated illegal immigrant area ( I know, the obvious).
Then Trump wanders around with the “Mexicans are rapists” statement, not sure whether to keep holding it, or quietly put it down. The statement is not completely accurate- but not totally inaccurate either.
Like certain Middle Eastern cultures, raping young girls is not that unusual. In fact, it happens so much it is accepted as part of the culture. And the best part is if you marry the girl, everybody in the village is cool with it. Not exactly what we demand as civilized behavior here in the United States. (I know, unless you find yourself in a highly concentrated area of illegal immigrants.)
These gorgeous mountain slopes in central Mexico, blooming with black pepper plants and golden cornstalks, camouflage the sorrow of the two silent sisters. Antonia and Isabel Francisco Melendez, who were born deaf, are nine months pregnant, and, according to the doctors treating them, were raped.
The sisters, who cannot speak, cry and crumple, and literally fold up, when asked how they got pregnant. Their babies are due at the same time, within a week or so. Do they know the man? Did it happen in the fields on their way home from school? Isabel seemed to try to reply once, to her grandmother, by pointing to a spot high on a mountainside before tears streamed down her face and she turned away again.
Antonia is 13 years old, and Isabel 16. Perhaps if they were older, the pregnancies would have been easier to keep secret, the way rapes and beatings of women are usually dealt with in Mexico. But in this little town of fewer than 500 people, a place where the church bells toll every afternoon at 5 to call everyone to say the rosary, the reality is hard to hide. The girls’ tiny frames swell more each day. Their backs and legs are sore — not from playing tag with schoolmates, but because their bodies are telling them they will soon be mothers.
“This is a crime and there should be an investigation,” said Juana Maria Diego Victor, a community leader in this village 85 miles northeast of Puebla city. “Someone should protect these girls.”
Mexico is struggling to modernize its justice system, but when it comes to punishing sexual violence against women, surprisingly little has changed in a century. In many parts of Mexico, the penalty for stealing a cow is harsher than the punishment for rape.
Although the law calls for tough penalties for rape — up to 20 years in prison — only rarely is there an investigation into even the most barbaric of sexual violence. Women’s groups estimate that perhaps 1 percent of rapes are ever punished. Although the two girls’ medical charts say their pregnancies were the “product of rape,” no police authority has looked into the case.
The truth is Mexico is a third world nation split for centuries along class lines. There are the rich elites and the peasant poor. The peasant poor come here. Sent by rich elites, who either refuse to assist the poor or cannot make the poor help themselves become middle class. And with their journey here, the peasant class brings with it all their bad habits.
Trump could have made the argument better. But it doesn’t change the fact it happens all the time.
An illegal alien kidnapped a 13-year-old girl from Polk County, Florida last week and was found with her in a house in Michigan, according to police.
Aurelio Hernandez-Gomez, 23, was captured by law enforcement in Van Buren County, Michigan. He reportedly told police he is an illegal alien from Chiapas, Mexico, according to The Ledger.
“After obtaining the information in NCIC, Van Buren County Sheriff’s Office deputies searched the residence about 8:15 p.m. Thursday and found the 13-year-old girl and Hernandez-Gomez, who was inside hiding.
“Van Buren deputies think Hernandez-Gomez sexually assaulted the girl while she was at his home. The victim was placed in the custody of Michigan Children’s Protective Services, and arrangements have been made for her to be reunited with her parents in Florida, according to a Van Buren Sheriff’s Office release.
“Hernandez-Gomez told Van Buren deputies that he entered the United States illegally and is originally from Chiapas, Mexico, according to a release. The Van Buren release stated that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was notified.
“He was arrested on criminal sexual conduct charges, a Polk County warrant for kidnapping and interference with child custody, and taken to the Van Buren County Jail, where he is being held on no bond.
The American people are tired of being asked to absorb the beatings the liberals and progressives are demanding. There are far too many of that angry group that if they vote as a group any politician that seizes on this anger will be elected in a landslide. Even blacks are hating the Mexican invasion, (and for good reason) so a good politician will get a number of them too.
Jeezz.. with this crew. What do you think he could do?
I like Judge Roberts. I don’t always agree with him, but I get where he is coming from. I argue with my conservative friends who bash him for not “stopping bad legislation.”
To this I say the following- It is not his job to stop our nation from being or doing stupid things. All he can do is give us a chance, through the democratic process, to stop ourselves. Which I argued he did when he let Obamacare stand. He believes that no court should be an activist court. Sadly, there are occasionally five judges who do, and did so in the gay marriage dispute. Which I will point out, Roberts vehemently disagreed with.
From his dissent;
Nowhere is the majority’s extravagant conception of judicial supremacy more evident than in its description—
and dismissal—of the public debate regarding same-sexmarriage. Yes, the majority concedes, on one side are
thousands of years of human history in every society known to have populated the planet. But on the other
side, there has been “extensive litigation,” “many thoughtful District Court decisions,” “countless studies, papers,
books, and other popular and scholarly writings,” and“more than 100”amicus briefs in these cases alone.
Ante at 9, 10, 23.
What would be the point of allowing the democratic process to go on? It is high time for the Court
to decide the meaning of marriage, based on five lawyers’ “better informed understanding” of “a liberty that remains
urgent in our own era.”
Ante, at 19.
The answer is surely there in one of those amicus briefs or studies. Those who founded our country would not recognize the majority’s conception of the judicial role. They after all risked their lives and fortunes for the precious right to govern themselves. They would never have imagined yielding that right on a question of social policy to unaccountable and unelected judges. And they certainly would not have been satisfied by a system empowering judges to override policy judgments so long as they do so after “a quite extensive discussion.” Ante, at 8. In our democracy,debate about the content of the law is not an exhaustion requirement to be checked off before courts can impose their will. “Surely the Constitution does not put either the legislative branch or the executive branch in the position of a television quiz show contestant so that when a given period of time has elapsed and a problem remains unresolved by them, the federal judiciary may press a buzzer and take its turn at fashioning a solution.” Rehnquist, The Notion of a Living Constitution, 54 Texas L. Rev. 693, 700 (1976). As a plurality of this Court explained just last year, “It is demeaning to the democratic process to presume that voters are not capable of deciding an issue ofthis sensitivity on decent and rational grounds.”
Schuette v. BAMN, 572 U. S. ___, ___ –___ (2014) (slip op., at 16–17).
The Court’s accumulation of power does not occur in a vacuum. It comes at the expense of the people. And they
know it. Here and abroad, people are in the midst of a serious and thoughtful public debate on the issue of same-
sex marriage. They see voters carefully considering same-sex marriage, casting ballots in favor or opposed, and
sometimes changing their minds. They see political leaders similarly reexamining their positions, and either
reversing course or explaining adherence to old convictions confirmed anew. They see governments and businesses
modifying policies and practice s with respect to same-sex couples, and participating active ly in the civic discourse.
They see countries overseas democratically accepting profound social change, or declining to do so. This deliberative process is making people take seriously questions that they may not have even regarded as questions before. When decisions are reached through democratic means, some people will inevitably be disappointed with the results. But those whose views do not prevail at least know that they have had their say, and accordingly are—in the tradition of our political culture—reconciled to the result of a fair and honest debate. In addition, they can gear up to raise the issue later, hoping to persuade enough on the winning side to think again. “That is exactly how our system of government is supposed to work.” Post, at 2–3 (SCALIA, J., dissenting).
But today the Court puts a stop to all that. By deciding this question under the Constitution, the Court removes it
from the realm of democratic decision. There will be consequences to shutting down the political process on an
issue of such profound public significance. Closing debate tends to close minds. People denied a voice are less likely
to accept the ruling of a court on an issue that does not seem to be the sort of thing courts usually decide. As a
thoughtful commentator observed about another issue, “The political process was moving . . . , not swiftly enough
for advocates of quick, complete change, but majoritarian institutions were listening and acting. Heavy-handed
judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, conflict.” Ginsburg, Some
Thoughts on Autonomy and Equality in Relation to Roe v. Wade , 63 N. C. L. Rev. 375, 385–386 (1985) (footnote
omitted). Indeed, however heartened the proponents of same-sex marriage might be on this day, it is worth acknowledging what they have lost, and lost forever: the opportunity to win the true acceptance that comes from
persuading their fellow citizens of the justice of their cause. And they lose this just when the winds of change
were freshening at their backs.
