Atlas Shrugs

GUNS: SECOND AMENDMENT VICTORY!

This is one of the most important SCOTUS decisions this liberal-heavy court has made. The ruling stays true to America and the constitution.

District of Columbia et al vs. Heller

ABC is reporting: SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS STRICT WASHINGTON, D.C. GUN BAN;  IN A 5-4 DECISION COURT AFFIRMS RIGHT TO OWN GUNS. INDIVIDUAL GUNOWNERSHIP!

Now, more than ever, when our political elites and elected leaders are failing to protect this citizenry of this great nation, we can at least take comfort in that fact that we will not be sheeps led to slaughter.

Should it come down to the streets, we will be able to defend ourselves, our families, our homes, our way of life. The jihad won't like this one bit.

Europe take notes.

UPDATE: The NRA has announced they will file myriad lawsuits in various cities against draconinan gun laws. Hope springs eternal!

UPDATE: From Patriot Post:

In the most important Supreme Court decision of the decade, District of Columbia v. Heller, a majority of justices ruled today that the Second Amendment is indeed constitutional. Not only that, but they reaffirmed that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, and that the District of Columbia's ban on handguns is unconstitutional. The Court was split 5-4, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the majority opinion.

"Logic demands that there be a link between the stated purpose and the command," Justice Scalia wrote. "We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans." Justice Scalia was joined on the majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito. 

We at The Patriot Post applaud the Court's majority in deciding that the Second Amendment means what it actually says, but we need to continue to urge our legislators to do the same. To that end, we invite you to sign The Patriot's petition affirming the Second Amendment's individual "right of the People to keep and bear arms."

If you have not already done so, I urge you to sign this petition today -- right now, please. We need more than 100,000 signatures in order for this petition to be given the attention it deserves from national leaders.

< To sign this petition online, go here.

You can also sign this petition by sending a blank e-mail to: sign-second@patriotpetitions.us

NO DEATH FOR CHILD RAPISTS SCOTUS BELCHES ANOTHER MORAL STINKER

What happened to state's rights? This ruling escapes me. The death sentence is absolutely an appropriate sentence for a child rapist.  How does Kennedy and his morally ill comrades quantify what died in that child? The rapist killed that child, metaphorically perhaps, but that child is dead. And their life, as it might have been, is over. They will never see the world the same, never feel safe, never trust, never have a moment not colored by that lowlife that stole their life from them. The child is dead.

It sounds like sharia law ............. imagine who O-bambi will nominate to that group. The mind reels.

In yet another infamous 5-4 ruling: hat tip ejo

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the death penalty should not apply to a man convicted of raping a child, saying that capital punishment only applies to murderers.

The Eighth Amendment (of the US Constitution) bars Louisiana from imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim's death," said the justices in a 5-4 decision.

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Wednesday outlawed executions of people convicted of raping a child.

In a 5-4 vote, the court said the Louisiana law allowing the death penalty to be imposed in such cases violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

"The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion.

What a morally ill human being.

His four liberal colleagues joined him, while the four more conservative justices dissented.

Allah, and Moe, ( horse shit be upon him ) are smiling from ear to ear.

SHOCKA! CAIR APPLAUDS SUPREME COURT GITMO RULING RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called the decision a “victory for objective justice”. Political Islam has the hardest and wildest last laugh.

COURT GIVES DETAINEES HABEAS RIGHTS (SCOTUS blog) hat tip van

FOOKIN NUTS! Perhaps Americans will begin to understand what a liberal Supreme court actually means - not in thought- but in deed. Jihadis, enemy combatants, killers of Americans and our soldiers are being granted constitutional rights. This is as ugly and sick as the Dred Scot SCOTUS decision.

Kathryn Lopez over at NRO writes, Make Me President of the Scalia Fan-Club
hat tip lovely Larwyn

From the decision today: After describing a passage from the last round of GTMO cases, where the court had said that the president has to consult with Congress on how to deal with the detainees, he writes: "Turns out they were just kidding."

Macranger: Liberal Half of Supremes Give Victory to Terrorists Liberal Half of Supremes Give Victory to Terrorists (UPDATE): Lawyer for Osama bin Laden's ex-driver to seek dismissal of charges at Guantanamo!

For credit reference the next attack on America, cite Kennedy, Souter, Ginsberg and Stevens, who decided today to rewrite the constitution decide that terrorists have the same rights as Americans.

"The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In its third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

Kennedy said federal judges could ultimately order some detainees to be released, but that such orders would depend on security concerns and other circumstances.

It was not immediately clear whether this ruling, unlike the first two, would lead to prompt hearings for the detainees, some of whom have been held more than 6 years. Roughly 270 men remain at the island prison, classified as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaida and the Taliban.

The administration opened the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to hold enemy combatants, people suspected of ties to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

The Guantanamo prison has been harshly criticized at home and abroad for the detentions themselves and the aggressive interrogations that were conducted there.

The court said not only that the detainees have rights under the Constitution, but that the system the administration has put in place to classify them as enemy combatants and review those decisions is inadequate.

The administration had argued first that the detainees have no rights. But it also contended that the classification and review process was a sufficient substitute for the civilian court hearings that the detainees seek.

In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also dissented.

Scalia said the nation is "at war with radical Islamists" and that the court's decision "will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

Here here Justice Scalia! Indeed, if there were ever a case for the people of the United States to remove Justices from the Supreme Court this is it. Let's hope that Federal Judges do release these terrorists and they come and settle down - innocent babes as they are - the neighborhoods of these four clowns.

Of course as Ed notes, "This will probably derail the hearings that had just begun at Gitmo for six members of the 9/11 conspiracy. By granting the unlawful combatants habeas corpus, the court has now eliminated the main reason for the military tribunal system — and for that matter, Gitmo itself. If the detainees can access American courts, they may as well be held on American soil."

Er, that would be Khalid Shaikh Mohammed the mastermind of 9/11. How does that make you feel America? If this killer gets his case taken to US Courts get ready for the circus instead of the noose that he deserves.

By the way, in the case of an out of control system of justice the people have the right to take back the Nation. That too is in the constitution.

Read it all.

CAIR IS DANCING.

In a statement, CAIR National Director Tahra Goraya said:

"Today's Supreme Court decision is a victory for objective justice. Once again, the Bush administration’s weak assertion that its heavy-handed detention policy operates within the law has not found support in our nation’s highest court.

“As with the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 was passed quickly without proper congressional debate. The repeated lack of appropriate legislative process and administrative double dealing has proven to be damaging to our nation.

“The prison facility at Guantanamo Bay is a legal and public relations embarrassment for our country and should be promptly closed.”

UPDATE: Bruce over at Democracy Project: Guantanamo Detainees Next Supreme Court Case

UPDATE: SCOTUS AIDS AND ABETS TERRORISM Lock n Load

UPDATE: THe Other Cheek laments: SOLD OUT!

 

Very bad news

Chief Justice John Roberts has suffered a seizure and is hospitalized in Maine, the Supreme Court says. More here.

LGF reports on the twisted fifth column - the left in America:

Edgy Wonkette editor wishes for Chief Justice John Roberts to die, removes byline from article. [Wonkette]

Chief Justice John Roberts has died in his summer home in Maine. No, not really, but we know you have your fingers crossed. [Talking Points Memo]

 

SCOTUS Rules Against New York Times

Woo Hoo! A victory for the good guys. The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Crimes Slimes Traitors  Times. Ginsburg must have been suffering from sleep apnea. From STACLU Here;

The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Monday, refusing to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two Times reporters in a leak investigation of a terrorism-funding probe.

The one-sentence order came in a First Amendment battle that involves stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon revealing the government’s plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.

Shenon and Miller called the two organizations for comment after being told by confidential sources of the government’s plans.

The Justice Department says the move tipped off the charities of planned government raids. The federal judge who ruled in the Times’ favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew of the government’s plans to raid either charity.

The government says that the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to “targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press.”

SCHUMER Wiil Ram Liberal Agenda Down America's Throat

The Democrats have big plans for the SCOTUS and they will filibuster while spitting in America's face, no doubt. Over at Stop the ACLU;

Casey, Webb, Ford & Tester Agree To Schumer Filibuster Pact 

For those involved in GOP-GOTV, it is very important to know the rumors on John Paul Stevens:

For the past several weeks, there has been a rumor circulating among high-level officials in Washington, D.C., that a member of the U.S. Supreme Court has received grave medical news and will announce his or her retirement by year’s end.

Then the GOP-GOTV dynamite is just what would these “moderate democrat” Senator wannabes do if elected:

Schumer is reported to have assured Democrats that Bob Casey Jr. — despite running as a moderate Senate candidate — would be supportive of Democratic efforts to block constitutionalist judicial nominees. “There’s no worry on judges,” said Schumer. “And judges is the whole ball of wax.” Other supposedly centrist Democratic candidates including Harold Ford Jr. (Tenn.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Jim Webb (Va.) have refused to rule out filibusters against judicial nominees.

Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and caldron; Democrat majority ready to go to war over Iraq

What to expect from Democrats in power based on past comments and voting patterns

Islamic Teachings in Public School OK by SCOTUS

This ruling by the United States Supreme Court was unexpected and incomprehensible. The initial ruling is typical of the ultra liberal (downright wacky) Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco but the SCOTUS rubber stamping the teaching and recitation of  Islamic prayers in the public school is......... bad news. Very bad news. hat tip sef

APPEAL ON SCHOOL'S LESSON IN MUSLIM CULTURE IS REJECTED

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday by evangelical Christian students and their parents who said a Contra Costa County school district engaged in unconstitutional religious indoctrination when it taught students about Islam by having them recite language from prayers.

The court, without comment, left intact a ruling by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco last November in favor of the Byron Union School District in eastern Contra Costa.

The suit challenged the content of a seventh-grade history course at Excelsior Middle School in Byron in the fall of 2001. The teacher, using an instructional guide, told students they would adopt roles as Muslims for three weeks to help them learn what Muslims believe.

She encouraged them to use Muslim names, recited prayers in class, had them memorize and recite a passage from the Quran and made them give up something for a day, such as television or candy, to simulate fasting during the month of Ramadan. The final exam asked students for a critique of elements of Muslim culture.

The students and parents who sued argued that the class activities had crossed the line from education into an official endorsement of a religious practice. A federal judge and the appeals court disagreed, saying the class had an instructional purpose and the students had engaged in no actual religious exercises.

Linda Lye, a lawyer for the school district, said the same instructional material remains available for classes, though it is not required.

"I'm delighted that the Byron Union School District can put this case finally behind it and get on with educating children and exposing them to the world's great cultures and religions in an appropriate way,'' Lye said.

Delighted is not what I am feeling.

Edward White of the Thomas More Law Center, an attorney who represented the plaintiffs, said the Supreme Court's rejection surprised him. The case "presents significant issues of national importance with regard to public school education and religious indoctrination of children,'' he said.

The case is Eklund vs. Byron Union School District, 05-1539.

The Twisted World We Live

The animals at Gitmo are Prisoners of War (thank you LLL SCJOTUS Kennedy) but not Gilad?

Gilad Shalit is not entitled to POW/Geneva Convention protections because the savages who kidnapped him are NOT a state and therefore not parties to the Geneva Conventions.

Cpl. Gilad Shalit is not a prisoner of war and is therefore not entitled to the full protection that international law affords POWs, according to Hebrew University international-law expert Yuval Shani.  JPost story here (hat tip Hugh)

No doubt Yuval Shani is a lefty liberal lawyer.

Hugh says, "We are a party to the Conventions, so we have to give non-parties all the protections (courtesy of the US-[edited by Atlas]- Supreme Court.)  But...the terrorists are allowed to kidnap us and murder us and it is OK."

Yes, Hugh exactly. What we have is  a member of an organized military of a sovereign nation, in uniform, captured...and he is not entitled to any protections. That is the twisted inverted world we live in.

The Hamdan ruling by the SCOTUS was an abomination. Abraham Lincoln said, in his first Inaugural Address:

"At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."

Scalia: "War is war," "Give me a Break"

Bin Laden chauffeur challenges Bush. Is the left siding with Bin Laden again?

In the upcoming issue of Newsweek the question of whether or not Justice Scalia should recuse himself from the upcoming Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, over at stop the ACLU;

The Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to try Guantánamo detainees in special military tribunals with limited rights for the accused. But Justice Antonin Scalia has already spoken his mind about some of the issues in the matter. During an unpublicized March 8 talk at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland, Scalia dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions, adding he was "astounded" at the "hypocritical" reaction in Europe to Gitmo.

"War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. "Give me a break." Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don't have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: "If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." Scalia was apparently referring to his son Matthew, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq. Scalia did say, though, that he was concerned "there may be no end to this war."

The comments are causing quite an uproar. Many, especially on the left, are calling it grounds for recusal.

I love Scalia. I love the way he thinks, speaks and doesn't suffer fools. Oh and BTW, he is absolutely right except about being surprised by Europe. They have completely succumbed. They are sitting ducks, waiting to be picked off.

He won't recuse himself, he knows it's another strawman tactic of the left. DUBAI!

Scalia Was Too Kind

Scalia Calls Philosophical Foes 'Idiots' here amen

In a speech Monday sponsored by the conservative Federalist Society, Scalia defended his long-held belief in sticking to the plain text of the Constitution "as it was originally written and intended."

d'oh

"But you would have to be an idiot to believe that," Scalia said. "The Constitution is not a living organism, it is a legal document. It says something and doesn't say other things."

