Archive for Justice and Law

Brady v NFL

John Dowd asks: Was Tom Brady ambushed? The issue is about clarity in rules and procedure that are especially important in sports.

Football, baseball, soccer and virtually every sport on the planet have one thing in common: They all have rules that are supposed to protect the integrity of the game. When rules get broken, everyone loses.

But when sports authorities don’t enforce their own rules with transparency and fairness, the integrity of the game is equally compromised. What’s happening today with the NFL undermines the concepts of integrity and fairness in the application of the rules and threatens to damage football’s credibility for years to come.

The NFL’s fundamental failure to conduct an expeditious, fair, honest and consistent approach to rules enforcement undermines the entire game. The league needs to reconsider its suspension of Tom Brady, and use this unfortunate episode as an opportunity to correct a terrible injustice to one the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history.

This is particularly interesting in that the NFL is trying to maintain that its actions were all about the integrity of the game. They seem oblivious to the idea that the concept of integrity also applies to them.

Leave a Comment

Treason of the Professors

John Hinderaker describes an article by William Bradford who says:

The following are seven tactics, in order of increasing departure from traditional conceptions of the scholarly enterprise, whereby CLOACA conducts PSYOP attacks to support Islamist military operations. The first is promotion of more rigorous rules and compliance standards for Western militaries. The second is distortion of LOAC principles to immunize Islamist combatants and render counterforce more operationally complex and legally risky. Third, CLOACA misrepresents aspirations for what LOAC should be as statements of fact as to what LOAC already is. Fourth, CLOACA degrades U.S. intelligence collection and exploitation. Fifth, it advocates restoration of Islamist detainees to the battle, and sixth, it calls for prosecution of U.S. troops for alleged LOAC violations to cause hesitancy, indecision, and reduction in military vigor. Finally, it encourages execution of direct action missions, including material support of Islamists and treasonous conduct.

The issue is 4th generation warfare and the battlefield is political. The mainstream propaganda machine, including the The Critical Law of Armed Conflict Academy, is a fifth column working for the defeat of Western Cultures and societies. As Hinderaker notes, the defense is out in force to rebut the article and demean its author. He concludes “We are long overdue for a serious discussion of the role that elites in the legal profession have played in our now 14-year-old (at least) war with Islamic extremists. Unfortunately, because of flaws in both the messenger and the message, Bradford’s essay will not prompt such a debate.” which only illustrates just how careful one needs to be when attempting to hold the machine to account.

Leave a Comment

Mass incarceration myths

Another book, another effort at deceitful propaganda. Powerline takes a look at Walters & Murray: The new Jim Crow revisited.

This book (hereafter, TNJC) is careless. The carelessness produces misdirection and it undermines the argument. Facts are stretched, the scholarly apparatus is weak, and the core argument is often contradicted by its own evidence.

Nonetheless, TNJC is a very popular book—rising to The New York Times best seller list, required reading for incoming students at Brown University

In a nutshell, TNJC argues that “[w]e have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it.” From the book jacket: “By targeting black men through the War on Drugs, and decimating communities of color, the U.S. criminal justice system functions as a contemporary system of racial control—relegating millions to permanent second-class status.” A primary concern is the loss of the right to vote.

The specific list of factual misstatements is long. For a book with scholarly pretentions, it is noteworthy that the book lacks a bibliography, and that its endnote citations are woeful.

Conduct either matters or it doesn’t. New York City Police Commissioner William Bratton asserts that it does. Bratton argues that blacks and Hispanics “represent half of our city’s population, but 96.9 percent of those who are shot, and 97.6 percent of those who commit the shootings.” These are terrible, troubling numbers. Dismissing the underlying phenomenon as a matter of mere “labels” is an irresponsible evasion.

We are expected to ignore the fact that black and white middleclass suburbs are not, by any objective measure, the primary locus of the criminal conduct at issue: firearms discharges (detected by automated recorders, not subject to “implicit bias”), violent-crime-related 911 calls, actual homicide victims—all these things are significantly less common in suburbs, and every sensible person knows that already.

Again we must dismiss actual data when we read that “The uncomfortable reality is that arrests and convictions for drug offenses—not violent crime—have propelled mass incarceration.” In state prisons, holding the largest number of incarcerated inmates, only 16 percent are drug offenders—54 percent of those incarcerated are violent offenders.

One could refute the specific criminal justice and drug use claims, and we shall try in one case. But we suspect that this is a trap. Every effort to rebut will be seen as confirmation of denial, even complicity, in American injustice. Even invoking the differential victimization of blacks by crime can be dismissed as pretext sustaining the system of injustice.

If you’re not troubled yet, you should be. The popularity of TNJC risks engendering a cycle of violent victimization of our most vulnerable citizens, who must depend on the criminal justice system to be their protector. The reality of black victimization requires us to strengthen, not condemn and abandon, institutions of law and order. TNJC makes telling the truth about our struggle on the streets an urgent duty.

The new students at Brown University, required to confront untrue charges that criminal justice in America is no more than an exercise in deliberate “mass incarceration,” should beware lest we fall prey to yet another “low, dishonest decade.”

Suspecting a trap when trying to take the stretch out of a ‘factual’ presentation? That is why there is trouble. Calling it dishonesty doesn’t go deep enough to explain the book and the tenacity with which its false reality is held. The popularity of such a book raises serious questions about just how serious many really are when it comes to solving serious problems of race and social behavior.

Leave a Comment

Implications: the war on weapons

It was just a matter of hours before prominent Democrats politicized a tragic on air shooting and that a “fired former journalist known on camera as “Bryce Williams” who murdered two of his former collegues on air with a Glock 19 9mm pistol this morning was a black, gay, racist fan of serial killers” (Bob Owens). The White House spokesman denied reality by claiming that gun violence was an emerging problem. Another story was about the fact that many gun related crimes were committed with stolen weapons. There are a few things about that as well. Gun Free Zone” Laws Are Arming Criminals explains the problem.

We’ve noticed a trend in recent months of law enforcement officers having their personal vehicles and professional vehicles alike targeted by gun and tactical gear thieves … Law enforcement agencies need to radically revisit the concept of leaving guns in their unattended vehicles. They are not alone, as their civilian counterparts are discovering that they have much the same issue

The vehicle thefts are not inevitable, but are the direct result of concealed carriers being forced to leave their personal protection firearms in their vehicles in order to attend events in certain public or private spaces where guns have been banned.

Criminals then wander through the parking lots outside these locations—at malls, outside stadiums, in parking garages, at businesses, and on city streets—and look for vehicles that match a likely target profile.

That means, despite a denial of the reality of the correlation between allowing citizens to arm themselves and crime, there is also the reduce to the absurd in the belief that more guns mean more gun related crimes and that many efforts to eliminate guns have implications and side effects. Gun free zones have been known a ‘free target zones’ and now it is becoming evident that they can be resources for the acquisition of firearms by theft.

As the panelists on Fox Five said of Juan Williams on one of these arguments: “He’s carrying more water than an Alhambra truck” in trying to defend against reality. Juan is not alone.

Leave a Comment

Trying to figure out what is bothersome

Jazz Shaw finally found it. Something about the Hastert case didn’t feel right but couldn’t pin it down until Connor Friedersdorf at the Atlantic provided the proper analogy. So evading government scrutiny is a crime. Why?.

Let’s toss in one more hypothetical from Friedersdorf just to drive the point home.

What if the government installed surveillance cameras on various streets in a municipality and then made it a crime to walk along a route that skirted those cameras?

That’s it in a nutshell.

This is behind why the extension of the PATRIOT Act caused so much rancor. The telephone records data mining effort is like the surveillance cameras and it bothers people that there is no way to get out of sight, to take another route, to avoid getting hassled for trying to avoid governmental snooping. The abuse of prosecutorial discretion in going after political enemies is a realized fear and the Hastert case is looking to be another example in such efforts. 

Leave a Comment

Politicizing prosecution

Several cases have surface recently that raise questions about the motivation behind the search for criminal misconduct. Scott Horton describes The Thin Gruel of the Hastert Prosecution — “We should all be concerned about Dennis Hastert’s strange indictment“.

The fundamental problem in the Hastert case is simple: what, exactly, is the crime? As presented, the crime consists of a series of structured withdrawals supposedly designed to avoid a reporting duty, about which Hastert misled federal agents when they questioned him. This is not only extraordinarily thin gruel, it is also ripe for abuse. Keep in mind that the prostitution scandal that was manipulated by a Bush-era prosecutor to end the career of Eliot Spitzer was also triggered by similar bank payment reports.

Another case is described by Armstrong Williams suggesting that a South Dakota ‘voter fraud’ case deserves more attention.

The 43-year-old Sioux Falls physician was accused by State Attorney General Marty Jackley of having committed what is commonly referred to as “voter fraud.” Specifically, she had been indicted for having turned in nominating petitions that include the names of people whose signatures she did not personally witness.

That she did so is not in dispute; how the doctor has been treated very much is. According to ballot access activist Paul Jacob, Mr. Jackley’s “threatened penalty is the most severe any American has ever faced on a petition-related charge,” while “the transgressions alleged against Dr. Bosworth are arguably the least sinister” the activist has ever seen brought to trial.

Then there’s the Oregon case where the allegation is that the prosecution colluded with an LGBT group in going after a $135k discrimination claim. The Orange County disqualification of all of its lawyers in the district attorney’s office in a capital murder case is another problem in this vein.

These prosecutions are only the active half. The other half can be seen in Baltimore, New York, and other places where Police are inhibited in their efforts to tackle crime by political demands. Then there is the judicial front such as in the suit to stop the mainlining illegal immigrants. The war is on many fronts in may different ways.

Leave a Comment

Righteous Anger

Lloyd Marcus says it is Another Thrilling Episode of Blacks Behaving Badly and he isn’t happy.

How do you expect black youths to react to the Left’s orchestrated campaign to convince them that white Republicans and conservatives are racist and out to get them, that white cops murder them at will, that the rich got rich stealing from them, and that business owners are selfish and evil?

These lies have been sold to black youths by the highest black voices in the country — Obama, Oprah, Sharpton, Holder, Jackson, the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, and assorted other race exploiting scumbags. …if I sound angry, it is because I am.

What was that mantra George’s dad on “Seinfeld” used to keep calm? Oh yeah, he said, “Serenity now! Serenity now!”

Enough with this hogwash that Christians should not get angry. The bad behavior destroying peoples’ livelihood in Baltimore and the “nuanced” response to it should make decent honorable people angry.

The Baltimore riots and other incidents of black mob attacks and assaults on innocent whites across America are the result of the Left’s hoax that blacks are victimized in America; perpetrating hate for political gain. Such evil should make decent Americans angry.

When Jesus turned over the tables of the crooks in the temple, he was angry. Jesus even called evildoers names, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” Jesus pretty much expressed my thoughts regarding modern-day black so-called civil rights leaders.

I am sick of it, folks — liberal officials, liberal talking heads, and liberal media justifying, tolerating, and even celebrating bad behavior.

He isn’t the only one. There is that ‘Mom in the Yellow Shirt’ captured on video. She recognized her son, grabbed him, and gave him the ‘what for’ to prevent him from joining the willding on the streets. But then there’s the President blaming Republicans for not caving sufficiently to inner city money grabs. You’d think violent proof of failed policies over forty or fifty years would start to sink in. The righteous anger is for those who will not learn and support and condone behavior that destroys communities and lives en masse.

Leave a Comment

Thought patrols and oppression supression

“The basis for this was the campaign-finance reform movement, which sees money in politics as a greater evil than a government empowered to shut down political speech. The John Doe law in Wisconsin shows exactly why government intervention in political speech is worse than any corruption it attempts to prevent. The use of force in Wisconsin got applied to one side exclusively, and intended to shut down conservatives before they could exercise their legitimate political power. It’s even more egregious than the IRS targeting of conservatives between 2009-2013, but it’s the same kind of abuse of power, and it leverages the same kind of campaign-finance reform statutes that give government at state and federal levels entrée to control political speech.”

Ed Morrissey on the Wisconsin efforts to silence certain political critics: “I thought it was a home invasion” — and it was

Leave a Comment

Double Down: propagating the propaganda to the bitter end

Two stories illustrate how deep the delusion runs. Clarice Feldman describes how New revelation helps exonerate Scooter Libby and Jack Cashill goes into What Columbia Missed In Its Review of Rolling Stone.

In a book just released, The Story: A Reporter’s Journey, Judith Miller, a key witness in the Libby prosecution, states that Patrick Fitzgerald had offered repeatedly to drop all charges against Lewis Libby if he would “deliver” Vice President Cheney to him.

That’s one victim. The other case attempted to smear a fraternity but the news reporting became a celebrity case itself so a journalism school was tasked to find out what went wrong.

With much ado, Columbia responded. Its 13,000-word report identified problems in “reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking.” This was all true enough, but Columbia missed the real problem. As I document in my forthcoming book, Scarlet Letters, cases like the Rolling Stone’s have become so common because those perpetrating a given fraud almost inevitably advance causes that the cultural establishment, the Columbia faculty included, wants to see advanced.

In both these cases, political ideology has swept aside truth, reality, and anyone in the way. When that happens, people get sacrificed for the cause. No wonder there have been reports about how the Russians are trying to put Stalin back on a pedestal by rationalizing what he did to so many of their fellow countrymen. It almost seems like the old medical practice of blood letting to cure anemia.

Leave a Comment

BMV, the Blowhard, and reality. Because: racism, of course.

Colin Flaherty says Spring Break Violence is a Black College Thing. What got him started was an episode of Juan Williams trying to school Bill O’Reilly.

Williams reminded O’Reilly of Freaknik, the annual celebration of black violence and anarchy that got so bad that even the Chocolate City of Atlanta had to pull the welcome mat. Then he mentioned Urban Beach Week in Miami Beach — only reporters call it anything but Black Beach Week — and how that was a celebration of chaos and violence as well.

The annual mayhem continued until 2013, when city officials ran out of ways to describe the “living hell” that 400,000 black people created in Miami Beach. So they turned that small town into a large armed camp.

Today, lots of attendees complain how the cops, the towers, the dogs, the drones, the license plate scanners, the lights, the Homeland Security and the cameras are all killing their buzz. And attendance is down.

large-scale and persistent mob violence during Spring Break is a black thing. Or as the t-shirts say: A Black College Thing.

This is a very long list of black parties that wore out their welcome after several years — and angry city officials determined to never allow that to happen in their towns again.

Most of these large gatherings of black people were cancelled or discouraged after repeated and long-term violence, property damage, lawlessness, fights with police and trash. Always mountains of trash.

There is a problem. Whether it is the mob violence or the blind eye towards seeing it for what it is, there is a problem. It isn’t getting better. Black Mob Violence (BMV) is a perpetrator in a privileged class trying to pretend it is a victim. There is a lot of sympathy for the claim. One can wonder why, but not out loud.

Leave a Comment

Fear mongering despite reality: the right to self defense

There is something about guns:

“What if someone who spies you walking down the street thinks you look suspicious? What if you become a target for would-be George Zimmermans? Or what if the man you argue with, or potentially insult or offend, even unintentionally, is armed and irascible—and the argument escalates?”

“The gun-rights movement claims it is a staunch defender of the peace, contributing to and bolstering law and order. As gun rights are currently advanced, nothing could be further from the truth.”

“LaPierre’s argument for being armed boils down to this: Americans are on the verge of—or already sinking into—a state of anarchy, where it is each man for himself. In that state, “the government can’t—or won’t—protect you…Only you can protect you,” he warns.”

“The cumulative effect of these efforts is a society where security must be upheld or enforced by individual gun owners, who could misperceive what justice demands in any given situation. Our police have a hard enough time with this task. Consider the controversies in Ferguson, Missouri, and Staten Island last year, where unarmed black men, implicated in minor crimes, died because police used excessive force.”

“A common feature of the many police shootings perpetrated over the last year, and highlighted in the media during and after Ferguson, is that police now assume their suspects to be armed. Given the state of affairs the NRA has fostered, this may be a prudent and understandable assumption. But it also means police are instinctively cautious, hostile, and all too ready to use their weapons against ordinary citizens. In an over-armed society, we may also expect to see a steady uptick in the number of cases involving police brutality or excessive force. And then, as the NRA would have it, the government is most fully and clearly the people’s enemy, too.”

How Gun Rights Harm the Rule of Law – “Second Amendment activists are redefining the public sphere, and with it, American democracy” by Firman Debrander provides an illustration of how modern debate is often not much more than irrational argument. In terms of the quote above, consider that the assertions about the Zimmerman and other cases are contrary to fact and that the assertion about the “gun-rights movement claims” is an ad hominem straw man. There is no substance in the essay. There is only fear about what is imagined might be that hasn’t any historical basis to support it. 

The facts are that the increase in legal gun ownership has resulted in a decrease in crime and that gun control laws have not been show to have any influence on whether or not the police will encounter armed criminals. The redefinition of American democracy lies at the feet of those who insist on redefining the second amendment and impugn the character of the American citizen by asserting that they will become violent criminals unless restrained by a benevolent government. 

Just how can you debate anything with someone who wants his own reality no matter how distant it is from the truth on the ground?

Leave a Comment

Culture in denial

The story is about The Old Man and the Sea of Black Mob Violence by Colin Flaherty.

“In light of thirty years as a court-appointed psychologist and prison psychologist, this episode of black mob violence in Concord is not Newburn’s first rodeo: “Through the MSM, the popular culture, and liberals in government, the message to black people for years has been that they are not responsible for their actions, nor will there be serious consequences for their violent behavior.”

“The result of this has been disastrous for black people. To the assailants in this crime, their violent assault was righteous, and now know they are backed up all the way to the White House. Adding fuel to this insanity fire is the tragic/comedic myth that the reason for their collective life failures and the gross decay of their communities is due to white people.”

“They had no conscience as they inflicted great violence on these helpless people, and they attacked because they believe they have legitimate license to do so.”

Self defense is punished. Crime is hailed as righteous. There is something ‘not right.’

Leave a Comment

We all lose

Jazz Shaw on George Zimmerman: No regrets:

“The media, while covering not only the Trayvon Martin case, but Michael Brown and others, has managed to further divide the country along racial lines and convince minorities that the rule of law is not to be trusted and authorities are to blame for all ills. But the real distrust of the government has spread to “the other side” as well, seeing how the idea of having your day in court and clearing your name no longer means very much. There were no winners in these stories. In fact, we all lost.”

This is the kind of damage to the society of the country that will be difficult to repair.

Leave a Comment

Some people think they have the power …

Of course, it’s the 47 Republicans reminding everyone that international agreements are not binding without Congressional approval that is getting a lot of news. Just a short while ago, wondering about the President’s patriotism was questioned by the same people who now want to paint nearly half the Senate with the label of Treason.

But on a smaller scale, there is a university president who is acting without considering his authority. Instapundit describes the situation as OU Could Be Making A Huge Mistake With Its Expulsions.

“Civil liberties advocates have already pointed out that punishing the students could be illegal, saying the song is protected free speech. But even if the offenses warranted expulsion, the taxpayer-subsidized school could be shooting itself in the foot by acting so quickly, and Boren could even be personally exposing himself to thousands of dollars in damages should he be sued by the punished students. …

“In the letter that Boren used to notify each student of their expulsions, he appears to be acting unilaterally as president to immediately expel the students without any prior due process.”


” the First Amendment issue may be clear enough to override qualified immunity; the due process issue is clearer still since it’s spelled out in the school’s own manual. If it were me, I’d go after him personally.

“And as for the people in the comments who say that libertarians like me, Eugene Volokh, and FIRE shouldn’t be defending these students: If you only defend speech you agree with, you’re not a free speech advocate, you’re just a partisan hack.”

This gets into the situation where regrets about a drunken night out stimulate an accusation where the true victim is considered guilty, period. Due process and civil rights in a University setting go by the wayside. The infection is at many levels.

Leave a Comment

The racial grievance industry: Come on, man

Colin Flaherty on The Biggest Lie of Our Generation: Ferguson Was All About Traffic Tickets

“So now every talking head in America wants to have an extended national conversation about unpaid traffic tickets?

  • All because everything thing else about St. Michael of Ferguson was a lie?
  • Hands up, don’t shoot? Lie.
  • Gentle giant? Lie.
  • Minding his own business? Lie.
  • Shot in the back? Lie.
  • Did not attack the police officer? Lie.
  • ‘Didn’t do nothing’ to the Asian shopkeeper? Lie.
  • Relatives did not try to start a riot? Lie.
  • Protests were “largely peaceful?” Lie.
  • National Guard would protect the business owners from looting…

This is a very long list of of the bodyguard of lies that reporters and activists (sorry for the redundancy) hoped would protect anyone from challenging the core truth of the racial grievance industry, which is the biggest lie of this generation: Black people are relentless victims of relentless white racism. All the time. Everywhere. That explains everything.”

“Thomas Lifson of American Thinker once said that media outlets that do not tell the truth are committing suicide.”

“We are now back to using the Dan Rather defense: the facts were wrong but the story was right?

Really?

It is not going to work. More and more people are more and more aware of the enormous difference between black and white rates of crime. More and more aware of the ocean of difference between what the press tells us about black mob violence and black on white crime and what happened in real life.

And how so many people in the media have so much invested in ignoring, denying, condoning, excusing, and encouraging it.

And sometimes, even lying about it.”

The thing about traffic citations showing racism in the Ferguson PD should have clued anyone in to the fact that deceit and denial were in play. That canard is just about on the same level as the idea that women are paid less than men for equivalent jobs in the workforce. The idea that traffic citations are influenced by race is an allegation that has been subject to repeated study that shows actual measure does not support the idea. But it is vague enough and subject to a large number of variables that is can be put up on the table anytime the Racial Grievance Industry needs something, anything, to hold on to. Come on, man, indeed.

Leave a Comment

Just what happened? Filibuster in solid partisan block won out in leaving the issue to the oligarchy

Hinderaker explains at Powerline:

The bottom line here is that the Democrats’ Senate filibuster succeeded. The House funded DHS through the end of the fiscal year, and Mitch McConnell tried repeatedly to bring the House bill up for a vote, but was stymied by the Democratic filibuster each time. It was the filibuster that prevented DHS from being funded, yet the press generally blamed Republicans for the impending shutdown. This makes no sense, but if those are the rules, Republicans should remember them next time they are in the minority. In the meantime, this episode has added steam to the “abolish the filibuster” sentiment now growing among Republicans.

In anticipation of the House vote yesterday, Jeff Sessions released this statement. I find what he says to be pretty much inarguable:

The Democratic Party has been completely unified in its defense of the President’s amnesty in the face of overwhelming public opposition—and in the face of the President’s own repeated declaration that his conduct was illegal.

They voted in unison, messaged in unison, and their outside allies have launched third-party attacks against Republicans.

As a result, our Constitution continues to be eroded, our immigration system continues to slide into anarchy, and our constituents continue to suffer the debilitating loss of their jobs and wages.

Essential to any sovereign nation is the enforcement of its borders, the application of uniform rules for entry and exit, and the delivery of consequences for individuals who violate our laws. President Obama has nullified those laws, rules, and borders, and replaced those consequences with rewards.

The President’s decree provides illegal immigrants with work permits, trillions in Social Security and Medicare payments, and billions in free cash tax credits—all benefits explicitly rejected by Congress. This takes jobs, benefits, and work opportunities directly from struggling and forgotten workers.

The will of the American people cannot be forever denied. Republicans will have to come to realize that it falls on their shoulders to give voice to the just demands of the American people for a lawful system of immigration that serves their interests, defends their jobs, protects their security.

Nor can we allow the President to dismantle the constitutional powers of Congress, ceding our status as a coequal branch, on the hope the Judiciary intervenes to restore some fraction of that lost authority. When it comes to defending our sovereignty there is no “moving on.” Now is not the time for recrimination; now is the time for renewed determination. What motivates and excites a small group of open-borders billionaires has no connection to the hearts and lives of the working people of this country. They have been silenced for too long. Those who think this fight is over could not be more mistaken; it is only beginning. When the power of the American people is finally leveraged, people will be astonished by the results.<b/lockquote>

Behavior as seen on this issue ups the ante and that requires a response. Tyranny of the minority is bad enough but when both law and precedent are tossed aside in the process, outcomes are foreboding. 

Leave a Comment

Net neutrality: the warning

First up is Karl Bode at TechDirt with a warning: Wireless Usage Caps (And Creative Abuses Of Them) Are The New Global Net Neutrality Battlefield.

“So while neutrality supporters here in the States are generally pleased to see that FCC boss Tom Wheeler is embracing Title II based rules, the discussion doesn’t end there. In fact, it’s only just beginning. Regulators truly interested in protecting net neutrality need to be every bit as tenacious, clever and intelligent as carrier executives who tirelessly look for creative new ways to abuse their uncompetitive telecom fiefdoms. Given the regulatory quality in most countries, that’s a damn tall order, but in the all-too-common absence of truly healthy and competitive broadband markets, there’s really no other choice.”

The warning is that the struggle will continue no matter what. The assumption on which this is based is “in the all-too-common absence of truly healthy and competitive broadband markets.” TechDirt represents the Left in this issue and they clearly illustrate the ‘attitude’ and tactics that are commonly found on that side of the issue.

William Teach at Right Wing News explains Net Neutrality: A Solution In Search Of A Problem (That Will Create More Problems) as an example on the other side of the debate.

“by turning the Internet into yet another heavily regulated industry, the government will not only stifle innovation and investment, but will be in a position to pick winners and losers, rather than as it is now, where competition reigns to pick winners and losers. No, the Internet is not perfect, nor are the companies involved. But, do you think it will get better, do you think minor problems will be solved, especially those problems that pretty much only exist within the minds of people who are saying “this could happen!!!!!!!!!”, by making it a highly regulated utility? “

The fact is that the proponents for regulation assume without evidence and without any significant support that I’net services are “uncompetitive telecom fiefdoms” and do this by creation of conspiracy and denial of economic realities. The basic problem is highlighted by the secrecy by which the FCC’s proposal is being held. The public will not know what is in it until after the FCC votes on it. That secrecy is part and parcel of manufactured presumptions, ad hominem argument, an army of straw men, and censorship of an questions or alternative ideas.

The persistence in trying to foist this ideology on the public, that of government knows best and much be in control, is evident and explicit by Bode. As long as that exists, and honest debate to determine real world actions of a productive nature will be difficult.

Leave a Comment

Jeff Sessions describes the situation

John Hinderaker sites Jeff Sessions as ;standing up for the Constitution and American Workers;.

A number of things have been happening today with regard to the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. There’s been a lot of spin about that and that somehow the Republicans are blocking the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. This gives new meaning to the word “obfuscation,” I suppose, or “disingenuousness.” The truth is, the House of Representatives has fully funded the Department of Homeland Security. It’s provided the level of funding the President asked for. It’s kept all the accounts at Homeland Security as approved through the congressional process. It simply says, but, Mr. President, we considered your bill, this amnesty bill that will provide work permits, photo IDs, Social Security numbers, Medicare benefits. You can’t do that. We considered that and rejected it. So we’re not going to fund that.

There is a Democratic Party minority in the Senate acting as a solid block using filibuster procedure to prevent the funding bill from even coming to the floor for debate. It is time that they were forced to the floor to explain themselves in proper debate on the issues at hand.

Leave a Comment

The oligarchy and necessary response

Selwyn Duke explains Why Not One Governor is Qualified to be President. The basis is that it is because they do not carry out nullification of unjust judicial rulings. In explaining why this is relevant, history is explored.

In recent times federal judges have ruled that Arizona must provide driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, states such as Utah and Alabama must allow faux marriage, and a Wisconsin voter-identification law is unconstitutional. And these are just a few examples of judicial usurpations that continue unabated and go unanswered. But the answer, which needs to be given first and foremost by governors, is simple:

“No. No — I will not abide by the court’s unjust ruling.”

What do you think “sanctuary cities” are?

They’re places where liberals have decided they’re simply going to resist federal immigration law.

Jefferson’s position is just common sense. We cannot be a government of, by and for the people if 9 unelected Americans in black robes can act as an oligarchy and impose their biased vision of the law on 317 million Americans. That is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

The idea that the courts have review authority for legislation comes from the 1803 Marbury v. Madison decision. As with any decision, there is always the fine line. That line is being pushed and a response is gathering. This should be a major concern of the courts and a tempering influence on their reach and grab, their oligarchic tendencies. There are several cases in front of SCOTUS that are on the edge and the decisions in these cases will likely guide much more than just the ruling itself demands.

Leave a Comment

Tactics: King v. Burwell on the legality of Obamacare

It’s a court case. The law is clear. The outcome threaten’s the desires and fantasies of the Left. William Levin describes  Battle station alert on the left.

“Steven Hayward correctly spotlights the panic on the left as King v. Burwell enters its final phase, adroitly terming it working the refs. Others call it battlespace preparation. In all cases, it is establishing the Narrative, which in the case of King v. Burwell is dedicated to the simple proposition that ending Obamacare subsidies will hurt the poor, even resulting in public epidemics and possible deaths. The move is a concession that the case is legally hopeless and it is on to politics.

This makes for a worthwhile moment to pause, because the case is like a control in a science experiment. We can view in slow motion the steps in the game book.

First, delegitimize the law. …”

“Second, ignore the facts. …”

“Third, create victims. …”

“Fourth, make it easy for the press. …”

“It matters not that the allegations have no relationship to the law passed by Congress, the legal controversy committed for review by the Supreme Court or the continuing harm done by the government itself to workable alternatives. Nor to be missed are the amici briefs as self-serving calls for interviews by the press, led by prominent lawyers and institutions, with throngs ready to help on background, and the full resource of notes listed in the citations of sources. Petitioner amici briefs offer the same, but except in rare occasions, their services will be duly ignored as partisan.”

There does appear to be some understanding of the tactics being used by the Left. That means they can be exposed, dissected, and put on display for everyone to consider as to their value for proper decision making in a just society.

Leave a Comment