After reading this dissent, those who still want to pillory Roberts Alinsky style should take pause. What he is saying is that SCOTUS should not be in the middle of changing the intent of the people or Congress or making laws out of whole cloth. He is trying to not allow an activist court while herding five activists judges like bi-polar cats.
Roberts gives religion a huge push with his next comments, literally telegraphing to the religious groups that their RIGHT, as described in the first amendment is real, while a created right out of two clauses is not. When the two are in conflict, the real right will win. One hopes. If it doesn’t, get ready for some serious civil disobedience.
Respect for sincere religious conviction has led voters and legislators in every State that has adopted same-sex
marriage democratically to include accommodations for religious practice. The majority’s decision imposing same-
sex marriage cannot, of course, create any such accommodations. The majority graciously suggests that religious
believers may continue to “advocate” and “teach” their views of marriage. Ante , at 27.
The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to “exercise” religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses. Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage—when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to
opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married
couples. Indeed, the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage. See Tr. of Oral Arg. on Question 1, at 36–38. There
is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this Court. Unfortunately, people of faith can take
no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today. Perhaps the most discouraging aspect of today’s decisions the extent to which the majority feels compelled to sully those on the other side of the debate. The majority offers a cursory assurance that it does not intend to disparage people who, as a matter of conscience, cannot accept same-sex marriage. Ante, at 19.
That disclaimer is hard tosquare with the very next sentence, in which the majority explains that “the necessary consequence” of laws codifying the traditional definition of marriage is to “demea[n] or stigmatiz[e]” same-sex couples.
Ante, at 19.
The majority reiterates such characterizations over and over. By the majority’s account, Americans who did nothing more than follow the understanding of marriage that has existed for our entire history—in particular, the tens of millions of people who voted to reaffirm their States’ enduring definition of marriage—have acted to “lock . . . out,” “disparage,”
“disrespect and subordinate,” and inflict “[d]ignitary wounds” upon their gay and lesbian neighbors. Ante, at
17, 19, 22, 25. These apparent assaults on the character of fairminded people will have an effect, in society and in
court. See post, at 6–7 (ALITO, J., dissenting).
Moreover, they are entirely gratuitous. It is one thing for the majority to conclude that the Constitution protects a right tosame-sex marriage; it is something else to portray everyone who does not share the majority’s “better informed
understanding” as bigoted. Ante, at 19.
In the face of all this, a much different view of the Court’s role is possible. That view is more modest and restrained. It is more skeptical that the legal abilities of judges also reflect insight into moral and philosophical issues. It is more sensitive to the fact that judges are unelected and unaccountable, and that the legitimacy of their power depends on confining it to the exercise of legal judgment. It is more attuned to the lessons of history, and what it has meant for the country and Court when Justices have exceeded their proper bounds. And it is less pretentious than to suppose that while people around the world have viewed an institution in a particular way for thousands of years, the present generation and the present Court are the ones chosen to burst the bonds of that history and tradition.
* * *
If you are among the many Americans—of whateversexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not
celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.
I respectfully dissent.
So what is the difference now? For years the gays, who successfully piggy-backed their cause onto the black civil rights movement have been the underdog. With the ruling by the majority, the religious groups are now the minority and now the underdog. Get ready for some serious court cases working their way up the chain. Obama has only twenty months or so to go. Most of this damage won’t be heard under his administration or his ideology- unless we elect Hillary.
On a side note, have you notice gays who target Christians never targeted a black baker or a black church? Why? Because blacks were loyal allies to the democrats on this one. And they will learn, once again, their role as “useful idiots” will cost them dearly when the first gay couple shows up at their church doors demanding to be married. It is inevitable because that is how militant gays roll!
Now to Obamacare. And I’ve argued this before, so I’ll be brief. Roberts believes that SCOTUS has no right to legislate from the bench. He also believes the Court has no right to change legislation IF that legislation has been constitutionally passed. Their only duty is to make sure any acts of the other two branches do not HARM people unconstitutionally.
Now understand, he does this with four activist liberal, and some questionably functional members… and Kennedy.
