Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category

Supreme Court Malfeasance

by Alan Caruba on Thursday, January 22nd, 2015

This is article 60 of 60 in the topic US Supreme Court
Question asked at a gay protest event

 

By Alan Caruba

 

Over the course of its history the Supreme Court has made some very bad decisions and the decision to declare abortion legal ranks high among them. On January 22, 1973, in Roe v. Wade the Court interpreted the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to extend a right of privacy to a woman’s decision to have an abortion prior to the third trimester of pregnancy.
There have been 57.5 million abortions since 1973—42 years—when the decision became the law of the land. In all the wars America has fought, going back to the Revolution, the total of those killed in combat as of September 2014 was 1,343,812.
The casualties of the Supreme Court’s decision about unborn Americans reveal the wide gap between the morality, as opposed to the legality, of the Court’s decision.
Now the Court has taken on cases that will determine the legality of same-sex marriage and here again the morality of sanctioning this definition of marriage is a world apart from the morality of marriage occurring exclusively between a man and woman as has been the norm since the earliest history of mankind.
Marriage has always been understood as the critical cornerstone of a healthy functioning society. It has always been understood that children raised by a mother and father are a benefit to society while those deprived of this union are frequently subject to problems of one sort or another.
In the United States, however, many of the traditional morals that served the interest of society have been abandoned since around the middle of the last century. The gap between liberals and conservatives has widened.
One result was recently announced in a Pew Research Center study that found that less than half of all American childrennow live in a two-parent household with two married heterosexual parents who are, in fact, their own parents.
The Daily Caller reported that “In addition, fully 41% of all American babies are currently born out of wedlock. By way of comparison, in 1960 73% of all American children” lived in a traditional married household.
An earlier Pew Research Center study, announced in August 2013, depicted mothers as the main provider in 40% of American households with children. Jennifer Marshall, Director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation, noted that 25% of “households with children under 18 are supported by a single mother.” Their median income was $23,000 and 44% are never-married moms. “More than a third of these single mothers aren’t working at all—meaning they are much more likely to depend on government welfare.”
What all these statistics add up to is a nation in which traditional marriage is under attack while living together unmarried or having children as a single mother have become accepted at an alternative lifestyle.
Now we are being told that America should abandon the concept of legal citizenship and accord it to anyone who crosses the border. This isn’t how an orderly society or sovereign state is defined.

Click to continue reading “Supreme Court Malfeasance”
Go straight to Post

Making Predictions

by Alan Caruba on Wednesday, December 31st, 2014

By Alan Caruba
If there is one thing pundits like to do it is to make predictions. If they turn out to be right you can always look back and quote them as proof of your prescience and if they are not, you can always ignore them.
The best ones, of course, are those filled with doom and I suspect they are the most prevalent. We all live to some degree in fear of the future. It is, after all, unpredictable and we are conditioned to believe something awful will happen. That’s what keeps insurance companies in business. Governments continue to create problems and then promise to solve them.
For example, at some point there will be a huge earthquake in California thanks to the San Andreas Fault and in a comparable fashion the Yellowstone National Park will have an even bigger event due to a huge volcano that lies beneath it. The loss of life and economic impact will be historic no matter when they occur.
What is predictable will be natural events such as hurricanes and tornadoes, but what is largely unreported is that both have been occurring less in recent years. As Weather.com noted this year, “the Atlantic basin, which includes the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean, produced the fewest tropical cyclones and fewest named storms since 1997.”  Worldwide, there are some 40,000 tornadoes and the U.S. averages some 1,200 a year. So the weather guarantees some unhappy news for some of us some of the time.
Blaming natural phenomenon on “global warming” which is not happening or on “climate change” which has been happening for 4.5 billion years is the way the merchants of fear keep everyone scared of real and imaginary weather events. The planet has been in a natural cooling cycle for the past nineteen years because the Sun is in one as well, producing less radiation.
As for climate, it is measured in units as small as thirty years and as big as centuries and millenniums. Nothing mankind does has any impact. The Pope is wrong. The President is wrong. And lots of others who claim that climate change is an immediate threat.
What interests most people is the state of the economy and the good news is that it appears to be improving although relying on government issued statistics is problematic because they are often mathematically skewed to show a favorable trend. There is a natural dynamism to the U.S. economy which would be even greater if the government would eliminate the hundreds of thousands of regulations that interfere with the conduct of business and stop issuing more. Less taxation would boost the economy as well.
I am hopeful people will stop being taken in by the talk about “income inequality.” If the economy improves there will be jobs and the marketplace will determine the salaries they will pay. By contrast, legislating minimum wage increases reduces jobs. We’ve been watching machines replace humans for a long time now.
Elsewhere in the world, the economy is very iffy. The drop in the price of oil will have a dramatic impact on nations whose economies are dependent on it.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Deceitful Selling of Obamacare Coming Home to Roost

