Republicans Have the Tools to Deal with Sanctuary Cities

Politicians by nature are cowards. They’re like water: fluid in rhetoric and follow the least path of resistance. How nice for them to have established a European system in which bureaucrats have supplanted the legislative branch by process of an administrative state. Congress has reinvented themselves as overseers of the Great Washington D.C. Plantation. Isn’t that special? Tell me, where is that in the U.S. Constitution?


One only has to look at this illegal alien problem to see how dysfunctional Congress has become. Liberals love to declare our immigration system is broken. NO! It’s Congress that’s broken. There are ways to deal with sanctuary cities, activist judges and elected officials who aid and abet this third-world invasion. What we need is strong leadership from the Republican party and I’m not talking about President Trump. He’s shown remarkable courage in the face of this unrelenting liberal sh**storm. I’m talking about the sniveling cowards in the Senate and the House of Representatives.


When Republicans controlled both houses of Congress they could’ve invoked the 14th Amendment and declared sanctuary cities in a state of rebellion. This action would’ve disenfranchisement local officials and reduced that states representation in Congress and the Electoral College. However, I doubt they realize they even have that power.


You ask, what about liberal judges? Surely, these plaintiffs would win in the courts. Well, the dirty, little secret is that Congress has the power to limit judicial review. They’ve had it all along, but refuse to exercise their constitutional prerogatives. Article III, Section II specifically gives Congress the authority to regulate the Court’s jurisdiction. For those who doubt Congress has this power, I’ll refer to the Aldrich Amendment in the Hepburn Act of 1906:


The fight in the Senate was not yet over. In order to obtain sufficient votes for passage of the bill, Roosevelt (a Republican) for five weeks secretly had backed an amendment proposed by Democratic Senators Joseph Weldon Bailey Sr.(Mississippi) and Benjamin Ryan Tillman, Jr. (South Carolina) that would limit judicial review of ICC orders on unreasonable rates to questions involving the ICC’s authority and the constitutional rights of the railroads. On May 4th, however, when it was apparent that the Tillman-Bailey Amendment did not have the necessary votes, Roosevelt, without notice to Bailey and Tillman and much to their consternation, announced at a hastily called press conference that the President supported a “broad” judicial review amendment proposed by Republican Senator William Boyd Allison (Iowa); this amendment had no limits on the scope of such judicial review, leaving it to the courts to decide the scope of review.


Congress didn’t debate about their authority to limit judicial review. Quite, the contrary, it was the opposite. They debated the extent to which the courts were allowed to interpret the law.


You ask, what about a divided Congress? There isn’t much we can do about the Senate and it's current leadership, but we most definitely can raise hell in the House once we take it back and we can use the Constitution to back it up.


Article One, Section One specifically allows each house to make its own rules and Section 5 gives the authority for each house to qualify and seat its members. During Reconstruction, The House of Representatives refused to seat incoming members from the South who participated in the rebellion. Therefore, there is a precedent and federal judges don’t have a say. But this would require strong Republican leadership and as we all know, that is seriously lacking.

We do have options to deal with liberals in and outside of the Beltway. What we need is the backbone to use it.


Source:

https://dwkcommentaries.com/2014/08/29/federal-regulation-of-the-railroads-in-u-s-president-theodore-roosevelts-second-term-1905-1909-the-hepburn-act/

Lawless Judge Imposes Lawless DACA on American People

Why am I uncomfortable about Washington D.C. reforming of our immigration laws?  Everything I’ve read so far has demonstrated our so-called representatives are not serious about stopping this third-world invasion.  Congress has the necessary tools to protect our country, but they are too damn feckless and cowardly to implement them. 


If we’re to have real immigration reform, Congress must deal with a branch of government that is largely responsible for legitimizing illegal aliens.  For example, a federal judge just ruled that an unlawful edict by President Obama must be reinstated.  Here is an excerpt from the Washington Times:


A federal judge in New York ruled Tuesday that the government must fully restart the Obama-era DACA deportation amnesty and accept brand new applicants as well as renewals, throwing a potential wrench in the ongoing debate over the fate of “Dreamers” on Capitol Hill.


Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis said the administration does have the power to revoke DACA, but it must give a sound reason for doing so — and the Homeland Security Department’s September 2017 rationale fell far short of what is required in that regard.


He even used Mr. Trump’s own tweets as evidence that the DACA program was ended precipitously, pointing to President Trump's claims that he could “revisit this issue” as proof the program could have been continued.



Judge Garaufis is the second federal judge to rule Mr. Trump’s aides bungled the phaseout — but his decision is the most wide-ranging, ordering the government to not only allow those already in the program to renew their applications but also ordering the government to accept new applications.


This judge just demonstrated that Congress has no legislative role when it comes to immigration and naturalization and that our current president is forbidden to enforce existing laws.  Need we remind these judges that DACA is not a law, but rather an edict promulgated by a megalomaniac with a pen and phone?


If we're to save our nation and the rule of law, Congress has to reactivate Article III which specifically defines the court’s original jurisdiction and that all appellate considerations are to be regulated by Congress; therefore, our elected representatives have the authority to declare federal judges have no jurisdiction when it comes to illegal aliens and immediate deportation is warranted upon arrest.  Foreign nationals who come into this country without authorization are not afforded due process. 


Sceptics will say, the 14th Amendment states otherwise.  No it doesn’t!  Section V specifically states Congress shall enforce the provisions in this article; not a black-robed thug with a messianic complex.


If Congress were circumspect, they would learn from the mistakes of Simpson - Mazzoli.  And one of those mistakes was allowing the federal judiciary to run roughshod over our immigration laws.        




Source:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/13/court-orders-full-restoration-daca-program/

https://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2012/06/simpson-mazzoli-act-was-big-lie.html

ICE Targets Northern California, MAGA-Style

ICE is targeting Northern California businesses, MAGA-Style. It seems only fitting that this state and particularly that region, which has been the vanguard of this illegal alien invasion, should get the stinky end of the stick. Here is an excerpt from Breitbart:


Businesses received notices of inspection from ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) special agents from Monday through Wednesday, ICE Spokesman James Schwab told Breitbart News. The notices gave each business three days from the date of being served to comply and produce I-9 documents.


Typically HSI takes the documents and conducts inspection for compliance. While the businesses were not initially identified, they were located within the San Francisco responsibility jurisdiction, including San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Jose.


Schwab said that HSI has increased enforcement activities to “enforce the laws that prohibit businesses from hiring illegal workers.” ICE Deputy Director Tom Homan has made known plans to increase the level of HSI worksite enforcement actions.


California’s attorney general has declared anyone who cooperates with ICE will be prosecuted. I believe it’s time Republicans in Congress step-up their game and invoke the 14th Amendment by taking away congressional districts and reducing Electoral College votes. They should also enforce the provision that disallows public office to anyone who defies federal laws.


Game on, assholes!


Source:


http://www.breitbart.com/california/2018/02/02/ice-immigration-agents-audit-77-businesses-seeking-illegal-workers-to-protect-american-workers/

Time to Turn California into a Military District

How perverse is this? California’s attorney general threatened business owners if they cooperate with ICE. According to AG Xavier Beccara, California’s new state law is supreme over our nation’s immigration laws. Anyone turning in an illegal alien will be prosecuted. Here is an excerpt from the Daily Caller:


“Ignorance of the law is no excuse if you violate it,” Becerra said.

Asked if his office was prepared to prosecute companies that cooperate with ICE, the state attorney general made clear he was.


“If there are violators of California law out there, law enforcement will investigate and prosecuting authorities, could be the local prosecuting authorities or it could be the attorney general’s office, will prosecute those who violate the law.”

California is in a state of rebellion. It’s time to to invoke the 14th Amendment and take away their congressional delegations, Electoral College votes and turn Sacramento into a military district.


Source:


http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/18/california-threatens-to-prosecute-businesses-that-cooperate-with-ice-video/

Time to Declare: California is in a State of Rebellion

California is in a state of rebellion.  Their General Assembly passed a bill that gives sanctuary to millions of illegal aliens and are suing the Trump administration for building a wall.  This state is basically flouting our nation’s immigration laws.  They have become the Crimea of Mexico.

We cannot afford a populous state such as California to run roughshod over the rule of law and our nation’s sovereignty.  They have 53 House representatives along with 55 Electoral College votes.  It is safe to say that illegal aliens have more influence in Washington D.C. than American citizens and it is time to put a stop to it.  It is time to declare, California is in a state of rebellion.  

When the Yankees conquered the South in the War of Northern Aggression they passed the 14th Amendment which disenfranchised those who participated in the rebellion.  Sections 2 and 3 prohibited rebels from holding public office and reduced their representation in the House, along with their Electoral College votes.  

This measure didn’t just pertain to Confederate soldiers and a specific time period.  Twenty years after Reconstruction, a congressman reintroduced disenfranchisement as a form of punishment.  Here is an excerpt from Capitol Men:

In 1898, the Republican congressman Edgar D. Crumpacker of Indiana suggested that a 40 percent reduction in the Southern representation in Congress would adequately reflect the extensive disenfranchisement of Southern black citizens.  During the South Carolina convention, the Tillman forces had actually agreed that they would willingly reduce the state’s representation in the electoral college and in Congress, if necessary, because from their perspective, the ability to dominate state politics along racial lines meant far more than having a slightly larger voice in Washington.

 

The last black Southerner in Congress at the time,  North Carolina’s George H. White, also advocated for disenfranchisement.  Here is another excerpt:

White had remained true to the emancipation vision of Douglass and the postwar black Republicans, and in Congress he did not hesitate to assail racial injustice and inequality head-on.  Among other initiatives, he revived the idea that Southern states deserved a diminished representation in Congress because of their broad disenfranchisement of blacks…

Here is an interesting tidbit further down the paragraph:

...and he demanded that his white colleagues stop telling “darkie stories” and using “dialect and old plantation language” when trying to represent blacks’ views and beliefs.
 

Some things just don’t seem to change.

Congress is the only institution that can disenfranchise rebels in California and those fools can’t even pass a budget.  However, this shouldn’t be necessary.  The only reason illegal aliens have political clout is because the Census counts them.  That’s how we end up with traitors like Luis Gutierrez in Congress who advocate this third world invasion.    

If Americans are serious about illegal immigration, it will only happen if we convene a convention of States.  We cannot depend on Washington D.C. to correct a problem they created.  We must do it ourselves.  The rule of law and our national sovereignty depend on it.  

Source:

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/16/california-goes-full-sanctuary-state-with-sweeping-immigration-bill/

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/california-file-lawsuit-over-trump-border-wall-130642062.html

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Time to Disenfranchise Sanctuary Cities and States

I’ve come to the conclusion Democrats have contempt for Americans and the republic in general.  Their advocacy for illegal aliens and sanctuary cities is a slap in the face to every law-abiding citizen in the country.  Any state that aides and abets this invasion should be sanctioned and the offending jurisdictions should be disenfranchised of congressional delegation and electoral college votes.

The 14th Amendment was established to protect American citizens of their rights and privileges.  There are people in this country actively undermining those rights and privileges by advocating an open borders policy.  This advocacy is a form of insurrection and rebellion.  Those advocates should be denied the privilege of office and vote.  Sections Two and Three have set a precedent for disenfranchisement.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

However, Section 5 states that Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.  

Maybe its time the states force their hand.

Progressives Reconstruct History and the United States

Progressives have been on a mission to fundamentally transform the United States for over 150 years.  The great leap from federalism to nationalism couldn’t have happened without the War of Northern Aggression and Reconstruction.  Southern secession became a catalyst for centralized power and ironically will lead to the dissolution of a union the Yankee invaders purportedly wanted to save.

Before anyone gets offended, I want to emphasize this post is about Progressives, the U.S. Constitution and the federalist principles therein and not about slavery.  I realize this distinction can be difficult for some; however, one must try to analyze this perspective from a federalist viewpoint.

     

How can one define Reconstruction?  You would think it a term for an epoch in American history where the conquerors helped the vanquished get back on their feet by easing them into the union after a devastating civil war.  This interpretation is completely false.  What happened was the equivalent of the Progressive Era’s Eugenics Movement:  Southerners will restructure the way they think, act and live their lives according to the dictates of their Yankee masters, or be sterilized from the political process.  Congressional Reconstruction was all about power and control and to hell with federalism. 

  

The Radical Republicans wanted to ensure their hegemonic rule by forcing the 14^th Amendment upon a prostrate people.  Twelve states refused to swallow this poisoned pill, which had a provision that disenfranchised southerners who volunteered to fight for the Confederacy.  This act of defiance brought about the third phase of Reconstruction:  the South was divided into five military districts and ruled by military governors.

Military occupations breed resentment and enmity which ultimately leads to failure.  Reconstruction was and is considered a colossal failure.  A generation of historians, often referred to as the Dunning School, documented the abuses and corruption of the Radical Republicans and their agents of occupation.  This resentment manifested itself in the rise of the KKK and Jim Crow laws that were implemented shortly after the Northern occupation was lifted.

 If you are a student of the Reconstruction era, you’ll notice that today’s colleges and universities are filled with Marxist who has a bitter resentment toward the so-called Dunning School.  Almost every book I’ve read on this subject contains what can only be considered a smear campaign against these early historians.  Eric Foner in particular impugns the character of these men by assigning racist motives.  Ironically, these men were northerners and one reporter, James Pike, served in the Lincoln administration.  I’ve never experienced this kind of vitriol in other disciplines of history.

However, one must note today’s Reconstruction historians subscribe to the tactics of W.E.B. Du Bois who invented one of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

Du Boise seems to be a guiding figure for today’s historians, not to mention the fact that he too was a Marxist.  There seems to be a consensus by Progressives that the failures of Reconstruction were the defunding of the Freedmen’s Bureau and a lack of willingness to redistribute land and money which translates into confiscation of property.  Some even consider the withdrawal of troops a contributing factor as well.  Few are willing to accept that invasion, occupation, disenfranchisement, and forced homogenization were the main factors for the failures of Reconstruction.

One thing is for sure; Progressives will not accept the failures of a top-down centralized government, perhaps that’s why today’s Marxist historians are so vitriolic in their condemnation of critics of Reconstruction. 

What do Libertarians Stand For?

I’m trying to figure out the Libertarian Party’s platform.  The common thread that seems to hold these people together is legalization of drugs, economic freedom and a general contempt for Christianity.  I might add that I’m not sure what kind of economic freedom they advocate when their presidential nominee is sympathetic to Bernie Sanders.  I’m getting mixed signals.

The one thing that really bothers me about Libertarians is their disregard for federalism.  They seem to have contempt for our Constitution when it conflicts with their world view.  Libertarians say they’re for limited government, but they sure as hell are not adverse to judicial activism when it suits their purpose.

Another view that sticks in my craw is their contempt for religious liberty.  Libertarians want to force Christians into violating their conscience.  The most obvious is this whole gay marriage nonsense.  Somehow, Libertarians believe the First Amendment right of freedom of religion doesn’t apply to Christian business owners.

Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s nominee, doesn’t seem to comprehend the purpose of the 14^th Amendment or the Civil Rights Act of 1964 & 65.  These laws were enacted to protect blacks from institutionalized discrimination.   States implemented black codes, segregation and stringent preconditions for voter registration which rendered second class status upon these citizens.  These measures were necessary to ensure equal protection under the law.  No where do these laws force people to violate their First Amendment rights.

If Libertarians were true advocates of economic freedom, they wouldn’t force business owners to violate their religious beliefs.  Instead, they should allow these entrepreneurs to succeed or fail based on their business model even if it’s offensive to the most “tolerant” amongst us.

Supreme Court Spits on American Citizenship; Bastardizes 14th Amendment

Once again, citizenship in the United States is under assault by the federal government.  We have a president who has flooded this country with illegal aliens; congressmen who cater to and depend upon these same illegal aliens for their seats in Washington D.C. and a federal judiciary who pisses on the very notion of citizenship by bastardizing the 14^th Amendment.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that illegal aliens can be counted in the U.S. Census and therefore can influence apportionment of congressional seats, henceforth diminishing representation in states that have more American citizens than illegal aliens.  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the following:

“As the Framers of the Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment comprehended, representatives serve all residents, not just those eligible or registered to vote,” she wrote. “Nonvoters have an important stake in many policy debates — children, their parents, even their grandparents, for example, have a stake in a strong public-education system — and in receiving constituent services, such as help navigating public-benefits bureaucracies.”

Did the framers of the U.S. Constitution and the Radical Republicans who authored the 14^th Amendment mean to legitimize a third-world invasion?    

Justice Ginsburg spilled the beans when she wrote that illegal aliens have as much right to taxpayer largess as an American citizen.  She also played her hand in promoting the federal bureaucratic leviathan over our federalist system.

The enemy of our republic has proclaimed itself.  There is only one remedy for this kind of treason.  It is time to invoke Article V of the U.S. Constitution and call for a convention of the states.

Source:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/4/supreme-court-illegals-count-apportionment/

N.C. Professor Laments Loss of Faculty Lounge Utopianism

I must admit, I do enjoy liberal hysteria especially from academia.  Nothing is more satisfying than reading an op-ed from some pampered and pasty professor lecture the working class about “democracy” and our obligations to faculty lounge utopianism.

Gene Nichol, a distinguished professor at UNC Chapel Hill, wailed about Tar Heel rejection of a progressive island in a New South.  North Carolina was supposed to transform into another New England, until the hayseeds took over and kicked out “enlightened” liberals who believe in an Obama-esque executive and a meek, irrelevant General Assembly.  Progressives love a thug when it comes to shoving their agenda down our throats; that’s what passes for a democracy in liberal circles.

You ask, what are the latest lamentations from the cloistered world of academia?  The answer is the same.  Mr. Nichols bemoans the lack of commitment to public education.  You would think his primary concern should be about educating children.  Wrong!  Here is an excerpt from his op-ed:

Shall we abandon North Carolina’s historic, enabling and almost visceral commitment to public education? The commitment that, more than any other, has worked to separate us from much of the South. Do we mean to allow this jettison? Can’t we at least be candid that the dismantling of public education is a principal, unrelenting goal of our General Assembly? Or are all the vouchers, charters, budget cuts, wrenching salary limitations, tenure and teaching assistant eliminations, rhetorical attacks and constantly pronounced school failures actually meant to accomplish something else? When we settle in to the lowest funding regime among the 50 states, will we still boast a proud dedication to learning?

According to the esteemed professor, failure should be rewarded while innovation and competition eschewed. As for this nonsense about North Carolina being the lowest funded in the 50 states is rhetorical hogwash.  I refuted this argument back in 2014.  Two of those posts are sourced below.

Had you read my referenced post on the state of education, we can pretty much determine Professor Nichol is economically illiterate.  We can probably deduce the same when it comes to history.  He, like many libtards, has completely bastardized the 14^th Amendment.  Here is another excerpt:

    

Do we strive to become a society deeply committed to the full dignity and membership of all? Put another way, do we relish and celebrate the 14th Amendment command of equality or do we begrudge it and rue its seeming shackles? Much political energy and legislative output, over the last five years, have taken aim at the prospects of racial minorities, lesbians and gay men, immigrants, women, the poor, the refugee.

We constantly have to disabuse ourselves of the above nonsense perpetuated by progressives.  We must remember the 14^th Amendment was designed to ensure ex-slaves and their progeny were afforded due process and equal protection of the law, it does not guarantee equality.  There is a big difference.  For instance, under this same amendment, Southerners who participated in the rebellion were disenfranchised.  They weren’t allowed to vote or hold public office without approval from their northern masters.  Is that equality?  I would say that is an emphatic, NO!

If you thought this equality nonsense is outrageous, read the following:

Are we a confident democracy, welcoming engagement, casting our fate on the side of full and generous participation, proud and optimistic in our founding premise of self-governance? Or are we to be a crabbed, fearful, querulous and excluding lot – ever-worried that our group may not always enjoy the ascendancy of its past? Lincoln died in the belief that “allowing all the governed an equal voice in the government, and that only, is self-government.” Finely crafted gerrymanders, biased ID requirements, poll closures, registration restrictions and structural municipal manipulations wage war on Lincoln’s premise. Curtailing democratic participation expresses an anomalous faithlessness in the actual American promise.

First of all, this is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.  Second, this crap about Lincoln is a bastardization of history. Lincoln invaded the South.  He sanctioned murder, pillaging and razing of homes and complete towns.  His legacy should be a denial of self-government, a suspension of rights and wanton destruction that impoverished the South for decades.  Lincoln was this country’s first tyrant.

And of course, what would a leftist tirade be without the usual environmental pablum.  You will have to read that for yourself.  But I’m sure you already know what’s in it.

 Source:

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article57341643.html#storylink=cpy

http://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2014/08/north-carolina-teachers-have-it-better.html

http://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2015/08/north-carolina-teachers-finding-greener.html

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article57341643.html#storylink=cpy

The 14th Amendment: A Vehicle for Illegal Aliens and Traitorous Presidents

Is there no end to the bastardization of the 14^th Amendment?  This post-civil war measure was designed to protect ex-slaves and their progeny while at the same time disenfranchised southerners who participated in the rebellion.  That was it.  Now it’s a vehicle for activist judges who seek to impose their social justice policies upon the country while at the same time conferring more power to the central government.  This is not how are federalist system is supposed to work.

The 14^th Amendment has wrought upon this country another unintentional consequence.  Illegal aliens and residential non-citizens are being counted in the census.  This distorts our congressional districts and ultimately the Electoral College.  The Politico reported the following:

The distribution of these 435 seats is not static: they are reapportioned every ten years to reflect the population changes found in the census. That reallocation math is based on the relative “whole number of persons in each state,” as the formulation in the 14^th Amendment has it. When this language was inserted into the U.S. Constitution, the concept of an “illegal immigrant,” as the term is defined today, had no meaning. Thus the census counts illegal immigrants and other noncitizens equally with citizens. Since the census is used to determine the number of House seats apportioned to each state, those states with large populations of illegal immigrants and other noncitizens gain extra seats in the House at the expense of states with fewer such “whole number of persons.”

This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. The GOP’s path to victory, by contrast, depends on states that would lose a mere three electoral votes in total. Republican stronghold Texas would lose two House seats and therefore two electoral votes. Florida, which Republicans must win to reclaim the presidency, loses one seat and thus one electoral vote.

Americans have to ask themselves, how can a man like Luis Gutierrez openly advocate for open borders and the interest of illegal aliens over his fellow countrymen and still get elected? Better yet, how can the electorate vote for a president who obviously doesn’t have the country’s best interest at heart?  Can anyone say, Barack Hussein Obama?

If Americans truly want a president and their representatives to look after their best interest and ultimately the country’s best interest, we must repeal the 14^th Amendment.

Source:

 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/illegal-immigrants-could-elect-hillary-clinton-213216#ixzz3nVkMmA54

Liberal Malice and Ignorance Erodes Liberty

Most Americans have no fundamental understanding of our Constitution and the workings of our federalist system.  When the U.S. Supreme Court manufactured a right – gay marriage – by bastardizing the 14^th Amendment very few questioned the legitimacy of their dictum.  Actually, just the opposite happened.  Liberals were elated that five black robed thugs could whimsically impose their will upon the American people with little regard for the law, or the democratic process.

When an elected official from the state of Kentucky was jailed for practicing her Christian faith by denying marriage licenses to gay couples, the media celebrated.  They rejoiced that a Christian was being punished for exercising her First Amendment right of freedom of religion.  Mind you, this is an actual right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, not some crypto-rightist nonsense promoted by liberals, their media surrogates, and enforced by a judicial oligarchy.

The above cartoon was published in the Charlotte Observer.  Kevin Siers is their illustrator.  He was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his work denigrating the U.S. Constitution, federalism, conservatives and the Christian faith.  

The above cartoon is typical of the liberal mindset in today’s printed press.  As you can see, Mr. Siers has no understanding of the important role Christians played in the founding of this great nation.  As a matter of fact, he equates the “Jesus freaks” with the murderous ideology of Islam.  Either this man is stupid, or he’s intentionally insulting over 80% of the U.S. population who identify themselves as Christians.

What we have is a serious erosion of liberty brought upon by ignorance and  malice.  A professor from Princeton summed it up:

The professor said that most of his students would likely answer that the founders passed the Bill of Rights, leaving the Supreme Court with the power to enforce those rights.

 George contended that answer was wrong, saying, “That misunderstanding has led to a serious erosion of our freedom.

 Instead, the professor argued that the Bill of Rights were “hotly debated” because many feared it “would actually undermine the main protections against tyranny.” According to George, the Constitution’s call for a “limited nature of the national government” was itself the chief protection against tyranny.

“The Constitution did not envision a national government of general jurisdiction … but rather a government of enumerated and delegated powers. A government that had authority over only specific areas of American life,” he said, adding that “all other powers” were reserved to the states or “American people themselves.”

 George said that the Ninth and Tenth Amendments have failed to curtail the growth of the federal government and that the Supreme Court has failed to keep the other two legislative and executive branches in check, resulting in a loss of freedom for the American people.

And no one checks the Supreme Court when they legislate and create rights from the bench.

Source:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/09/08/princeton-prof-common-misunderstanding-of-constitution-has-led-to-serious-erosion-of-freedom/

Gov. Chris Christie Supports Black Robed Thuggery

Some of these republican candidates are making it easy to be winnowed out of consideration for the presidency.  Birthright citizenship eliminated over half of them and now we have a Kentucky county clerk jailed for exercising her First Amendment rights and defying a lawless federal judiciary.

Gov. Chris Christie has eliminated himself on both counts.  Here is his excuse for allowing birthright citizenship:

Christie: It’s in the Constitution and I don’t think we should be looking to change it. Now, what I said was, if we wanted to have comprehensive immigrant reform, I’d be willing to listen to anything. But the truth of the matter is that it’s not something that, that’s not something that we should be focused on, that is an applause line. The fact is that it is in the Constitution, let’s talk about the things we can fix, and fix simply without having to amend the Constitution where we would need two-thirds of the Congress and 38 states to agree.

Birthright citizenship for foreign nationals and their anchor babies is not in the Constitution.  I’m tired of politicians and media pundits perpetuating this lie.  The citizenship clause was designed to protect ex-slaves and their progeny.  That’s it!

Here is Gov. Christie’s response to the jailing of a Kentucky county clerk:

Earlier Tuesday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Davis should be given another government job, because those licenses “have to be issued” under the law.

 “People have a right to practice their religion,” Christie said on “Fox and Friends” Tuesday morning. “Now, I’ve said what I would do with this woman is to move her to another job where this is not an objection for her. Because you have to follow the law — and the law has to be these licenses have to be issued.”

“I think we should give her an option to do another job where her religious concerns are not going to be put into the cross hairs on this. So we have to have respect for people, but the government also has to function,” Christie said, adding that fellow 2016 Republican candidates shouldn’t “play politics” with the case.

Do we have to remind Gov. Christie that Kim Davis is an elected official?  Maybe a federal judge can find him a new job too.  How about janitor?  I’m sure a black robed thug can divine that in the 14^th Amendment as well.

Source:

 http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/23/christie-abolishing-birthright-citizenship-is-an-applause-line-video/#ixzz3lCK9c7Ys

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/kim-davis-the-kentucky-clerk-who-was-jailed-last-128638521231.html

State Judge Fed Up With Supreme Court's 'Iron Fist and Limp Wrist'

A Tennessee state judge is taking the next logical step when it comes to marriages and divorces. 

Judge Jeffrey Atherton dismissed a case by Pamela E. Bumgardner against Thomas A. Bumgardner because, he said, the Supreme Court's ruling that gay marriage must be allowed everywhere  "preempted state courts from addressing marriage/divorce litigation altogether."

"With the U.S. Supreme Court having defined what must be recognized as a marriage, it would appear that Tennessee's judiciary must now await the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court as to what is not a marriage, or better stated, when a marriage is no longer a marriage," Altherton said, according to Chattanoogan.com

Here’s the money quote: 

Altherton also said in his opinion that the Supreme Court's way of doing things these days, "with its iron fist and limp wrist," is making things hard on state-level courts.

Hell, I’m waiting for a ruling from the Supreme Court dictating how many sheets of toilet paper a person can use at one sitting.  Why not?  I’m sure they can divine this absurdity in the 14^th Amendment as well.

Source:

http://news.yahoo.com/tennesee-judge-trying-flex-supreme-003331640.html

Carly Fiorina Enables Federal Government Lawlessness

I’m having serious reservations about Carly Fiorina’s candidacy for the republican nomination.  At first, I thought, she was an ideal candidate for taking on the central government.  She’s intelligent, articulate, prepared, and more importantly, she’s not a D.C. insider.  But she has strayed from the issues that are important to Americans.

Her stance on birthright citizenship is particularly annoying.

 Carly Fiorina said that changing the Constitution to remove birthright citizenship would not be an efficient way to address immigration reform. There are more important matters to discuss, she added.

 “It would take passing a constitutional amendment to get that changed. It’s part of our 14th Amendment. So honestly, I think we should put all of our energies, all of our political will into finally getting the border secured and fixing the legal immigration,” she said.

 Fiorina also said the U.S. should defund sanctuary cities and deport undocumented immigrants who commit crimes.

I have news for Carly Fiorina.  Bastardization of the 14^th Amendment is an important matter.  Anchor babies and forcing States to educate illegal alien children legitimizes this third world invasion from Latin America.  It undermines our sovereignty and the rule of law. 

A president with fortitude and force of personality can persuade Americans on the forthrightness of his or her actions by pointing out the abuses of the federal judiciary and particularly the Supreme Court.  If need be, a president must organize an Article V States convention to rid us of this meddlesome vehicle for activist judges.

Ms. Fiorina likes to talk about the rule of law, but what about judicial activism.  Will she abide by unlawful rulings by rogue judges who believe their legislators and not jurist?  Here is her response to the arrest of a Kentucky clerk who has the audacity to be a Christian.

In a radio interview on Tuesday, Ms. Fiorina, who has been forceful about the rule of law, said, “Is she prepared to continue to work for the government, be paid for by the government, in which case she needs to execute the government’s will, or does she feel so strongly about this that she wants to sever her employment with the government and go seek employment elsewhere where her religious liberties would be paramount over her duties as a government employee?”

Does Ms. Fiorina understand the basic principles of federalism?  Kathy Davis is not a federal government employee.  She was elected by her constituents in a county in Kentucky.  Worse, Ms. Fiorina doesn’t believe Christians should practice their faith in public life.  This is a dangerous sentiment and concedes to the lawlessness of the Supreme Court and their band of black robed thugs throughout the federal judiciary.

Ms. Fiorina likes to talk about the rule of law.  Maybe she would be more convincing if she addressed the lawlessness of the federal government.

 Source:

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/birthright-citizenship-where-the-2016-127093585661.html

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/09/03/candidates-support-kim-davis-with-varying-intensity/