In Obamacare he twisted function of the law to match the intent of its designers. He knew the law is crap, he’s not blind, but is it constitutionally passed crap? The answer, sadly, is yes. I think privately he knows it will fall apart or get modified over time, but is not the duty of SCOTUS to stop us from allowing our representatives to pass bad laws. It is their duty to stop those bad laws from violating our constitutional rights. See Citizens United for an example.
How many people voted in 2008 presidential race for the democrat? By group there is this. By totals there is this. There is a great simple interactive graph at the NY times that shows how they voted in the primaries, showing who voted for Clinton or Obama, which was a harbinger of what was going to happen to McCain- arguably Hillary’s male doppelganger.
Then they threw up Obamacare care, pushed the mess through with some shenanigans, and Obama signed it. Maybe hardball politics but constitutional. If you’ll note, no Republicans sued because the dems cheated.
Sixty-nine million people voted for Obama and the dems. Blame them.
Five hundred thirty seven elected federal office holders were in power when it passed. Blame them.
A number of states accepted their fate eagerly and created the exchanges. Blame them.
Other lower judges split over the same constitutional issues. Blame them.
Bureaucrats succumbed without a fight. Blame them.
The media lied about Obamacare from the start. Please blame them.
And four other justices jumped at the chance to push it through for activists reasons. Blame them.
Roberts believes it is not his job or SCOTUS job to stop us for voting for corrupt fools and then letting those same fools make bad law. He gave us that chance in 2012. He will, and has stepped in, when those laws offend the rights of citizens. See Heller and Hobby Lobby.
We blew it. Sixty-five million gave Obama four more years, during which THIS happened. So..hello? For those of you who stayed home in protest- blame yourself. Then LEARN from your mistake.
He has encouraged religious groups to come to the court to seek protection when, and it will be when, the governments strike them.
And I believe he will defend those rights. Getting four others to join him is going to be iffy.
This came to me when I was watching the Kelly File interview of the surviving woman of the Alton Nolen beheading attack in Oklahoma. It was funny because just the day before that I had wondered if there were any updates to the attack. I Googled it and found nothing since 2014.
Nothing. He was arrested, everybody moved on. Why? Partially because the federal government works hard to avoid dealing with domestic terrorists. Since the MSM is in its pocket, they do the same. Nolen was pushed out to the public as just another angry black guy with revenge on his mind for being suspended. Another criminal black. Which I think is just lazy and frankly a little racist. What does that mean exactly? They can’t help it? That if you are a criminal black guy, it is expected that you end up someday beheading women in anger? Sad.
Truth is, Alton Nolen was a recent and ardent convert to Islam. A “Jailhouse Jihadi” to be exact. He attended a mosque where some pretty radical things were spoken. He Facebooked and supported terrorists acts across the globe, including beheadings. THIS is Alton Nolen. Witnesses to the attack, including the woman, said he kept shouting things in Arabic ending with Allah Akbar. Not for nothing pal, but…. sounds a little terroristy to me.
Nolen at the mosque. Uh… one check mark here, I think?
So why did the FBI, after recovering so much information suddenly do a Frank Drebin and say “nothing to see here, move along.” A lot of it has to do with how Muslims have managed to change the definition of terrorism within the federal government and how that makes the FBI react to what individual agents may think is a terrorist attack. Here is the Jedi mind trick CAIR pulled on the FBI. “There are no terrorists here.”
Terrorism is defined in the U.S. by the Code of Federal Regulations as: “..the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
This is a broad definition but allows for a limiting of defined terror attacks by opinion, not by the facts of the event.
Further domestic terrorism is defined as this.
• Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
So why isn’t Nolen a domestic terrorist and Dylan Roof is? Are neither terrorists or both? Nolen was angry, Roof was angry. Nolen felt a certain group was causing his anger, so did Roof. Nolen targeted and killed members of that certain group while shouting why he was doing it as justification. So did Roof.
Right now the FBI, that prefers to monitor terrorism until the act happens or is about to happen, is starting to round people up. Unusual and maybe a reaction to the fear of the approaching July 4th holiday. For them to jump means they know something we don’t. Like maybe they need to get back to catching bad guys and not pleasing the PC gods.
