Posts Tagged ‘SCOTUS’
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Monday, March 6, 2017
Imagine, or pretend for a moment that you were President of the United States.
You would be literally be “the boss of” and have access to a vast trove of over 14 different American Intelligence & National Security agencies.
If so desired, you could watch video of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, see photographs of his corpse and burial at sea, and examine the report made of his DNA following his death and capture. By virtue of the Office of the President, there would be virtually nothing to which you would not entitled to know, or view in the agencies of the United States government. You would be able to see the code-named TOP SECRETS of our government. You would have full and unfettered access to the highest levels of secret information… including Nuclear Access Codes.
The Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Energy, State, and Justice, along with all their myriad divisions and offices – ALL Executive level agencies – which includes the FBI, US Marshals Service, Secret Service, DEA, ATF, Coast Guard, and more – would ALL be under your ultimate control, and you would be their Boss.
The CIA is an independent agency.
Because the FBI and the NSA are Executive level offices/agencies, it is NOT a stretch to imagine that the President ~COULD~ Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: 45, banking, BHO, Breitbart, business, Chief Justice, CIA, CJ John Roberts, computer, Congress, court, Death of Osama bin Laden, defense, Department of Justice, DJT, DoD, DOJ, FBI, FISA, FISA Court, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, fraud, GOP, intelligence, John Roberts, judge, justice, law, lies, money, National Security Agency, NSA, Obama, Osama bin Laden, POTUS, president, Russia, SCOTUS, server, spy, surveillance, terrorism, Trump, United States Code, USA, USC | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Sunday, December 11, 2016
Recall the recent Supreme Court case Shelby County v. Holder which involved Shelby County, Alabama?
The other party was Eric Holder, former Attorney General of the United States.
Essentially, that case gutted the heart of settled law which was the 1965 Voting Rights Act which protected minorities’ Civil Rights to Vote.
If you’re like most, you get your information from the MSM (Main Stream Media), which often doesn’t do a good job of explaining. And honestly, most folks are not up-to-date on Supreme Court cases. So here’s a quick explanation of how that could affect you, and your ability to vote… regardless of your skin color.
Calera is currently the fastest-growing city in Alabama. Before Calera’s local elections in 2008 the town had redrawn its city boundaries which eliminated the city’s only majority-Black district which had been represented by Ernest Montgomery since 2004, and decreased the voting-age Black population from 71-30% – even though the town’s Black voting-age population had grown from 13-16%. It did that by adding three overwhelmingly White subdivisions while failing to include a large surrounding predominately Black-populated neighborhood.
The United States Department of Justice objected to Calera’s actions, and notified City Officials, who defied the DOJ’s orders and held the election anyway, which caused Mr. Montgomery to lose the election by two votes, about which he said, “they voted against me because of the color of my skin.”
Under Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Calera was required to Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - My Hometown is the sweetest place I know, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: 1965, AL, Alabama, blacks, Calera, City of Calera, Department of Justice, Elections, Eric Holder, Ernest Montgomery, gerrymander, GOP, Holder, Jeff Sessions, Justice Department, racism, SCOTUS, Shelby County, Shelby County v Holder, USDOJ, vote, Voting Rights Act, VRA, Whites | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, October 27, 2016
Church Pastor: The Truth About My Late-Term Abortion
by Amy Butler, October 26, 2016, 7:55PM EDT
“Trump’s words drove me to tears, and to write my painful story for the first time.”
Elections are supposed to be about real people — and not the ones whose names appear on the ballot. They are supposed to be about all of us, the policies that will impact our lives in tangible ways and the choices we make about the country we want to be.
The Rev. Dr. Amy Butler is the Senior Minister of The Riverside Church in New York City. Prior to this call, Pastor Amy served as Senior Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. Pastor Amy holds degrees from Baylor University (BA ‘91, MA ‘96); The International Baptist Theological Seminary (BDiv ‘95); and Wesley Theological Seminary (DMin ‘09).
But this year, we have watched a major candidate for our country’s highest office demean and slander whole categories of American citizens. We have watched him make offensive, outrageous claims about real people and real decisions that everyday Americans face. People like me. Decisions like mine.
What sent me to my computer to write is late-term abortion. As I heard Donald Trump talk about babies being “ripped” from their mothers’ wombs, as if ending a pregnancy is a reckless, irresponsible afterthought, my outrage poured down my face in angry tears. In those moments, Trump, who has never been pregnant and presumably has navigated this far in his life without undertaking any difficult, gut-wrenching, gray-area decisions, used my own pain — deep, deep pain — to advance his political agenda.
But his words won’t tell my story, so I’ll tell it here. I don’t often speak about this experience. And I’ve never written about it until now.
The late-term abortion I chose was the end of a dream. The pain was so real and so consuming that navigating my way through the grief, I never thought that I would have the happy, healthy family that I do today. It was one of the most agonizing experiences of my life and Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Do you feel like we do, Dr. Who?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: 2016, abortion, Amy Butler, baby, children, choice, Christianity, church, decision, Dem, Democrat, election, faith, fetus, freedom, GOP, health, healthcare, Hillary, Liberty, life, medicine, minister, New York City, NYC, Pastor, Pregnancy, religion, Republican, Rev. Dr. Amy Butler, Riverside, Roe, Roe v Wade, SCOTUS, Senior Minister, story, The Riverside Church, Trump, woman, women | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Some rightfully believe/feel/think that government should NOT be making decisions for them and ask, “Do we really want government making decisions about our health care?” They are steadfastly convinced that they should make such important decisions for themselves.
People should be free to make their own decisions in such matters. I don’t want the government, or someone else making decisions for me when I’m fully capable of making them for myself. That’s one HUGE reason why I support Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Do you feel like we do, Dr. Who?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: 2016, abortion, Clinton, decision, Democrat, election, GOP, government, health, healthcare, Hillary, law, logic, politics, Pregnancy, privacy, reason, Republican, Roe, Roe v Wade, SCOTUS, teen pregnancy, Trump, United States | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Saturday, October 22, 2016
Your remark “in God we trust” has validated what I wrote, which is that “Abortion is a religious matter. It is NOT one for the government.”
On a strictly PERSONAL RELIGIOUS level, I oppose abortion. And yet, as a strictly legal, Constitutional matter, I acknowledge that our United States Supreme Court has decided that we the people have the FREEDOM to make deeply personal decisions for ourselves, WITHOUT governmental interference.
Imagine, if you can, if the government told you that you must have a tubal ligation, or that you must have a hysterectomy… or, for a man, that he must have a vasectomy, or an orchidectomy (surgical removal of the testicles) so that they could no longer reproduce. Would you like that? Would you think that would be good? What if your neighbor could Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Do you feel like we do, Dr. Who?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: abortion, birth, birth control, Catholic, choice, Christ, Christianity, communism, Constitution, Constitutional law, Didache, faith, freedom, God, government, health, healthcare, hysterectomy, Jesus, late term, late term abortion, law, legal, Obamacare, orchidectomy, Pregnancy, privacy, religion, religious, reproduction, Reproductive Health, Roe, Roe v Wade, SCOTUS, sex, sexuality, slavery, Supreme Court of the United States, tubal ligation, vasectomy | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, October 20, 2016
A few thoughts on a Presidential Debate topic by Moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News, with candidates Hillary Clinton (D) and Donald Trump (R) from the third, and final debate held last night at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Wednesday, 19 October 2016:
1.) Tweet from Dr. Jen Gunter, MD: “There is no such thing as a ninth month abortion – I’m a doctor who trained in late term abortions”
2.) A portion of her blog entry (linked herein) on the topic from the Debate states: “Trump’s statement, as incorrect as it may be, supports the fallacy of the due-date abortion. It is a common anti-choice narrative that Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Do you feel like we do, Dr. Who?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Uncategorized | Tagged: abortion, Associate Justice, Associate Justices, birth control, Byron White, Chief Justice, Chris Wallace, Clinton, CO, Colorado, Constitution, constitutional, Constitutional law, contraception, contraceptive, contracetption, debate, Debate Night, Dem, Democrat, Dems, facts, female, females, fetus, foetus, Fox, geotag, geotagged, GOP, Harry Blackmun, health, healthcare, Hillary, Las Vegas, late, late term, late term abortion, law, Lewis F. Powell Jr., medication, medicine, moderator, Nevada, NV, October, party politics, Planned Parenthood, politics, Potter Stewart, Pregnancy, Presidential Debate, presidentisl debate, privacy, Republican, research, Right to Privacy, rights, Roe, Roe v Wade, SCOTUS, statistics, term, Texas, Third Debate, Thurgood Marshall, Trump, TX, University of Nevada, University of Nevada Las Vegas, UNLV, Warren E. Burger, William J. Brennan Jr., William O. Douglas, William Rehnquist, woman, women, youth | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Saturday, June 27, 2015
My puppy loves me.
I love my puppy.
I don’t want to marry my puppy.
My puppy is spayed.
My puppy could probably care less about mating.
I feed my puppy quite well.
My puppy loves me.
My puppy walks alongside me off lead.
I don’t want to marry my puppy.
No one in Alabama has EVER been forced to marry anyone.
Anyone who says otherwise is Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man? | Tagged: Alabama, chicken, considerate, court, dog, food, fun, Gay, heterosexual, kind, law, lesbian, LGBT, love, loving, marriage, Marriage Equality, marry, neuter, pet, pet food, pets, puppy, queer, salmon, same sex, Same-sex marriage, SCOTUS, spay, SSM, Transgender, U.S. Supreme Court | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, January 22, 2015
I don’t recollect exactly what year it was when I first heard the song “Woman Child” by the late singer/songwriter artist/musician Harry Chapin. I do recollect, however, that a young lady then near my age, was a fan of his, and it was through hearing some of his music she was playing that I learned of him.
It was perhaps his 1978 album “Living Room Suite” which I had seen her playing, but it was his second album “Sniper and Other Love Songs,” released in October 1972, which I subsequently purchased, which so powerfully affected me.
Chapin died tragically in July 1981, aged 38, and though the exact cause of his death was undetermined, he was thought to have suffered cardiac arrest while driving, which was explained as the likely cause of his wreck. The truck driver into whose path he swerved, along with the assistance of a passer-by, rescued him from his burning 1975-model Volkswagen Rabbit, and he was subsequently flown to a nearby hospital where a team of perhaps 10 or more worked fruitlessly for nearly a half-hour to save his life.
Chapin’s artistic creative style might be considered similar, somewhat, to that of a troubadour or wandering minstrel, because each and every song on that album – and indeed, every song of his – was a well-crafted, and expertly told story. The stories weren’t from a fantastic, idealistic fantasy life, but were from everyone’s work-a-day life. The struggles, trials, tribulations, joys, victories and crushing blows of unjust defeats in life were all subjects in his songs. From “W – O – L – D,” to one of his best-known “Cat’s In The Cradle,” Chapin’s gift of lyric and music made each song a veritable raconteur’s masterpiece.
As many older older teens are, at that time Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Round, round, get around, I get around., - Uncategorized II | Tagged: abortion, album, child, conception, doctor, Gibson, girl, guitar, Harry Chapin, health, healthcare, history, love, modern, mother, musician, Pregnancy, SCOTUS, sex, singer, sniper, songwriter, story, woman | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, January 15, 2015
It wasn’t by accident that George W. Bush nominated John Roberts as SCOTUS Chief Justice, because he’s the SECOND YOUNGEST of ALL the Justices (Elena Kagan b.4/28/1960 is younger than John Roberts b.1/27/1955 by 5 years, 3 months, 3 days), and his influence could be felt for perhaps 40+ years. At his appointment, John G. Roberts was aged 48 years, only 4 years older than the First Chief Justice, John Jay (served 1789-1795), who was aged 44 years when he took the oath of office.
FYI, the youngest Associate Justice was Joseph Story (served 1811-1845), who was aged 32 years when he took the oath of office.
The longest serving Associate Justice was William O. Douglas who served 36 years, 7 months, and 8 days from 1939 to 1975.
The longest serving Chief Justice was Chief Justice John Marshall who served 34 years, 5 months and 11 days from 1801 to 1835.
The average number of years that Justices have served is 16.
However… the average tenure of a Supreme Court Justice from 1789 through 1970 was 14.9 years.
For those Justices who have Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: Chief Justice, court, Elena Kagan, federal, John G. Roberts, John Roberts, law, Roberts, Scalia, SCOTUS, Supreme Court | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Friday, July 4, 2014
SC Restaurant Owner Refuses To Serve Blacks, Cites Religious Beliefs
July 2, 2014
By Manny Schewitz
In South Carolina, a BBQ restaurant owner (Maurice’s Piggy Park BBQ) claimed that he was within his rights to refuse service to blacks based on his religious beliefs. In the case brought before the Supreme Court, Maurice Bessinger stated that his religion required him to keep black people from eating in his restaurant, although he was perfectly OK with taking their money, so long as they ordered their food to-go.
The attorney representing the petitioners suing Piggie Park also addressed in court the “First Amendment religious privilege claim that petitioner asserted that his religion required him” to deny service to black customers.
“I’m just a fair man. I want to be known as a hard-working, Christian man that loves God and wants to further (God’s) work throughout the world as I have been doing throughout the last 25 years.” (Source)
And now for you who actually took the time to read the story instead of basing your outrage solely off a headline before sharing with an ALL CAPS blurb of “SEE? I TOLD YOU THE SOUTH WAS FULL OF RACISTS!!!”, this case was Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Business... None of yours, - Did they REALLY say that?, - Lost In Space: TOTALLY Discombobulated, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: barbecue, BBQ, Bessinger, bigotry, cooking, cookout, food, hatred, hobbylobby, Manny Schewitz, Maurice Bessinger, news, politics, pork, racism, recipe, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, SC, SCOTUS, South Carolina, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of the United States, United States Supreme Court | 2 Comments »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Wednesday, July 2, 2014
This just gets creepier and creepier.
In light of these recent revelations, perhaps the SCOTUS might want to vacate their decision.
Hobby Lobby Funded Disgraced Fundamentalist Christian Leader Accused of Harassing Dozens of Women
Wed Jul. 2, 2014 6:00 AM EDT
For a decade or so, Hobby Lobby and its owners, the Green family, have been generous benefactors of a Christian ministry that until recently was run by Bill Gothard, a controversial religious leader who has long promoted a strict and authoritarian version of Christianity. Gothard, a prominent champion of Christian home-schooling, has decried the evils of dating, rock music, and Cabbage Patch dolls ; claimed public education teaches children “how to commit suicide” and undermines spirituality; contended that mental illness is merely “varying degrees of irresponsibility”; and urged wives to “submit to the leadership” of their husbands. Critics of Gothard have associated him with Christian Reconstructionism , an ultrafundamentalist movement that yearns for a theocracy, and accused him of running a cultlike organization. In March, he was pressured to resign from his ministry, the Institute in Basic Life Principles, after being accused by more than 30 women of sexual harassment and molestation—a charge Gothard denies.
The Institute traces it origins to 1964, when Gothard designed a college seminar based on biblical principles to help teenagers. The ministry says it was established “for the purpose of introducing people to the Lord Jesus Christ” and to give individuals, families, businesses, and governments “clear instruction and training on how to find success by following God’s principles found in Scripture.” The group, which operates what it calls “training centers” across the United States and abroad, says more than 2.5 million people have attended its paid events, which have brought in tens of millions of dollars in revenue. Gothard and the Institute have drawn support from conservative politicians, including Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue. The Duggar family, the stars of the reality show 19 Kids and Counting, have been high-profile advocates of Gothard’s home-schooling curriculum and seminars. (One of Gothard’s alleged victims has called on the Duggars to break with Gothard and the Institute.) Don Venoit, a conservative evangelical who has long been a critic of Gothard, contends that Gothard’s approach to Christian theology emphasizing obedience to authority creates a “culture of fear.” In 1984, Ronald Allen, now a professor of Bible exposition at Dallas Theological Seminary, observed that Gothard’s teachings were “a parody of patriarchalism” and “the basest form of male chauvinism I have ever heard in a Christian context.” He added, “Gothard has lost the biblical balance of the relationship between women and men as equals in relationship. His view is basically anti-woman.”
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: abuse, ACA, Affordable Care Act, AR, Arkansas, asshole, bigot, Bill Gothard, birth control, Can you smell the hypocrisy cooking?, contraception, contraceptives, creep, creepy, cult, dirtball, evangelical, fanatic, fundamentalist, fundy, geotag, geotagged, health, health insurance, Hobby Lobby, Hobby Lobby Store, Hobby Lobby Stores, hypocrit, IBLP, Institute in Basic Life Principles, insurance, lawsuit, Little Rock, millionaire, Nashville, Obamacare, oral, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, PPACA, Protestant, religion, reproduction, SCOTUS, scum, sexual abuse, sicko, Tennessee, TN, war on women, women | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Hobby Lobby’s Hypocrisy: The Company’s Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers
When Hobby Lobby filed its case against Obamacare’s contraception mandate, its retirement plan had more than $73 million invested in funds with stakes in contraception makers.
—Molly Redden on Tue. April 1, 2014 6:00 AM PDT
Hobby Lobby supporters pray to end abortion outside the US Supreme Court. Jay Mallin/ZUMA
When Obamacare compelled businesses to include emergency contraception in employee health care plans, Hobby Lobby, a national chain of craft stores, fought the law all the way to the Supreme Court. The Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate, the company’s owners argued, forced them to violate their religious beliefs. But while it was suing the government, Hobby Lobby spent millions of dollars on an employee retirement plan that invested in the manufacturers of the same contraceptive products the firm’s owners cite in their lawsuit.
Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012—three months after the company’s owners filed their lawsuit—show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).
Several of the mutual funds in Hobby Lobby’s retirement plan have stock holdings in companies that manufacture the specific drugs and devices that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, is fighting to keep out of Hobby Lobby’s health care policies: the emergency contraceptive pills Plan B and Ella, and copper and hormonal intrauterine devices.
These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other stock holdings Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Business... None of yours, - Lost In Space: TOTALLY Discombobulated | Tagged: abortion, Can you smell the hypocrisy cooking?, contraception, Hobby Lobby, Hobby Lobby Store, hypocrisy, news, SCOTUS, sexual health | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Monday, June 30, 2014
We’re good with Sharia Law as long as it’s for business purposes.
Think about that next time someone’s favorite religious nut job goes to court.
Because of extremist, right-wing religious radicals, women are again being relegated to second class citizens, WITHOUT full rights and being further victimized by having access denied to birth control/oral contraceptives – i.e., Ortho Novum 777, progesterone, estrogens, etc. – NOT abortion.
Those medications also treat other diseases exclusive to women, including polycystic ovarian disease, endometriosis, amenorrhea/ dysmenorrhea, etc.
The question before the court was this:
“At issue here are regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), which, as relevant here, requires specified employers’ group health plans to furnish “preventive care and screenings” for women without “any cost sharing requirements,” 42 U. S. C. §300gg–13(a)(4). Congress did not specify what types of preventive care must be covered; it authorized the Health Resources and Services Administration, a component of HHS, to decide.”
One’s private personal religious beliefs should never be on trial.
Yet now, because of extremist right-wing radicals, the door is now opened wide to mandate any employee of a “closely held” multi-national corporation, to FORCE them to adhere to THEIR religious beliefs… even when it jeopardizes their health.
Any well-read, well-studied Christian should be familiar with Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Lost In Space: TOTALLY Discombobulated, - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: "Are you stupid or what!?" Jesus, abortion, Apostle Paul, bigot, bigotry, birth control, blood transfusion, case decision, Catholic, Christian, closely held, Congress, contraception, diabetes, extremists, faith, fight, geotag, geotagged, health, healthcare, Hobby Lobby, House of Representatives, insulin, Islam, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jewish, Jews, law, Muslim, pigs, Protestants, radical, religion, religious, Religious Freedeom Restoration Act, reproduction, Reproductive Health, RFRA, right wing, saints, Scientology, SCOTUS, sex, sexual reproduction, Sharia, Sharia Law, sinners, Supremes, U.S. Supreme Court, unclean, United States Supreme Court, war, women | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Friday, March 28, 2014
Here, all along, we’ve been made to believe that Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. – a privately held firm headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, which boasts themselves “as a major private corporation in Forbes and Fortunes list of America‘s largest private companies,” – objects on religious grounds (even though their owners are Protestant) to providing insurance coverage to their employees, which insurance includes coverage for female contraceptives.
Here is their attorney – Paul D. Clement, himself the 43d former Solicitor General of the United States – arguing their case:
Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Docket Number: 13-354
Date Argued: 03/25/14 Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Did they REALLY say that?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: ACA, Affordable Care Act, argument, Barack Obama, birth control, contraception, faith, Forbes, God, health, healthcare, Hobby Lobby, Hobby Lobby Stores, insurance, law, money, news, Obamacare, OK, Oklahoma City, oral, Paul Clement, politics, religion, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of the United States, United States, United States Solicitor General, women | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Monday, May 20, 2013
This OpEd is probably some of the best, and most genuinely warranted criticism of President Obama which I’ve yet read.
As late former president Theodore Roosevelt wrote:
“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.* Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”
-Theodore Roosevelt’s OpEd Column entitled “Sedition, A Free Press and Personal Rule” published May 7, 1918 in the Kansas City Star
*Roosevelt’s sharp criticism of President Wilson‘s leadership during World War I led the Post Office to warn that the Star that such views might cost the paper its second-class mailing privileges.
Obama A Big Hypocrite? Ask Legal Schnauzer, Roger Shuler
By Joan Brunwasser (about the author) Permalink
Life Arts 5/18/2013 at 22:24:54
My guest today is Legal Schnauzer, Roger Shuler. Welcome back to OpEdNews, Roger.
JB: Your recent piece The President Paints Himself Into An Ethical Corner By Voicing Outrage Over Evolving Scandal At The IRS is pretty scathing. What’s got you so upset?
RS: In early January 2009, just a few days before he took office, President-Elect Obama said he intended to “look forward, as opposed to looking backwards” on apparent crimes under the Bush administration. As president, Obama seems to have followed through on that pledge because his Justice Department has failed to review political prosecutions such as the one involving former Governor Don Siegelman in Alabama, where I live.
Political prosecutions, of course, were just of one of many improper acts on the justice front during the Bush years–torture, warrantless wiretapping, firings of U.S. attorneys were among the others. In essence, Obama issued a decree that no one would be held accountable for those acts.
Obama’s “look forward” statement made no sense at the time, and it makes even less sense now, coming after he expressed outrage the other day over disclosures about the IRS targeting conservative groups for political reasons. Obama said in a news conference that he would not “tolerate” such actions, that wrongdoers must be held “accountable,” and the problem must be “fixed.”
But his inaction toward the DOJ shows that he will tolerate the targeting of political opponents, that he will not hold individuals accountable for such actions, and he will not take steps to fix the problem. Obama was uttering empty words at his press conference about the IRS. Many of us expect that from a Republican chief executive; we should demand better from a Democrat.
JB: For readers unfamiliar with the Siegelman case, Roger, can you give us a brief overview of what happened and why anyone outside of Alabama should care? It didn’t happen under Obama’s watch so how can he be blamed?
RS: Don Siegelman was a Democratic governor in a deep-red state, a state where Karl Rove has a strong power base. Siegelman accepted a campaign donation from a businessman named Richard Scrushy, and then appointed Scrushy to a health-care regulatory board–a board on which Scrushy had served under three previous governors.
The standard for a bribery conviction in the campaign-donation context is that the prosecution must prove an “explicit agreement” in a something-for-something deal (known in legalese as a “quid pro quo.”) No evidence at trial pointed to such an unlawful deal, and the federal judge presiding over the case (a George W. Bush appointee named Mark Fuller) gave incorrect jury instructions that did not include the “explicit agreement” requirement. He allowed the jury to Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Business... None of yours, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News | Tagged: A Free Press, Alabama, apeal, appeal, Atlanta, Barack Obama, Democrat, Don Siegelman, Elena Kagan, Free Press, George W. Bush, GOP, injury, IRS, justice, Kansas City Star, Karl Rove, law, legal, miscarriage, Obama, OpEdNews, politics, Post Office, prosecution, Republican, Richard M. Scrushy, Richard Scrushy, Roosevelt, scandal, SCOTUS, Siegelman, Theodore Roosevelt, United States, Woodrow Wilson, World War | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Wednesday, March 27, 2013
What you’re about to read is NOT about religion.
For a brief moment – if you can – set aside a religious mindset (if you have one) about homosexuality.
As an ‘institution,’ marriage confers legal benefits to each spouse which are enforceable in courts of law in all 50 states.
For example, the following is a partial list of legal benefits Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: Administration of federal assistance in the United States, civil rights, civil union, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, domestic partner, Employee benefit, FaceBook, God, Homosexuality, Israel, law, marriage, religion, rights, Same-sex marriage, SCOTUS, United States | 4 Comments »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Some time ago, a friend shared an unsolicited comment about “ObamaCare” before all the ruckus over it had reached the SCOTUS. He had observed about a fellow he knew and described as “a snaggle-toothed Tennessee hillbilly,” whom had joined the United States Army. He observed that the fellow had some health needs, among them poor dentition and the need for corrective lenses. Upon his enlistment, he noted that the fellow was given proper healthcare, and all of his needs – food, clothing, housing, and healthcare – was provided by the United States government.
“Now, why did they do that?,” he asked rhetorically.
Answering his own question, he said quite simply, “because they know Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Faith, Religion, Goodness - What is the Soul of a man?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home., - Uncategorized | Tagged: brethren, brother, business, Christ, Corrective lens, employment, enterprise, entrepreneur, entrepreneurship, family, freedom, health, health care, healthcare, Holland, insurance, Jesus, model, Multinational corporation, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, policy, politics, prediction, risk, SCOTUS, Supreme Court of the United States, Tennessee, United States, United States Army, United States government, United States Supreme Court | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Monday, December 31, 2012
This is the complete text of the Supreme Court’s Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary.
The document itself is available as a PDF document via: http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2012year-endreport.pdf
Page breaks and page numbers are annotated at the bottom of the page enumerated beginning with page 2.
Note: The links provided in this version are NOT part of the original version.
EMBARGOED until 6 p.m. E.S.T. December 31, 2012 (No wires, no broadcasts, no Internet until 6 p.m. E.S.T.)
For further information, contact the Public Information Office 202-479-3211
2012 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary
Imagine a young seaman, two hundred years ago, standing night watch at the rail of an American frigate. Just one generation removed from the war for independence, he finds his Nation once again squaring off in battle with Great Britain, the world’s preeminent sea power. The sailor has ample reason to be anxious. Britain’s Royal Navy includes 115 ships of the line and 126 frigates, while the United States Navy consists of only 17 vessels. Perhaps the seaman musters confidence from the name of his ship: USS Constitution.
Named by President Washington himself, the Constitution was one of six frigates Congress authorized in 1794 to bolster the fledging United States Navy. The name was apt. The ship’s designer, Joshua Humphreys, drew on venerable Old World principles and New World ingenuity to engineer a nautical vessel uniquely suited to the country’s needs. Like the Framers, Humphreys produced an American original. He fashioned a ship long on keel but tight of beam. Constructed from frontier timber and copper bolts
forged by Paul Revere, the Constitution was durable but economical, nimble yet powerful. Christened with a bottle of madeira—the favorite beverage of future Chief Justice John Marshall— she launched on October 21, 1797.
During her early years, the Constitution patrolled the eastern seaboard and saw action in the Caribbean and along the Barbary Coast. But she became the stuff of legends two hundred years ago, at the outbreak of the War of 1812. Called into battle off the coast of Nova Scotia on August 19, the Constitution engaged and decisively defeated the British warship HMS Guerriere. The American ship’s sturdy oak hull repelled the Guerriere’s 18-pound cannon balls, earning her the nickname “Old Ironsides.” Four months later, the Constitution repeated the feat off the coast of Brazil. On December 29, she traded broadsides with HMS Java and reduced the British ship to an unsalvageable wreck.
The War of 1812 was fought over a wide field of battle. Measured against the whole war effort, the Constitution’s unexpected victories did not play a decisive role in the outcome of the conflict. But facing long odds, she did her part and did it well. The triumphs of Old Ironsides boosted America’s sagging morale during the early days of the war. Her exploits were celebrated in the paintings of Thomas Birch, the poetry of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., and the prose of James Fenimore Cooper. Through Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Read 'em and weep: The Daily News, - Did they REALLY say that?, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: Administrative Office of the United States Courts, annual, budget, Chief Justice, CJ John Roberts, CJ Roberts, Federal Judicial Center, finance, Fiscal Cliff, GOP, HMS Java, John Roberts, Judiciary, law, legal, money, news, report, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, United States, United States Navy, USS Constitution | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Sunday, September 23, 2012
“The signature of the Roberts Court has been its willingness, even its eagerness, to overturn the work of legislatures. Brandishing a novel interpretation of the Second Amendment, the Court has either struck down or raised questions about virtually every state and local gun-control law in the nation. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, decided earlier this year, the Court gutted the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law in service of a legal theory that contradicts about a century of law at the Court.”
Precedent and Prologue
by Jeffrey Toobin, December 6, 2010
Bush v Gore was the beginning of Republicans’ use of Judicial Activism
Momentous Supreme Court cases tend to move quickly into the slipstream of the Court’s history. In the first ten years after Brown v. Board of Education, the 1954 decision that ended the doctrine of separate but equal in public education, the Justices cited the case more than twenty-five times. In the ten years after Roe v. Wade, the abortion-rights decision of 1973, there were more than sixty-five references to that landmark. This month marks ten years since the Court, by a vote of five-to-four, terminated the election of 2000 and delivered the Presidency to George W. Bush. Over that decade, the Justices have provided a verdict of sorts on Bush v. Gore by the number of times they have cited it: zero.
Both sides had their reasons for consigning the decision to history and leaving it there. In his concession speech on the day after the decision, Al Gore said simply, “It’s time for me to go.” He meant it, and he left politics for a life of entrepreneurship and good works. George W. Bush, for his part, found little reason to dwell on the controversial nature of his ascension to office, and in his memoir, “Decision Points,” he devotes less than a page to the Supreme Court decision. (“My first response was relief,” he writes of his reaction.) In public appearances, Antonin Scalia, a member of the majority in Bush v. Gore, regularly offers this message to people who question him about the decision: “Get over it!”
Even at the time, Bush v. Gore was treated as a kind of novelty item, a one-off decision that applied only to the peculiar facts then before the Justices. The majority itself seemed to want it that way. In the most famous sentence from the decision, the Justices wrote, “Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities.” (Unlike most weighty decisions, Bush v. Gore had no single author and was delineated “per curiam,” or by the Court, a designation the Justices usually reserve for minor cases.) In light of all these admonitions to leave the case be, might getting over it be the best advice?
Actually, no. To return briefly to the distant world of chads, hanging and otherwise, it’s worth recalling what Bush v. Gore was about. The pervasive uncertainty about the results of the election in Florida—at the time, Bush led by five hundred and thirty-seven votes out of nearly six million cast—prompted the Florida courts, interpreting Florida election law, to order a statewide recount of all undervotes and overvotes; that is, ballots that indicated no Presidential preference or more than one. (Chads were the tiny paper rectangles that voters were supposed to push through punch-card ballots.) That recount had already begun on Saturday, December 9th, when five Justices—Scalia, William H. Rehnquist, Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas—issued a stay, barring the Florida authorities from continuing their labors. Three days later, the same five issued the per-curiam decision that stopped the recount once and for all.
What made the decision in Bush v. Gore so startling was that it was the work of Justices who were considered, to greater or lesser extents, judicial conservatives. On many occasions, these Justices had said Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in - Lost In Space: TOTALLY Discombobulated, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. | Tagged: Activism, Al Gore, Antonin Scalia, Bush, Bush v Gore, court, courts, Florida, Florida Supreme Court, George W. Bush, Gore, Gore v Bush, GW Bush, judicial activism, Roberts Court, SCOTUS, Supreme Court | Leave a Comment »