Connect with us

Conservatism

The myth of overturning Roe v Wade

Published

on

The myth of overturning Roe v Wade

Many on the right are skeptical about opening up Roe v Wade insisting that overturning Roe v Wade will not serve Pro-Life causes because it will force the issue back on the states. In such scenarios, Alabama will be the safe haven for the unborn while New York becomes the importer for people who want to kill their babies. Even if this is the case, it is still a giant win for the pro-life side to enable entire states to ban abortion. But this is merely a literal overturn of Roe v Wade, not a practical one.

Take Brown v BOE as an example of a Supreme Court case that overturned a predecessor: Plessy v Ferguson. The Ferguson ruling maintain the theoretical notion that separate accommodations could be equal; therefore, private businesses must comply with the state’s discrimination policies. It’s a pretty bad ruling, comparable to Roe v Wade, which conjured out of nowhere a Constitutional right to an abortion. But Plessy v Ferguson was overturned by demonstrating that the black schools were inherently inferior to the white schools. So Plessy v Ferguson, was overturned by the parameters of its own ruling.

The Alabama bill defines an abortion as a murder by the practitioner. This is a different animal than what the Supreme Court has ruled on before. In this case we have multiple issues. The chief issue at play is when does personhood begin? The Supreme Court, in order to strike down the Alabama law would have to rule that an unborn child is not a person, again. Evidence has changed since the Casey ruling in biologically proving that an unborn is a human being, not a clump of cells. The pro-abortion arguments against moral personhood have gotten more extreme than viability. Arguing that a fetus is not a person is a losing argument as conception/implantation are the most logically defensible points of the transfer of moral personhood.

The next issue is who has the power to define personhood? Should the Supreme Court strike down the Alabama or the Georgia law, the Supreme Court, out of their own superfluous arrogance would, once again, assert their own jurisdiction in the realm of life. If the Supreme Court rules that a state can define where life begins, they will be denying the self-evident. But what if the Supreme Court rules that inalienable rights, in our founding documents, plainly recognize life begins at creation. In such ruling the Supreme Court would be taking a hint from the Divine, and could issue a sweeping ruling denouncing abortion everywhere.

A third issue at play: does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? The state’s ability to write criminal law is on the line in this court case to come. Alabama has placed steep penalties on the mob doctors who perform abortions. The Supreme Court, in upholding infanticide, would essentially be placing limits on the state’s ability to write criminal law as it relates to homicide. The anti-Constitutional implications of this is yet another power reserved to the states impressed upon, subject to overseeing by the federal government. This ruling would enable people who kill an unborn child and the mother to only be charged with one homicide, not two. Essentially, the law in New York will be the law of the land in a worst case scenario.

What if it fails

I would advocate that Alabama and Georgia ignore the Supreme Court, instead choosing to enforce the law which they pass. The Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce their rulings, by design. So let them try. If they do not recognize when life begins or recognize when life begins and still decree that Alabama must sanction murder, then the Supreme Court is not worth obeying.

Final Thoughts

When does personhood begin? Who has the power to define personhood? Does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? These three questions need answers, and a sweeping ruling is almost certain.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Conservatism

Democrats are fighting enforcement of immigration laws for a more dangerous reason than you realize

Published

on

Democrats are fighting enforcement of immigration laws for a more dangerous reason than you realize

Immigration reform on multiple fronts is needed today, but not nearly as much as enforcement of current laws already on the books. But enforcement is becoming increasingly difficult as Democrats use every legislative roadblock they can muster to hamper ICE and keep border patrol under-resourced. Their motives are disingenuous; they claim to care for the migrants while doing everything they can to prevent them from receiving the help they need.

If we enforce current laws while working to improve them, the crisis at our southern border can be relieved a great deal. It’s not the full solution, but it would go a long way to stopping the massive migrant flow. As I noted on Twitter:

If you ask any conservative pundit, armchair politician, or keyboard warrior on social media why Democrats are obstructing enforcement of current immigration law, you’ll get a lot of correct (and some incorrect) replies. They’ll say Democrats want open borders, which is true. They’ll say they’re appealing to the Hispanic community for votes, which is true. They’ll even say they don’t care about America, which is partially true.

But there’s a bigger and much more dangerous reason I rarely hear, even from pundits. Unfortunately, conservatives are pragmatic in that we normally face the problems at hand. Progressives have an advantage over us from a strategy-perspective because they think in terms of decades instead of years. This is why they’ve been able to take control of the two primary information-providing industries in America: mainstream media and higher education. We’ve done a piss-poor job over the decades planting the right people in the right places. Progressives have been working on subverting 2020 since before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was born.

It’s important to note a distinction before I return to the topic at hand. I’m not suggesting Democratic politicians think ahead. They can’t think beyond the next cocktail hour. But the various leaders of the radical progressive movements have been working to subvert our nation since the 1960s or earlier. They’ve done so in a coordinated fashion, one that acted to benefit them at the time while clearly setting up a path for deeper radicalization in the future.

Today is the future they’ve planned for, one in which socialism is becoming more popular and truth is heading towards extinction.

The real danger in the actions of today’s Democrats as it pertains to the border is the normalization of “immigrant” to refer to anyone from a foreign land regardless of legal status. This is why they cry about detention centers but fight against giving them the funding they need. It’s why they refer to anyone opposed to illegal immigration, including legal immigrants like me, as racists. They are using a technique known as jamming to insert their ideology through terminology repeated to the masses and invading the collective consciousness.

Conservatives must do everything we can to reverse the course being set by radical progressives through their pawns in the Democratic Party. “Immigrants” are legal immigrants, period. “Illegal aliens” are people from foreign lands who have breached our borders, circumvented our immigration laws, and/or taken advantage of loopholes to enter and remain in this country illegally. These are not a unified body of people. There are clear distinctions between someone like me, who was born in another country and went through the process of entering the United States and becoming an American citizen legally, and those who choose to break our laws so they can garner the fruits of being in America.

The American Conservative Movement is forming to do many things, including nominating conservative candidates to defeat “RINOs,” helping conservatives win in elections for offices currently held by Democrats, and educating the people about dangerous policies like Medicare-for-All as well as ideologies like socialism. But we cannot simply sit back and try to fight fire with fire when it comes to combating many of the techniques utilized by progressives. As they use jamming to change the way Americans think about “immigrants” in general, we can’t just sit back and say, “that’s not true.” We have to demonstrate our message is correct by offering clear and concise reasons the progressives’ message is wrong.

Having the truth on our side is a start, but it’s not enough if the post-truth society the progressives are building is allowed to go unchecked. We must fight smarter and harder. This is why the conservative movement must grow. Will you help?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

AOTR 06-24-19: PolitiBunny joins Rick on KOKC 95.3FM, 1520AM

Published

on

AOTR 06-24-19 PolitiBunny joins Rick on KOKC 953FM 1520AM

Occasionally I have the honor of hosting an afternoon talk radio show on KOKC 1520 AM and 95.3 FM. in Oklahoma City. During this interview, we talk with Sam Janney who you may know on Twitter as @PolitiBunny. On this interview, we talk about the life of a Twitchy editor.

Before we get to that though we also discuss the Executive Order Donald Trump signed to add transparency to medical pricing. I am no fan of Executive Orders but this one I can support. I have been advocating for visible pricing in medical procedures for over a decade and I applaud him for trying to do something about q huge problem we have in this country.

If you like the episode make sure to check out KLRNRadio where I happen to be the program director. I will also begin contributing here on NOQ more frequently.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Cults of personality and the U.S. presidency

Published

on

Cults of personality and the US presidency

THE DAYS OF CAMELOT

John Fitzgerald Kennedy was the first President during my lifetime to whom followers ascribed a larger-than-life persona. He was a World War II hero from an affluent and influential New England family. He was just in his early 40s when he became President. First Lady Jackie Kennedy was a wealthy sophisticate fluent in European languages and culture. There was just something special about JFK and his family.

I was just a young teenager from out west, but even I couldn’t resist trying to mimic that impeccable Massachusetts accent by intoning the words: “Well, let me say this about that. We are moving on to the New Frontiers with great vigor.” I can still do it, by the way.

Then it all came crashing down one dark November day in 1963 in Dallas, Texas. The crudeness of Lyndon Baines Johnson was a rude awakening which rubbed salt in the wounds of those who had lost Camelot.

4.5 DECADES OF MERE MORTALS IN THE OVAL OFFICE

Nixon was awkward. Ford was clumsy. Carter was a faux Southern gentleman. Reagan’s legacy as bigger than life is largely retrospective. Bush 41 often misspoke. Clinton always sounded and acted like he just came out of the trailer park. Bush 43 tended to bumble a lot.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II

As a child in Indonesia, he grew up as Barry Soetoro and at Punahou School in Hawaii he was Barry Obama. It was Michelle who convinced him that Barack would serve his intersectional purposes better. He has played the part perfectly.

In the early days of POTUS 44, school children in Philadelphia were singing hymns of praise to the man who fled Hawaii to take up racial politics in Chicago. He had reached the pinnacle.

All serious consideration of his background and credentials were strictly off-limits. Verboten. You know all the questions so I won’t repeat them here. The perfect Manchurian Candidate.

DONALD JOHN TRUMP

As different as they may be in many ways, our previous President and the incumbent share one overriding similarity. Each is totally wrapped up in himself. All else is secondary at best or irrelevant at worst.

But it is not what Donald Trump thinks of himself that is the issue. It’s the vicarious thrill up the leg of all his followers who see themselves in his place of ultimate power with a trophy wife.

Ego has never been a disqualifier for political office. In fact, it usually helps propel a candidate to get there in the first place. The real concern is whether the person has the knowledge and qualifications to do the job. Not to mention the propensity for it.

Perhaps a President and Commander-in-Chief need not be a Subject Matter Expert [SME] on national security or economics. But he or she must have the basic knowledge, wisdom and temperament to choose the best advisors and stick with them.

President Trump’s first Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was a nothingburger. Now Mike Pompeo is a rather pompous little twit who is out of his league. National Security Advisor Mike Flynn was right on and understood the ideological underpinning of Islamic Jihad. He was replaced by General H.R. McMaster, a total dhimmi. Any morning now, expect to wake up and find out that expert John Bolton has moved on because he no longer has the President’s ear.

The real underlying problem in all this is that the cult of personality around Donald Trump is convinced he can do no wrong. Whether he does a, b or c, that is the right course of action simply by virtue of the fact that Trump is the one doing it. Decisions are no longer based upon empirical facts. They are tied to the reputation of the person doing them.

There are strong reasons to believe that reticence in retaliating against Iran’s downing of a U.S. Navy drone was a warning sign of a lack of resolve by the decision-maker, President Trump. Whether his order for ICE to round up and deport illegal aliens was put in abeyance due to an unauthorized leak by a member of his administration or not remains to be seen.

I try not to use terms like Trump zombies or sycophants, but the truth of the matter is that far too many people are unwilling to assess our current President’s policies and actions on their own merit.

As an example, if those who attempt to storm and breach our southwestern border are met with tear gas and if illegal aliens are detained as long as necessary, it should not matter whether that order was given by Barack Obama or Donald Trump during their respective tenures in the Oval Office. Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree ~ but of course never will ~ that this is not a political issue. Our national sovereignty is not negotiable.

POTUS 46

So, is Donald Trump the Real McCoy? Do we take medical advice from a person who says he’s not a real doctor but that he just plays one on TV? DJT gave an Emmy Award-level performance in his audition for the part of President and Commander-in-Chief. He won the role much to his own surprise. Now, I believe he is sincerely trying to do the job.

Feeble attempts at substantive discussions during the GOP debates were met with insults and put-downs. But in a society that values visuals on the screen above the ability to do the hardest and most important job in the world, we get what we asked for and what we deserve.

The Democrat circus currently underway is following the same script. You’re not going to hear any serious discussion or debate regarding the essential issues of the day. It will be all glitz and glamor and one-upmanship.

Which Progressive personality do you want to form your cult around? Are gender and demographics important to you? Is something right or wrong because it is right or wrong or because somebody you like or dislike says it?

THE FUTURE OF OUR REPUBLIC

The reason I saw the 2016 election as a no-win situation was that either we would have the reprehensible policies of Hillary or else I would have to try to defend Donald against detractors even though his campaign performance revealed how fragile his capabilities really are.

If we now had President Hillary Clinton ~ as everyone shudders in unison ~ at least conservatives would be united in getting the best candidate to limit her to one term. But, now anyone who sees Trump as potentially vulnerable to defeat in 2020 is considered a traitor. We are just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic in preparation for next year’s election.

It’s pretty well obvious now that no conservative is going to mount a primary challenge against Donald Trump. That severely limits our options in trying to stop our train of state from totally derailing next year.

The far-left radical wing of the Democrat Party is squelching and silencing all opposition and eliminating any moderates from contention for the nomination. Remember in 2008 how Republicans were thrilled that Barack Obama stopped Hillary’s bid, because they thought he had no chance to win in November. How did that work out for them?

Don’t think that an absolute socialist or open borders advocate cannot possibly become our next President. Whatever his chances, great or slim, I would suggest that we not undermine the candidacy of Joe Biden. Yes, he’s moving left to accommodate the progressive constituency.

But if Trump goes up against a different Democrat who is willing to destroy America to achieve his or her own ambitions and then he loses, that will be an unmitigated disaster. That’s why I hope his opponent will be Joe Biden. At this point, I will cast my vote for Donald Trump in that binary scenario. But I don’t think Joe Biden would wreak havoc upon American society the way the other Democrat candidates would.

THINK AHEAD TO 2024

If Trump wins re-election and serves a full second term, then who will emerge to succeed him? Mike Pence is certainly competent and a decent fellow. But he isn’t dynamic and has no political charisma. If we had to survive four years of Biden, conservatives could once again benefit from being the party out of power.

Republicans never know how to handle their authority. They waste golden opportunities. They squander the chance to do things when they’re in control. With a GOP President and control of both Senate and House for two years, they did nada!

ACM’S TIME HAS COME

As we build American Conservative Movement, we need new blood within the Republican Party. We need to start now as we prepare for the 2020 elections.

Then if Trump wins, we have to prepare for the post-Trump era which will begin in 2024. If he loses, our incentive will be all that much stronger and we will benefit from being united against the Democrat policies rather than divided by whether to give Trump carte blanche or whether to support him when he’s right and oppose him when he’s wrong.

So, I would say our priority at this point is to recruit new talent. Mount primary challenges against RINOs for federal, state and municipal offices. Do what we can to support Donald Trump’s re-election campaign. But don’t be caught off guard without a Plan B on November 4, 2020. Plan B stands for Biden and our forming the loyal opposition.

It’s either that or clearing the high hurdle overcoming the calamitous policies of President ____________ [fill in the blank with the name of the Democrat candidate who is your worst nightmare].

GETTING BACK ON TRACK

After 12 or 16 years of having a cult of personality behind the person in the Oval Office, we really need to refocus on selecting the man or woman most qualified to handle the awesome responsibilities of that high office. I’m ready to start that quest now. Are you?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending