One Liberal Justice Away


Dem Ass gun to American Uncle Sam

Justin Smith writes of the dangers to America’s Constitutional Republic as created by our Founding Fathers, if Obama successfully places another Left Wing Activist Justice on the Supreme Court. This is an awesome Editorial!

 

JRH 3/10/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

One Liberal Justice Away

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 3/10/2016 12:00 PM

 

Scarcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question.”  – Alexis de Tocqueville, 1835

 

So much more than the Office of the U.S. President is at stake in the November election. The direction of a partisan U.S. Supreme Court is also a consideration, since the next president will quite likely select two or three of the next Justices; and if the Progressive Democrats and their unconstitutional and anti-constitution agenda control the Court, the future for our children will be damaged and liberty in America will be in grave danger.

 

Too many Justices from years past to the present have abandoned objective reason and impartial arbitration concerning our fundamental law, and they have consistently produced rulings that were distorted by their own personal feelings and prejudices, especially in cases seen as representing some aspect of “social justice.” This has resulted in the Supreme Court overstepping its own Constitutional authority by creating new de facto law through its rulings. And, when the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court cannot read the same law in the same way on the same day from the same Constitution and U.S. legal code, splitting along party lines in almost every case, we no longer have a court of law — we have an elitist body politic.

 

For thirty years, Justice Antonin Scalia opposed the judicial activists of the Supreme Court, until his death in February. He rigorously defended the U.S. Constitution in all areas, irrespective of the issue. His strong adherence to the fundamental law of the Constitution stood in stark contrast to those who viewed the Constitution as an infinitely malleable “living document”, and he opposed all who attempted to turn the latest left wing fads into the law of the land.

 

In past years, Democrats have called on Supreme Court nominees to accept Roe v. Wade as a super-precedent more fundamental than the Constitution itself. But in a 2009 interview, Scalia suggested that state constitutional amendments may take precedence to prevent abortions, effectively overruling Roe v. Wade; he also noted that nothing in the Constitution, especially in light of the 9th and 10th Amendments, specifically delegates the power to fund abortions to the federal government. So under what constitutional authority does the federal government mandate abortion policies over the states?

 

To paraphrase Senator Ted Cruz, America is one liberal justice away from having Her religious liberties erased and from the Supreme Court forcing us to violate our religious conscience upon pain of a fine or imprisonment. America is one liberal justice away from open abortion on demand — one liberal justice away from the Ten Commandments being erased from the countryside and from every government building wherever they are found — one liberal justice away from our Second Amendment being eradicated and one liberal justice away from U.S. law becoming subservient to The Hague and international law. [Bold Italic emphasis is Blog Editor’s]

 

Under the Leftist agenda, homosexual “marriage” is sanctioned by unelected judges, the innocent unborn can be murdered, gun ownership is only for the government, healthcare penalties to coerce behavior are taxes, religious liberty only protects private belief and the president can rewrite U.S. law at will.

 

In this political environment, the Republicans are well within their rights to reject all of Obama’s nominations to the Supreme Court, since Obama treats jurisprudence as a weapon of political warfare. In 2006 and well before the midterm elections, Obama, then a Senator, filibustered Justice Samuel Alito and demanded a 60-vote threshold; and, since his election in 2008, Obama has brazenly abused executive power and ignored Congress, in his race to embed his hard-left agenda within our American culture and force a fundamental transformation away from our Founding Principles.

 

Let’s not forget that then-Senators John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and 21 colleagues joined Obama against Alito. Let’s not forget Obama’s explanation that the Constitution requires “an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology and record”, as he criticized Alito as “somebody who is contrary to core American values.”

 

Nobody is more “contrary to core American values” than Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama nominee, who advocated for the acceptance of the integration of some aspects of Sharia law into the U.S. jurisprudence in 2006 when she was the Dean of the Harvard School of Law.

 

Does anyone really believe that Justice Sotomayor exemplifies “core American values”?

 

The Democrats are two-faced, when it concerns the Supreme Court, they fight dirty and they fight for keeps. They have two standards for judicial appointments – one for themselves and another for Republicans, but now they are crying “foul.”

 

So what if the Democrat controlled Senate under Pres. Ronald Reagan confirmed Justice Anthony Kennedy on February 3,1988? They only did so after excoriating and brutally impugning the honorable reputations of Robert Bork and Douglas Ginsburg.

 

Obsessed with identity politics and social justice, make no mistake, the brawlers in the Democratic Party, such as Senators Schumer and Reid, would be blocking Republican nominations, if the situation was reversed. In fact, they did filibuster one of Bush’s federal court nominees, Miguel Estrada, in 2003, simply because they thought he might make it to the Supreme Court one day. And more significantly, Obama voted against John Robert’s nomination because of Robert’s “overarching political philosophy.”

 

It is also worth noting that despite the Democrats’ insistence that Justice Scalia’s seat must be filled quickly, the Court is designed to function with very few Justices, if necessary, and it has throughout history. In 1789 there were only six Justices, but a quorum of four was required to do the Court’s business. In 1801 there were five Justices; ten existed in 1863 and Court held seven in 1866: There is no such thing as a rule of nine.

 

Think of all the narrow 5-4 decisions in recent history that upheld fundamental rights such as religious liberty, freedom of speech and the Second Amendment, and one will see this 2016 election to be an historic juncture of the utmost importance to America. Therefore, U.S. Senators have the obligation to the American people to prevent the confirmation of any liberal justice to the U.S. Supreme Court, who would use the Court like a continuing constitutional convention. They are obligated to defend the U.S. Constitution against all who would dismiss our rule of law in favor of their own arbitrary, arrogant and authoritarian rule of men, and this requires U.S. Senators to reject any of Obama’s radical judicial activists for a lifetime on the Supreme Court: Senators have the duty to advise and consent, not to say “yes.”

 

By Justin O. Smith

____________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets are the Editor’s.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

 

I Dislike Obama as much as the Next Guy, BUT PUBLIC EXECUTION?


 

Secret Service Agents and BHO

 

 

John R. Houk

© June 2, 2012

 

Okay then, If Obama is ever impeached for knowingly becoming President while ineligible, do you believe that is a capital crime?

 

Frankly I do not! I believe it is a crime worthy of prison and maybe even a suspended sentence. Obama’s agenda is heinous for America; however it is a Socialist agenda that is supported by a large amount of Americans wittingly or unwittingly. I believe that such a conviction in the Senate should negate all Presidential privilege for Obama’s records past and present.

 

If after examination of Obama’s records a worse nefarious crime is uncovered such as actively selling out to a foreign nation or a foreign interest, then and only then, should a capital crime be on the table.

 

At any rate I am bringing this up because of a numbskull in Texas spoke of the impeachment process and Senate conviction should lead to a public execution of Barack Hussein Obama. That stirred enough trouble that allegedly the Secret Service paid the numbskull a visit.

 

WND reports the incident as if a Secret Service investigation was intimidation of a Birther proponent violating his civil rights. But I got to tell ya, such language as “beheading” Obama in public execution warrants a look-see by the Secret Service the agency assigned to protect the President of the United States of America.

 

Just as a bit of clarification I am sympathetic to the Birther cause. I just don’t believe it is a winnable cause as long as Barack Obama is in the Office of President.

 

Below is the WND story which includes the Youtube videos of Birther Rudy Davis.

 

JRH 6/2/12

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Video: ‘Birther’ gets visit from Secret Service

Men in suits ask him about family, weapons, searching his home

 

By Drew Zahn

June 1, 2012

WND

 

VIDEO: Obama Eligibility Activist LoneStar1776 Visited By Secret Service Agents

 

 

A Texas man and skeptic of Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president has posted a video on YouTube revealing two investigators, reportedly from the Secret Service, questioning him at his home.

 

Rudy Davis, known also as “LoneStar1776″ on YouTube.com, posted video of the inquiry the day after he had uploaded another video in which he suggested Obama, after being convicted of treason for usurping the highest office the land, be executed for his crime.

 

When two men in dark suits showed up at his door the next day, Davis told them, “I think I know why you guys are here.”

 

Video of the exchange shows Davis explaining his belief that Obama is ineligible to be president and clarifying that he only wished the judicial system to execute Obama “once he has been convicted in a court of law.”

 

“OK,” the first investigator replied, “but you don’t mean to assassinate him?”

“No, sir,” Davis replied. “I don’t want to hurt anybody. I just want truth and justice in America.”

 

Show members of Congress how many others demand “truth and justice” in America in the name of constitutional integrity.

 

The investigators then began a series of “pertinent” questions they explained were required because, “We do have a job to do,” including the following:

 

§  “Have you ever been in the military?”

 

§  “Any handgun training, martial arts?”

 

§  “Do you belong to any groups or associations?”

 

§  “Have you ever traveled out to see the president?”

 

§  “Do you have any criminal history?”

 

§  “Do you own any weapons? All your weapons are registered?”

 

§  “Have you ever been hospitalized for mental [illness]? Family history of mental illness?”

 

§  “A possible search of your home – are you OK with that?”

 

§  “In the past year, how many places have you traveled to?”

 

§  “Do you have any siblings? Would you mind telling me who they are? What about parents? Can we talk to them?”

 

§  “Where do you work?”

 

Multiple times the investigator also asked, “Do you understand that threatening to harm someone is a crime as well?”

 

“I understand that,” Davis said, “but I have not threatened to harm [anyone].”

 

In Davis’ previous video, which presumably prompted the investigation, Davis had cited the example of England’s Oliver Cromwell beheading King Charles I as an example of what should be done to Obama.

 

“Once [Obama] is convicted in a court of law,” Davis said, “we don’t need to send him off to prison, we don’t need to send him out of the country, we need to behead him publicly.”

 

Why publicly?

 

“To show everybody that’s what happens to you when you come in to America and you lie and you forge and you fraud and you take over commander in chief when you know you’re not eligible,” Davis explained. “America doesn’t put up with that.

 

The first video, in which Davis advocated beheading, can be seen below:

 

VIDEO: Public Beheading

 

 

At one point, one of the investigators said, “We’d prefer if you didn’t film us,” but Davis asserted it was his property and his right to do so.

 

Still, in yet a third, follow-up video, Davis discounted the idea that the agents were attempting to be “intimidating.”

 

“They were very nice and cordial, and they were doing their job,” Davis said.

 

Davis also concluded, “Promoting the truth is a patriotic thing, even if it brings the Secret Service to your door.”

 

Does anyone really know where Obama is from? Find out the startling truth from New York Times best-selling author Jerome Corsi.

______________________________

I Dislike Obama as much as the Next Guy, BUT PUBLIC EXECUTION?

John R. Houk

© June 2, 2012

______________________________

Video: ‘Birther’ gets visit from Secret Service

 

Drew Zahn is a former pastor who cut his editing teeth as a member of the award-winning staff of Leadership, Christianity Today’s professional journal for church leaders. He is the editor of seven books, including Movie-Based Illustrations for Preaching & Teaching, which sparked his ongoing love affair with film and his weekly WND column, “Popcorn and a (world) view.”

 

© Copyright 1997-2012 All Rights Reserved. WND.com Inc.