Reason. Logic is a beee-you-tee ful thing

The greatest document ever written in human history.
"Living organism" my ass. That living organism sounds like  ebola to me.

WTF? Backing Off Iran?

Oh to be a fly on the wall in these backroom meetings where duh shit gets fixed. We are backing off ....... Or is this a charade to allow Iran a face saving move ?........Telling the outside world one thing and doing another?
West Tells Russia It Won't Press to Penalize Iran Now
Diplomats said that they were pursuing a limited effort to convene a Security Council debate and send the matter back to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

oh yeah that's the ticket-- the IAEA........isn't that how we got here in the first place?

It's high noon at the OK Corral, fellas.

IAEA to hold emergency meeting on Iran on Feb. 2
The International Atomic Energy Agency will hold an emergency meeting on Feb. 2 on Iran's nuclear activities at the request of Britain, France and Germany, the IAEA said Wednesday.

So let me understand this. It's an emergency but it can wait until February 2nd? 

It's all about the intel, isn't it? What if the intel is right? What if the intel is wrong? What if the intel says 3 months, 3 weeks, 3 years? What do you do? Nothing? Because you can't really know for sure.

The intel can't be perfect. This much we do know. Iraq taught us that, eh? The intel in Iraq was not perfect and the American left and the left leaning world have not stop recriminating.

And now it seems Gd in his infinite wisdom shows us that Iraq was merely the opening act for the really big shoe. (Gd is a comedienne playing to an audience with no sense of humor) The really big shoe, the ultimate test of our intellectual and testicular fortitude. Iran was always the big get, tough to take down, tougher to take out. Playing the long hand strategically, wasn't it smarter to remove the Iraqi despot before the really big Iranian shoe? Wasn't that necessary?  Don't misunderstand me, I am not suggesting that that is the reason we invaded Iraq but it was definitely a plus in the strategic and tactical columns . It was smart. It is still smart.

Speaking of shoes....................eluxury.com had this insane PUCCI shoe on sale from $675 down to  $195, just one size left (two sizes too big for me), I bought them anyway. Going down baby in a blaze of fabulous fit challenged footwear. Channeling the Manolo........

Speaking of good intel/bad intel from Power line;

The Predator strike has been widely denounced as a "botched" attempt to kill Swahili. It appears, on the contrary, that it was a well-executed strike that would have succeeded if Swahili had shown up for dinner. In addition to killing a number of aides who were evidently close to Swahili, the attack, which was apparently based on human intelligence, should have good effects. It presumably will arouse suspicion and confusion in AL QED over the identity of the informant and the depth of our penetration of the organization or its allies, and it will remind villagers in the region of the dangers involved in aiding the terrorists.

Speaking of religious fervor Dr. Sanity observes the following;

The schizophrenic patients I have seen with religious delusions were often the hardest to treat and least responsive to medication. Most of them had such severely impaired thinking processes that they could hardly function on a day-to-day basis; let alone would they have been able to rise to a position of influence or power in any culture. But there were a few who were notable for their single-minded and persistent incorporation of everything they came in contact with into their delusional system; and who had only contempt for anyone who didn't subscribe to their psychotic ideas. These latter patients exhibited a psychopathically clever and manipulative intelligence that was completely immune to any insight into their illness. These patients' were chillingly and frighteningly serious about their delusion, and to them you were nothing.

Meanwhile, back at the asylum the mental patient is picking up his marbles and going home

'Iran will halt nuclear cooperation with IAEA if referred to UN'

Maybe they are cocky for a reason here. Deputy Chairman for International Affairs of the Iranian Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Mines Fereydoun Entezari called for joint ventures between Iran and China in the Iranian economic sector.

Addressing a gathering to study prospects for Tehran-Beijing economic cooperation Monday evening, he said expansion of private sector cooperation between the two countries can pave the way for establishment of business partnerships.

It's good to have friends.

UPDATE: Go over to Le Monte de Sisyphe for this afternoon's international developments from an European point of view Tel Aviv bombing and Iran;

A Palestinian terrorist has blown himself up on a Tel Aviv market this afternoon. So far, it seems that 15 persons have been wounded. Of course, this means that 15 more persons and their relatives are going to be traumatized for the rest of their lives. No press agency tells you this. Its' interesting though to see the official reactions:

Javier Solana (that's the guy dealing with foreign policy issues in the EU):

Solana said the attack occurred at a moment of great importance "for the future of Palestine, because of elections." He appealed "to everybody to forget terrorist acts and to give political life a chance. Elections are the only way civilized countries can express themselves."

What Palestine? The one on UN maps? As far as I know there is no "Palestine". And Javier, please, "forgetting" about terror has always been a trademark of the Europeans and leftist antisemites all over the world. Don't ask the victims to do so as well.

on Jacques!
French president Jacques Chirac expresses his willingness to use nuclear weapons against states launching terrorist attacks on France (I hate to quote AFP):  

"Leaders of any state that uses terrorist means against us, as well as any that may be envisaging -- in one way or another -- using weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would be exposing themselves to a firm and appropriate response on our behalf," [Chirac] said Thursday.

 

Send in the Clowns: Alito SCOTUS Carnival Deux

Watching these hearings is painful. Wincing this hard will leave nasty crow's feet.

I do not agree with the pundits. I don't see it their way. My take on Alito bringing up the priviledged snot nosed "radicals" on the college campuses during his years at Princeton is a contemptuous swipe at Kennedy and his ilk.

You gotta love Alito bringing up the ROTC bringing thrown off the Princeton campus during his tenure and how sick this made him. For all the those sixties loving radicals, Alito is the quintessential counter counter-culturist, eh?

"Splash" Kennedy's hostility, IMHO, is a direct result of the absolute fact that if Alito had been the judge in the Mary Jo Kopechne incident, "Splash" would have served serious time, for murder. He'd never be in a position to undermine the tenets of this great country on a daily basis, that's for sure. Splash can't shine Alito's "special" shoes or clean his pool for that matter.

These proceedings are good for one thing, America needs this flashlight. D.C. is too far away from most Americans to smell the gangrene, but here they can see it, up close.

Speaking of Carnivals.............another Carnival of the Clueless is playing here

up now (btw, look how the press kissed his ass after Mary Jo's murder - he was hurt?)

Joe Biden took over eleven minutes to ask his first question. The left is out of its league. Alito is the real deal.

Here is a poll from the notoriously lefty AOL:

Do you think Samuel Alito will be confirmed to the Supreme Court?
Yes 83%
No 17%

What's your opinion of the Alito nomination?
He's a great choice 51%
I oppose him 35%
I'm on the fence 14%
Total Votes: 44,195

Best description of the hearings so far (on FOX);

"Alito is a work horse, not the show horse that Roberts was but he is doing a great job".

Yup, that just about sums it up. Roberts is an impossible act to follow. I mean really. He is the closet thing to "divine" you are going to find on Gd's green earth. That Alito could follow him and do so able a job speaks volumes to his intelligence, his reason, and his character.

SCOTUS Alito Hearings: The Liberal Goatherd

What is it about the elections that the left does not understand. THEY LOST! STFU!
 
Click above for movie . Turn on FOX. Alito hearings with Brit Hume and Fred Barnes (heartthrobs all)

UPDATE: So far nothing has changed Arlen Specter is still a putz.... NEXT Leahy, oy.
UPDATEe: Nothing's changed, Leahy is still a blowhard. Hatch is eloquent. "Splash" Kennedy is up to bat......Need I say more? Another round!

 

Update: Sorry guys had to run out.  Schmucker Schumer is up now. As the Washington Post reported: 'Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), and People for the American Way "rushed out statements blasting the nomination even before Bush announced it."' '
Watching him one must wince. He is so smug as to appear silly. Silly, smug and foolish. Who is going to tell him about 9/11, islamokazes, and that a nuclear free day is  good day?
Yes, Chuckie, tell me all about Sandra's "special shoes".

All You Need to Know about Sam Alito

"I am and always have been a conservative... I believe very strongly in limited government, federalism, free enterprise, the supremacy of the elected branches of government, the need for a strong defense and effective law enforcement, and the legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values. In the field of law, I disagree strenuously with the usurpation by the judiciary of decision-making authority that should be exercised by the branches of government responsible to the electorate... When I first became interested in government and politics during the 1960s, the greatest influences on my views were the writings of William F. Buckley Jr., the National Review, and Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign. In college, I developed a deep interest in constitutional law, motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment" -- from Supreme Court nominee Sam Alito's 1985 application to work in the Reagan administration as a political appointee, released today by the Reagan Presidential Library.
hat tip:Political Journal, WSJ

Democrats Caught Passing Talking Points Bashing Alito (VIDEO)

 Democrats Caught Passing Talking Points Bashing Alito (VIDEO)

These clowns would be funny if they weren't so dangerous. They have no problem with a Ginsburg, former lawyer for the ACLU/NAMBLA/ MAN BOY LOVE, but these upstanding citizens they try to tear down and mind you I am Pro-Choice (first three months)

Red State traces the document back to the DNC – and also finds the document was originally titled “how they made their $$, personal holdings, the whole deal”

Now, this is interesting - because even Tip O'Neil's flack (Chris Matthews) thinks it's not only bad politics - it's just offensive.

Despite the Democrat's attempt to make this document "Not for attribution" - let's go ahead and attribute it, shall we? Because the technical wizards at the Democratic National Committee never got the "don't forward Word documents" memo. You can download the document here.

HOST: we’ll have it live as soon as it begins. Wait for that, more on the nomination of Samuel Alito is chris matthews. Of course, conservatives extremely happy.

MATTHEWS: Right.

HOST: Let’s cut to the chase. Do you think we’ll see a filibuster?

MATTHEWS: I don’t know. I think the democrats, i’m sitting here holding in my hands a disgusting document, put out not for at try bution. the democrats are circulating it. it’s a complaint sheet against judge alito’s nomination. the first thing they nail is he failed to win a mob conviction in 1988. they nail him on not putting italian mobsters in jail. why would they bring this up? this is either a very bad coincidence or very bad politics. either way it will hurt them. this document, not abortion rights, not civil rights but that he failed to nail some mobsters in 1988. this is the top of their list. amazingly bad politics. .

HOST: why not attack him if you are a liberal, why not openly say we fear for abortion rights?

MATTHEWS: i have to ask that. why did they put this document out. this will hurt the democrats. they shouldn’t go after ethnicity. as a prosecutor, a judge, a yale law grad. i don’t understand this kind of politics. unless they have someone who nut on the top of 20 items. the guy being than i talian american not nail a conviction in 17 years ago? interesting.

HOST: what you have in your hand, who signed it?

MATTHEWS: i was given it by one of the producers of nbc, called democrats are circulating this document. they are trying not to put a signature on it. it’s from them.

hat tip:Political teen

The Trick? Miers, The Treat Alito!

He He......Alito, it was Alito all along. Happy Halloween. The Judge's Judge

ALITO! click song #1 (substitute ALITO! for TEQUILA! and dance around the room)

                                                  BUSH KICKS ASS
                                         Bush kicks ass. Ass brays bitterly.

The Miers Nomination: The Right Can Be Wrong

I have been back and forthing with my sister on the ongoing tug of war on the Meirs nomination.

The thing I find interesting about brilliant Washington insiders is how full of shit they are. Or in love with their own agendas or theories. I do not habitually sign on to any one of them except maybe Rush and Barnes, but not Taranto, or even Krauthammer or Coulter (I think she's sees this as a personal insult being a constitutional lawyer herself)

Intelligence and ability is in the eye of the beholder and then becomes the conventional wisdom when the TV experts repeatedly drum a perception into our heads. For example, Quayle was a dunce. He was actually quite bright, but GOP wimps, especially in the absence of a right wing media, let them say it and didn't defend him. Harry Reid said Clarence Thomas was, in a word, stupid or incompetent with poorly written opinions. I don't believe this is so but no one stuck up for him. The same Harry Reid thought very much of Miers and even recommended her for the court.

We know some things about her. She's no dunce. She's been the trusted White House counsel for years and you don't just get to be the president's lawyer if you're a lightweight. It's an important job and not one in the limelight so it's definitely based on merit. The real complaint is she's a corporate lawyer and not a constitutional lawyer. So could she learn what's necessary and in how much time? She could the same way doctors in one discipline can switch to another in a matter of months, but I don't even think it makes a difference because the liberals on the court who are constitutional experts just rule according to thier leftist ideology ignoring things in the constitution or finding things that aren't there or even citing foreign law just to get a desired outcome, the law be damned!

She was the one vetting the choices of the "short list"... and just like Cheney was the one vetting vice presidential hopefuls when the president turned around and said that none of them were good, "I want you, Dick", Bush basically said again "none of these, Harriet, I want you". We are not getting a lot of straight talk because both sides are desperate for someone else. The conservatives want a sure thing and they want to kill this nomination (see Noonan she's one of them) and the liberals will wish to bury her on abortion. There would have been as vicious a fight no matter who was picked (the fight was literally planned for the 2nd pick) but it wouldn't have included this conservative civil war had it been, say, Luttig. Bush expected his people to be loyal or exercise restraint, but they didn't wait for the hearings.

I still say the contentious atmosphere is underrated. Right now we have Delay indicted so he lost his leadership position. They're trying to look at Frist for something (insider trading?) and a dirtball liar like Wilson is the basis for possible indictments of Rove, Libby, and even Cheney. Step back. These are all bullshit fomenting attacks by the left as they try to bring down every important GOP figure to cripple Republican power. Bush tried to do an end run. I wish they would have given this lady a chance. Nobody worries about legal--or any other kind of gravitas--when we're talking about a Democrat. They have some embarrassing leaders from Cynthia McKinney, Maxine Waters, Patty Murray who said Bin Laden was better than us because he ran daycares in Afghanistan, the guy who thought sharks were waiting to eat a million black slaves in the water, the congresswoman who thought man had already gone to Mars, the guy who couldn't find Bosnia on a map and a surgeon general like Jocelyn Elders, a fan of Eric "Clappman", who was the pies de resistance of embarrassing. We never call them stupid or harp on their gaffs. Just Republicans. It's a double standard, it stinks and it should end.

They're so worried? I say it's all bullshit. She's smart enough. If not, it would be evident in the hearings. They could have waited for the hearings and let the Dems attack a woman and look like creeps and lose their credibility even more. Anytime she would rule on that court in the future, could she do any worse than Souter, Stevens, the mellowed O'Connor or the neutered Kennedy--all Republican picks!

hat tip Dr. Nance

My Take on the Miers Nomination

I cannot lie. I do not know enough about constitutional law to weigh in on this one. People that I love and respect can do a far better evaluation than I can............

Limited-government conservatives oppose Miers in part because we believe there is no reason to expect her, based on her legal experience and qualifications, to argue forcefully and persuasively in the Court against the judicial activism of both parties. We oppose her precisely because we don't want to take the chance of supporting someone who will disregard the Constitution and isonomic law for the sake of either party's myopic promises of immediate gains

see what I mean?
more thoughts here;

The Sins questions the intellectual honesty of Miers’ critics, including yours truly: “how can you oppose someone because they are not conservative enough when you argued ideology should not matter for Roberts?

And the answer is, judicial philosophy matters.  And clearly having a conservative ideology shouldn’t be exclusionary—particularly when that “ideology” calls for an approach to the Constitution that demands fealty to the text and discourages activism.

I argued that Roberts was clearly qualified, and that he approached the law the way a conservative justice should—even though I had several local concerns.  That is, I don’t need to know (and indeed, I should’t know) how he will vote on, say, abortion—because I am comfortable that he is approaching the law in good faith.

How am I to extrapolate the from what Miers has offered? 

Because she has no judicial track record, I’m forced to look at her political feints.  Personally, I don’t care how she votes on any particular issue.  I just need convincing that her judicial decisions will be grounded in a viable and coherent judicial philosophy.  And her political positions seem to suggest to me otherwise, which is why I’d be more comfortable with a candidate who has a strong reputation for professing the kind of conservative ideals that are consistent with strict constructionism.

What do I really think? I think Miers was way down the list and on one else wanted the harangue of a public hanging. I know I wouldn't. Think about it. The only one who could make it through such a grueling, impossible vetting would be a sweet little church lady.

Could you see Gestapo interrogator,  the murdering drunk Chappaquidick Kennedy, being  vetted in this fashion? Ha!

As Anthony Scalia recently said;

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, often extolled by conservative Republicans as their ideal model of a judge, said yesterday the confirmation process was too politicized and that he wouldn't want to experience it again,"  

UPDATE: October 12th Taranto weighs in and it's heavy. And Fred Barnes........these are the guys I pay attention to.

Live Blogging the John Roberts Hearings at LITTLE GREEN FOOTBALLS

I will be over at Little Green Footballs here  liveblogging the Kennedy vs. Roberts at the nomination hearings

Watch it if you wish to see good vs evil in the flesh..............FOX NEWS has Live Streaming Video here

Great post over by Caesar over at LGF:

Ted Kennedy's strategy:

Step 1)
Speak briefly about precedent that does not apply to his ultimate point.
Step 2) Try to make an argument against the nominee, so that you might justify your not voting for him.
Step 3) Watch said argument be torn apart.
Step 4) Ignore the fact that said argument has been torn apart, go back to pre-written notes based on the idea that said argument would not have been torn apart, and imply that Roberts is anti-black, pro-whitey, anti-handicapped, and anti-women.

Roberts strategy:
Step 1) Explain the law to an idiot.
Step 2) Watch the idiot make a fool out of himself as he struggles to and ultimately fails in understanding said law.
Step 3) Rinse, repeat.

15 minute break. I think Teddy is going to go get himself a few shots of vodka.

Top Photo: Fox News: Jack Roberts, John Roberts' son, yawns while sitting during the confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Photo: Fatboy's Scrapbook, hat tip Paul, LGF

UPDATE 1:05pm:  Hearings Recess for lunch.
I will continue live blogging the hearings at 2:15 pm at the Tuesday Open Thread at Little Green Footballs here, do join me and synchronize your watches.

Chuckie "WE ARE GOING TO WAR OVER THE SUPREME COURT" Schumer coming up to  bat

UPDATE: The Dems aka Fifth column had the audacity to bring up the murder of Teresa Schindler Schiavo. But that is Kennedy's specialty isn't it, making government an accessory to murder, eh?

Schiavo Judge Accepted Excessive Campaign Contributions

[Judge Greer - candidate ] A candidate may not accept a contribution in excess of $500 from any one person per election.

However, records show that George W. Greer did last year----including an extra $500 from an attorney representing Michael Schiavo

hat tip: J Crue

MoveOn.Org aka Soros' Wallet Targeting Honorable John Roberts with Katrina Horrors

These people will stop at nothing............and I mean nothing. They are completely and utterly morally bankrupt, and essentially evil
From USA TODAY

The televised images of poverty-stricken evacuees from Hurricane Katrina are part of a provocative, last-minute effort by a liberal interest group [translation: treasonous thugs hoping  to overthrow the America we know and love - Atlas] to divert federal Judge John Roberts' path to confirmation as chief justice.

		'We believe John Roberts' record on civil rights ... is clearly not the direction our country needs to head now,' a MoveOn.org spokesperson said.
		By Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP

MoveOn.org Political Action[aka as George Soro's wallet, who BTW is targeting Santorum as well and winning - Atlas] plans to unveil a TV ad on Monday that questions whether Roberts is sensitive enough to civil rights concerns to lead the Supreme Court. The ad suggests that the plight of the mostly African-American evacuees in New Orleans showed that poverty remains a serious problem among minorities, said Ben Brandzel, the group's advocacy director. In a mix of judicial and racial politics, the ad then suggests that minorities could suffer if the Senate confirms Roberts.

My position of Roberts? If he is having trouble getting confirmed, then G-d couldn't get the job either............

 

- Chief Justice William Rehnquist has died,

Expect the muvuh off all battles.........
..........too much at stake.  And the lefties are going to be apoplectic.

Expect every scare tactic imaginable, abortion abolished, equal rights abolished, RICO abolished, Patriot Act abolished.
Get your popcorn out you are in for a reallllllllly big shooooooooooooooe

GLOVES OFF BOYS!

Eminently Appropriate

Hi Pamela,
I'm sure you've probably heard about his, but I wanted to let you know just in case. I've copied the following from the Western Standard's blog, The Shotgun ), which is an excellent blog to visit if you're interested in the fight for individual freedoms and Western Civilization up here in Canada. [yes Charlotte, my favorite Canadian,  is fighting the good fight in the battle for the hearts and minds of our Northern neighbor - Atlas]

Eminently Appropriate

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Kelo v. City of New London, has plenty of people upset. They include a London Darrow Clements who appears to be pretty clever. He was steamed enough to try to figure out a way to use eminent domain on one of the Justices that voted in favour of the eminent domain ruling. He found one in Justice David Souter.

So what's he up to? He's put forward a proposal to take just that Justice's home and replace it with the Lost Liberty Hotel. The Hotel would feature a 'Just Desserts Cafe,' as well as a permanent museum to the loss of liberty in America. Found under each pillow will be a free copy of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.

Wrote Clements in the application:

"Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, Kelo v. City of New London, clears the way for this land to be taken by the government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare."

Does he have a case? Maybe not. But he does say this:

"This is not a prank ... The town of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

The Boston Herald likes the idea, but doesn't think much will come of it.

Which would be a shame. So I did a little digging and found the email addresses of the five Board of Selectmen in the town of Weare, New Hampshire. I then wrote them a letter explaining that, for one, I will make the trip out to New Hampshire regularly to visit the Hotel, and I will also try to host a Liberty Summer Seminar in New Hampshire as well, should the Hotel be built. It'll be good for the Town of Weare, after all, with all the tax revenue and tourism dollars which, surely, will be of greater public benefit than Justice Souter sipping sweet tea in a hammock all afternoon.

You can write them a letter too, if you want.

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on July 11, 2005 at 04:21 PM

I've written the Selectmen of Weare a letter, outlining how myself and all of my friends would stay at this hotel and visit Weare. I'm sure many on your blog would love to write them letters as well.

Charlotte

Thanks Charlotte, my favorite email of the day