Tag Archives: morality

Rule By Law vs Rule Of Law

Posted on by
1

The Justice Department said Thursday that it will sue Texas over its voter ID law and, separately, look for ways to intervene in a lawsuit over the state’s redistricting policies

It’s just one harassment of a State after another by a Federal government disgruntled that it can’t get its way just for the demanding.  Attorney General Eric Holder justified the attack, saying this is just part of DoJ’s

continuing effort to protect the voting rights of all eligible Americans.  We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision [that Congress must update its Voting Rights Act pre-clearance criteria] to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.

Emphasis on that “We will not allow.”  Holder will not allow the Supreme Court decision to have effect; the United States’ chief lawyer will simply ignore it.  Never mind that his actions are designed to attack the voting rights of all eligible Americans by preventing states from ensuring that only eligible Americans vote.  Indeed,

[f]ollowing the [Supreme Court] ruling, Holder called the court’s decision and its reasoning behind it “flawed,” and vowed to find other ways within the law to challenge the ruling.

This is rank rule by law—cynically using law (or creating it, which is not, strictly speaking, the case here) to achieve government ends, rather than living within law the We the People have made through our elected representatives in order to protect us…from government, among others.

As an aside, it’s interesting to note that the center of other criticisms of states’ voter ID laws is a claim like Colin Powell’s: “there is no voter fraud.”  Even if this were true, there’d be no harm in taking steps to keep it that way.  As the objectors know; hence their objection plainly centers on their need for the ineligible to be able to vote early and often.

A White Line

Posted on by
Reply

…with just a tinge of pink.

Since Obama declared last August that chemical weapons would constitute a “red line,” the administration this past June did conclude that the government used chemical weapons.

Now, a year later, and after additional CW attacks (which our allies have tended to confirm, even though our government will not admit of this), comes this:

…Syrian activists are accusing Bashar Assad’s forces of killing hundreds in a gas attack—in what would be the worst and deadliest chemical attack to date.

The attack raises new concerns that the so-called “red line” in Syria has been crossed, violated and effectively ignored.

That a major gas attack, with hundreds of casualties, occurred has been confirmed by video, symptom suites, and eye witness accounts.  Intelligence sources confirm that the Syrian rebels are very unlikely to be capable of mounting a chemical attack of this magnitude.  Beyond that, the political consequences, even in Syria, of being found out render a rebel CW attack of this size even more unlikely.

President Barack Obama, though, had this to say, through his secondary spokesman, Josh Earnest:

The United States strongly condemns any and all use of chemical weapons.  Those responsible for the use of chemical weapons must be held accountable.  Today, we are formally requesting that the United Nations urgently investigate this new allegation.  The UN investigative team, which is currently in Syria, is prepared to do so, and that is consistent with its purpose and mandate.

Yeah, that’ll show ’em.  Assad is shaking in his loafers.

What do “held accountable” or “unacceptable” (another favorite Obamatalk word) mean when there are no consequences?

Another Take

Posted on by
Reply

…on the relationship between Progressives and their plantation hands of a certain group.  Here‘s Louisiana State Senator Elbert Lee Guillory (erstwhile Democrat, now Republican):

It’s no longer the American Dream, it’s the American nightmare of relying on a monthly government check.

And

Only capitalism can provide the upward mobility for the meekest among us to break the shackles of poverty and rise into the middle class. This is what we call “The American Dream.”

Guillory has more here.

The Free at Last PAC also looks like a group worth serious consideration.

He Doesn’t Get It

Posted on by
Reply

Baptist Minister Bruce Prescott, with the aid of the ACLU, is suing Oklahoma (specifically, the Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission) in a state court over the presence of a monument representing the Ten Commandments on the state’s Capitol grounds.

Prescott told Oklahoma City’s News9

It’s inappropriate, it’s not the right place.  Put it on the doorpost, that’s what the Bible says; it doesn’t say to put it at the State Capitol.

Here’s what he doesn’t get: the State Capital is the doorpost for all the citizens of Oklahoma.

Too, his ACLU representatives are ignoring the facts that this is a privately funded and erected monument and that the Supreme Court already has ruled that such monuments in the public square—or on government grounds—are entirely appropriate so long as displays representing other religions or atheism are not barred.  Of course, the ACLU is not alleging such a barring.

Special Treatment

Posted on by
Reply

It’s been a few days since the “for the fun of it” murder of a white man by black teenagers, so it’s appropriate to ask.

Where’s the hue and cry?

Who would President Barack Obama’s notional son resemble in this case?

Where is Eric Holder organizing protests against this racist murder?

Where are Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson—both men of the cloth by their nominal education—protesting against the injustice of this race-oriented murder?

Where is the NLMSM’s coverage of this black-on-white murder?

Hmm….