Democrats Gerrymander Districts by Hook, Crook or Judiciary

If there is one thing I admire about Democrats, it’s they don’t accept defeat and they’re always on the offensive. It doesn’t matter if they were soundly defeated, they’ll deny it to the very end. Can anyone say Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams? Wow, this woman is delusional.

Not only are Democrats sore losers, they’re outright Machiavellian. Look at what Obama and the Clintons did to President Trump. I’m surprised he didn’t wake-up with a horse head at the foot of this bed. Unlike the mob, Democrats will go after after your friends and family too. General Michael Flynn can attest to that.

It doesn’t stop there. Democrats will not only ruin lives and reputations to gain power; they’ll use the courts to gerrymander districts. We witnessed this firsthand in North Carolina. Now, it’s Ohio’s turn.

“The court issued a meticulously detailed opinion, concluding that Ohio’s map was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander, and ordered the state to enact a new remedial plan by June 14,” said Freda Levenson of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Ohio. “This opinion, declaring Ohio an egregiously gerrymandered state, completely validates every one of our claims and theories in every respect.”

Republicans hold 12 of Ohio’s 16 congressional districts. The plaintiffs say GOP legislative aides drew the current map after the 2010 census with careful guidance from national Republicans and former House Speaker John Boehner, whose 8th district encompassed suburban Cincinnati and the state’s rural stretches on the Indiana border. Their goal, the plaintiffs charge, was to entrench a Republican majority in the state congressional delegation for a decade.

Well, isn’t that what Democrats are doing? Aren’t they using liberal judges to gerrymander districts to their advantage? I guess it’s okay for a black-robed thug to sanction maps, instead of a duly elected General Assembly as mandated by the U.S. Constitution.

Elections are supposed to have consequences, except if you’re a Democrat. They’ll win one way or another, whether it be hook, crook or judiciary.

Source:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/05/03/ohio-republicans-gerrymandering/

Welcome to Hotel Blue State

Welcome to Hotel Blue State: You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave. That pretty much sums up the mentality of liberals no matter where you live. These people are a bunch of busybodies who aren’t content unless they’re forcing their values onto everybody else. And if you believe you can escape their self-righteous dictates, you’ve got another think coming.


For instance, Illinois is developing a scheme to destroy the value of their citizens property by raising taxes so high, they can’t afford to leave. Rush Limbaugh summed it up best:


Furthermore, you would not be able to escape this by selling your house and leaving. You know why? You’re not gonna be able to sell your house. Nobody’s gonna buy your house in Chicago with this kind of taxation on it.


And the people that come up with these rules — this is the reasoning from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. “New taxes wouldn’t affect people thinking of moving to Illinois. While they would have to pay higher property taxes, that would be offset by not having to pay as much for their new homes. In addition, current homeowners would not be able to avoid the new tax by selling their homes and moving because home prices should reflect the new tax burden quickly.”


In other words, they fully expect the value of you in Chicago and Illinois who own your homes, the value of those homes to plummet with the application of these new property taxes. So people arriving in the state are gonna be able to afford your house because you’re gonna have to practically give it away, which means you’re gonna lose every bit of equity and wealth you have in your house if you try to sell it and leave.


And if you are able to escape a blue state hellhole, Progressives will use the courts to force their values onto the rest of the country. Illegal immigration, auto emissions, obamacare, environmental standards, it doesn’t matter, they’re going to make damn sure no one escapes their utopian worldview. The Washington Examiner published an article that outlined California’s nefarious schemes. Here is an excerpt:


Federalism has traditionally been a shield, protecting states from an overreaching federal government. But California’s blue-state bully federalism is more like a sword, trying to prod others into following its world view. States are required to give “full faith and credit” to the public acts, records, and court declarations of other states, according to Article IV of the Constitution. If not violating the letter of that law, California certainly disrespects and dishonors its spirit.



People will argue the auto emissions controversy both ways, but the larger story deserves attention as well. When a state sues the federal government 39 times in 19 months, something bigger is going on. In this case, California is trying to impose its own blue-state policies on immigration, civil rights, environmental standards, healthcare and more on the rest of the country wherever it can. That effort should be seen for what it is— a blue-state political power play, not a high-minded defense of federalism and states’ rights.



Progressives respect nothing if it doesn’t advance their agenda. Unfortunately, these totalitarians have fellow travelers in the judiciary who’ll do their bidding.


Source:

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/05/14/illinois-liberals-destroy-home-values-fund-union-pensions/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/california-is-using-lawsuits-to-impose-blue-state-values-on-the-rest-of-the-country

N.C. Democrats Sleaze-Up Judicial Elections

Take a look at this face. This face belongs to a scumbag Democrat who is making a mockery of our elections by registering as a Republican in a judicial race. Chris Anglin is calling himself a constitutional Republican in order to deceive voters. He was a registered Democrat right up until June 7 of last month.


This ploy is designed to siphon votes from Barbara Jackson, a veteran lawyer with eight years experience on the State Supreme Court. Her Democratic competitor is Anita Earls whose only job seems to be suing the state of North Carolina in order to advance a liberal agenda.


So who put this jerkoff up to this? Here is an excerpt from the Charlotte Observer:

Anglin, 32, is running as a "constitutional Republican" who assails what he calls "the constant assault on the independent judiciary at the state and federal level."

Though he shared a campaign photo of Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper on his Facebook page in 2015, Anglin said he's not a Democratic "plant." He's also Facebook friends with Democratic Sen. Jay Chaudhuri and Ken Eudy, a Cooper adviser.

"I filed as a Republican to ... stand up for the independence of the judiciary," he said. "...This is not a trick by the Democrats. ... I didn't think I could sit on the sidelines any more and not take action."

Not a trick, huh?  Yeah, right.

What Democrats mean by an independent judiciary is an unprincipled judge, completely unmoored from the rule of law, who’ll advance their agenda. That’s what an independent judiciary means to them.


What has Democrats pissed off is their nominees have to declare party affiliation and they can’t stand being revealed. Now they’re resorting to tricks like this. But that’s not the end of it, Democrats are also paying filing fees for fake opponents. Here is a report from WRAL:


A Wake County judicial candidate paid for an acquaintance to run against him in an upcoming District Court race, changing the ballot at the last minute so it has two Democrats and two Republicans.

The local GOP chairman called it "disgusting political chicanery" and an obvious effort to split the Republican vote.

The "sleaziest, most underhanded, and outrageous thing I can imagine a candidate for judge doing," Wake County Republican Party Chairman Charles Hellwig said in a statement. He accused Walter Rand, a local attorney making his third bid to get on the bench, of a "simply inconceivable" and "simply disgusting" effort to bring in "a fake opponent."

Republicans aren’t innocent in these matters, but at least they aren’t sinking as low as these Democrats.


Source:

https://www.wral.com/judicial-candidate-pays-opponent-s-filing-fee/17672267/?version=amp&__twitter_impression=true

https://www.wral.com/cooper-veto-overturned-2018-judicial-primaries-cancelled/17023207/

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article214261469.html

N.C. Trial Lawyers Lament Party Affiliations on Judicial Ballots

I remember back in the day when I was foolish enough to believe public officials, despite their political affiliation, would uphold and defend the rule of law and their Constitutions, both state and federal . Today, I laugh at such silly notions. What’s worse is I get angry when others are emphatic that these transgressions are infrequent and isolated particularly when it comes to the judiciary. We all know that’s not true especially when it comes to liberal judges.


The Charlotte Observer published an op-ed by James F. Watt and John R West, both are trial lawyers, who lament party affiliations on the ballot and reduced terms. Here is an excerpt:


Laws affecting the election of judges gain few headlines and, when they do, they provoke limited discussion in the public arena. When the General Assembly eliminated public funding for statewide judicial races, few outside the legal profession expressed concern. The same reaction followed when the General Assembly returned partisan labels to all candidates for the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals; likewise, when the law was passed to place those running from the Governor’s party first on the ballot in Court of Appeals races (each of those candidates won.) This year, the General Assembly has added partisan labels to those running for Superior Court and District Court races and eliminated judicial primaries, so that now a winning candidate has only to tally the most votes – not even a majority.


In its last session, the Senate proposed a constitutional amendment to shorten the terms of all judges in North Carolina to two years. Terms are currently eight years (except for district court judges who hold four- year terms). As Chief Justice Mark Martin stated, “Electing judges for two-year terms would force judges to raise money constantly, and would disrupt the administration of justice.”

All of these measures have a common denominator: an attempt to turn those pursuing judicial service – regardless of their intentions – into “regular politicians.”

The concept of judges as politicians runs contrary to the Founders’ fundamental ideal that those who serve in the judiciary would not be partisan politicians. The oath all of our judges take pledges allegiance to the Constitutions, state and federal, and to the rule of law. What judges do each day should have nothing to do with politics.



I have news for these two trial lawyers: judges are politicians and sometimes worse. I personally want to know their party affiliation because that is a leading indicator of their political philosophy and how they’ll rule, as I’ve made it quite plain at the beginning of this post.


Does anyone remember Howard Manning? He was the North Carolina judge who ruled that the General Assembly must violate a state law by funding preschool education for “at risk 4 year olds.” I kid you, not. This judge became not only a politician but a legislator as well. So don’t tell me that judges are objective arbiters of the law when we have jurist like Howard Manning sitting on the bench.

And I just love it when liberals quote Federalist Paper #78 when assuring the restraints of an independent judiciary. That was Hamilton’s response to the pseudonymous author Brutus’ Anti-Federalist paper #11. Here is an excerpt from Brutus and you tell me who was more prescient.

They will give the sense of every article of the constitution, that may from time to time come before them. And in their decisions they will not confine themselves to any fixed or established rules, but will determine, according to what appears to them, the reason and spirit of the constitution. The opinions of the supreme court, whatever they may be, will have the force of law; because there is no power provided in the constitution, that can correct their errors, or controul their adjudications.


How many times have we seen judges, whether at the federal or state level, who do not confine their rulings to any fixed or established rules, but to their political ideology? I can say with certainty, too many damn times.


Source:


http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article188865519.html


https://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2011/07/judge-rules-nc-taxpayers-must-fund.html


https://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2011/12/newt-gingrich-should-propose-repeal-of.html

 

Goodwin Liu Shot Down in Flames!

The Republicans in the U.S. Senate did America a favor today.   They filibustered the nomination of Goodwin Liu as an appellate court judge.  This man is a dangerous ideologue.  He holds the U.S. Constitution and our founding principles in contempt.  I’ll go even further and state that he is a Marxist.

Madame Barbara Boxer states that Liu is a respected constitutional scholar.  What kind of an American respects his view of our venerable compact?  I would say the self-loathing kind.  Boxer and her ilk have no credibility when it comes to judicial nominees.  The Democrats smeared Robert Bork, Miguel Estrada, Janice Brown, Charles Pickering, and a whole host of others who never had an up and down vote.  And those who did get one had their reputations and character smeared.  Just listen to Boxer’s speech.  It’s all about identity politics.  She practically wets herself over the fact that the nominee is an “Asian-American”.  

Goodwin Liu is more radical than the loons who currently serve on the 9^th Circus Court.  Today, the country was saved from the “mainstream views” of the Progressives/Liberals.     

Tyranny by Judiciary

California’s proposition 8 was overturned last week by a federal judge. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment was again cited. This amendment is the most abused; if not the most misinterpreted amendment in jurisprudence history.

The 14th Amendment was established to guarantee ex-slaves and their progeny citizenship and due process. It was not established for illegals to come over our border and drop their anchor babies; nor was it established for the federal government to become the overlords of the states. Now every state that amended their constitution that defined a marriage is between one man and one woman can now be considered “unconstitutional”, because one judge doesn’t know his history.

Senator Lindsay Graham stated in a recent interview that we have to address the 14th Amendment.



Many are saying that we have to go through the amendment process. No we don’t! All we need is the court; congress; or a president to stand up and say the 14th amendment has been misinterpreted: the courts were wrong. And if they don’t have the balls to do what is right, the states must use nullification to right the abuses of the federal government.

Elena Kagan was just sworn in to the Supreme Court. She is the epitome of an activist judge.



We are now living in a country that is under tyranny by judiciary.