Archive for the Civil Rights Category

The larger meaning of Chik-Fil-A-palooza

Posted in Civil Rights, Democrat Hate/Violence, Fascism/Nazism/Communism, Freedom of Speech, Liberal Hypocrisy, Video Library for Liberal Escapees with tags , , , on August 4, 2012 by b5blue

This is the baseline of our republic….

…and liberalism’s inherent failure to comprehend the fundamentals has brought us to the potential watershed event.  They’ve erected hypocritical walls of political correctness to dampen free speech to gain an upper hand in politics… and what did they do? Trample the boundaries of decency and civil discourse to the point that any dissent outside of their dogma is met with vile bile.   Reason and logic be damned.

There is no more clear example of  liberalism’s  detachment from the fundamentals than the viral video of a (now) former CFO of Vante Corporation acting in a heinous manner towards a polite young Chik-Fil-A employee.  A CFO?  Are  you kidding me?

I’m a corporate puke for a large company and an absolute fundamental of my job is to watch my behavior to protect my job and my company.   Hence, the pseudonym.  Heck, what I post is not remotely vile within the confines of civil discourse… it’s just the specter of PC makes it hard for conservatives to have a dissenting point of view.   Adam Smith?  He felt empowered to video a hateful tirade and post it to the web.  That’s the difference in discussion dynamics between liberals and conservatives/libertarians.  What Adam Smith did was not only grotesquely rude… it was profoundly DUMB.  This is the emotional aspect of liberalism where they have simplistic emotive responses to dissent…devoid of logic most of the time.

Professor Jacobson raises a good point about our response to Mr. Smith’s outcome: Do we cheer Mr. Smith’s unfortunate career demise? 

Of course not.  I don’t wish ill upon anybody…however…. what I do like is the small victory for discourse.  There, apparently, IS a limit to the amount of vile bile for liberals.   High metric, yes… but a boundary nonetheless.   Mr. Smith engaged in a behavior that just a few decades ago would have horrified even the staunchest of liberals and he advertised it.  This act alone demonstrates the paradigm shift in liberalism’s view of political discourse.  They’re marinated in bile and don’t even know it now.

Liberalism constructed the rules of PC and then went on to trample even the basic tenets of decency.  We should cheer the karma, not the outcome to an individual’s future.  Perhaps this karma will serve as a lesson to others on the left.

I’m not optimistic they will learn from it, though.


Chik-Fil-A Entrance Poll: Obama’s Goose is Cooked

Posted in Civil Rights, Democrat Memory Hole, Freedom of Speech, Liberal Straw Men, Obama with tags , on August 2, 2012 by b5blue

Go to ‘Cluck heard ’round the world’Nuff said:

I won’t spend much time discussing the overwhelming success of Chik-Fil-A Appreciation Day…’s all over the web.  I do want to mention a very important aspect: the visceral psychological dynamic of like-minded people rallying together. This does not bode well for Obama and the Spendocrats in November.  Thousands of political conversations occurred yesterday and they were 100% against the bullying establishment that is the Obama administration.

The Obamas and Bloombergs of the world have pushed the majority too far.  In November, the voters will have the final say. (give it a second to load)

Runaway Slave

Posted in Civil Rights, Democrat Racism, Liberal Straw Men, Republicans, Spendocrats, U.S. government with tags , , , , , , , on July 21, 2012 by b5blue

A new movie featuring the stories of black conservatives finding their way off of the Democrat Plantation is opening across the country.

Juicy parts:

Herman Cain caught a great deal of flak for his comment on the campaign trail that he “had left the Democratic plantation,” but he’s not the only one saying it.  Indeed, C.L. Bryant has now joined the ranks of a number of  black closet conservatives who are speaking out against big government, which is what they perceive to be the new plantation.   And the list of black conservatives finding the courage to speak out is growing.

Joining Bryant in this documentary are famous faces like Herman Cain, Allen West, Thomas Sowell, AlfonZo Rachel, and Alveda King.  Sirius radio host David Webb speaks out, and we meet a host of other black conservatives who share their stories such as Mason Weaver, Marvin D. Rogers, and K. Carl Smith, who is the founder of Frederick Douglass Republicans and subscribes to the “four life-affirming values of Douglass: respect for life, respect for the Constitution, belief in limited government and individual responsibility.”


Given all this, why such a monolithic turnout from the black community for the Democratic Party?  This is one of the questions Runaway Slave attempts to answer.  How has black America been improved by all these handouts?  Part of the problem seems to be the controlled decimation of the black family perpetuated by the requirement that to receive that entitlement check, there must not be a father in the home.  You get married, you lose your welfare check.

Planned Parenthood and the high rate of abortions in the black community are also cited.  Most Planned Parenthood centers are in black communities; in New York in 2008, for example, more African-Americans had abortions than gave birth.

In her new book, Blacklash, Deneen Borelli asks, “Why aren’t black kids improving and growing at the same rate as their peers?  My opinion: It’s all in the message from the career black politicians who promote big government solutions that result in stagnation and government dependence.”  The better way, Borelli suggests, is to quit blaming everyone else and take responsibility for your life.  The Constitution does not guarantee you success, but it does guarantee you the opportunity for success.

Worth a click.

Romney and Civil Rights

Posted in American History, Civil Rights, Democrat Racism, General Politics, Romney with tags , , , , on July 15, 2012 by b5blue

This picture obliterates 1,000 words of liberal double speak:

Obamacare: It’s now up to us

Posted in 2012, Civil Rights, Gov't Run Healthcare, U.S. government, Video Library for Liberal Escapees with tags , , on July 2, 2012 by b5blue

Yes, it is.

Lemons and lemonade: Obamacare (Pssst! Bring your own danged sugar!)

Posted in 2012, Abolishing Federal Abominations, Civil Rights, Gov't Run Healthcare, Obama with tags , , , , , , on June 29, 2012 by b5blue

Obviously, I wish the Supremes would have done our grandchildren a huge favor by eviscerating this monstrosity ….but one of the greatest features of the internet is seeking points of view of others with better insight.  Let me open the Obamacare lemonade stand and see what silver linings portend:

1.  Courtesy of Future of Capitalism.  Juicy, tart lemon parts bolded for each opinion piece.

There are already some voices on the right of center angrily denouncing Chief Justice Roberts as a turncoat. I actually think he probably made the right call. Not only for the legal reasons (the mandate, after all, is a tax, because the penalty for being uninsured isn’t being thrown in jail or being deported but paying a tax), but because in the end it may well be better for the country for these decisions to be made through the political process rather than by a group of nine robed graduates of Ivy League law schools in a non-televised proceeding. Look at how Roe v. Wade polarized the abortion debate by taking it out of the political compromise and debate realm and placing it into the Constitutional law realm. A similar move by the court on the health care mandate might have had similar deleterious effects.

2. Courtesy of J. Christian Adams:

The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce.

Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority.

3. Courtesy of Jennifer Rubin.

That is lock, stock and barrel the argument that conservatives have been making and liberals mocked. Roberts reminds us: “Everyone will likely participate in the markets for food, clothing, transportation, shelter, or energy; that does not authorize Congress to direct them to purchase particular products in those or other markets today. The Commerce Clause is not a general license to regulate an individual from cradle to grave, simply because he will predictably engage in particular transactions. Any police power to regulate individuals as such, as opposed to their activities, remains vested in the States.”

Roberts also gave the back of the hand to liberals’ argument that the ”necessary and proper clause” does something more than the Commerce Clause. (“Even if the individual mandate is ‘necessary’ to the Act’s insurance reforms, such an expansion of federal power is not a ‘proper’ means for making those reforms effective.”)

In short, we are a government of enumerated powers, and the Commerce Clause is not a free pass to do whatever Congress pleases.

On the taxing power, Roberts put great weight on what the Obama lawyers said, rather than what was written in the law. He wrote: “It is of course true that the Act describes the payment as a ‘penalty,’ not a ‘tax.’ ” It cited the fact that the IRS is going to collect the payment as evidence it is a “tax.”

4.  Courtesy of Tom Scocca

Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War

The business about “new and potentially vast” authority is a fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress’ regulatory powers, and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society. In 2005, Sen. Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts’ nomination, saying he did not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as “whether the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce.” Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted he would do.

5.  Courtesy of Hot Air.

Romney raises over $100,000 in less than an hour after SCOTUS ruling; Update: RNC says now over $1 million

6. Courtesy of Jay Cost.

Second, the Roberts Court also threw out a portion of the Medicaid expansion. States have the option of withdrawing from the program without risk of losing their funds. This is another major victory for conservatives who cherish our system of dual sovereignty. This was also a big policy win for conservatives; the Medicaid expansion was a major way the Democrats hid the true cost of the bill, by shifting costs to the states, but they no longer can do this.

Politically, Obama will probably get a short-term boost from this, as the media will not be able to read between the lines and will declare him the winner. But the victory will be short-lived. The Democrats were at pains not to call this a tax because it is inherently regressive: the wealthy overwhelmingly have health insurance so have no fear of the mandate. But now that it is legally a tax, Republicans can and will declare that Obama has slapped the single biggest tax on the middle class in history, after promising not to do that.

7.  Courtesy of The Anchoress.

Did Roberts just give Obama the bird? (Go sample the lemonade at Club Anchoress)

8. Courtesy of Noisy Room.

Is Roberts playing Bridge?

By correctly classifying the funding vehicle as a tax, he has played a card that exposes the liberal reality and invites a response from Congress as well as the electorate.

By acknowledging that the *electorate* is responsible for its political choices and therefore its politicians and therefore, ultimately, its laws, and by making it clear that bad law and bad policy may not, in fact, violate the Constitution, since the Constitution was not written with the explicit injunction that “legislators may not write stupid laws,” he plays the card that clarifies the path to eliminating not only the heinous Health Care Sabotage machine, but also the fools and crooks who gave it to us.

Roberts is looking across the table at us now.

9. Courtesy of Mark Tapscott.

After reading and stewing about it all day, I’ve  concluded that what Roberts has done is fundamentally shift the constitutional debate away from the liberal assumption since the Woodrow Wilson era that an Imperial Presidency and supine Congress can pretty much do as they please so long as it’s covered by at least one of those fig leaves known as the General Welfare, Necessary and Proper or Commerce clauses of the Constitution.

The new assumption is, thanks to Roberts, that at least two of those clauses in fact cannot simply be dragooned into the service of whatever a passing majority in Congress wants to do. And having shifted the meaning of those two clauses, courts will likely now have to view the other clause differently as well.

In other words, the Constitution means something today that it didn’t yesterday, at least in terms of constitutional precedent. It’s not a grand rout of liberalism from the field of battle, but the correlation of constitutional forces has now shifted under their feet in such a way that they must go over to the defensive on ground not of their choosing.

10.  Courtesy of Richochet.

At the same time, he (Roberts) dodged the political firestorm, and nearly all of the liberals who have commented on the matter – a slow-thinking lot, in my opinion – have applauded what they take to be cowardice on his part as “judiciousness.” Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit was among the first to recognize that Roberts might be playing an elaborate game. He compared the decision to Marbury v. Madison, where Chief Justice John Marshall surrendered in the case before the court while firmly and eloquently reasserting the Court’s right and responsibility to engage in judicial review; and Reynolds pointed to one crucial fact: Senate rules do not allow a filibuster when the bill under consideration has to do with imposing or repealing a tax. If the Republicans take the Senate and the Presidency, they can now repeal the individual mandate. They will not need sixty votes.

11. Courtesy of George Will.

Conservatives won a substantial victory Thursday. The physics of American politics — actions provoking reactions — continues to move the crucial debate, about the nature of the American regime, toward conservatism. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.has served this cause.

The health-care legislation’s expansion of the federal government’s purview has improved our civic health by rekindling interest in what this expansion threatens — the Framers’ design for limited government. Conservatives distraught about the survival of the individual mandate are missing the considerable consolation prize they won when the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional rationale for the mandate — Congress’s rationale — that was pregnant with rampant statism.

That’s all for today.  Going to hit the beach, y’all.

Obamacare: Right vs Commodity

Posted in Civil Rights, Gov't Run Healthcare, Video Library for Liberal Escapees with tags , , , on June 26, 2012 by b5blue

Share it with a local liberal.

Worth 5 minutes of your time.  I pwomise.

%d bloggers like this: