Connect with us

Everything

When will activist judges be satisfied? Never

Published

on

Federal Judge Nelva Gonzalez Ramos, in a stunning display of naked judicial activism, has again struck down a Texas law requiring proper identification to vote, even though this law had addressed the concerns expressed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals toward its predecessor. Ramos wrote that the law “imposes burdens disproportionately on blacks and Latinos.”

Wow. What a load of horse manure.

How is anything ever more difficult for blacks and Latinos than it is for white people or anyone else? Well, the only answer for that is, of course, that Judge Ramos sees these people as less capable than whites or Asians. If a requirement that is uniformly applied is somehow seen as discriminatory against one group or another, it is because those seeing the discrimination see those being “discriminated” against as less capable.

They aren’t. Blacks and Latinos are just as capable as anyone else of raising families, having a job, paying their bills, voting, and getting an ID. Leftists constantly tell us they are not, and that voter ID is therefore racist. Seems to me the fact that the Leftists see blacks and Latinos as less capable of getting an ID is racist.

The Democratic National Convention was held last year. Guess what you needed to get in? An ID. You have to have proper ID to buy alcohol, drive a car, get a job, or fly on an airplane. Are all these activities racist? The stupid people of the world will immediately try to argue these are not rights, but privileges.

Ok smart people: You have to have an ID to buy a gun, which is a RIGHT guaranteed by the Constitution. Are we going to start selling guns to people without ID now? No, because Leftists don’t want that done at all, much less without ID. By Leftist logic though, requiring ID to buy a gun is racist.

A few years ago I was working as a process server and private investigator. I was delivering court documents to the courthouse and there was a black man in the clerk’s office, trying to get some paperwork done. He needed a notary and couldn’t afford a lawyer. I happened to be a notary so I had him follow me down to my truck after I filed my paperwork, just so I could help him out free of charge.

He was obviously disabled and blind in one eye. I found out he was on disability. He was black, poor, disabled. The guy had nothing. He was a perfect example of what the Left claims Voter ID laws discriminate against. Guess what he DID have? If you said “an ID” you’d be correct. I wouldn’t be able to notarize anything for him without one. He wouldn’t be able to DO anything without an ID. That’s life in America today. The idea that he wouldn’t be able to get an ID is complete fantasy.

There’s only one logical reason liberals in general and the Democratic Party in particular make these bogus claims of racism when it comes to voter ID: they want to be able to commit voter fraud.

They want illegals to vote. They want volunteers to go vote claiming to be people they know are dead. They want to be able to go and vote on behalf of people they don’t think will show up.

When I worked at a polling station a few years ago before Texas had voter ID, a number of people were not able to vote because they “had already voted.” They were understandably angry. They showed us ID voluntarily, proving they were who they said they were. Unfortunately, since it wasn’t required, other people had come before them, claiming to be them and voting in their stead.

How do I know they were voting for Democrats? Who is doing the complaining about voter ID? Sure, plenty of Republicans would be against voter ID if they thought they could benefit from it, but so far they haven’t.

It’s funny to me how the American Left is constantly railing about “the integrity of our democracy” etc when it comes to talking about the electoral college verses the popular vote, but they aren’t the least bit interested in making sure that popular vote has integrity through a simple thing like making sure voters are who they say they are, and that they are American citizens who have the right to vote in our elections. No, illegal aliens, and even legal immigrant non-citizens do NOT have a right to vote in our elections.

The argument over Voter ID really is one of the silliest we’ve seen, and that is saying something in this day in age. Blacks and Latinos are just as capable as anyone else of getting an ID. To say otherwise is racist. So is the American Left racist or are they simply interested in committing the crime of voter fraud on a massive scale? Those are the only two options.

I almost feel silly writing this article, since this is all so obvious. I should have written this under the pen name “Captain Obvious.” And yet, the Left will make their ridiculous arguments, and you and I, dear reader, can just sit back, shake our heads, and mock the transparency of their fraud.

Judge Ramos is continuing the work of the 9th and 4th Circuits, as well as the lunatic judge in Hawaii who struck down President Trump’s travel ban even after it was upheld by the Supreme Court, in completely destroying what’s left of the credibility American judiciary. A lawyer I have close ties to once told me that all judges rule based on the law, not personal ideology. My eyes nearly rolled out of my head. This is a prime example of judicial activism and it has to stop.

Congress needs to start impeaching these out of control judges and get us back to the rule of law. I fear that will never happen though, as the current congress can’t even get a repeal of Obamacare done with both houses of Congress under their control as well as a Republican in the White House. This would be an obvious place to start, since the integrity of our elections should be important to everyone… except for those who don’t want integrity in our elections, of course.

 

Benjamin Wilhelm served as a commissioned officer in the United States military for 10 years, serving one combat tour in Afghanistan. He is a recipient of the Bronze Star and Combat Action Badge among other military awards. Ben has worked in a variety of private sector businesses both large and small. He is a former military and civilian firearms instructor and an advocate for veterans issues. Ben is a strict Constitutionalist who sees the Federal government as an out of control leviathan, and the federal debt as a burden that will break the country. Ben is a divorced father of two boys.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinions

It isn’t Never-Trump or Always-Trump destroying conservatism, it’s Sometimes-Trump

Published

on

One of the craziest—or should I say laziest—accusations leveled against me by Trump’s die-hard loyalists whenever I dare to call him out for breaking a campaign promise, getting caught in a lie, or promoting unconstitutional non-conservative ideas, is that I’m a liberal. Sometimes, they go so far as to accuse me of working for George Soros.

As I’ve said many times in response, I don’t work for Mr. Soros, but since money’s been a little tight at the Strident Conservative lately, if anyone has his number, I’d appreciate it if you’d send it my way.

It’s a sad reality that these pathetic taunts are what passes for political discourse in the Age of Trump. Gone are the days when differences could be civilly discussed based on facts instead of emotion.

Another sad reality of this behavior is that it’s a sign that the end of conservatism is near, as Trump’s small army of loyal followers attempt to rebrand conservatism by spreading the lie that he is a conservative and, using binary logic, accusing anyone who opposes him of being a liberal.

This rebranding effort has had an impact. Last week, RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel warned Republican hopefuls that anyone who opposed Trump’s agenda would be “making a mistake.”

McDaniel’s threat was issued following the GOP primary defeat in South Carolina by conservative Mark Sanford after he was personally targeted by Trump himself. Sanford’s crime? Disloyalty to the NY Liberal.

Another source of damage to conservatism has come from evangelicals and the so-called conservative media. In the name of self-preservation, they choose to surrender their principles by promoting the lie that Trump is a conservative. Some of these voices have taken to labelling conservatives who oppose Trump as Never-Trump conservatives, or worse, branding them as liberals and/or Democrats, as was recently written in a piece at TheFederalist.com:

“Trump may be an unattractive and deeply flawed messenger for contemporary conservatism. But loathe though they might be to admit it, what’s left of the Never-Trump movement needs to come to grips with the fact that the only words that currently describe them are liberals and Democrats.”

Then there are those who have adopted a Sometimes-Trump attitude about the president, where everything Trump does is measured using a good Trump/bad Trump barometer. While it has become fashionable for Sometimes-Trump conservatives to stand on their soap boxes condemning both Never-Trump conservatives and Always-Trump faux conservatives, I believe that this politically bipolar approach to Trump is the greatest threat of all to Constitutional conservatism in America.

Sometimes-Trump conservatives have accepted the lie that it’s okay to do a little evil in exchange for a greater good. Though they may fly a conservative banner, their lukewarm attitude about Trump is much like the attitude we see in the Laodicean church mentioned in the Book of Revelations (3:15-16).

“I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.”

Trump is a double-minded man unstable in all his ways (James 1:8). When lukewarm Sometimes-Trump conservatives choose to overlook this reality, they end up watering-down conservatism to the point that it has no value or power to change America’s course.

As lukewarm Sometimes-Trump conservatives point to the Always-Trump and Never-Trump factions as the reason for today’s conservative divide, remember that it’s the unenthusiastic, noncommittal, indifferent, half-hearted, apathetic, uninterested, unconcerned, lackadaisical, passionless, laid back, couldn’t-care-less conservative imposters in the middle who are really responsible.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and FacebookSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video Double play: Busting the gun grabber’s musket myth.

Published

on

By

Gun confiscation bingo

Two videos that eviscerate the Liberty Grabbers ‘One shot’ musket myth.

It is a bedrock principle (if they have any) of the Liberty grabber Left that back during the ratification of the US Constitution the only weapons in existence were flintlock musket that took 5 minute to reload. Thus there wasn’t any school violence because it would have taken too long for the perpetrator to kill anyone.

As it typical of the lore of the national socialist Left, this is a lie of the first order. A previous video celebrated the “Assault Weapon” tricentennial, which was bit of the tongue in cheek variety since there were other repeating “Military Style” weapons in existence before this time period. These will be detailed in future articles. Meanwhile we present two videos that also bust the ‘Musket Myth’, one a short presentation from the Royal Armouries on the Jover and Belton “Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket”

Royal Armouries
Published on Aug 30, 2017
Curator of Firearms, Jonathan Ferguson, gives us a peek at the Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket, by Jover and Belton (1786)

This is a very relevant piece since the inventor Joseph Belton corresponded with the Continental Congress in 1777:

May it Please your Honours,
I would just informe this Honourable Assembly, that I have discover’d an improvement, in the use of Small Armes, wherein a common small arm, may be maid to discharge eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time, & each one to do execution five & twenty, or thirty yards, and after so discharg’d, to be loaded and fire’d with cartridge as usual.

“It was demonstrated before noted scientists and military officers (including well known scientist David Rittenhouse and General Horatio Gates)”

This destroys the mythology that the founders had no knowledge of this type of repeating firearm technology that existed already.

The second is a humours dissertation on the subject from video raconteur Steven Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/

from a few years ago that also eviscerates this bit of Leftist mythology.

Published on Feb 10, 2015
People have been telling us for years that the 2nd amendment was written in a time of Muskets, and that it doesn’t apply to the evolved weapons of today. Is it true?

So why is this important?

Two primary reasons. One that these factual examples demonstrate that the founding fathers knew of these technological advances. Therefore, they destroy any Leftist pretences that the 2nd amendment be confined to muskets. Second that, school violence is something other than an issue of guns.

Continue Reading

Immigration

House proposal makes DACA permanent and grants citizenship to illegals

Published

on

When Donald Trump issued an executive order in Sept. 2017 rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) order issued by Barack Obama, he was cheered by his adoring fans for appearing to keep one of his campaign promises regarding the illegal immigration problem. However, as the old saying goes, appearances can be deceiving.

The reason I call it deceiving is because Trump’s order was merely a technicality—sort of a Rescind-In-Name-Only moment—used to buy the time necessary to make DACA permanent, which has been his “big heart” goal from the beginning.

Of course, any permanent legislation needs to come from Congress, which should have been problematic for Republicans who campaigned for years against Obama’s handling of illegal immigration. But in today’s Republican party—owned and operated by Trump—such commitments have become secondary to the requirement to please Dear Leader.

For example, just days after Trump’s deceptive order, Mitch McConnell went on record in support of negotiation with Democrats and the president—but I repeat myself—to save DACA and create an amnesty plan and eventual citizenship for approximately 1.8 million DREAMers.

Though past attempts have failed, election-season fever is sweeping Washington, so Trump and Republican party loyalists are making another push to get the job done.

After conducting several days of Nancy Pelosi-style meetings behind closed doors, Paul Ryan released an immigration plan yesterday that will legally protect DREAMers while also providing over $23 billion for another Trump promise—a border wall.

Wait a minute! I though Trump promised us that Mexico was going to pay for the wall. I suppose that’s just another in-name-only moment for the New York liberal.

Back to the House proposal. DREAMers can apply for “nonimmigrant status” which is essentially a newfangled way to say visa. The extra visas necessary to handle these requests will be available due to new restrictions that will lower the number of legal immigrant applications, which means legal immigrants will be effectively moved to the back of the line.

But that’s not the worst part.

Once obtained, these visas become the first step on a pathway to citizenship, which means that years down the road, 1.8 million illegals—probably more—will have jumped the line to US citizenship ahead of legal immigrants, despite the rhetoric from Trump and the GOP claiming otherwise.

Though this proposal may or may not pass, making DACA permanent and creating a pathway to citizenship are broken promises. But as I wrote a few days ago, breaking promises has become a job requirement in the age of Trump and today’s GOP.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and FacebookSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.