Tag Archives: Democrats

Just Vote (Veto Beto)!

I know I haven’t ranted here in a while (too much to rant about, too little time), but I thought I’d use this outlet to gently remind all conservatives reading this (especially here in the Lone Star State, and in other states with hotly contested Senate or gubernatorial seats, but everywhere else too) to, if you haven’t already, GET OFF YOUR ASSES AND VOTE!!!

Please, no excuses, but if you must give excuses, at least, for the love of God, don’t give me any holier-than-thou moral high-ground posing.   You, know, the “refusing to vote for the lesser of evil” bullcrap about how you’re such a superior human being because you’ll sit there and do nothing and let our great nation literally go to hell, rather than vote for some flawed, imperfect Republican politician.  There’s just too much at stake this time.  The alternative to that flawed, imperfect Republican politician will be a crazed, evil Democrat politician.  The Left and the Democrat Party have now gone full-out bat-shit crazy, and are hellbent on utterly destroying both the Trump presidency and the anything that remains of constitutional principle, Christian virtue, and just basic sanity in this nation.

Take the great, until recently “deep-red” Lone Star state of Texas, where, since summer, “Beto” signs have sprung up everywhere like noxious toadstools after a rainstorm.   For anyone who’s been under a rock, the empty-headed spoiled-brat rich kid pretty-boy is the Left’s Great White Texan Hope, and new Democrat Messiah-in-training, heir apparent to Dear Leader Barrack Hussein Obama.  For this purpose, leftist donors from across the U.S. (and possibly beyond, if scandals are true) have poured record-breaking amounts of cash into his campaign, and national media have done their part to promote his rock star status.  The reason for this is not the man himself (a remarkably un-remarkable and vacuous candidate), but the hope that if they can run someone successfully in Texas and turn the Lone Star State blue, they can have an easy shot at the presidency if they run him in a future election.

“Beto” is from top to bottom a fraud and phony, so much so that he cannot even run on his own real name, Robert Francis O’Rourke, instead going by the Hispanic “Beto” (diminutive for Roberto), in hopes of fooling Hispanic voters into thinking he is one of them, and overcome any disadvantage against running against a guy who actually is Hispanic (Cruz).  He freely uses race-baiting tactics and whines like a snowflake against the evils of “white privilege,” while he himself is a walking definition of “white privilege,” a white dude from a rich family, the sort of guy liberals are supposed to hate (at least in the abstract).   He shamelessly copies Obama’s rhetoric and weird machine-gun burst speech patterns, while lacking Dear Leader’s rhetorical skills.  And, while vowing to vote to impeach Trump if elected, he regurgitates Trump’s “Lying Ted” attacks on Cruz from the 2016 GOP race.  His sole accomplishments he (endlessly) touts on his resume are making campaign visits to every county in Texas (as if this stunt proves anything beyond that he really wants votes), as well as having been in a punk band and being able to ride a skateboard.

 

While Cruz is still ahead (barely) in polls, the numbers show far too many Texans are buying into this crap.  It’s hard to how much of this is simply phony internet trolling by Democrat leftists (I’m praying most of it is), but I’ve been seeing far too many Texas “conservatives” claiming they will vote for Beto the Fake Mexican because they are fed up with Cruz for some reason or another.   Most of it being on the grounds that Ted is a gutless sissy and shameless political whore for supporting President Trump after all the nasty attacks Trump made against him and his wife in the 2016 GOP presidential race.

The “Beto” camp has milked the 2016 Cruz-Trump feud for all its worth, attempting through bogus “non-partisan voter groups” to get Trump-fans to vote Beto based entirely on Trump’s nasty 2016 campaign attacks on “Lying Ted.”  On the one hand, according to O’Rourke, Trump is an evil liar and crook who needs to be impeached.  While on the other hand, every ugly word the Trumpster uttered against his rival in 2016 is gospel truth, and reason enough to vote against Cruz.

Much as I admire sticking up for Mrs. Cruz’s honor and all, really?  For that, you’re willing to toss out one of the Senate’s most consistent conservatives for a socialist, open-borders, SJW, race-baiting, cop-hating, fanatically pro-abortion, gun-grabbing weasel, who would slavishly vote in line with Chucky Schumer, and has vowed to vote to impeach the President?  If this is the state of Texas “conservatism,” God help us all.  As the Dems are well aware, as falls Texas, so falls America.  (Perhaps most troubling, I’ve even seen “Beto” bumper stickers in the parking lot of my a very conservative FSSP parish.  Sadly, even some Trads have now bought into the whole “social justice” nonsense to the point that they are willing to support fanatically pro-abortion politicians.)

Not to despair, but we conservatives need to all look at the big picture, and make sure we vote Tuesday.  (if you haven’t early voted already, as I have).  This is about something a lot better than Ted and Beto (or whoever’s running in your state.)  If the Dems control Congress, especially if they win both houses, we’re looking at:

  • Yet more endless bogus witchhunt “investigations” into President Trump, his family, and administration, at the very least, and likely impeachment.
  • Votes to impeach Justice Kavanaugh, and perhaps Justice Thomas.
  • Blocking of any and all SCOTUS nominees anywhere to the right of Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
  • Legislation pushing single-payer socialized medicine, and bankruptcy by the entirely unsustainable “medicare for all.”
  • Gun-grabbing legislation, and a sustained attack on our Second Amendment rights.
  • God-knows-what assorted socialist and “LGB-whatever” legislation, and attacks on religious liberty for Christians.
  • Moves to abolish the Electoral College, and (if they win the house but not the Senate) abolish the Senate.

Unless all that sounds like fun, get out there and vote Red tomorrow.  And, yeah, I know most Republicans suck.  But the Democrats are pure evil.  And stark-raving  insane to boot.

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

The Vegas Massacre, Nihilism, and the Left’s Gun-Grabbing Demagoguery

Donnie: “They were Nazis, Dude?”

The Dude:   “They were nihilists.  They kept saying they believe in nothing.”

Walter:  “Nihilists?!  F*** me!  Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism; at least it’s an ethos.”

~ from The Big Lebowski

 

(Again, apologies on the untimely lateness of this post – I really have no time to blog.)

Of course, following the largest mass-shooting in American history in Las Vegas earlier this month (59 dead, hundreds wounded), the usual crowd of idiots and miscreants on the Left, without missing a beat, exploited the horror to play politics before the bodies were even cold – as is their ghoulish want.  One took it too far even for her own liberal company; a senior executive at CBS was fired following the dissemination of a tweet that she had no sympathy for the victims because she said country music fans are mostly a bunch of gun-toting “Repugs.”  (I doubt her masters at left-wing CBS were truly that appalled at her statement – though they knew bad pr when they saw it.)  And later, two Dem congressmen walked out before a moment of silence for the victims, saying it was “not a time for silence, but for action.”

Anti-gun “liberals” are always sanctimoniously lecturing us Repug deplorable types on how we need to lose the right to bear arms (the right to self-defense) because of the importance of protecting human life.  But apparently, for some anti-Second Amendment pols, the lives of those they supposedly so badly  want to protect  are not even worth a couple minutes of prayerful respect, lest it take precious time away from pushing their all-important gun-grabbing agenda.  Or, apparently, if the victims’ politics might differ from their own.  (There was similar crap following the attempted mass murder of a bunch of Republican congressmen which left Steve Scalise seriously wounded.  Since he had opposed proposed “gun-control” legislation, he was only getting his just deserts.)

Of course, this allegedly deep concern for the protection of human life among progressives immediately evaporates the moment the topic changes from guns to abortion.  The supposed inviolable constitutional “right choose” or “right to privacy” supposedly found buried somewhere deep in the emanations of the penumbra means people have the absolute right to kill unborn babies in the womb at any time for any reason.  And, not only that, but the we must all be forced to help pay for the killing with our tax dollars.  One bleeding heart leftist l I heard say that he struggled for years trying to find a reconciling compromise between the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” positions, but in the end he had to “respect the primacy of individual human choice” by supporting the absolute right to abortion on demand.  Unsurprisingly, this guy was also a passionate advocate of government gun-grabbing, and all sorts of other big-government restrictions on “individual human choice,” Second Amendment and all be damned.  But human life itself was one thing that should not trump human choice.  Or, as one meme succinctly put it, “I don’t listen to anti-gun arguments from folks who think it’s okay to kill babies.”

And, of course, we can expect another round of pious nonsense from the USCCB and other “progressive Catholic” groups about how we’re “not truly pro-life” unless we support the federal government grabbing everyone else’s guns.  Such statements conveniently ignore the Church’s long tradition of teaching on legitimate self-defense, and the Catechism even speaks of a duty to protect the lives of those under our care.  Second amendment rights help ensure the means to such defense and protection – which presumably is not limited only to cops.  I might start taking “gun control” arguments half-way seriously the day “anti-gun” politicians and celebs willingly disarm their own security details.   But apparently the right to self-defense doesn’t apply to Little People.

 

As for the vile mass murderer himself, we may never know his motives.  Was he merely a lone psycho, or part of a bigger plot?  There’s a lot of really weird stuff about the murder that just doesn’t add up, but at this point, it’s all idle speculation.  Whenever there’s a mass killing, the Left rushes to gleefully speculate on possible right-wing connections.  And according to the Left, this killing was really all the fault of the NRA, which is being labeled a “terror organization” (despite no evidence ever tying the NRA to any terrorists plots).  But on the right, after the killing, some were openly speculating about political motives.  Was the killing, as some others have suggested, a leftist attempt to “parody” the right, by collecting a ridiculous amount of weapons, then shooting up a country concert?  I admit, there was a certain part of me – not a particularly good or noble part – that was sort of hoping the killer would turn out to be a leftist or ISIS recruit in order that my politics might be vindicated.  But the reality is that it would be wrong to exploit a mass murder and the deaths it caused for the purpose of scoring cheap political points.

 

While I don’t think an ISIS connection may be totally ruled out, it remains likely that the killing has no political or ideological motive whatever.  And that is perhaps in a way the most horrifying possibility.  All of us seem to want to have some enemy extrinsic to the killer himself to blame – something out there we can blame, fight, and, God willing, defeat.   It may well be that the murderer was not trying to send any ideological message, left, right, or otherwise, but was simply looking to kill a large number of people before he quit this earth so he could go out in a blaze of infamy.  Many mass killing-suicides are non ideological, but simply nihilistic evil.  This kind of evil is something leftist ideology cannot understand – as for it everything is politics and politics is everything, and there are no problems  that bigger and better government can’t fix.  Such evil won’t be fixed by government “gun control” or other measures.  (There are no gun laws that in reality would have prevented this – especially when the killer has no respect for the law, and plans on killing himself anyway, and there are ways of killing crowds of people without guns – by home-made bombs, vehicles, etc.)

Following the rise of global Islamic terrorism, a common talking point of  the “new atheists” and the secularist, anti-Christian Left is that religion is the cause of most killing in the world, and that if people stop believing in God, the world will become a peaceful, rational place.  (This point is often amended to “believing in anything with certainty” after it is pointed out that atheistic Communists regimes have killed far more than religious groups.  Nether mind that such people rarely question their own pc liberal assumptions about the world.)  And never mind that religious mass-killings are largely confined to a particular strain of Islam.  All liberal fantasy to the contrary, there simply exists no substantial world-wide movement of persons killing, destroying and raping in the name of Christ.  Sadly, even the Left’s useful idiot in the Vatican, Pope Francis, has repeated such nonsense – equivocating Jihadist terror with random, completely irreligious crimes by persons who may have been baptized Christian, and saying global capitalism is really to blame.

But, as others have pointed out, if the Vegas killer had been a religious, believing Christian, who took Christ’s teachings seriously, as well as final judgment, heaven and hell, it is unlikely he would have proceeded to murder and maim a crowd of persons made in God’s own image before taking his own life.  While not much is known about the killer’s beliefs, he apparently does not have any religious affiliation, and did not appear to be a religious man.  Most atheists, like most other normal people, will have no inclination to commit mass murder or other atrocities against their fellow man.  But for the minority that are so inclined, if there is no God, no objective morality outside our own feelings and human rules, there is no reason not to – especially if one is intent on annihilating himself and avoiding any earthly consequences, legal or otherwise.

As Nietzsche proclaimed, without God, all things are permitted.  In a world of moral nihilism, particularly if – as is likely – we’re in for tough times, things will likely get very ugly.

Meanwhile, the left will continue to play politics with this and every other horrific event.  First bumpstocks (a largely worthless item for most shooters) will be banned, and then more items, and then actual weapons.

In the same way the Left now plays politics with just about every damn thing in existence.  Disasters from mass killings to natural disasters (such as Hurricane Harvey)  exist to be exploited and used to damn your enemies.  Everything now is all politics all all the time, 24-7: crime stories, weather (you filthy climate-change denier!), sports (next up, my thoughts on the NFL nonsense).

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

Fools and Knaves

Well,  John Boehner and the House “leadership,” after giving only the most pathetic pretense of a fight, caved in and voted to pass a DHF bill that includes full funding for Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty for illegal aliens.  Surprise, surprise.

Dear Leader and the American Totalitarian Party (aka the Democrats) got everything they wanted.  As did the amnesty-loving Chamber of Commerce fat cats who bankroll the Stupid Party.  In the meantime, America and constitutional rule of law once again got screwed royally.   Including we poor dumb conservative schmucks who actually gave the Republicans their majority in Congress, in the faint, and now obviously vain and foolish, hope that they’d actually do something to stand against the tyrannical piece of excrement occupying the oval office.

Is Boehner then a coward, a fool, a knave, or all of the above?  I’ll let you, Gentle Reader, be the judge.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

More Rotten Business as Usual

More rotten business as usual in politics last week.  (Again, been busy,  my apologies for the lateness of this post.)

First, once more we see the noble bipartisan cooperation between the Jackasses and the GOP “leadership” as they both agree to raise the debt ceiling with no spending limitations, and accelerate our nation’s plunge into bankruptcy to the point of no return.

There should be no doubt left that there is no substantial difference whatever between the Democrats and the Washington establishment Republicans – they are simply two heads on the same insatiably ravenous statist beast, and both are equally contemptuous of true conservatism, and of true conservatives.

Every single Republican Congressman and Senator who did nothing to stand up for conservative principles and oppose the runaway growth of the Leviathan State needs to be tossed out.

Also, in federal tyranny rules, a federal judge ruled the Commonwealth of Virginia’s law (passed by popular vote) limiting legal marriage to a man and a woman “unconstitutional” – showing typical disregard for actual Constitution, which nowhere grants the federal government the power to define or redefine legal marriage.  (See the woefully neglected 10th Amendment.)   Once again, liberal activist twist the actual meaning of the law of the land beyond all recognition in order to advance a left-wing social agenda.  No doubt, this issue will head for the Supreme Court, though I’m not exactly optimistic about how that will turn out – especially given the record of the that traitorous weasel John Roberts as Chief Justice, who puts political game-playing above interpreting the Constitution, and thus gave a green light to the Obamanation of Obamacare.

Dr. Jeff Mirus writes of this issue in CatholicCulture.com, “One of the dangers of any constitution is that eventually it will be used to enforce policies which those who wrote the constitution never even dreamed would be desired in the first place.”

But the danger is not in the Constitution, but rather in the government – made up of power-mad men who are not ones to let a mere piece of paper stand in the way of their power or ideological agendas.  It is just as happy to ignore the Constitution altogether, as its judges are to radically “reinterpret” it.

Without virtue or morality to reign in ambition, the restraints of the Constitution are broken as easily, as our second president John Adams so memorably phrased it, “as a whale goes through a net.”

Given the active on-going onslaught of our courts and federal government against our deepest moral principles, you’d think it time more serious Catholics get behind efforts to reign in the Leviathan State, rather than support its expansion.  The hour draws late.

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

Immigration and the Suicide of the Right

Republicans in Congress are debating the passing of an “immigration reform” bill that would grant amnesty to 11 million aliens living in the U.S., as well as make it easier for non-immigrant workers to enter the U.S.

Today’s wishy-washy “moderate” Republican “leadership” (McCain, Boehner, & co.) would have us believe that this is somehow a good thing for America and for their party.  For time now, I’ve heard the line from many Republicans and self-described conservatives that Mexicans and other Hispanics are natural conservatives, who will happily flock to the GOP if only we do more to grant amnesty and open the borders.

This is despite the fact that Hispanics, as well as most other immigrant groups, consistently and overwhelmingly vote Democrat.  Democrats won over Hispanic voters by landslide numbers in every single presidential election since 1980, including two years after Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to millions of Mexican immigrants in 1986.  And this was with the GOP running largely “moderate” candidates who would do nothing to restrict immigration, such as Dole, Bush II, McCain, and Romney.

However, I keep seeing conservatives casually state things such as, “all the Republicans need to do is grant amnesty, and their problems with Hispanic voters will be over.”  (While on the internet, this appeared to be said with a straight face.)  This, despite the fact that Republicans granting amnesty has completely failed to win over Hispanics in the past, and the fact that polls show that the majority of Hispanic voters oppose amnesty for illegal aliens.

The truth of the matter is that the majority of Hispanics and those from other immigrant groups vote Democrat rather than Republican, not because of perceived Republican opposition to immigration and amnesty, but for the simple reason that they tend to be more liberal/socialist on just about every issue.

Polls show, for instance, that they are far more in favor of big government policies, and things like gun control, than most Americans.

But, aren’t Hispanics religious, pro-family, pro-life people who are socially conservative?  Some years back, a pro-life conservative woman cheerfully informed me, with a tone of absolute certainty, that Mexican immigrants would create a pro-life Republican majority in America.

Well, not exactly.  Polls show that Hispanics are actually more in favor of legal abortion than Americans as a whole, as well as somewhat more in favor of “gay marriage.”  (That last one actually surprised me.)

The reasons Washington politicians like unrestricted immigration and amnesty are clear enough.  The big-gov Jackasses like it because it ensures a steady supply of new Democratic voters, ensuring that they become a permanent majority and remain in power forever.  The big-business corporatists who have the GOP “leadership” bought and paid for like it because it ensures a steady flow of cheap labor to be exploited.  (Even though it will ultimately ensure the end of the GOP.)  In neither case does it have a damn thing to do with genuine concern for the poor and downtrodden stranger.

However, plenty of well-meaning ordinary folks, including many conservatives and Catholics, have their heads far up their pious posteriors on this issue.  The US Bishops, those reliably enthusiastic cheerleaders for welfare state socialism, continue to crusade for amnesty and open borders, as well as universal tax-payer-supplied benefits for illegals – all in the name of hospitality for the stranger.  (At least one good Bishop went so far as to declare that those opposing amnesty or “immigration reform” are “not pro-life.”)

One conservative commentator (a family friend) even condemned alleged conservative opposition to immigration as a form of “right-wing idolatry of the state.”  This sparked pious gushing from a reader about how much the influx of those holy Mexicans with their “deep devotion to the Virgin of Guadalupe” would improve our country.

And plenty of libertarians adamantly support open borders on “anti-statist” grounds.

The brutal truth is that unrestricted immigration and easy amnesty policies will in fact do nothing to advance the cause of either social conservatism or of liberty, but will result in the increased destruction of both, by ensuring continued left-wing statist rule into the indefinite future.

In fact, it will ensure that Catholics, conservatives, and libertarians will lose on almost every single issue.

The brutal truth is that unrestricted immigration and easy amnesty policies will in fact do nothing to advance the cause of either social conservatism or of liberty, but will result in the increased destruction of both, by ensuring continued left-wing statist rule into the indefinite future.

In fact, it will ensure that Catholics, conservatives, and libertarians will lose on almost every single issue.

Hospitality to the stranger does not mean we must blithely accept and welcome anyone who sneaks or breaks into our homes, much less that we make them members of our household.

Conservatives want enforcement of existing reasonable restrictions on immigration, and not granting law-breakers the same path to citizenship as those who played by the rules.

And anyone who thinks that a country can maintain its unique culture and identity while being flooded with new-comers who do not share it need only ponder the fate of the American Indian after the coming of the white man.

The irony is that if our current trends continue, America will no longer be prosperous land of opportunity that for hundreds of years drew immigrants from over the world to her shores.  Immigration from south of the border actually slowed considerably in the Obama years, not because of increased border security, but because of lack of jobs in the dismal U.S. economy.

My point here is not to bash Mexicans, Hispanics, or immigrants in general (of which, in fact, there are many wonderful, and even conservative, individuals). Rather, Catholics, conservatives, and libertarians, need to wake up and get their heads out of the sand before they give enthusiastic support to policies that will ensure their own demise, as well as that of America.

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

Apocalypse Averted!

Well, as we all know, last week the Apocalypse was averted, and we were all saved by the heroic efforts of our Dear Leader, with the cooperation of the Republican Senate “leadership,” who basically handed him everything he wanted.  (I use the word “leadership” with full irony to describe Boehner, McCain, & company, as they do little but capitulate to Obama and the Dems, while denouncing any among the Republican minions – such as Senator Ted Cruz- who dare actually oppose Obama and the continuing unlimited expansion of federal government power.)

(Way back in the 1780s, having fought against a tyrannical monarchy, our founding fathers [you know, those irrelevant Dead White Guys] set up Congress as representatives of the People, having the power of the purse, rather than the President.  Today, it seems they’re supposed to be mere courtiers in the court of an imperial president, rubber-stamping his every whim.)

With this noble bipartisan effort, the Jackasses and Elephants together saved us all from our fair country’s greatest crisis since the Civil War by putting aside their petty differences and agreeing to continue spending like teenagers in the mall with daddy’s credit card.  They, and the adoring mainstream press, proceeded to slap each other on the back for their “leadership” and “maturity” (you, know, they’re “the adults in the room.”)   Apparently, endless, unlimited, and ever-increasing borrowing and spending of money which can never be paid back ($17 trill and counting, not to mention many trillions more in entitlements) is the mark of maturity and adulthood, while any calls for fiscal responsibility are routinely attacked and dismissed by our “leadership” and the media as immature and childish, if not a sign of mental illness.  Call for any substantial restraint in federal spending, and you’re a naughty child throwing a tantrum, or, worse yet, an unhinged extremist Tea-Party crazy (and undoubtedly racist to boot).

The establishment Republicans, who had vowed to fight Obamacare during election year, have no more serious intent of curtailing unlimited government power than Barrack Obama had of ending the government’s powers over the citizenry gained in wartime by George W. Bush.  Washington politicians of both parties are stinking drunk with power, and never met an increase in federal power they didn’t like.  (Establishment Republicans just think they know how to do Big Guv better than the Dems.)

I’ll finish with this appropriate quote on the debt limit debate:

 The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

Obviously, some wild-eyed crazy anarchist tea-bagger right-wingnut, obstinately hell-bent on obstructing Obama’s every move, right?

Well, not exactly.

That was Senator Barrack Obama, back in 2006.

Meanwhile, no one wants to apply for Obamacare, and their website’s a dud.  Here’s to mature, bipartisan leadership, which forced this mess on us.

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

Damn the Constitution, Full Speed Ahead!

I’m trying to finally get back into ranting on here after a long absence due to the intrusion of that thing called life, and recent (greatly appreciated) traveling and meeting with family and friends.  My apologies to my dear readers (not to be confused with Dear Leaders) for allowing Gregorian Rants to lie dormant for so long, as I’m sure you waited all those weeks in breathless anticipation for the publication of the next Rant.  (Hey, I’m kidding – take it easy, there.)

Since the SCOTUS ruling, led by “conservative” Chief Justice John Roberts, declaring Obama’s HHS Mandate to be a “tax,” and thus constitutional, Justice Roberts is now (as I predicted) being widely praised by the usual collection of left-leaning chatterboxes in the media for his alleged brilliant non-partisan magnanimity in pursuit of Constitutional justice, and sublime Solomon-like wisdom.  Those currently heaping accolades on Roberts no doubt include many who once condemned him as an unacceptable right-wing partisan “extremist” back when he was nominated by Bush II.   Now, such partisan animosities are tossed aside, as Roberts’ former lefty opponents hail him as pretty much the greatest man since . . . well, since Barrack Obama.  In the words of one Slate scribe, Roberts’ decision avoided an “ugly partisan victory” which would have resulted had he voted to reject Obamacare as unconstitutional.  (Of course, giving Dear Leader what he wants can be neither partisan nor ugly.)

Some on the right (as well as on the left and muddled middle) have praised Justice Roberts’ alleged bi-partisan tactical brilliance in granting Obama and the Dems a tactical victory in ruling the HHS Mandate constitutional by declaring it to be a tax (against the declarations of Team Obama that it is not), while (quite rightly) rejecting the arguments from the left that the mandate was allowable under the Commerce Clause, which was supposedly a strategic victory for conservatives.  Supposedly, this ruling would give greater leverage to Obama’s opponents by declaring the mandate a tax.

But isn’t that exactly the sort of partisan political game that those praising Roberts’ decision claimed he was so brilliantly avoiding?   The goal of a Supreme Court justice should be to correctly interpret the U.S. Constitution, not to find clever compromises between dueling partisan political interests.  Whether Democrats or Republicans are politically helped or hurt by the decision should be utterly irrelevant to the decision-making process.  The hard fact remains that this ruling, however you choose to spin it, grants the federal government unprecedented new power over the lives of citizens.  Calling the mandate a “tax” is quite a stretch, as no prior taxes have involved forcing citizens to purchase a particular product against their will.  It’s the same as if the government were to force every citizen to go buy a Ford vehicle under penalty of law.  Who needs convoluted Commerce Clause arguments when you can simply declare whatever the government forces citizens to do with their money a tax, and therefore constitutional?  Justice Roberts has betrayed not only conservative principle, but the Constitution he swore to uphold.

As we celebrated Independence Day yesterday, we recalled how our forefathers rose up against the British Crown, fought, bled and died, over unjust taxation and oppression that was utterly paltry in comparison to that exercised by our current government, which taxes and meddles in the private lives of its citizens on a scale and scope undreamt of King George and the British government of the 1770s.  Today, our government overlords and toadies in the courts busily seek ways to expand the definition of taxation to justify ever-greater government intrusion on our freedoms.  The Constitution was drafted to limit federal power, but today Supreme Court justices instead find ways to twist it in knots to declare any expansion of government power they like “constitutional.”

Our forefathers were willing to sacrifice everything for the cause of freedom.

Today, we’re willing to settle for free condoms instead.

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

The Tyranny of Militant Hedonism

Forget for a moment the blatant immorality of the HHS contraception mandate.  Forget for a moment the issues of constitutionally-guaranteed religious liberty.  Forget the fact that pregnancy is not a disease, and contraception is not health care.

What in the hell gives the federal government the right to dictate what private entities must buy for others?  By any standards, food and drink are more essential to basic health than contraceptives.  Should the government mandate that colleges provide beer and pizza for students free of additional charge?   What other freebies will suddenly become “rights” owed by private institutions to students or employees?  When the government becomes freed of any constitutional restraints, the sky is indeed the limit, and we’re left with tyranny, pure and simple.

The U.S. Bishops have been courageous in fighting this tyranny, but they, who have long been champions of an ever-expanding socialized-everything Welfare State, are now battling a monster which they have helped create.

It seems the only real discernible principle  the modern-day Left has is that everybody has an absolute entitlement to (in the parlance of our times, man) bang absolutely whomever however and whenever they want, free of all consequence; and it is the duty of the government, and consequently tax-payers, to subsidize and support everyone’s sexual debauchery of choice.  Those that choose to fornicate are owed free contraception, and if a baby is conceived, the government must subsidize those who provide abortions.  And the government must ensure that if people choose to engage in same-sex sodomy, which cannot result in the procreation of any life other than the bacterial variety, their “union” must receive the same benefits given to married men and women faced with the burden of raising a family.

All rights, including religious liberty, economic freedom, and constitutional limits on government power, are subordinated and sacrificed to the all-overriding principle of Consequence-free Sex for All, under what is best described as Militant Hedonism.   The current regime is as coldly ruthless and relentless in enforcing the utopian hedonist goals of the Sexual Revolution as the Russian Soviets were in enforcing those of the Bolshevik Revolution.   Our Holy Father was not engaging in idle hyperbole when he warned of a “dictatorship of relativism.”

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