by Roger Aronoff on Tuesday, November 18th, 2014

This is article 697 of 701 in the topic Healthcare

MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber’s comments regarding the “stupidity of the American voter” necessitating legislators to craft the Obamacare law in such a way that voters wouldn’t understand its impact, have sparked outrage, mostly from conservatives. But while Americans are focusing on comments that Gruber has now retracted, they should also pay attention to the real misinformation that he has been peddling about the signature health care legislation all along.

“He called you stupid,” writes Ron Fournier for National Journal. “He admitted that the White House lied to you. Its officials lied to all of us—Republicans, Democrats, and independents; rich and poor; white and brown; men and women,” and that “the law never would have passed if the administration had been honest about the fact that the so-called penalty for noncompliance with the mandate was actually a tax.”

“Liberals should be the angriest,” said Fournier. He said that he has “to admit, as a supporter, that Obamacare was built and sold on a foundation of lies. No way around it.” We say, welcome to Obamaland. It’s not just Obamacare, it’s pretty much everything they are selling. But it’s good to see someone from the mainstream media acknowledging this, however belated it may be. Actually, Fournier has been one of the more honest members of the liberal media. Hopefully, this will help inform his judgment on other issues as well, such as the IRS and Benghazi scandals.

But Gruber’s initial comments about this legislation’s authors deceiving voters haven’t generally received attention in the mainstream media. Most have ignored it. Howard Kurtz, host of the Fox News Channel’s “Media Buzz” went on “The O’Reilly Factor” and called it a “virtual blackout,” and “inexcusable” how the media have ignored this story. Others are trying to spin it to help the Obama administration. The Washington Post, for example, has praised Gruber as “the man who’s willing to say what everyone else is only thinking about Obamacare.” And New York Times writer Josh Barro went on MSNBC and justified Gruber’s comments, saying, “So, the public puts politicians in a position where the only thing they can do to make the public happy is lie and so, people lied.” Apparently, the ends justified the means for Barro. Anything to get the President’s signature health reform through Congress.

As Rush Limbaugh said, imagine how the media would have reacted if a former George W. Bush adviser had said they had lied about weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, because Americans were too stupid to otherwise support going to war to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

Gruber backed away from his “stupidity of the American voter” contention in an appearance on “The Ronan Farrow” show on MSBNC, saying he spoke “off the cuff” at an academic conference and “inappropriately.” But this isn’t the first time he’s used that excuse.

“I think what’s important to remember politically about this is, if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits,” Gruber said to a small audience in 2012 during a controversy that erupted this July, according to The Washington Post. “But your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Black leaders slam Supreme Court’s ‘cowardice’ in marriage protection ruling

by Jim Kouri on Wednesday, October 15th, 2014

This is article 31 of 32 in the topic Marriage

A number of black Christian pastors and church leaders slammed the United States Supreme Court justices for turning down a case that would once and for all settle the dispute and divisiveness created by the issue of same-sex marriage. The National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders characterized the court’s decision — “not to hear the case” and send it back to the lower courts — as cowardice on the part of the nine members of the nation’s highest court.

Has the Supreme Court become just another politically-motivated body of black-robed lawyers?

Has the Supreme Court become just another politically-motivated body of black-robed lawyers?
SCOTUS Press Gallery

On Monday, Oct. 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court simply stated that it would not review cases which overturned state laws of five states defining marriage as exclusively the union of one man and one woman. The African American Christian group was disappointed that the court gave no explanation for its seemingly arbitrary decision.

The very next day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguably the most far-left federal court in the nation, overturned two traditional marriage laws, one in the state of Idaho, the other in Nevada. In their press release on Thursday, the Christian group said, “As a result of the decisions this week, 32 states are potentially forced to recognize so called “same-sex marriage” by edict of unelected federal judges holding life-time appointments.”

However, the members of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders, a client of the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, promised the news media and the American people that these African American church leaders would press on and fight for the traditional marriage between a man and a woman.

“While the mainstream news media — who act as the propaganda machine for gay and lesbian groups — attempts to portray opponents of same-sex marriage as being elderly, white Republicans, the truth is that a overwhelming majority of blacks and Latinos oppose anything but traditional marriage. It’s only in the white community in which you find most of the support for same-sex marriage,” notes political strategist and attorney Victor Rygardt.

Rygardt claims that one of the disturbing trends within much of the news media is the simplistic “good guys vs. bad guys” scenario. “Agenda-driven ideologues masquerading as journalists portray supporters of gay and lesbian marriages as the victimized good guys battling the evil and intolerant mob of Christians and Jews who oppose such concepts,” he said. “The fact is that the nation’s political leaders, the courts and the bureaucrats who run the country are supporters of same-sex marriage, so it is the Christian pastors who are David battling the all-powerful Goliath — the political leaders and their media mouthpieces,” he added.

One of the Black Coalition members, Pastor Danny Holliday, of Victory Baptist Church in Alton, Illinois, told the news media: “Just as the Supreme was all wrong on slavery, which resulted in the Civil War, it is all wrong on legalizing same-sex marriage. I have seen prayer removed from schools, Christmas Nativity Scenes removed from public property. I have watched as the words Merry Christmas have become taboo.

Click to continue reading “Black leaders slam Supreme Court’s ‘cowardice’ in marriage protection ruling”
Go straight to Post

A Supreme Court, Not Supreme Wisdom

by Alan Caruba on Sunday, October 12th, 2014

This is article 61 of 61 in the topic Courts

By Alan Caruba

I am not a lawyer, but I have read the Constitution and I cannot find any indication that the Founding Fathers intended the guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” in the 14th Amendment to include same-sex marriage.
The idea would have been regarded as an abomination to the men who created the Constitution. To many who regard the institution of marriage a sacred bond between a man and a woman, the decisions of lower courts that have facilitated same-sex marriage are deeply offensive
When the Supreme Court decided not to decide upon appeals from seven states regarding lower court rulings that their bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, they essentially endorsed same-sex marriage. It is now legal in 25 states, paving the way for a total of 30 states that recognize it, but only by popular vote in three of them; the rest had it imposed through the courts.
The same can be said of the Supreme Court’s decision in 1973 that permitted abortion as a legal right. Here again, the 14th Amendment was cited. As one source noted, “The Court summarily announced that the ‘Fourteen Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action” includes “a right to personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy and that “this right of privacy…is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
As this is being written, there have been more than 57,245,810 fetuses aborted since 1973 and, this year, there have been 840,045. Thus, decisions that the Supreme Court makes can literally result in life or death.
One of the most dramatic decisions of an earlier Supreme Court was the 1857 Dred Scott case that ruled that African Americans, whether slave or free, could not be American citizens and thus had no standing to sue in federal court, nor that the federal government had any power to regulate slavery in the territories acquired after the creation of the nation. The Civil War would follow in 1861 and last until 1865, resulting in more than 600,000 casualties, but finally ending slavery in America. Even some of the Founding Fathers had predicted that conflict.
When the Supreme Court has wandered into the area of social policy and culture, it has made decisions that were contrary to the majority of the population. The decision about slavery was about property—the slave–but many regarded slavery as an institution that must be ended.
The Supreme Court, of course, is not one long list of bad decisions. It has done much good and one man is credited with setting it on its course as a co-equal brand of the federal government. That man was John Marshall. I doubt that his name and deeds are  even taught in the schools of America.
As a brilliant and very entertaining biography by Harlow Giles Unger, “John Marshall: The Chief Justice Who Save the Nation”, reveals, “Marshall’s pronouncements would ensure the integrity and eminence of the Constitution and the federal government and catapult him into the pantheon of American Founding Fathers as the father of the American federal justice system.”
“He would become the longest serving Chief Justice in U.S.

Click to continue reading “A Supreme Court, Not Supreme Wisdom”
Go straight to Post

Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion

by Alan Caruba on Sunday, August 24th, 2014

This is article 184 of 186 in the topic US Constitution
By Alan Caruba
The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution do not abandon religion, they embrace it. They do not, however, require that Americans believe in God, nor punish them for failing to do so.
Central to the liberties enshrined in these documents is the belief that they come from a higher power and America exists because of that belief. Without it there would have been no America. There are those among us who insist that, as a nation, we abandon faith in God and, if we do, America will cease to be a power for good in the world.
When Thomas Jefferson presented the Declaration to those who would pledge their lives and their sacred honor to achieve independence from England John Adams asked that it include the words “They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” after the phrase “all men are created equal” and Benjamin Franklin agreed, suggesting that “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence” be added as well.” In their 2004 book, “Under God” by Toby Mac and Michael Tait, said “The changes demonstrated Congress’s strong reliance upon God—as delegates added the words “appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions.”
Aware of the dangers inherent in a state religion, the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” followed by freedom of speech, the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievance.” There is no state religion in America, but reflecting the values that created it, its leaders have always acknowledged a greater power than government, the belief in God.
There would be no America if the Pilgrims who established Plymouth, Massachusetts had not left England in the quest for their right to worship as they wished, reflecting the Protestant Reformation. Another early settlement, Jamestown, was a business venture by investors to obtain wealth. Jamestown failed and Plymouth is with us today.
I am not a religious person per se, but I do believe in God. Always have and always will. I don’t insist that anyone else has to and neither do our founding documents. They do, however, acknowledge God and sought His protection to create a new nation; a republic with clearly stated protections for all its citizens.
There are, however, those who insist that any reference to God be removed from public documents and recognition. The leader among them is the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their most recent lawsuit is against the U.S. Treasury Department claiming they are discriminating against non-believers by including the phrase “In God We Trust” on the nation’s currency. Their claim is that the government is prohibited from endorsing religion over non-religion.
“In God We Trust” on U.S. coins was first approved by Congress during the Civil War in 1864. In 1956, Congress passed a resolution to recognize the words officially as the national motto, replacing the de facto phrase, “E Pluribus Unum” and it has appeared on U.S. currency since 1957.
The Foundation’s intention is to make any acknowledgement of God illegal by any public institution.

Click to continue reading “Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion”
Go straight to Post

"Riots & Racism" and "Inconvenient Truths"

by Burt Prelutsky on Friday, August 22nd, 2014

Can we all agree that , the recent riots in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, had as much to do with the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown as it did with a hurricane in Hawaii or a square dance in Iowa?

As I have written in the past, a legitimate protest consists of tossing tea into Boston Harbor; it doesn’t involve stealing a TV. Time and again, young black thugs in Detroit, L.A., Philadelphia and now St. Louis, have taken advantage of an event to run amok, turning over cars, looting stores and setting fires. They do it because they are bottom-feeders who feel empowered by corrupt politicians, a liberal media and race hustlers like Al Sharpton, to carry out the sort of violence which when committed by one or two individuals results in jail time, but when committed by a mob results in liberal pundits justifying the mayhem.

A reader, Bob Alton, wrote to me, posing the following question: Now that Hillary Clinton is speaking out against Obama’s foreign policy, can we expect her to be branded a racist? It’s a fair question when you realize that her husband was labeled one in 2008 for no other reason than that he campaigned for his wife during the primaries, and “racist” has been branded on the rump of every Republican who has voiced an objection to anything Obama has said or done over the past six years.

It’s no secret that Democrats, including Obama, have been pressuring the older liberals on the Supreme Court to retire ASAP so that Obama can leave a longer lasting impression on America. I think it’s a move that can wind up biting the Democrats in the butt in 2016. After all, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 81, Anthony Kennedy, 78, and Stephen Breyer, 76, are too old for the job, which pretty much consists of sitting around reading briefs and occasionally casting a vote, it might be hard to convince people they should run out and vote for Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 when the 2016 election takes place, and a ripe 77 by the time her second term would conclude. But perhaps they simply assume that being the commander-in-chief is as easy a gig as Obama makes it seem: rounds of golf, interspersed occasionally with expensive vacations and fund-raising galas.

Speaking of things that have not only ripened, but dropped off the tree and are well on their way to being mulch, we have Jimmy Carter. According to a recent article in the Washington Times, the reason that Carter, who once condemned Israel as an apartheid nation, is such a vociferous fan of Hamas is because he blames his loss to Ronald Reagan in 1980 on Jewish voters.

As a Jew, nothing would make me prouder. However, inasmuch as Reagan garnered 43 million votes to Carter’s paltry 35 million, and 489 electoral votes to Carter’s infinitesimal 49, and that Jews represent a mere 2% of the population, it’s a bit far-fetched. What’s more, although he did better than other recent GOP presidential candidates, Reagan still managed to lose the Jewish vote 39% to Carter’s 45%.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

"Illegal Aliens Are What They Are" and "Moral Equivalency & Other Fantasies"

by Burt Prelutsky on Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014

The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans when it comes to illegal immigration is that the Democrats stand to benefit from increasing the Hispanic vote. But both are equally guilty when it comes to not stemming the invasion. Otherwise, we would hear the Republican politicians demanding that a huge wall be erected along our southern border, instead of parroting Obama’s call for comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty).

The problem is that folks on both sides of the aisle want to privatize the profits to be accrued from cheap labor while socializing the costs. If we were serious about solving the problem, we would, one, stop subsidizing illegals with free health care, free education and free food; and, two, we would fine and jail anyone responsible for hiring them. And I’m not just referring to smalltime outfits that hire a few guys to help out on construction jobs, but the folks who own the hotels and restaurants where these people are making beds and busing tables.

Obama wants Congress to help him bring what he refers to as “the best and the brightest” to the United States. If he’s referring to those illiterates sneaking across the border, perhaps he’s auditioning for a career as a stand-up comedian. Until now, I had assumed he kept his sense of humor concealed in the same vault where he’s concealed his birth certificate, his early travel visa and his college application.

The EEOC, like every other federal bureaucracy under Obama, has over-stepped its authority by constantly filing lawsuits against companies that insist their employees speak English.

But, then, there is no government agency that I wouldn’t like to see either diminished or eliminated altogether. What’s more, I would see to it that no government bureaucrat, be it at the city, state or federal level, ever received another bonus. What do they ever do that deserves one? It certainly can’t be for working overtime. As we all know, anytime you show up at one of those offices after closing time, whether it’s at 4:01, 4:31 or 5:01, you’ve found the doors locked and the lights off.

Speaking of federal agencies, I bet no conservative in America was surprised to hear that our State Department was far more incensed over the killing of one Arab youngster than it was by the killing of three Jewish teenagers in Israel. What’s more, Israel arrested six suspects in the murder of Abu Khdeir after a couple of days, whereas the Palestinians not only haven’t made any arrests in the murders of Eyal Yifrah, Gilad Shaar and Naftali Fraenkel, after a few weeks, but aren’t likely to in the next fifty years. But it’s only Israel that is ever condemned by the weasels at the U.N. and the anti-Semites who infest academia and the media.

It seems that Hillary Clinton, who is pinning most of her political hopes on carrying a large majority of the single woman vote, once, as a 27-year-old lawyer, defended a creep who beat and raped a 12-year-old girl. Recently, a four decades-old tape popped up on which she is heard laughing while saying that she had lost all faith in polygraph tests because her client had fooled the machine.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Obama Encounters an Apex of Anger

by Alan Caruba on Sunday, July 20th, 2014

This is article 994 of 1015 in the topic Obama

By Alan Caruba

Barack Obama has managed to do something one would hardly imagine a President could achieve by the midpoint of his second term. He has managed to anger most segments of the American populace, including those to the far Left who constitute a significant part of his base.  It has taken time for most people to reach this point.

Americans are amazingly patient with their presidents, but Obama has pushed them beyond scandal fatigue. The “final straw” appears to be the illegal alien invasion masterminded by Obama.

What they are seeing and hearing is not what they were sold; a charming man of allegedly extraordinary intelligence. Friday’s press conference regarding the shoot down of the Malaysian commercial aircraft showed us a man utterly lacking any moral outrage and, as always, “leading from behind” by insisting this was Europe’s problem, not one that would be addressed by an America doing anything more than applying a few economic sanctions.

He looked and sounded bored, annoyed that he had to utter a bunch of empty platitudes about Russia; the same Russia with which he and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had declared a “reset” from previous administrations’ relations. Putin took his measure and saw weakness.

Obama’s response to the Middle East was to pull out all our troops from Iraq and a muddled series of actions in Afghanistan topped by the announcement of when troops there would leave, always a very bad idea when the enemy is still in the field. The “Arab Spring” became another Obama nightmare of bad decisions.

Lies, Lies, and More Lies

It took years, but it eventually became clear to most paying any attention that Obama has told so many lies that whatever he says now is deemed worthless. Then, too, his administration is now subject to congressional investigations that include the Internal Revenue Service and the Veterans Administration.

The Attorney General was slapped with contempt of Congress. A key figure in the IRS scandal, Lois Lerner, has pled the Fifth.

The House of Representatives is getting ready to sue Obama for failing to obey the Constitution’s separation of powers. The President’s efforts to ignore the Constitution have been met with an extraordinary number of Supreme Court rebuffs, many of which were unanimous.

How bad is Obama’s situation at present? One indication is the way the news media has been slowly, but steadily falling out of love with him. As Paul Bedard noted recently in the Washington Examiner, “In unprecedented criticism of the White House 38 journalism groups have assailed the president’s team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials, and overall ‘politically-driven suppression of the news.”

David Cuiller, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, said, “It is up to journalists—and citizens—to push back against this force.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

A Few Sad Truths

by Burt Prelutsky on Friday, July 18th, 2014

Only a liberal dunce could seriously contend that the exclusion of four of 20 contraceptive options constitutes a war on women. And yet in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, that is exactly what people like Hillary Clinton, Sandra Fluke and the three politically partisan harpies on the Court, Kagan, Ginsburg and Sotomayor, would have you believe.

As I see it, the fact that young women actually expect that people with whom they’re not having sex should provide them with free birth control pills is clear evidence that the real war is the one being waged on the American taxpayer and commonsense.

I realize that Sen. Thad Cochran’s primary victory in Mississippi is being appealed by his challenger, Tea Party favorite Chris McDaniel. If I lived in that state, I very likely would have voted for the challenger. But the real mystery is why on earth registered Democrats are allowed to cross over and vote in a Republican primary. I’m not asking as a conservative. After all, I assume Republicans are also allowed to vote in Democratic primaries. But how dumb is that!

It’s bad enough when the Democrats financially support the Republican candidate in a primary because they assume he or she will be the easiest to defeat in the general election or when they run a fake Republican in the general election, hoping to fool a sufficient number of dummies into splitting the vote with the actual nominee. But a state really has to be addicted to stupid pills to have open primaries, which negates the whole purpose of having primaries in the first place. What’s next, declaring the winner of a Mississippi election to be the candidate who receives the fewest number of votes?

Recently, after encountering “ISIS” in one of my articles, a reader wrote, asking what I was referencing. I explained that the scumbags currently overrunning the cesspool known as Iraq started out calling themselves the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria before, like certain show biz celebrities, shortening their name to the Islamic State. But my first reaction to being asked to define ISIS was to channel my inner Bill Clinton. I then immediately took a shower.

Speaking of congenital liars, it occurred to me the other day that the only time Barack Obama can be trusted to tell the truth is when he’s telling his fellow jihadists the date upon which the U.S. will be withdrawing its troops from a war zone.

I wasn’t a great fan of either George H.W. Bush or his son, but even compared to them, Obama is the ultimate bush leaguer. For the life of me, I can’t imagine why his approval ratings remain in double figures or how it is that any Democrat in the House or Senate can refrain from calling him out over Benghazi, the VA, the IRS or his constant trashing of the Constitution. Is it conceivable that Satan has worked out the traditional swap of eternal damnation for successful careers with each and every one of them?

Click to continue reading “A Few Sad Truths”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin