Tag Archives: Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia, RIP, and the Fate of the Constitutional Republic (Or, What’s Really at Stake this Election)

Well. I’ve finally got back to ranting and raving (online, that is) with Silly Season 2016 already in full swing.

This month saw the unfortunate passing of the great Antonin Scalia, a judicial giant and true constitutionalist the like of which we may never see again in our lifetime.  May he rest in peace.

While we pray God may rest him in heaven, unfortunately his death leaves those of us Americans left here on earth in a truly perilous situation.  If the Republicans in Congress fail to block any Obama appointees, it may well put the final nail in the coffin of our constitutional republic.

Melodramatic?  Hyperbolic?  I don’t think so when you consider the facts.  There are now only two constitutionalists on the U.S. Supreme Court, Thomas and Alito (the Republican nominees Kennedy and Roberts have proven shameful traitors to our constitution).   And, of course, it’s a given that any and all Obama nominees will be left-wing activists who don’t give a rat’s ass about the Constitution or the intent of the framers.  With an Obama-appointed justice, the court will become nothing more than a rubber stamp for whatever pieces of unconstitutional Marxist despotism he or any future leftist president might cook up.  And no doubt such a court would take judicial activism to new heights (or, rather, depths) of “creative” judicial tyranny.

And this is in addition to Obama packing the federal courts with leftist activists.  (About 40% of current federal judges are Obama appointees.)

The nomination of Supreme Court justices and federal judges is probably the biggest reason this presidential election matters.  And it’s an issue much of the media would have us ignore, preferring to focus on trivialities and nonsense.

Obviously, it goes without saying that if either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Comrade Sanders wins the presidency, we’re all screwed royally.

But what about the Republican side?  Much as I dig his combative un-pc New York style, and even his goofy hair (toupee?), front-runner Donald Trump is no conservative.  Prior to deciding to run as a GOP candidate for Prez, he’s been liberal on neary every issue, and today is often vague on his actual positions.  When he does mention specifics, he too often takes a corporatist statist stance, as with his support of “eminent domain.”  His campaign reminds me of Obama ’08 in that they’re both mostly cult of personality coupled with incredibly vacuous but catchy slogans (“Hope and Change!” “Make America Great Again!”)   While breathing fire all over Ted Cruz and other conservatives, he’s quick to tout how eager he is to “get along” and “make deals” with the liberal Dems in Congress.  Sounds a bit too much like the Establishment Republicans he’s supposed to be against.

Trump has criticized Scalia, and once said his ultra-liberal judge sister would make an excellent Supreme Court justice.  Doesn’t sound like a guy it’s safe to gamble on this year.

No better is GOP Establishment puppet and two-faced weasel Marco Rubio.  This is the man who lied to voters that he would oppose amnesty for illegals, before authoring much of the notorious “Gang of 8” bill, and now lies about his past position, while having the audacity to call Ted Cruz a liar for pointing this out.  His record as a senator is otherwise thin and spotty.  Despite not being present at the voted to defund abortion giant Planned Parenthood, he’s apparently being hailed in certain Catholic circles as a political messiah of sorts.  I have even been accused by some pious souls of “putting my politics ahead of my faith” for supporting Cruz over Rubio.  (Sadly, for many Catholics, belief in an open-borders welfare state has become a chief article of faith, even the chief article of faith.  In NewChurch, things such as the infallibility of Scriptures or “traditional” sexual morality may be open to dispute, but question amnesty or our government’s spending on “social” programs, and it’s anathema sit!)

This leaves Ted Cruz –love him or hate him–as the only actual conservative in the race.  He’s also one of the few U.S. senators who actually kept his promises to voters after going to Washington, and who’s record has been consistently conservative.  No, this isn’t a campaign ad, and I’m not going to promote Cruz as some messiah.  (We should know better than to look for saviors in politicians or government, anyway.)  He’s just the guy running who’s least likely to screw over the country.   Any conservatives voting for Trump or Rubio will have only themselves to blame if we get the shaft.  Frankly, I think there’s way too much on the line this year to gamble here.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

(Another) Day that Will Live in Infamy

(Blogger’s note:  Originally I was going to write a rant this weekend concerning the politicization of the recent vile murder in Charleston, and the ensuing brouhaha over the Confederate flag.  But today’s news is of far more serious consequence to the country, so I’ll put that one off for now, and write on today’s travesty.)

Well, the U.S. Supreme Court did it again, and in a major way.  Once more, the Supreme Court made a ruling on the case Obergefell  v. Hodges, that not only spit in the face of Christians, natural law, and millennia of human tradition, but also was a blatant rape of the U.S. Constitution, whose job the Supreme Court justices is to uphold.  This decision to make homosexual “marriage” the law of the land was hot on the heels of another SCOTUS decision upholding the unlawful monstrosity of Obamacare (the majority opinion being written by that two-faced piece of filth John Roberts, who at least took the right side on the “gay marriage” case).

(But I must give credit to Alito and Thomas for fighting the good fight in their brilliant dissent.)

If the Supreme Court was actually doing its job of interpreting the Constitution, this case would be thrown out.  In the Constitution, the powers belonging to the federal government are limited and enumerated, and the power to define marriage is nowhere granted to federal courts.  Barring an amendment of the Constitution, such matters are left to the states and the people.

And before you bleeding hearts start lecturing me on “precedent,” I’m well aware that the SCOTUS now has a long history of rulings that rewrite the law to force a left-wing social or political agenda down the nation’s throat, rather than legitimately interpret what the Constitution actually says.

And that’s exactly the problem.  (I hold the old-fashioned, troglodytic view that the job of the Court is to uphold and interpret what the law actually says, rather than force a political agenda. And you can go shove your emanations up your penumbra.)

And any Christian who believes the line that today’s ruling will have no effect on religious liberty is deluding himself.  We’ll see more Christian bakers, florists, photographers, etc. being forced against their will to cater to homosexual “weddings” or lose their business.  And of course, kids in all public schools will be forced to learn about same-sex “marriage” as a legitimate option.  Churches that refuse to perform or lend facilities to “gay marriage” will likely face lawsuits and lose their tax-exempt status.  The goal of the militant homosexual lobby was never just tolerance, but elimination of any resistance.

This, of course, was immediately followed by jubilant celebration everywhere in the “mainstream media” (which I’ve made a point to largely avoid, though I do see the headlines), and by corporations, such as Google, Android, and others touting their support on Google’s Chrome homepage.

Our media and corporate elite apparently see sexual perversion, sodomy, and genital mutilation as unqualified goods to be universally celebrated; as if it were utterly unthinkable that any of us could possibly have any problem with it (except, of course, for us few right-wing bigoted troglodytes).  “Gay marriage” is to be universally celebrated like it’s the U.S. team winning an Olympic gold medal.  And Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner is an American hero!  (Or is that heroine?  But don’t call our troops “heroes,” because that can get politically complicated.  Don’t want to offend terrorists, do we?)

Hell, even flippin’ WordPress, which I’m publishing on, now has that goddamn rainbow flag at the top of their edit page.

While making a cash withdrawal at a Chase ATM, I was first greeted by a cheerful on-screen invitation from the good folks at Chase to join them in celebrating National GLBTQ-whatever-the-hell-the-current-alphabet-soup-is Month.  As if this was as nice and uncontroversial as, say, wishing customers a happy Father’s Day.  (Of course, for today’s left, I suppose the entire idea of fatherhood is indeed greatly problematic.  Not like, say, a man getting himself castrated and mutilated and calling himself a woman, which is happy and healthy, and worthy of universal celebration.)

But if a bank, or similar institution serving the public, wishes customers a “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Easter” during the appropriate seasons, that’s out-of-bounds, and calling for lawsuits, or at least major controversy.

Welcome to the twisted, through-the-looking-glass world of 21st century “progressive” America.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,