I Shed No Tears For Notorious RBG

In this recent submission by Justin Smith, the title informs he sheds no tears for the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – NEITHER DO I.

Celebrated with awe by the transform America Left, I view Ginsburg as a Constitution-shredding Justice who was a judicial activist making the Constitution mean whatever the Left (now-a-days: Dem-Communists) decided it should mean regardless of the jot and tittle of the letter of the Constitution.

If you hear the Dem propaganda machine Mainstream Media (MSM) that these days includes Fox News claim RBG was a champion of Women’s rights, you should actually the “right” referenced was to legalize the murder of an UNBORN person.

NOPE! I do not shed one tear for the demise of Justice RBG. I encourage you to read Justin Smith’s elaboration.

JRH 9/22/20

Your generosity is always appreciated - various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products.

****************************

I Shed No Tears For Notorious RBG 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 9/19/2020 11:05 PM

"She just died? WOW. I didn't know that. She led an amazing life. What else can you say? She was an amazing woman, whether you agree or not. She was an amazing woman who led an amazing life. I'm actually sad to hear that."  ~ President Donald J. Trump, September 18th 2020

The woman considered by many Americans to be a national treasure, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a history-making jurist born on March 15th 1933,in Brooklyn, New York, ushered in the Jewish holiday of the Days of Awe with her death on September 18th 2020, having served in the federal court and the Supreme Court for four decades. Ginsburg's life was one of great accomplishment for a woman of her time, a remark she would appreciate if she heard it. Her life's work was a mixed-bag and filled with many items, both ignoble and principled, that brought ultimate harm and good alike to American society, but too often it tore asunder the Constitution and the founding ideas and principles that best support true liberty.

In the days preceding her death from pancreatic cancer, at age 87, as her strength and her life slipped away, Ginsburg dictated the following words to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed." 

If You're listening, Ruth, we don't always get what we want.

Chief Justice John Roberts stated: "Our nation has lost a jurist of historic stature. We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her -- a tireless and resolute champion of justice."

A 1954 graduate of Cornell University, Ginsburg was well remembered by all. Cornell President Martha Pollack stated: "Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a true hero and a giant of American jurisprudence. A relentless champion of equity, she dedicated her life to innumerable, honorable causes, always fighting for what was right. While the nation mourns her passing, we can find solace in the indelible imprint that she leaves on American society and on the lives of each of us who found inspiration from her actions and who will carry her spirit with us long into the future."

Justice Ginsburg had to fight and scrap every step of the way to gain acceptance in a male dominated profession, in the first days of her career, from Harvard Law to Columbia University , first being rejected for a coveted Supreme Court clerkship with Justice Felix Frankfurter in 1960, who rejected her only for being a woman. But, her mentor, Professor Gerald Gunther finally secured her a clerk position, by telling U.S. District Judge Edmund Palmieri he would never recommend another Columbia student for Palmieri's chambers if he refused to hire Ginsburg. Palmieri agreed with the stipulation he would fire her if she proved unsatisfactory. 

Ginsburg became the first tenured woman on the law faculty at Columbia University. She coauthored the first casebook on sex discrimination, and she founded the Women's Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, a socialist/ communist front that hid behind its supposed fight for liberty for all Americans as it very often worked to subvert the Constitution and liberty in America. And, during her time at the ACLU, Ginsburg was the chief strategist of an insidious campaign to effect social and political change for women through the courts, by essentially "discovering" non-existent "rights" and steadily expanding the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to prohibit distinctions based on sex.

As an advocate at the Women's Rights Project, through the ACLU, Ginsburg researched and argued six gender discrimination cases before the Supreme Court during the 1970s. She won five, earning acclaim as the Thurgood Marshall of the women's rights movement from those who recall her early days as a litigator and director of the Women's Rights Project. 

Once she was asked who was the smartest person she ever knew, and she named he mother, Celia Amster Bader. During her Amherst talk, during a 2004 Holocaust remembrance ceremony, Ginsburg offered a truly striking observation that spoke volumes about what it really means to be an American, observing: "I had the good fortune to be a Jew born in the U.S.A. My father left Odessa bound for the New World in 1909, at age 13. My mother was first in her large family to be born here, in 1903 ... What is the difference between a bookkeeper in New York's Garment District and a Supreme Court Justice? Just one generation, my mother's life and mine bear witness."

