The Insane Rationalizations, Bigotry And Out Right Hypocrisy Of The Left

[Kenneth P. Katz]

Misogyny and vile behavior are fine as long as the people who do them are on the Left.

 

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/12/two-cheers-for-double-standards/

 

A question for Professor Fish. Does this same logic hold for political violence?

[Mr King]

Former Obama Pastor Endorses March on Jerusalem

 

 

http://www.israelnat...25#.T1_RJGBsg1c

 

 

Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who was US President Barack Obama's pastor for 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has endorsed the planned "March to Jerusalem" slated for March 30th.

It follows on the heels of the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic Doha Conference in Qatar on the Defense of ‘Occupied’ Jerusalem," a two day long effort to demonize Israel and deny Judaism’s more than three thousand year connection to Jerusalem.

Both events are designed to reverse what their organizers call the "Judaization" of "occupied Jerusalem."

The White House has refused to comment on Wright's decision to endorse the "March to Jerusalem", or the presence of State Department consultants at the so-called Doha Conference.

 

He has also made openly anti-Semitic statements saying Jews have robbed him of his influence over Obama, “Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office."

"[T]he Jewish vote, the A-I-P-A-C vote, that’s controlling him,” Wright also has also claimed.

[Mike Steele]

Misogyny and vile behavior are fine as long as the people who do them are on the Left.

 

http://campaignstops...uble-standards/

 

A question for Professor Fish. Does this same logic hold for political violence?

 

Cracks me up when someone on TN complains about double standards.

[RETAC21]

The blog you will love:

 

http://zenhuber.blogspot.com/2012/01/preview-fools-fanatics-and-bull-feather.html

 

Mike, avoid it, not good for you.

[Stargrunt6]

Re: Jeremiah Wright. Hasn't the administration intervened before in similar, inflammatory gestures, a la, Quran burning?

[Mr King]

A reel of misogyny from the left.

 

http://content.bitso...34mIds-dh3Zgtip

[Michael Eastes]

A reel of misogyny from the left.

 

http://content.bitso...34mIds-dh3Zgtip

 

We should not be surprised by such behaviour from people who have openly declared us to be their sworn enemies. We should revel in the contempt of these people, who are themselves beyond contempt. If people like Maher and Matthews, et.al., despise us, I will wear it like a decoration.

[Mr King]

WI Radio Hosts' Sexist Attacks On Lt. Gov

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/30/Shock-Video-Lt-Gov

[Mr King]

Grosse Pointe North HS Blocks ‘Respect Women!’ Posters, Despite Allowing 'Black Power' Display

 

 

Is encouraging fellow students to "Respect Women" "vitriolic"? That's how Grosse Pointe North High School's administration described student Grant Strobl's posters (found below) which highlight how conservative women have been demagogued mainly in the media.

 

Grant Strobl, the chair of the YAF chapter at Grosse Point North, has also pointed out that the school has allowed a display titled "Black Power" and has allowed a teacher to post a sticker promoting gay marriage (from the so-called Human Rights Campaign). Seems hypocritical to say the least.

 

http://www.yaf.org/respect-women.aspx

[Mr King]

News Week editors joke about letting Dick Cheney die.

 

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/newsweekdaily-beasts-yarrow-would-take-heart-back-cheney-one-most-evil-people-world

[Mike Steele]

I guess they dont like it much when it gets done to them....

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/02/obama-confident-supreme-court-will-uphold-health-care-law/

[Stargrunt6]

I guess they dont like it much when it gets done to them....

 

http://www.foxnews.c...ealth-care-law/

 

What's he gonna do about it? Have them arrested?

 

*wait, he might.

[Skywalkre]

I guess they dont like it much when it gets done to them....

 

http://www.foxnews.c...ealth-care-law/

 

What's he gonna do about it? Have them arrested?

 

*wait, he might.

/sigh

 

Let's try to keep this grounded, folks...

[Jeff]

I guess they dont like it much when it gets done to them....

 

http://www.foxnews.c...ealth-care-law/

 

What's he gonna do about it? Have them arrested?

 

*wait, he might.

/sigh

 

Let's try to keep this grounded, folks...

Exactly! He might try to pack the court like FDR or dare them to enforce their ruling like Andrew Jackson but I doubt he'd try and have them arrested.

[rmgill]

Ignore a judicial ruling? It's not like he hasn't done that before.....

[Skywalkre]

Exactly! He might try to pack the court like FDR or dare them to enforce their ruling like Andrew Jackson but I doubt he'd try and have them arrested.

Again, let's keep this grounded.

[rmgill]

Exactly! He might try to pack the court like FDR or dare them to enforce their ruling like Andrew Jackson but I doubt he'd try and have them arrested.

Again, let's keep this grounded.

 

Grounded eh? Is that how you describe someone who decries the idea that the Supreme court could decide that a law passed by a majority of congress as unconstitutional is an unprecedented move? After all, no laws passed by Congress in a large majority have EVER been handed down as unconstitutional have they? Not ever.

[Soren Ras]

"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Obama said

 

*snort*

Let's see:  that is one count of failure of simple arithmetic:  219-212 is a strong majority on what planet?

Also, one count of failure of either law history or basic English.  Since the learned President used to be a fancy law professor [of constitutional law!], let us be charitable and posit that he just does not understand what "unprecedented" means, the alternative being that he does not know much about constitution law.

 

"I'm confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld," Obama said, describing the law as "constitutional."

 

So confident that not a single legal argument need be put forward, it appears.

 

Abysmal.

 

--

Soren

Edited April 3, 2012 by Soren Ras

[Simon Tan]

DOJ just got called by the 5th Circuit fo an opinion on judicial review. Go O!!!!!

[Skywalkre]

Exactly! He might try to pack the court like FDR or dare them to enforce their ruling like Andrew Jackson but I doubt he'd try and have them arrested.

Again, let's keep this grounded.

 

Grounded eh? Is that how you describe someone who decries the idea that the Supreme court could decide that a law passed by a majority of congress as unconstitutional is an unprecedented move? After all, no laws passed by Congress in a large majority have EVER been handed down as unconstitutional have they? Not ever.

You're right. His comments the other day totally give away his intentions at arresting the judges, or packing the court, or ignoring it, or all sorts of other crazy stuff!

 

Loosen the tin foil, folks.

[rmgill]

Hey Skywalker, don't ever grab ahold of the neutral conductor in an electrical circut. It is the grounded conductor...but that doesn't mean that it's safe to handle...

[rmgill]

You're right. His comments the other day totally give away his intentions at arresting the judges, or packing the court, or ignoring it, or all sorts of other crazy stuff!

 

Loosen the tin foil, folks.

 

Lets see we have...

 

The 5th Circuit ASKING the DOJ if they thought that the courts had a purview to even rule on extant law per their boss.

The president and his administration ignoring not one but two rulings about drilling in the Gulf and their stop orders issued by the MMS.

The president outright distorting the meaning and background of a supreme court case and telling them, to their faces no less that they ruled incorrectly.

The president, saying that they should not rule against him because a bunch of people were behind the law. Lets review again:

 

 

President Obama today said that he was "confident" that his signature Health care law would be upheld by the Supreme Court but warned that should the court rule the law unconstitutional, it would be an "unprecedented extraordinary event."

 

"Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Obama told reporters today while speaking with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

 

 

You hear that? That's the declaration that what makes a law constitutional is the weight of votes behind it and not it's legal structure or how it's impacted by other legal restrictions.

 

Want to pass a law confining a small minority to the gas chambers, it's constitutional because enough people want it. Any evil in the history of the US, say like the forced relocation of a people who won a court case (Worcester v. Georgia), was not allowed legally but still pushed through by authority figures because of the desires of the democratic body politic.

 

Do not mistake this for a declaration that "ObamaCare = gas chambers".

 

This is in fact an observation that just "because most of congress voted for it" != Constitutional.

 

 

Lets look at that statement again.

"Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress..."

 

The Communications Decency Act was passed by a strong majority of Congress. It was found to be VERY unconstitutional. Such is HARDLY unprecedented. The test for Constitutionality is NOT whether there was a 2/3rds or 3/4's vote by Congress for the passage of a bill.

 

The whole point of a Constitution on the limits of government, even a very democratic government is to preclude that "because enough people want it", it's Ok to herd people off against their will and in violation of their rights whether it is to inter them collectively or to drive them up the steps one by one to the guillotine.

 

Is that spelled out in clear enough terms for you?

Edited April 3, 2012 by rmgill

[Skywalkre]

Hey Skywalker, don't ever grab ahold of the neutral conductor in an electrical circut. It is the grounded conductor...but that doesn't mean that it's safe to handle...

It's not that hard to know how to spell my handle. It's right there next to all of my posts.

[rmgill]

Hey Skywalker, don't ever grab ahold of the neutral conductor in an electrical circut. It is the grounded conductor...but that doesn't mean that it's safe to handle...

It's not that hard to know how to spell my handle. It's right there next to all of my posts.

 

What, you're getting all bent out of shape about a little mutability of text? Why the change of heart?

 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2012 by rmgill

[Skywalkre]

What, you're getting all bent out of shape about a little mutability of text? Why the change of heart?

You think you're so clever, yet you can't even spell my handle right.

 

And I still think, as is always the case in this overly-right-wing-extremist-circlejerk-that-is-the-FFZ, that you all are worrying way too much over highly unlikely scenarios.