Category: Enemies of the Constitution

“Take a step back and you see that every warning light is flashing red.”

As David points out, the Democrats don’t much like the Constitution itself, and he cites numerous books and articles by academic and media elites to that effect. It’s not just the elite either, with 49% of all Democrats thinking the document “should be mostly or completely rewritten.” The reasons vary, some Democrats believing that the document is tainted by its racist writers, other Democrats seeing it as a hindrance to the type of social change they wish to enact, and others just believing that a 240-year-old document is an archaic relic in need of a re-write.

<snip>

By the way, I haven’t even delved into the vast array of dirty, norm breaking tricks that the Democrats have either engaged in or had revealed over the past four years, including lawfare, indictments, FBI raids, censorship, spying on campaigns by the security agencies, electoral chicanery, etc… All of which would lead to the understandable fear of the Democrats not relinquishing the White House to Trump.

Take a step back and you see that every warning light is flashing red.

Source: The Coming Storm

Kick ’em Out!

More like this, please. There’s no Constitutional exception allowing your God-given rights to be curtailed in government buildings.

The commission, with no remaining options left, decided to do what any decent landlord would do when faced with problem tenants: they evicted them.

At a meeting last week, the commission voted unanimously to kick the courts out of the building and relocate them to other county-owned buildings that are either not currently being used or will soon be vacated.…

Stories like this are a good reminder that we should never accept an anti-gun situation as something beyond our ability to change.

Source: Nevada County Evicts Anti-gun Judges From County Government Building

 

Defense in Depth

Ask a leftist the very most basic question you can, and you will never get an answer. Try “What imbues a human life with value?”, and you’ll get a pile of hard luck pregnancy cases, and some very impolite descriptions of your character. Ask “What characteristics define a woman?”, and you’ll get called a transphobe. (Matt Walsh has made much of his career out of this.) Ask “To what standard should we keep those that simply decline to work?” and you’ll get called heartless
This isn’t an accident. They KNOW that they can’t actually defend ANY of their positions, so they deflect from actual discussion OF those positions.
And here is where OUR failure begins, and where Donald Trump has shown us the way. We need to stop letting them get away with it! We need to start pointing out that their policies have led to tens of thousands of child sex slaves being brought across their unmonitored border, that the minimum wage leads ONLY to generational poverty, and benefits virtually no one. We need to keep asking the questions, and ignoring the obfuscation. We need to STOP pretending that they have “good intentions”, because anyone that is willing to lie to bring about their goals CANNOT mean well.
 

Bar association threatens freedom

A conservative judge running for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court says the state bar association has threatened him with a “Not Recommended” rating if he doesn’t fill out its “political” questionnaire on diversity and LGBT issues.
These questions are intrusive, divisive, and racist. Would you answer these? I reject the very premises of the questions and would file them in the garbage can. “Inclusion” is not important. In fact, “inclusion” violates freedom of association.
 
If these various types of “people” aren’t included it’s for good reason. Either they want to be left alone, like most normal people, or they are moral reprobates who should be excluded, if not jailed, for their deviant crimes (looking at you, LGBTPxyzwtf crowd).
 
I used to think that bar associations were groups of professionals…
 
• “How important is it to you to have inclusion from people of a different race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, physical or mental disability, military status, or sexual orientation than you as a lawyer and/or judge in the legal profession?
• “What efforts, if any, have you made in your community to include people of a different race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, physical or mental disability, military status, or sexual orientation than you as a lawyer and/or judge in the legal profession?”