Twenty years after her last argument before the Supreme Court, to Ginsburg's credit and speaking as the father of two daughters, who I taught to be fiercely independent and to think things through, her explanation in the 1996 discrimination case of United States v. Virginia was excellent, correct, righteous and true, one of her best moments. In a moment of personal triumph, writing for the majority of a 7-1 decision, she stated that Virginia had failed to provide the "exceedingly persuasive justification" that the Constitution required for treating men and women differently, concluding: "Women seeking and fit for a V.M.I quality education cannot be offered anything less under the state's obligation to afford them genuinely equal protection. Generalizations about 'the way women are', estimates of what is appropriate for most women, no longer justify denying opportunity to women whose talent and capacity place them outside the average description." 

Also to her credit, Ginsburg championed for the mentally disabled, as seen in Olmstead v. LC (1999). The ruling held that the Americans With Disabilities Act often requires people with mental disabilities to be placed in community settings and not institutions, with Ginsburg writing: "Institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life."

And, if there's any ruling that can possibly move some forgiveness for all her other leftist rulings, perhaps it is M.L.B v. S.L.J and a parent's "right" to be able to pursue their parental rights in court, despite being too poor to pay for the filing costs that normally are required before a case may proceed. Although the Supreme Court of Mississippi had ruled that the state had no obligation to pay for the filing, Ginsburg rejected their opinion in the majority ruling that stated "the state may not bolt the door to equal justice" when it comes to parental rights. 

Adored by all the liberal, Marxist Socialists and communist women, and many men too, at barely 5 feet tall and a hundred pounds, Ginsburg's powerful, dissenting opinions attracted a great deal of attention, as the Court moved farther towards the right. In June of 2013, a law student at New York University, Shana Knizhnik anointed Ginsburg with the nickname of the Notorious R.B.G, a play on the Notorious B.I.G, a famous rapper who was Brooklyn-born, just as Ginsburg was. The name stuck, and along with her serene yet severe expression, eyes framed by oversized glasses, a frilly lace collar adorning her black judicial robe, and a gold crown phot-shopped on her head at a rakish angle, R.B.G became an internet sensation.

Even more curiously, Notorious RBG's politics did not affect her personal relationships. She was a very close friend of the extremely conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, before he passed. 

However, to her shame, she fought intensely to protect "the right of abortion", which has never been found in any U.S. legal code or anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, at any time prior to its magical appearance in 1973. After the Court upheld Congress's Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 in Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), Ginsburg wrote in her dissent, in part: (The majority ruling) "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. In candor, the Act, and the Court's defense of it, cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court -- and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women's lives." 

As a mother of a son and a daughter, one is left puzzled at how she could be such a staunch supporter of so heinous and evil an act, as abortion. And no matter how many times one calls it a "right" or attempts to justify it in some other manner, it's still baby murder anyway one slices it. 

In 1999, just a month after undergoing cancer surgery, Justice Ginsburg, suggested: "No door should be closed to people willing to spend the hours of effort to make dreams come true". Well, I would offer that some people's dreams are other people's nightmares. Some people dream of committing mass murders, while others dream of being able to engage in deviant, unnatural, vile and evil sex acts with children and being able to marry people of the same sex. Some people dream of an authoritarian government where no Inalienable Rights exist and people all join in together in the service of the government and one's Supreme Leader.

One must also note Ginsburg's disdain for the U.S. Constitution, in 2012, as she told Egypt's Al-Hayat TV, that the U.S. Constitution would not be the best model for post-revolution Egypt, stating: "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary. ... It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution."

Someone should have objected to this bit of idiocy on her part, since a more recent time stamp on an idea doesn't make it the best idea of one's days. She was touting a constitution constructed by the communists of the black African National Congress primarily for South Africa's black people, that largely restricts the white people of their country, and in the process, she erroneously asserted that it included "freedom from discrimination". She also praised the constitutions of Canada and the European Union. Ginsburg was simply blinded by the positive rights they advanced, since she always has held via implication, that rights come from government, as seen through her opinions and dissents, rather than as being from God. 

Of course, rights that are subject to the whims of men and women holding office on any particular day can easily be eradicated, whereas our Inalienable Rights exist despite the actions of any men and as granted by God. And for those of us who hold this as a fundamental truth, it is of the utmost importance that we help President Trump and this Congress affirm and seat Justice Ginsburg's replacement, as soon as possible, with a true conservative American who will uphold the principles of freedom and liberty for all Americans.

In the meantime, I shed no tears for this woman whose views regarding life in the womb and the rights of the UnBorn Child were so vile and so flawed, in many respects, that she advocated and upheld the non-existent "right" of a woman to murder her child in the womb, at every opportunity, even at the point of birth itself. She saw it as a matter of equality, although her position negated equality for the UnBorn Child and his rights as a living being. 

I shed no tears for a woman whose views on the constitution were so anti-American and sympathetic to those enemies from within, the socialists and communists, who would destroy Christianity and the nuclear family in this nation, through her affirmation of homosexual marriage, in Obergefell v. Hodges.  

Now, Ginsburg's demise will serve only to motivate the country's domestic terrorists and intensify America's culture war and shake the nation to its very core. Her death has already set the stage for what promises to be a nasty and fierce political battle over who will succeed her, and the vacancy on the Supreme Court is now a front and center focus of the presidential campaign. And by no means should Republicans hesitate for a second to move immediately to fill it.

President Trump has a constitutional obligation to act promptly, and he stated as much, at around 9:00 am this morning (September 19th): "We were put in this position of power to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!"

Republicans won the election on November 3rd 2016. They hold the presidency. They hold the Senate. For Democrats to suggest that some unwritten rule exists that demands they must wait for the new election and a new president -- hopefully a Democratic president in their way of thinking -- is sheer double-standard lunacy. Whoever holds the seats of power when such openings occur have every right and authority to feel them under the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution. 

As Dan McLaughlin wrote on August 7th for the National Review, anticipating this event: "Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration. (This counts vacancies created by new seats on the Court, but not vacancies for which there was a nomination already pending when the year began, such as happened in 1835-36 and 1987-88.) The president made a nomination in all twenty-nine cases. George Washington did it three times. John Adams did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. Ulysses S. Grant did it. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it. Barack Obama, of course, did it. Twenty-two of the 44 men to hold the office faced this situation, and all twenty-two made the decision to send up the nomination, whether or not they had the votes in the Senate."

Not only is the leader of the Supreme Court's Leftists gone, but Chief Justice John Roberts no longer holds the controlling vote in closely contested cases, which may be a blessing in disguise. Although Roberts has a fairly consistent conservative record, for the most part, he has split on crucial cases, such as the time he saved the so-called Dreamers from deportation, upheld a major abortion precedent and upheld bans on large church gatherings during the COVID plandemic. And now, with Ginsburg gone and no clear majority, the next few weeks offer to be a bare-knuckle political brawl, writ large, across the stage of the presidential election.

President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel have already noted the hard reality of the necessity of taking advantage of this monumental opportunity. Whether or not President Trump wins in November, he will go down in history as one of the most significant presidents, if he can actually seat a third Justice to the Supreme Court, since the last Republican to install three Justices in his first term was Richard M. Nixon. And, we should all be hoping and praying that the President's nominee is the incredibly intelligent, impeccable and honorable Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a Notre Dame University Law School graduate and a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, since Trump just hinted that he would pick a woman.

Ginsburg knew what was to come, and so she fought to remain as she attempted to set the terms of her own departure, in order to shape the election Her death will have profound consequences for the Court and America.

At every level and every segment of society imaginable, America is more volatile today than at any other time in history, and with the most significant election in decades so near, and such a monumental opening appearing on the U.S. Supreme Court, the country stands at the edge of a dangerous abyss and prepared to plunge into a prolonged conflict, marked by extreme and deadly violent civil upheaval, that promises to further damage and perhaps even end the republic. The stakes for the survival of America have never been higher. 

By Justin O. Smith

_______________________________

John R. Houk is the Blog Editor. Typically I take steps to embed sources to info in blog submissions, but I am running a bit behind. So I am posting as is after running a spell check.

© Justin O. Smith

A Challenge to Point out Communism in Dem Party Platform PT 1

John R. Houk

© October 25, 2018

I recently received criticism on a MeWe group for sharing a Justin Smith post entitled “Liberty First and Foremost”. The beginning of Justin’s essay said this:

The Democratic Party has grown to be the enemy within our country, and the communist Democrats working in federal positions are the same as foreign agents infiltrated into federal agencies, seeking to do whatever is needed to end this republic.

Chris Worth at this MeWe group said something to the effect he read equating the Dems to a “Communist” and decided the post was worthless and hence encouraged readers there was no need to read further.

That kind of irked me. So, I quipped he should read the Dem Party Platform to see the Communism dripping from the words.

