The Audacity of Thuggery

We can never dismiss Liberal Democrats or Union Organizers as stupid.  Cunning and devious are good descriptive terms as is unethical and, sometimes, “criminal.”  But they are not usually stupid.  We can’t, therefore, look at the ruling by a Dane County, Wisconsin, County Judge as stupid, per se.  I’m sure that Judge MaryAnn Sumi did not believe that her familial relationship with a political operative who was a former lead field manager with the AFL-CIO and a data manager for the Wisconsin SEIU State Council, would come to light as her son’s name is Jacob Sinderbrand.  She had no reason to believe that it would be revealed for, after all, no one had mentioned it after she refused to issue an order sending striking Wisconsin teachers back to work in February during the height of the anti-Walker demonstrations in Madison.  I mean, she got away with it once so why not again and again and again?   

So last Friday she quickly issued a temporary restraining order at the behest of the unions and their Democrat supporters that prevents the Wisconsin Secretary of State, Democrat Doug La Follette (who really didn’t want to publish the law anyway), from publishing the bill while she reviews the case.  I cannot believe that she is that ignorant of the law, although I fully realize that judges are sometimes amazingly ignorant.  Nor can any thinking person given her son’s prominent union activities.  No, this was clearly a case where Judge Sumi decided that she would use her judicial power to trump an action with which she and her son disagree.  It is a case where democracy be damned, the judge knows better.  (See:  http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/03/21/wisconsin-judge-maryann-sumi-her-seiu-afl-cio-political-operative-son/ .)

Liberals, i.e., Democrats, and unions do understand how to use judges like MaryAnn Sumi to accomplish their goals despite the will of the people.  They are very adept at getting their issues before activist judges who believe that their mission in life is to impose their liberal-view of the world on We the People whether we like it or not.  We are, after all, the proletariat and have no right to question the determination of our ruling liberal elite.  This is amply demonstrated in the thuggish attitude displayed at a Western Maryland correctional facility recently when a union boss lost his cool and tried to intimidate prison guards after they started asking questions how their dues were being spent and the benefits of belonging to a union during a pre-shift meeting.  (See:  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/20/union-boss-goes-off-at-meeting-prison-guards-say/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS .) 

What is true is that Liberal Democrats and unions will brook no questioning by We the People.  The prison guards were told that union spending was none of their business ant that they have no choice but to belong.  If you dare to dispute, they are most willing to resort to violent tactics or, at least, the threat of violence.  Who can forget the bussed-in union demonstrators at the suburban Maryland home of a senior banker last fall who were escorted there by Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department.  They frightened the man’s teenage son, who was home alone, so badly that he locked himself in the bathroom and used his cellphone to plead for help.  And then there is this very recent nice little video of SEIU protestors at another bank headquarters:  http://biggovernment.com/eyeblasttv/2011/03/21/watch-seiu-protesters-take-over-bank-headquarters/ which was clearly meant to send a chilling message:  “Either it goes our way or we’ll show up at your house and, gee, you’ve got a nice family there, don’t you?  It would be a shame if something happened to them.”  

Al Capone couldn’t have done it better.  And he certainly couldn’t have done it with the protection of the President and his Attorney General.  The SEIU and the AFL-CIO clearly can; and pure, unadulterated thuggery is just one of the tools in their bag of tricks, albeit the one they use with great relish.  

But wait, you ask, didn’t We the People speak last November and repudiate the Liberal Democrat, pro-union, pro-tax and spend agenda?  Yes, we did, but they don’t plan to listen.  Those who would be dictators usually don’t.  Nor do they care about the outcome of any election except the ones which they control.  They care only about retaining the power that they have regardless of what elections, laws or courts must be perverted to do so.

What we have in public employee unions is a racket the likes of which would have pleased organized crime figures like Al Capone or any of the reputed Mafia godfathers.  Once the union gets into power they have almost unlimited resources with which to maintain their power.  The dues, which ultimately come from the deep pockets of the taxpayers and are just passed through the hands of the government workers, are deducted directly from the paychecks of the employees and deposited to the union’s account.  With the steady flow this money they fund the political fortunes of politicians ranging from the local school board up to and including the President of the United States.  At the local level they are usually successful in installing people willing to ensure that the demands of the union at the bargaining table are met.  And why not?  No elected official is charged with making a profit so there is nothing to protect.  Taxes, after all, are taken from the public who have little say in the day-to-day operation of the local government entity, be it a school board or a local government.  And on the legislative level it behooves the liberal Democrats and their RINO co-conspirators to support the needs of the public employee union because that is where they get their much needed campaign funds. With union support they are sure to win because no one is as adept at ensuring an election as a union which can line up its members and march them to the polls to vote in concert with the union’s wishes.  Doubt it?  How do you think Harry Reid kept his seat in the Senate last November?  Do you think that all those SEIU employees from the casinos in Las Vegas made up their own minds to take the same buses to the polls to vote all at the same time?  No they were told what to do and they followed orders.  The money keeps flowing from the public coffers through the unions--who ensure they take a generous cut, by the way--and back to the accounts of the politicians who raised the taxes and favored the unions.  It’s money laundering, pure and simple, but those same politicians will never declare it to be illegal even though it smells even worse than laundered drug money which, when caught, is severely prosecuted.  

But it has to stop.  It should be illegal for any funds that come from the taxes paid by the public to be used for any political purpose no matter how it is laundered.  Public employee unions should be absolutely forbidden from making political contributions because it places public employees in the position of being part of the ruling elite instead of the public servants of We the People.  It’s time to step-up and say so even though we can be sure that liberals, Democrats and RINO parasites will never agree to cut themselves off of the public money teat.  As for the unions, they will try to frame this as a violation of their “civil rights” when there is no such right as evidenced by the fact that every president up to JFK absolutely refused to allow public employee unions.  But they won’t stop until absolutely forced to do so and they’ll fight, even if they lose in voting, with the help of activist judges like MaryAnn Sumi.  It has to stop.  The taxpayer can no longer afford to pay for outrageous public employee pensions and benefits and have those taxes used to support the party (Democrats, of course) that keeps increasing the taxpayer’s burden by increasing the pay, pensions and benefits.  It must stop.

Follow the title link for more on just how far from the law Judge Sumi strayed in order to help subvert the will of the Wisconsin Legislature and the Governor.  People like her do not belong on the bench and politicians who support public employee unions do not belong in office.  Both should be in jail.  

Judge: Natl Day Of Prayer Unconstitutional

Judge: National Day of Prayer Unconstitutional

Judge Barbara Crabb was appointed by President Jimmy Carter.  So go figure.

The problem with activist judges like this is that they willingly impose their personal will and prejudices on We the People using their office to supplant the legislature.  Judge Crabb is just following the liberal-progressive-socialist game plan for de-Christianizing America.  The National Day of Prayer does not establish a state religion but recognizes that we are a Christian nation.  The liberal-progressive-socialists from the far left just cannot stand that idea and have actively been seeking a way to destroy it.

Follow the link for the story.

Posted using ShareThis

More Reasons Why Goodwin Liu is Unfit for the Federal Bench

President Obama has nominated Prof. Goodwin Liu for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals despite his having no substantial experience, beyond teaching, and no experience at all as a judge. It is clear that the nomination was made based not on qualifications but is a result of a shared ideology. He may, of course, be considered brilliant by his promoters on the left but he is certainly far from qualified.

In order to mask his radical views Liu purposely neglected identifying all his legal and scholarly activities as required in preparation for his hearings before the Senate. This indicates that he either doesn't respect the Constitutional process (what a surprise as neither does Obama) or he fails to understand the Advice and Consent role of the Senate (what a surprise as neither does Obama). In either case, his "omissions," as he put it, place serious doubt as to his fitness for the bench as a Federal Magistrate let alone an Appeals Court Justice.

Now, the Ninth Circuit is well known to be the most liberal Circuit Court in the nation and is situated in San Francisco on the Left Coast of the United States. The Ninth Circuit has so diverged from mainstream legal thought that it is often said in legal circles that there is the law of the United States and then there is the law of the Ninth Circuit. In that respect Liu, with his radical left-wing ideas would probably fit right in; but the danger of his being confirmed surfaced this week with the indications that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, widely considered a liberal on the court even though he was appointed by Gerald Ford, would retire soon. It is not too far a stretch to assume that President Obama will use that retirement to nominate a liberal, if not radical, jurist to that seat. If Liu is confirmed despite his clear antipathy towards the process of confirmation, then he would clearly fill one of the President's primary considerations: The proper ideology.

Follow the link to read an excellent post from Michelle Malkin.

Leftists Have No Right to Strip Faith from American History

Leftists Have No Right to Strip Faith from American History

To deny that the Christian faith played a leading, if not the leading, role in American history is to propagate a lie. Despite the effort by liberal-progressive-socialist judges to redefine the Constitution, the clear wording is understandable to anyone with an 8th grade education save, of course, lawyers. The 1st Amendment provides for the freedom of religion but doesn't say that religion must be expelled from all governmental activities. No where in the Constitution does it say anything about the separation of church and state. It only says that the national government shall not establish a state religion and says nothing about any requirement that there be no religion at all in government.

It is those who promote the solid wall that have the mental problem, incapacity if you will, to allow others to believe as they wish and to freely practice their own religion. There is even a special name for them in American English. They are called liberal-progressives. They have a strong bent towards an exceedingly large, socialist central government and a view that allows for the silencing of any beliefs other than their own. They can be from the Democrat Party or RINOs for the party doesn't matter as much as the extension of control over We the People. And liberal-progressives of both stripes bask in the idea that they are doing what is best because they are the ruling elite.

Both are equally dangerous to the Republic and should be avoided like the snakes that they are.

Follow the link for more.

EDITORIAL: Federal judge goes after gun owners - Washington Times

EDITORIAL: Federal judge goes after gun owners - Washington Times

Would it surprise you that this activist, clearly anti-gun judge was appointed by Bill Clinton?  This only underscores the need for Conservatives to win in November so that the Senate will prevent the appointment of judges like this.

Follow the link for more.

On Goldstein On Liu

An excellent piece from Jonathan H. Adler in the Volokh Conspiracy blog.  I would recommend this to all as the Left Stream Media is sure to flood the airwaves with misinformation and outright lies once Liu's confirmation hearings start.

The Republicans should do everything in their power to stop Liu's nomination and any Republican RINO that votes for Liu should be sent packing when he faces re-election.  Liu is a far-leftwing ideologue or Obama would not have nominated him.

To that end, considering the arrogance of the left, no Obama judicial nominee should pass in the coming 3 years.

Follow the link for more.  This is, as I said, recommended reading.

THE HUDDLE - "Bawls in their court"

The Democrats are, as the President would say, “all wee-wee’d up” over the reaction of Justice Samuel Alito to the President’s outright falsehood about the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission. Clearly they realize now that what the President said and the political reaction on their side of the aisle is not playing well in Peoria. Thus the Chicago Mob has gone to the mattresses.

Reading the Left Stream Media, and it’s followers like the linked opine, one would think that the Court had changed the whole body of law covering election donations when in reality they only addressed the issues that were covered under McCain-Feingold. That is a law that has, since it was passed, been viewed by legal scholars as weak on Constitutional grounds and many predicted that it would not stand the test of time once it was reviewed by the Court. Those people were right.

To compound the error of their spin, however, THE HUDDLE jumps on the conservative faction of the Supreme Court by saying that both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito lied in their confirmation hearings when they professed their loyalty to stare decisis which we all know is a doctrine indicating that previously holdings of the Court would be honored unless there is a good, articulable reason to overturn them. This allegation of their lying is, of course, spurious and meant to draw attention away from the President’s unbelievable gaffe in criticizing the Court in his purely political speech.

What is happening, of course, is that the Democrats, led by Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, are crying foul in loud shrill voices meant solely to block out any reason on the matter. There is, of course, a danger in this, their fealty to a false representation of stare decisis. They really should think about what they are saying for under the definition of stare decisis that they are pandering, Dred Scott would have stood the test of time and still be the law of the land today. No one would want that...except maybe some Democrats whose history includes the KKK.  And what say the Democrats as to the activist judges appointed by President Obama?  They have, in their scant judicial rulings absolutely ignored stare decisis time and again preferring to rule based not on settled law but on "social justice."  Where is the stare decisis in that?

In truth, stare decisis is important in that it allows settled law to remain settled.  But no law passed by Congress is truly settled until it has passed Constitutional muster. In that McCain-Feingold failed despite the best intentions of its' authors. The Supreme Court did its' duty under the Constitution, which we all know is the law of the land that really matters. Wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats obeyed that law instead of trying to constantly redefine it so that they could further liberal-progressive-socialism?

Follow the link for more.

"Blacks Held to Lower Standards in Perpetuity" by La Shawn Barber

The key point of Ms. Barber's piece is "Every lawsuit and complaint that cites 'disparate impact' confirms that our government believes blacks and other preferred minorities should be held to lower standards in perpetuity."  That sentence begs the question, "Are we to believe that in 2010 blacks and other 'preferred minorities' lack such intellectual abilities so as to make it necessary to 'dumb-down' the standards so that they can be employed?"

The answer is, of course, a resounding "absolutely not!"

In truth, the blame lies squarely and purely with the liberal-progressive-socialist welfare and education programs that have failed the people that liberal-progressive-socialists claim to champion. They are the ones who have engineered a system that perpetuates racial stereotypes and the separation of races in order to increase their own political power.

Follow the link for more.

FOXNews.com - Federal Appeals Court Rules Washington State Felons Can Vote

FOXNews.com - Federal Appeals Court Rules Washington State Felons Can Vote

This is the type of judges you get when liberal-progressive-socialists are given a free-hand in their nominations. The 9th Circuit, which is based in San Francisco and encompasses the West Coast of the United States, has always been the most liberal Federal Court in the land. The judges on the 9th Circuit are fond of making new laws and administering "social justice" such as the ruling they've just issued on a case from the State of Washington.

Imagine, convicted felons being given the right to vote when the state's statute says otherwise.

Follow the link for the story.

The Problem with Activist Judges

You will often hear conservatives complain about activist judges and the linked article shows very clearly why the complaints are valid.  Judges have gotten used to being able to overturn the will of the people in political matters and this should be stopped.  This judge should be removed and required to attend a course on the Constitution before being allowed back into the legal profession.

Follow the link for more.