At this point, even a moderately intelligent child would go “WTF? The flag did it?” At least that would be the takeaway of this if you listened to the MSM and the shallow politicians in this nation. The flag did it. At some point you just throw up your hands and give up.
This did it? Nothing else? No alternate possibilities? Come on. You aren’t even trying anymore!
Here is the sad fact, Senator Pinckney of South Carolina was a advocate for many causes- many liberal, a member and spokesman for the AME church and one can assume a known factor in race issues in South Carolina. He was also the first black man to be targeted for being those things since MLK. I repeat, he was the FIRST black man targeted since MLK.
He wasn’t killed because of a flag. He wasn’t killed because he was black. There are plenty of blacks running around Roof could have killed, probably standing on every street corner in certain parts of South Carolina, so it wasn’t his race or his color or lack of opportunity. It was because of who HE was and what he represented.
Here is his wiki. Oddly short. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney
Here is a short Youtube interview with Henry Gates. (Do you remember him? Yep, arrested by Cambridge police, commented on by Obama and part of the “Beergate” thing. Obama’s first of many attempts to broad brush all police institutionalized racists.)
Pinckney takes the time in this short interview to talk about the blacks’ role in politics and how they had an obligation to influence the political sphere. He is right. They have a role, just like everyone else, but not the role of shutting out political debate by using Political Correctness along the lines of “If you criticize me, you are a racists” kind of thing. Because without a voice, people tend to find other ways to protest.
Pinckney highlights a few names in his talk, Richard H Cain and Robert Smalls . Both South Carolina historical figures playing a role in black freedom during the Civil War and the founding of the AME church in South Carolina.
(Smalls is interesting reading. He apparently, as a slave, stole a transport ship and sailed it, along with his crew and their families into the North during the Civil War, giving the North the maps of the mines and defensive layout of Charleston Harbor.)
Pinckney was an educated, intelligent, loyal democrat who worked to change the landscape of South Carolina in favor of his people.
Dylan Roof disagreed with his efforts and shot him for it.
Because of Political Correctness, this act is kicked under the rug and everybody starts saying “if only we could get rid of the flag things would better. ” Why?
Because if the politicians would push political correctness aside and ask why is it that we cannot talk to each other OUTSIDE political correctness, certain hard truths would arise.
Nobody wants to talk about the eight hundred pound angry, black, armed and violent (and increasingly Islamic) young man in the room. Why? Because they know how he got there, they know he is partially their creation, and they do – not – know – how – to – stop – him!
That guy (or girl) is not Pinckney, Pinckney rose above all of that, he was part of the talented ten percent W.E. B. Dubois spoke about. But did Pinckney address this issue honestly, or did he kick the can down the road, blaming the usual suspects?
On the other end, we have in a Washington Post article, Karen Attiah, stating that millennials are racists as their parents. That’s a lot to chew on. And by and large not true. Especially when she lets her veneer slip a little with this comment-
The shooting suspect in Charleston has been identified as Dylann Roof, a white 21-year-old. He was arrested (peacefully, one should add) at a traffic stop. Many will argue about what words we will use to describe Roof, whether he should be described as a mentally disturbed kid (a description rarely applied when the alleged perpetrator isn’t a white male) or a rational adult responsible for his alleged actions. His age matters, but not for the reasons you may think.
Obviously, her position is he was arrested peacefully- because he’s white- not that he gave up (unlike Mike Brown and the recent cop killer in New Orleans). Or, that his actions were from a mentally disturbed mind- because he is white- but if a black youth shoots up a group of people, as they did in Detroit and Chicago recently, those black youths are thugs. (BTW- they are.) In this short paragraph, At the same time, Attiah signals to us her worldview and makes my case about why we can’t be honest about race in America.
Where Attiah goes wrong- well she goes wrong in several areas- but the one about millennials is this; she thinks Roof existed in a vacuum. That his world is our world. Which is not true. Roof lives in a young world FILLED with racial strife and violence, much of it promoted by certain leaders in the black communities. Look at Ferguson and Baltimore. Look at how blacks are killing blacks en masse, yet the black leaders somehow find a way to blame “the white guy.” Even in the Baltimore riots, it wasn’t long before someone tried to lay the blame of sixty years of black democratic rule on the white Republican governor who was in office for five months. Then there is others like Roof, but of a different color- like Eric Sheppard. He issued his own manifesto. Which, by the way, reminded me of this:
Here is Sheppard’s first paragraph…I think-
Let me Clear the Air and Set the Record Straight once and For All on Questions Inquiries Suggestions and otherwise in regards to this Entire Ordeal. We Will Determine who Is Truly Guilty and Who is Truly Innocent Throughout the Course of this Literary Revelation. Many still question the possibility of my surrendering to the people who call themselves “authorities”. To Give you a Simple Answer, No! I will Not Turn Myself Over to Any White Man and I will Ensure this With my Own Will to Self-Defend and To Annihilate those Who Come After Me. These same people who you all know as “legal officials/police officers/sheriff/detectives” or any other falsified label of ‘authority’ only know wickedness and devilish behavior. It SHOULD be clear by now that this is a White Supremacist Nation Owned, Operated, and Controlled by White People. Yes it is ALL white people who help to maintain this wicked nation to a greater or lesser degree given the default status aided to them by virtue or vice of White Privilege. Thus all functionalities, codes, rules, policies, curriculums, cultures and social criteria created or concocted therein are Meant to Benefit Whites ALONE AND EXCLUSIVELY! The recent yet ongoing hideous & disgusting rash of white supremacist brutality (police brutality) as well as All other forms of European Aggression on Afrikan people here in Amerikkka; as well as the emanating circumstances that have precipitated into a sick/vile pattern show CLEARLY that “white” people can and will escape Just Punishment (Justice) so long as it is In alignment and Cooperation with the White Supremacist Agenda of Afrikan Genetic Annihilation of ANY form. Extreme Cognitive Dissonance causes ALL of You white people to Deny this TRUTH however when Afrikan People Drop the ‘Realistics’, Kick the Ballistics and Present to You the Statistics Recorded and Documented by Your Own white mathematicians and social scientist you revert to weak racist and ignorant “justifications” to affirm your false sense of correctness in the continuity of your White Supremacist Power System Structure (Racism).
(On a side note, Sheppard, even after threatening to fight to the end, was arrested for having a gun on campus and terror threats by the police- because he gave up. As he should have. See, how that works?)
Worse, and where I wish I could get Attiah to pay attention to, is the actual lives young kids live, especially young isolated white kids who can’t defend themselves. A world where beating up young white kids, or whites in general have become a pastime for far too many young angry black kids. THIS is their reality. Spend some time with Colin Flahtery on his Youtube videos and books and you will see a totally different version of the world. A world nobody wants to talk about. This Kroger attack is a perfect example. As is the case in College Town Texas nobody heard about.
THIS IS ROOF’S WORLD!
As highlighted in the intro video on Flaherty’s YouTube website, one black commentator says that if the police patrolled white neighborhoods like they did black, the crime rate would be as high. Uhh, no it wouldn’t it. That is a “blind to reality” statement. In predominately white neighborhoods crime would be reported all the time, especially if at the levels and types of crimes we see in the inner city. White people like cops showing up and arresting bad guys. The “snitches get stitches” rule does not apply. Further, crimes don’t occur because of the police being there, the police show up because the crimes occur. Jeezz…
Roof said part of his “awakening” was the Zimmerman trial. If this made him angry, he was in good company. Many people across the nation were horrified to see how the “state” abused Zimmerman for political purposes, as it did Darren Wilson and others, oddly during national election cycles. People were angry, but there was no political outlet or justice. Corey is still working. Scott is still the governor. Holder retired with honors. Obama was reelected. So, the life of an innocent man counts as nothing. That stings. And people remember.
But the real question is this; Did Pinckney address any of what we know is the reality, that inner cities are fragmenting, that there is a Balkanization going on within America, even in colleges, driven by political forces? Did he stand up and say enough!? Or did he play a part in the effort- at least in the warped view of his assassin Dylan Roof?
Regardless, once again we have missed a chance to really address issues that could make our nation better, and we’ve collectively blamed a flag from a long dead era. While these flags continue to foment violence.
Hmm… where’s a good reporter from the Washington Post when you need one?