Essentially Chris Worth called bull and challenged me to show where Communism was found in the Dem Platform.

Ergo the purpose of this post.

Responding to Chris Worth of LEFT VS RIGHT~DEBATE IS ON! FIGHT FOR YOUR CAUSE! On MeWe

The Democratic Party Platform is updated every 4 years corresponding to Presidential elections. The 2016 Dem platform true to Socialist/Communist ideology to fool the people, disguises their words to sound appealing, yet when compared to the less likely to disguise Socialist/Marxist agenda of making decisions rather than offering choices is quite apparent. The DNC Platform is 50 pages of disguised flowery promises impossible for the most part to accomplish without bankrupting government and/or taxing “We The People” so heavily that no one will ever manage their own affairs without government -cough- guidance.

Here’s a summary of the 50-page platform with a little added commentary:

Bioethics Issues

Supports appointing judges who defend abortion rights.

Opposes efforts to limit or prohibit taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood.

Opposes any laws that limit abortion.

Supports the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion services.

Supports free abortion and contraceptives for all women.

Supports “sexual and reproductive health and rights around the globe.”

Opposes the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars American assistance to abortion throughout the developing world.

Here’s the Socialist/Marxist rub on “Abortion Rights”. There is NO WHERE in the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing a right to kill unborn babies for the primary purpose of exacting birth control for unwanted pregnancies. An “Abortion Right” was created by a majority decision of SCOTUS using a frankly UNCONSTITUTIONAL Living Constitution paradigm interpreting the Constitution NOT by what is written, instead ignoring what the Constitution should mean. The Living Constitution paradigm ensures an elite few rather than the Amendment/Convention of States process prescribed by the Constitution (See Also LexisNexus summary) to make the Rule of Law.

Dem Platform summary continued:

Criminal Justice Reform

Supports reforming mandatory minimum sentences and closing private prisons and detention centers.

Supports working with police chiefs to invest in training for officers on issues such as de-escalation and the creation of national guidelines for the appropriate use of force.

Encourages better police-community relations.

Supports requiring the use of body cameras.

Opposes the use of “weapons of war that have no place in our communities.”

Opposes racial profiling that targets individuals solely on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, or national origin.

Supports a requirement to make the Department of Justice investigate all “questionable or suspicious police-involved shootings.”

Supports states and localities “who help make those investigations and prosecutions more transparent, including through reforming the grand jury process.”

Supports assisting states in providing a system of public defense that is adequately resourced and meets American Bar Association standards.

Supports reforming the civil asset forfeiture system to “protect people and remove perverse incentives for law enforcement to ‘police for a profit.’”

Supports removing barriers to help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully re-enter society by “banning the box” (persuading employers to remove from their hiring applications the check box that asks if applicants have a criminal record). Supports executive action to “ban the box for federal employers and contractors, so applicants have an opportunity to demonstrate their qualifications before being asked about their criminal records.”

Supports expanding re-entry programs, and restoring voting rights for felons.

Supports, whenever possible, prioritizing prevention and treatment over incarceration when tackling addiction and substance use disorder.

Endorses the use of effective models of drug courts, veterans’ courts, and other diversionary programs that “seek to give nonviolent offenders opportunities for rehabilitation as opposed to incarceration.”

Supports abolishing the death penalty.

This dreamy sounding police reform if read carefully, smacks of Big Government (i.e. The State, Big Brother, Comrade Leader, World Leader, Alphas, Chairman, Supreme Leader, Führer … Obama) control of local lives. Racism is bad, right? When race baiters begin victimizing the majority, who are the racists. What is the correct view of Social Justice? Is usurping or destroying property to mindlessly equalize a race or the poor for past wrongs of Justice or Injustice (socio-philosophy & Biblical  perspective)?

The Socialist/Communist/Democrat as evidenced by history and recent events spurred on by Dems and their acolytes (e.g. Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Militant LGBTQ, etc.). The so-called reforms for Criminal Justice are code words to enlist the disgruntled to control Americans that still respect the Constitution as the Rule of Law and remember sacrifices that has led America being a great nation.

Dem Platform Summary Continued:

Discrimination and Racial Issues

Supports ending discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.

Supports promoting “racial justice through fair, just, and equitable governing of all public-serving institutions and in the formation of public policy.”

Supports removing the Confederate battle flag from public properties, “recognizing that it is a symbol of our nation's racist past that has no place in our present or our future.”

Calls for a “societal transformation to make it clear that black lives matter and that there is no place for racism in our country.”

Supports U.S. ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.

Supports adding the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Much of these flowery words are already covered by American Rule of Law. Key terms deceptively slipped in that probably most voters who agree that racism is bad and any form of discrimination against women is bad, probably don’t understand that “sexual orientation and gender identity” mean making the ungodly LGBTQ lifestyle normal ignoring the standard in Christian Morality noting such a life is NOT natural. The Left has used activist Courts for decades to AGAIN … transform society via the non-constitutional path of Leftist Judicial Activism and Leftist media brainwashing.

I’ve had a bit of trouble locating a web page charting American attitudes toward homosexuality. I suspect largely it is anathema to show how much Americans viewed the LGBTQ as a perverse lifestyle. Here is an article obviously supportive of homosexuality going through the “struggles” of being homosexual and the American Rule of Law: Being Gay Used to Be Illegal; 3/27/16.

I have mixed feelings on the old Confederate flag. While it is a symbol of America’s slavery past it is also a period in history which Americans deeply believed in their cause which divided America into its bloodiest war when American killed American (uncannily similar to the present - is there a Civil War emerging?).

Dem Platform Summary Continued:

Drugs and Drug Abuse

Supports the federal government removing marijuana from the list of “Schedule 1” federal controlled substances and to appropriately regulate it, “providing a reasoned pathway for future legalization.”

Supports states that want to decriminalize marijuana or provide access to medical marijuana.

Supports policies that will allow more research on marijuana, as well as reforming our laws to “allow legal marijuana businesses to exist without uncertainty.”

Supports expanding “access to prevention and treatment, supporting recovery, helping community organizations, and promoting better practices by prescribers.”

Supports expanding access to care for addiction services, and ensuring that insurance coverage is “equal to that for any other health conditions.”

Such legislation should be along a State’s Rights issue. This is a case that the Federal government observe:

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Dem Platform Summary Continued:

Education

Supports making community college free for all students.

Supports the federal government pushing “more colleges and universities to take quantifiable, affirmative steps in increasing the percentages of racial and ethnic minority, low-income, and first-generation students they enroll and graduate.”

Supports “ensuring the strength of our Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions.”

Supports refinancing of current student loan debt.

Supports simplifying and expanding “access to income-based repayment so that no student loan borrowers ever have to pay more than they can afford.”

Supports a student borrower bill of rights to “ensure borrowers get adequate information about options to avoid or get out of delinquency or default.”

Supports the Public Service Loan Forgiveness and loan discharge programs “begun by the Obama Administration.”

Supports the inclusion of student loans in bankruptcy.

Supports a moratorium on student loan payments to all federal loan borrowers.

Supports restoring year-round Pell funding.

Supports strengthening the gainful employment rule to ensure that for-profit schools enable students to complete their degrees and prepare them for work.

Supports the Department of Education using their oversight to “close down those for-profit schools that consistently engage in fraudulent and illegal conduct.”

Supports universal preschool for all children.

Supports efforts to “raise wages for childcare workers, and to ensure that early childhood educators are experienced and high-quality.”

Supports increased investments in afterschool and summer learning programs.

Encourages group mentoring programs.

Encourage states to develop a “multiple measures approach to assessment, and we believe that standardized tests must be reliable and valid.”

Opposes use of standardized tests that “falsely and unfairly label students of color, students with disabilities and English Language Learners as failing.”

Opposes the use of standardized test scores as basis for refusing to fund schools or to close schools.

Opposes the use of student test scores in teacher and principal evaluations.

Support enabling parents to opt their children out of standardized tests without penalty for either the student or their school.

Supports a national campaign to recruit and retain high-quality teachers.

Supports “high-quality STEAM classes, community schools, computer science education, arts education, and expand link learning models and career pathways.”

Supports ending end the “school-to-prison pipeline by opposing discipline policies which disproportionately affect African Americans and Latinos, Native Americans and Alaska Natives, students with disabilities, and youth who identify as LGBT.”

Supports the use of restorative justice practices that “help students and staff resolve conflicts peacefully and respectfully while helping to improve the teaching and learning environment.”

Supports improving “school culture” and combating “bullying of all kinds.”

Supports expanding Title I funding for schools that serve a large number or high concentration of children in poverty.

Supports charter schools but opposes for-profit charter schools.

Supports increasing sexual violence prevention education programs that “cover issues like consent and bystander intervention, not only in college, but also in secondary school.”

This huge Education summary can be boiled down to reality! For such Education Reforms to take place the classic Communist principle of Wealth Redistribution will be forced upon American taxpayers. For Education Reform in this platform Americans capable of paying taxes will be thrust into poverty. Then OOPS! No more money to steal from taxpayers for the unsustainable Education Reform. Then what? The only way the Dems could maintain control of the government is to terminate the Constitution and institute rule-by-force. Then boom! The Utopian lies turn America into a totalitarian regime giving more to the government telling people what to support, how to believe and ultimately terminate Faith (meaning Judeo-Christian Morality) in favor of a government managed Secular Humanism.

VIDEO: Obama's "Spread the Wealth Around" Marxist Economics

DiscoverObamaDOTcom

Published on Oct 27, 2008

And voters put Obama in Office for 8 YEARS when his agenda was transparently Marxist! MIND BOGGLING!

Dem Platform Summary Continued:

Faith-Based Organizations

Says: “We believe in lifting up and valuing the good work of people of faith and religious organizations and finding ways to support that work where possible.”

Now that is a load of lying donkey dung. It is the Dems and Dem supporters that condemn traditional (NOT RADICAL) faith based organizations for standing for traditional Christian Moral Values derived from the Bible (See Also Manhattan Declaration). It is the Dems and Dem supporters that fell in line with Judicial activist Judges who extra-constitutionally changed Constitution of the First Amendment from Freedom of Religion to Freedom from Religion in all taxpayer supported venues (Of interest: The Establishment Clause, Civil Religion, and the Public Church).

Dem Party rejection of faith as the backbone of American culture is evidence of Marx’s Stage Development Theory dream of marching toward Socialism ending in Communism.

Dem Platform Summary Continued:

Human Trafficking

Supports the “full force of the law against those who engage in modern-day forms of slavery, including the commercial sexual exploitation and forced labor of men, women, and children.

Supports increasing diplomatic efforts with foreign governments to “root out complicit public officials who facilitate or perpetrate this evil.”

Supports increasing the “provision of services and protections for trafficking survivors.”

If the Dems could ever be trusted in sincerity, this stand would be awesome.

END OF PART ONE

JRH 10/25/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider

chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

The 9th Court Usurps Power!

9^th Circuit Appellate Justices Richard Clifton, Michelle Friedland, and William Canby.

Justin Smith reasoning demonstrates the hypocrisy and idiocy of the American Left’s rabid reaction to President Trump temporarily banning immigration and refugees from seven nations that Islamic terrorism is a hotbed of death.

JRH 2/14/17

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

**************

The 9th Court Usurps Power!

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/13/2017 7:19 AM

President Trump doesn't need to issue any new travel ban order, that may or may not please the anti-American activist judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal or other supporters of Islam and Sharia law (see Justice Elena Kagan's tenure at Harvard University), open borders and international communism in the Supreme Court and within America's own population. His original order was well within the U.S. Constitution and the law, and, in order to stop this current intrusion on the President’s authority in areas of foreign policy and national security, a usurpation of power and a judicial coup d’état, President Trump should defy the 9th Court and set to work with the Republican majority and any agreeable Democrats to limit the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution and reclaim stolen legislative powers for Congress.

It has universally been acknowledged for over 230 years that the President, the United States Commander-in-Chief, has broad authority and great leeway in all matters of immigration and foreign policy and national security [Judge Napolitano & NRO], which places the recent ruling of leftist activist judges Michelle Friedland (Obama appointee) and William Canby Jr. (Carter appointee) on par with an act of treason. These two judges are so willing to give President Trump a political black eye, allowing Trump's "Muslim ban" campaign statements to be used in the evaluation of his executive order, that they have ignored the law, circumvented the Constitution and violated the separation of powers clause between coequal branches of government; and, they have blatantly dismissed the reality  of refugees, who can't prove who they are and whether or not they have any ties to Islamic terrorist groups, while allowing district judge James Robart, another leftist activist judge (notwithstanding being a Bush appointee), to absurdly overrule the President of the United States on border security during wartime.

There is not any manner of violation against the U.S. Constitution and the 1965 Immigration Act in President Trump's travel ban. Trump isn't discriminating against anyone, but rather, he is looking at seven nations from a security threat assessment, which were already determined to be state sponsors of terror by former President Obama and his advisors, addressed in Section 1187 (a) (12) of an Obama-era provision of the immigration law.

And also in his executive order, President Trump expressly cites 1182 (f), enacted in 1952, which states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such time as he may deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants ... ". [Blog Editor: bold-italics is Editor’s]

In 1893, America was detaining approximately 20 percent of all hopeful immigrants reaching Ellis Island, due to sickness and disabilities, and anarchists and the insane were automatically rejected [Blog Editor: History.com point 4-  Immigrants were subject to physical and mental exams to ensure they were fit for admittance to the United States]. About two percent of these immigrants were judged unfit to become U.S. citizens and sent home on the next ship. By the 1920s, our government established quotas based on nationality and skill. And the majority of Americans have always understood that just like anyone has the right to decide who enters their home, so too, our nation has that same sovereign right.

No "moral obligation" to these refugees exists that can compel us to allow them to enter without knowing for certain who they are. The moral obligation to open our doors, often mentioned by the Leftists and International Communists, doesn't mean America must throw reason and caution to the wind.

People who do not share our values -- Islamofascists seeking to reach America's shores and murder Americans -- and anti-American "refugees" seeking to transform America into a Balkanized hell are not welcome here.

Why weren't all of these anti-American leftist judges evoking Emma Lazarus and Lady Liberty lifting her lamp "beside the golden door" when President Clinton sent little 6 year old Elian Gonzalez back to a communist dictatorship in Cuba, under the executive branch's broad power? Or when President Obama turned away real refugees fleeing Castro's oppression "yearning to breathe free"? [Blog Editor: See Also Breitbart & 100% Fed Up]

America doesn't have to destroy its cultural identity by helping foreigners, but this is precisely what Democrat commie bastards such as President Johnson and Senator Ted Kennedy intended to accomplish through the 1965 Immigration Act. This one law has eroded our cultural identity severely and created extremely detrimental demographic changes over time. And most recently, former President Obama specifically brought in one million immigrants from Muslim majority countries like Kosovo, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan, even though these countries were the origin of terrorists that have already attacked America.

Many of America's "progressive" Leftists consider the destruction of America, as we know it, to be a desirable goal, however, most Americans reject their fundamental change. Americans who love this country want a strong America, that will be able to defeat the dangerous ideologies currently threatening Western Civilization.

Rebuke the disingenuous pious progressives who decry those of us supporting the President’s executive order as anti-immigrant and issue flowery utterances on sanctuary, when sanctuary is for the truly persecuted innocents, like the Christians in the Middle East. Exercising our first responsibility to protect ourselves and Our Beloved America bears no shame.

Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ala) stated that Trump's executive order was "plainly legal" under both statute and the Constitution, adding: "No foreigner has a constitutional right to enter the United States and courts ought not second-guess sensitive national security decisions of the President. This misguided ruling is from the 9th Circuit, the most notoriously left-wing court in America and the most reversed court at the Supreme Court.

Representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala) said, "Unfortunately, American lives are at risk until this unfounded and reckless [9th Court restraining] order is reversed by the Supreme Court."

How can Americans trust unreliable and corrupt courts with our national security? The Supreme Court ruled Obamacare to be both constitutional and a tax, after Obama called it a "penalty" for years. The courts have overturned the will of 'We the People' in numerous referendums and centuries of traditions and hundreds of state and federal laws, so that they could manufacture non-existent rights to abortion and deviant, perverse homosexual "marriage" [coupling], rights that cannot and never will be found in Madison's Constitution.

Judges and justices are not empowered by the Constitution to make U.S. law or govern the nation. Those duties fall solely to Congress and the President.

Pat Buchanan observed on February 10th that President Andrew Jackson defied Chief Justice John Marshall's "prohibition" against moving the Cherokee Indians across the Mississippi and to the western frontier. He also noted President Lincoln considered sending U.S. troops to arrest Chief Justice Roger Taney, when Taney declared Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus unconstitutional.

President Trump must simply defy U.S. District Judge Robart's overly broad and illegal restraining order, upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal. He must order Homeland Security and his State Department and Justice Department to continue executing his executive order which is in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and existing law, because his act is a rare and righteous moment in this war against terrorism, the Islamofascists, the Radical Left of America and the International Communists, who seek our demise. And a Constitutional crisis is much preferred over more murdered innocent Americans.

By Justin O. Smith

_____________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets and source links are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith