Homosexuality: The Political Battering Ram

“I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if “pockets of resistance” to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people.”

- Chai Feldblum, an open Lesbian who was nominated to serve as a Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Barack Hussein Obama

The lid has yet again been blown off of the radical homosexual agenda. As the Supreme Court held hearings on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, Obama spent $350 million on sexual indoctrination classes for children. The timing is impeccable.

Through the Personal Responsibility Education Program, students will be taught that no type of sex is wrong and that the only “unsafe” behavior is becoming pregnant.

One can look to New York City, which implemented a similar type of sexual indoctrination on NYC schools in 2011. This curriculum is taught to grades 5, 8, and 10, which students receive standardized testing on.

Here are some examples of their twisted curriculum:

  • High-school students go to stores and jot down condom brands, prices, and features such as lubrication.
  • Teens research a route from school to a clinic that provides birth control and STD tests and write down its confidentiality policy. (Interesting, I will say that again – they are to write down the confidentiality policy. Did you hear that, parents?)
  • Kids ages 11 and 12 sort “risk cards” to rate the safety of various activities, including “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant,’’ mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral sex, and anal sex.
  • Teens are referred to resources such as Columbia University’s website Go Ask Alice, which explores topics like “doggie-style” and other positions, “sadomasochistic sex play,” phone sex, oral sex with braces, fetishes, porn stars, vibrators, and bestiality. (See Exodus 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

Do not those who developed this curriculum belong in jail?

Within a year after this perversion was implemented, an article was released in the Wall Street Journal that revealed cases of sexual misconduct by teachers and that the teachers’ unions were protecting the teachers who received little to no consequence for their crimes against children.

For example, teacher William Scharbach was found to have inappropriately touched and held young boys. “Respondent’s actions at best give the appearance of impropriety and at worst suggest pedophilia,” wrote the arbitrator, the fox in the chicken coop who was hired by the union to protect the union, before giving the teacher only a reprimand. The teacher didn’t deny the touching but denied that it was inappropriate. This is criminal!

Also coinciding with the radical push for sexual deviancy upon America’s children, we cannot forget about Dan Savage, a radical homosexual who dared God’s justice by authoring a book titled “Skipping Towards Gomorrah.” Savage uses the guise of anti-bullying with his Obama-endorsed organization “It Gets Better” – which is nothing but an attempt to normalize homosexuality. Savage attacked the Bible and bullied Christian teens at a high school journalism conference. Yes, I said “high school.”

It was reported that the first thing the bully said was, “I hope you’re all using birth control,” that the Bible was “bulls—”, and then spewed out sexual innuendos during his speech. The bully also set an atmosphere of hostility towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on himself – he was attacking students while crying “victim”. More than 100 students stood up and walked out of his derogatory, perverted, deranged, vulgar, and backward-meaning speech.

If Dan is not licking doorknobs in hopes that others get sick with the flu, then he (and his husband) is a guest at the White House for President Obama’s 2011 LGBT Pride Month reception, as well as attendees at the White House anti-bullying conference.

Keep in mind this is the same president who overlooked the ICE investigation into the Pentagon (5000 Pentagon employees were investigated for child pornography), who appointed over 225 homosexuals and transvestites into key positions in government (including Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who “queerified” Harvard), and who appointed as safe school czar Kevin Jennings- who wrote the forward to a book entitled Queering Elementary Education. Jennings’ hero was Harry Hay, an icon for NAMBLA (North American Man and Boy Love Association) whose motto is “sex before 8 before it’s too late” when marching in gay pride parades.

The NEA has worked hand in glove with this agenda as well. They already had an LGBT caucus for teachers but in 2010 felt it necessary to celebrate a new caucus: the “drag queen” caucus. The NEA also refused to pass Amendment I-24, designed to protect students from sexual misconduct by teachers. Many feel that they refused to pass the amendment in order to protect teachers who have sex with students.

No wonder this bully felt so emboldened to attack a bunch of high school students (and right under the noses of their parents.)

Dan Savage is also the same radical homosexual who said on HBO he wished all republicans were “f—ing dead.” In 2006, Savage said that a particular candidate for Senate “should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope,” which, by the way, stands contrary to the radical homosexual agenda’s premise for hate crimes legislation.

He also said on Bill Maher’s show: “I sometimes think about f—ing the s— out of Santorum. I think he needs it. Let’s bone that Santorum. I’m up for whipping up some Santorum in Santorum.” Savage also once claimed that “the only thing stopping his d**k from being put in Brad Pitt’s mouth is a piece of paper”, speaking of legislation. Did you catch that? I thought he was married. Out of his own mouth, he just admitted that “homosexual rights” are not about marriage; they are about promiscuity. He contradicts himself at every turn, my friends.

Here is a video exposing this sad soul:

If the president and the homosexual lobby went out to prove my point, they could have not done a better job. In concert, these two radicals are clearly and literally at war with God and America as you know it.

The radicals are now operating in the light of day what they used to do through deceptive measures.

The American people have found out the radical homosexual agenda’s every deception through their “civil rights” cry, their “hate crimes” cry, and now their “bullying” cry. At every turn, their false premise is discovered.

People have seen clearly, after Savage’s demonstration, their version of tolerance and love – it is quite the opposite. Attack and then cry “victim!” is their face for the world to see. It is bigotry to the fullest – hate and intolerance towards anyone who resists their perversion.

America must come to the very realization that this agenda undermines everything we are. People like Dan Savage used to be jailed for their perversion; now, they are hailed by this corrupt administration. When paralleling the actions of the radical homosexuals such as the Dan Savages of the world to the actions of our founders, we now understand why God calls it an abomination.

America, it’s time for you to learn from historyso it does not repeat itself. We can even look to Canada, which implemented homosexual marriage in 2005, and see the moral devastation.

It is clear to see that, unbeknownst to the average homosexual, the radical homosexual agenda is being used as a political battering ram to target our children and silence anyone who opposes their deviant and criminal behavior in an attempt to demoralize and enslave the American people.

John Adams, the second President of these Untied States, said that “Our Constitution is made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Charles Carroll, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, reminds us that “Without morals, a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of FREE governments.”

Who is Bradlee Dean?

How America Really Feels About ‘Homosexual’ Marriage

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to give you the right answers.”Bradlee Dean

In light of the Supreme Court hand-picking the issue of homosexual marriage this week – an issue that has been settled by our Creator, the laws of our republic, and the righteous compliance of the American people – I thought it was important to ask where the American people are deriving the belief that radical homosexual marriage is accepted by a majority of our citizens.

Fact: At least 33 states have voted down homosexual marriage.

During the state’s Proposition 8 battle, 7 million Californians voted against homosexual marriage (the majority were black voters.) Not once but twice was their voice heard. Yet, the corrupt judicial system got involved and stripped it from the hands of the people, placing it in the courts – right where they wanted it. That way, they could control the “debate”; and the state-run media were right there to help them along.

Another example dates back to May 1, 2004, in Seattle, Wash.

Approximately 25,000 people protested homosexual marriage at the Mayday for Marriage rally. Approximately 1,500 radical homosexual sympathizers showed up to protest the rally, holding up signs stating“Bigots go home!” The state-run media twisted the truth and told the public that the 1,500 homosexual supporters holding up signs stating “Bigots go home!” were the majority and made the 25,000 protesters out to be the minority, totally turning the event to be against the “bigots” instead of homosexual marriage.

The media repeated the same twisted reporting in Washington, D.C. this week.

Hegelian Dialectic

The Hegelian Dialectic is the tool that the corrupt in government use in an attempt to manipulate the minds of the people to accept their “change” when they normally would reject it.

The Hegelian Dialectic is the process in which the usurping elitists create a crisis, knowing in advance how the population will react to that created crisis, thus conditioning the people that a change is needed. Once that is achieved, they will then bring the “answer” to the crisis.

They attempt to control both sides of the debate over how and why the “change” is needed, thus diverting anyone from asking the right questions, in order to avoid bringing the right answer.

With the help of the state-run media, this process is repeated over and over again to make it seem as though society is accepting of their “change.”

Rather than citing the Bible, the Constitution, or the laws of our republic, they continue their manipulative debate until a perceived compromise is reached. The outcome of the “debate” – which purposely addressed the “concerns of the public” with the mandate to do something – is enacted as public policy (never law), and their radical agenda moves forward.

The Supreme Court, the media, and this administration are exemplifying the Hegelian Dialectic today. After placing radical lesbian Elena Kagan on the bench, they have attempted to take issues such as marriage out of the hands of the people so they can push their unconstitutional and, therefore, illegal agenda.

The same can be said with the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The American people accepted the lie that abortion is legal just because the Supreme Court said so.

As William Blackstone stated, “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.”

After 57 million babies have been aborted, the American people are finally beginning to awaken to the fact that the Hegelian Dialectic has deceived them. If they would have shown their true intent by running on a slogan such as “Support the murder of innocent children. Vote yes today!”, the populace would have been appalled; and those who would have the audacity to advocate such a crime would have been thrown in jail.

Simply put, America is dealing with less than 1.7 percent of the population that is being used as a political battering ram to upend your Constitution.

Friends, remember they will always do what you let them get away with.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams

Homosexual Manifesto – Satire or Reality?

Canada Warns America About Homosexual Marriage:

Who is Bradlee Dean?

Obama’s Outrages

Angry Obama SC Obamas Outrages

As if it isn’t glaringly obvious, the America-Destroyer-in-Chief has ramped up his attacks exponentially since he got away with the massive voter fraud that gave him the election. He’s continued his policy of nominating far-left, incompetent crooks and extremists to important positions of power, a policy that couldn’t work without the complicity and connivance of the Republican Establishment. And that is just for starters.

The tactic of nominating America-hating radicals has resulted in Sonia Sotomayor (a racist and radical feminist) and Elena Kagan (a probable lesbian, radical feminist, and political hack as justices of the Supreme Court); avowed communist Van Jones as “Green Jobs Czar”; radical wackos Cass Sunstein and John Holdren; and dozens of other “Czars” – a total of 45 of ‘em – sticking their noses and greedy leftist fingers into the people’s business and getting paid $158,000 per year and up of the taxpayers’ money to do it. The Republican Establishment has done nothing to rid us of these unconstitutional human monkey wrenches. The silence has been deafening.

To make bad worse, one of these “Czars,” John Brennan, who at best is an Islamist extremist sympathizer and promoter and at worst is a genuine closet radical Muslim, was just approved as new head of the CIA by the spineless parasites in what used to be the United States Senate, but now is just a rubber-stamp for the Marxist in the White House. Voting for this disaster-in-the-making were some of the usual dither-and-cave RINOs – John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Susan Collins (R-ME), Bob Corker (R-TN), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Dan Coats (R-IN), and Richard Burr (R-NC). But joining this shameful throng were some supposed conservatives – Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Tea Party heroes Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).

Rubio and Flake also voted to confirm traitor John Kerry as Secretary of State of Disarray, as did all but three Republicans. Only four Republicans voted to confirm leftist Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Surrender, but one of them was the Great Conservative Hope, Rand Paul (R-KY). Paul and Flake also voted to confirm Jack Lew, the originator of the Sequester, as Head Looter…er…um…Treasury Secretary (FYI, Ted Cruz of Texas is the only Senator who has voted No on all of Obama’s nominations). Orrin Hatch was quoted as saying, “I am bending over backwards to show deference to the president’s nomination, and I hope that doesn’t go unnoticed”; and this seems to sum up the “thinking” of Republicans in the Senate.

Taking their cues from the Fraud in the White House, Kerry and unindicted felon Eric Holder both pushed the outrage envelope even further. The State of Disarray Department, in cahoots with Michelle Obama, was caught trying to give the prestigious International Woman of Courage award to Samira Ibrahim, a known anti-American and anti-Semitic activist from Egypt. When this was exposed, they backed off and withdrew the offer – for now. And Eric Holder had to be brow-beaten into conceding that murdering American citizens who posed no imminent danger on American soil, without any due process, was unconstitutional. However, the government recently claimed that their drone technology can tell if a person is carrying a weapon. Thus, after the fact, they can claim that the victim was armed and therefore a legal target. Again, hardly a peep of outrage from Republicans. To his credit, Rand Paul did publicly protest. But, to their ever-growing shame, John McCain and Lindsey Graham proclaimed murder by dictatorial fiat to be something they approved of.

Obama’s pals and supporters in the “mainstream” Fifth Column media, Congress, and elsewhere showed exactly where their politics and sympathies lie in their reaction to the death of communist dictator and Obama role model Hugo Chavez. Democrats in Congress issued statements of sympathy and praise; and two Democrat congressmen – one sitting and one former – actually attended the funeral, as did wastes of food Jesse Jackson and Sean Penn. Disgraced former Democrat President Jimmy Carter broke new America-hating ground with a statement lauding the dead thug that topped all his previous public stupidity by a significant margin. Obama, portrayed by the Fifth Column as the leader of the Democrat Party, said nothing to the contrary and thus gave his approval of this despicable show of anti-Americanism.

On a much more ominous note, the brilliant foreign policy of Obama, the confused and inept actions of the State of Disarray Department, and the totally mixed messages coming from the Department of Surrender have pushed and enabled desperate and deranged dictator Kim Jong Un of North Korea to seriously threaten to launch a nuclear attack on America. The good news is they are only capable of hitting wacko leftist West Coast cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles. But combined with Iran being inches away from having their own nuclear weapons, it is almost certain that the erstwhile Nobel Peace Prize winner is about to drag us into another war, this time a nuclear one.

Where is the outrage?

Photo credit: SS&SS (Creative Commons)

Elena Kagan, The Fox In The Chicken Coop

Elena Kagen SC Elena Kagan, The Fox in the Chicken Coop

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”– Franklin D. Roosevelt

As the Supreme Court conveniently looks at the issue of homosexual marriage, the Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the federal law defining marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.

The specific issue the Supreme Court will be deciding on is the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996 to protect marriage as between a man and a woman. Radical homosexuals are attempting to create an unlawful stir because part of the law bars them from receiving federal benefits that heterosexual married couples receive, even in states where same sex marriage is considered “legal.”

Apparently, these pretended justices have a severe hearing problem. Thirty-one states have already voted down homosexual marriage in agreement with the Laws of God and our Republic and a little common sense, while nine states and Washington, D.C. have deceived themselves into thinking that THEY HAVE defied God and the people and unlawfully passed homosexual marriage.

Haven’t they learned from Canada, which is suffering dire consequences after illegally passing homosexual marriage?

The United States Supreme Court is also reviewing a challenge to California’s ban on homosexual marriage. 7 million California voters made their voice heard that they were in agreement with the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, banning homosexual marriage. Radical homosexual activists got involved and circumvented the people, bringing the case before a radical homosexual judge, Vaughn Walker, who appealed Prop 8. Walker is no longer on the bench. In any case, the court was right where they wanted it.

The stage has been set, and just in time. Before the elections, Obama came out in support of homosexual marriage. Of course, he first had to repeal DADT and place 225 homosexuals in key positions…such as the Supreme Court… before he made his announcement.

Such a person is Elena Kagan.

Elena Kagan is the former dean of students at Harvard. Contrary to Harvard’s founding mottos “For Christ and the Church” and “For the glory of Christ,” Kagan is known for “Queerifying Harvard.”

During her tenure, she did the following:

Kagan hired former ACLU lawyer William Rubenstein to teach “queer” legal theory, in which he taught courses on taking up new identities such as bisexuality, transgender f**k, involving polygamy, sadomasochism, and the sexuality of minors.

Kagan also hired other radicals (a lesbian and a transsexual) to teach transgender law courses, as well as Cass Sunstein, who has written in support of polygamy and free-for-all marriage relationships.

Kagan viciously attacked our military in opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” even banning military recruiters from coming on campus. Kagan’s attempt to ban the recruiters was unsuccessful; and even after losing her legal campaign, she encouraged students to continue protesting them.

Kagan’s radical activism on campus was so toxic that there was even a campaign to make the entire university trans-inclusive, using Harvard’s “gender identity” non-discrimination policy to spew gender confusion among students on campus.

Elena Kagan has never judged a case a day in her life. Yet Obama, unqualified for office himself, has seen fit to “qualify” her on the Supreme Court bench…just in time for the Court to review homosexual marriage.

Obama’s Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued that the DOMA is unconstitutional because it violates “the fundamental guarantee of equal protection.” The phrase “equal protection” comes from the Fourteenth Amendment. Verrili conveniently omitted that equal protection is “of the laws.”

The question is, whose law? The laws of our republic, which are derived from God.

As Thaddeus Stevens said in his debate on the floor over the 14th Amendment, “no distinction would be tolerated in this purified republic but what arose from merit and conduct.”

William Blackstone, author of Commentaries on the Laws of England (which our founders studied when establishing America), stated: “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.”

America needs to come to terms and understand that no president, no administration, and no Supreme Court has the right to break God’s law.

Homosexual Manifesto Threatens America:

Who is Bradlee Dean?

 

Don’t Forget The Courts, Says Crouse

Supreme Court building 2 SC Dont Forget The Courts, Says Crouse

The nation’s largest public policy women’s organization thinks voters need to keep in mind that the man who wins Tuesday’s election will be able to shape the Supreme Court for decades to come.

While the economy is likely the primary concern of voters in the 2012 campaign, Concerned Women for America (CWA) makes note of another long-term issue that cannot be ignored: the Supreme Court.

President Obama has already been able to appoint two left-leaning justices — Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — during his first term. And Dr. Janice Crouse, senior fellow CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, points out that four justices are over age 70.

Read More at onenewsnow.com . By Chad Groening.

Photo Credit: Laura Padgett (Creative Commons)

The Most Important Election In History

Obama Romney SC The Most Important Election in History

Who says Republicans and Democrats can’t agree? Every four years, politicos and pundits, both left and right, come together in a harmonious hymn of hyperbole: “This is the most important election in history!” they sing.

I think hyperbole is responsible for all of the world’s problems. Still, this time nobody’s exaggerating. What happens on Nov. 6 really is of critical importance. America’s future really does hang in the balance.

We’re in uncharted territories. We’re lost. We stand dazed at cliff’s edge – legs wobbling – with big government winds at our back. Under President Obama, the reasons for this election’s unparalleled significance are piling up like pink slips in the private sector, like credit rating downgrades, like zeros on the national debt.

Yet, as I see it, there are nine black-robed reasons in particular that reign supreme.

And those reasons never get a pink slip.

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton wrote: “The judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution. … [T]he judiciary is, beyond comparison, the weakest of the three departments of power … [and] the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter.”

I know. Settle down.

Alas, Alexander Hamilton was obviously no better with a crystal ball than he was with a dueling pistol. For better or for worse (hint: for worse), today’s judiciary – through the constitutionally erosive drip-drop of judicial attrition and congressional submission – has, instead, become the most powerful branch of government.

Today, rather than the properly balanced, decentralized constitutional republic our founders envisaged, we live, to a large degree, under a very much centralized judiciocracy. (That is, when President Obama’s not circumventing the Constitution via executive fiat.)

William Howard Taft, who served as both our 27th president and our 10th Supreme Court chief justice, had unique insight into the dichotomy between the framers’ intent and today’s reality. He summed it up well: “Presidents come and go, but the Supreme Court goes on forever.”

Indeed, due to the creeping misalignment of separation of powers, the function of appointing Supreme Court justices is almost certainly the most significant thing any president can do. Though it defies the High Court’s original construct, these nine unelected, well-meaning, yet very human individuals profoundly steer law, public policy, and our larger culture in perpetuity.

So much for the balance of powers.

Therein lies the problem. Conservative columnist Andrew McCarthy noted in March that four of the nine sitting U.S. Supreme Court justices are in their late 70s and early 80s.

“We wish them all well,” he wrote, “but the brute fact is that whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and maybe more new members of the Supreme Court – in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come.

“If you don’t think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama,” concluded McCarthy, “I think you’re smokin’ something funky.”

Speaking of “smokin’ something funky,” during Thursday night’s vice presidential debate, Joe Biden touched on the Supreme Court. He agreed with McCarthy: “The next president will get one or two Supreme Court nominees. … For Mr. Romney, who do you think he’s likely to appoint? Do you think he’s likely to appoint someone like Scalia … ? We picked two people. We pick people who are open-minded.”

And, of course, by “open-minded,” Biden means “not bound by those pesky constitutional limitations intended to avert government tyranny.” He means liberal “living constitutionalists.”

To be sure, the next president may well appoint one, two, three, or even four new justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. As voters, this should be our most critical point of focus: ensuring an originalist, strict constructionist majority. If Mr. Obama is re-elected and appoints just one more Ruth Bader Ginsburg, forget it. America, as our founders envisioned her, is gone.

This is why, after the primary, I went from an outspoken Romney critic to a cautiously optimistic Romney supporter. He has pledged: “I will appoint conservative, strict constructionists to the judiciary.”

Still not sold?

President Obama has already shown who he’ll appoint. In Justices Elena Kagan and Sonja Sotomayor – nice though they may be – he has stacked the Court with two radical counter-constitutionalists who share his belief that the Constitution “is not a static, but living document and must be read in the context of an ever changing world.”

Naturally, if the Constitution is “ever changing,” the Constitution is meaningless.

But it gets worse. Obama has also called this – the very founding document upon which our laws, public policy, indeed our very freedoms rest – an “imperfect document,” a “living document … that reflects some deep flaws in American culture.”

Yikes.

Moreover, during the 2008 campaign, Obama lamented that the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Earl Warren, failed to “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.”

Let that sink in a moment. In his own words, this man – a man solemnly sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution – has betrayed utter disdain for it. He has, in essence, admitted that he views our most sacred founding document as a “constraint” against his thinly-veiled efforts to “fundamentally transform” America into Greece.

Thank God our Founding Fathers predicted that men like Barack Obama would come and go. And thank God they had the wisdom to plan accordingly.

Patrick Henry once said, “[L]iberty ought to be the direct end of your government.” Today, we have it exactly backward. Four more years of Barack Obama, and government will be the direct end of your liberty.

Still thinking of sitting this one out?

I hope not.

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action.

Photo credit: Cain and Todd Benson (Creative Commons)

House Republicans Give Obama More Dictatorial Power

Barack Obama speech 9 SC House Republicans Give Obama More Dictatorial Power

Up until this past Friday, the U.S. Senate has had the duty to confirm presidential appointments to key government positions including federal judges and key positions of federal departments. Just last year we watched as the Senate held their confirmation hearings on Obama’s appointment of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, and for many of us, our hearts sank when the Senate voted to confirm her appointment.

In 2011, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate that would exempt many presidential appointments from needing Senate approval. To no one’s surprise, the bill easily passed the Senate and was sent to the House where one would have expected it to be readily defeated. However, in one of the rare times the Republicans worked with the Democrats, the House passed the bill last month by a 261-116 vote.

On Friday, President Obama signed the bill into law. Barack Obama and every president that follows him will now be able to make appointments of key staff of departments including Treasury, Education, NOAA and Homeland Security without Senate approval. In other words, it will make it that much easier for a sitting president to stack the deck with his minions without having to worry about whether or not the Senate will approve them.

Obama has already given himself way too much power through his numerous executive orders. The last thing we need is for Congress, especially a Republican controlled House, to give him more power. Family Research Council’s Senior Vice President Thomas McClusky, agrees with the dangers of giving this kind of power to the president, saying:

“The United States Constitution does not bestow kingly powers on the President to appoint the senior officers of the government with no process.”

Read More at godfatherpolitics.com. By Giacomo.

Dem Senator Threatens Supreme Court

Patrick Leahy SC Dem Senator Threatens Supreme Court

Two months ago, Barack Obama decided he could intimidate the United States Supreme Court into finding his namesake healthcare plan Constitutional. Overturning the Affordable Care Act “…would amount to an unprecedented, extraordinary step of judicial activism” said the President at a rare White House news conference, adding “…I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

Though someone with the hyper-arrogant mentality of the Manchurian Candidate doesn’t really need a reason to direct this sort of psycho-babble at a presumptive enemy, Obama was probably responding to information provided by far left Justice Elena Kagan that the Court’s closed-door, preliminary vote on ObamaCare had not gone very well. Each Friday, the 9 justices gather for an initial vote on the cases heard during the week. And although these weekly conferences are to be strictly confidential, it’s a safe bet that Obama’s Court stoolie was on the phone with the White House minutes after its conclusion.

However, as this preemptive strike on the court was met with a nationwide flurry of criticism even from a number of his media supporters, Obama made no further reference to the prospective ruling.

But on Monday, a new county was heard from. Dedicated leftist Senator Patrick Leahy directed a 2000 word dissertation at the Court from the Senate floor, selecting as his principle target Chief Justice John Roberts. “The constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act is the current instance in which narrow ideology and partisanship are pressuring the Supreme Court to intervene where it should not,” claimed Leahy, making clear his view that the Court has no business interfering with a Congressional assault on the Constitution. The senator advanced the 2000 Bush/Gore decision as an example of the sort of “judicial activism” that “shook the confidence of the American people in the Supreme Court.”  He ridiculed conservative justices for their tough questioning of principle ObamaCare advocate Solicitor General Donald Verilli during oral arguments, stating “their action will not help restore American’s confidence in the Court to fairly apply the law.”

And he alternately praised and threatened the Chief Justice, literally claiming that if Roberts joined other conservatives in a 5-4 decision against ObamaCare it would “…undoubtedly further erode the reputation and legitimacy of the Supreme Court.”

But what prompted Leahy’s sudden decision to lecture the Supreme Court as to its proper role in government? Was it a last ditch effort to intimidate justices into finding ObamaCare constitutional? Or has Kagan perhaps advised Democrats that Roberts is “wavering” a bit, leading Leahy to believe his misguided, nonsensical claims might persuade the Chief Justice to decide in favor of passage?

Since its enactment in 2010, liberals have believed the Affordable Care Act to be a sure thing to pass Constitutional muster. They were stunned when Justices took offense at the law’s contempt for individual liberty during oral arguments. After all, how could forcing Americans to purchase something they don’t want be unconstitutional if it’s for their own good!

If 5 Justices rule the ObamaCare individual mandate unconstitutional, the American people will hear a wailing and gnashing of teeth unequaled since the pro-Gore efforts of the Florida Supreme Court were undone after the 2000 election. We will be in for some very entertaining days.

Exclusive: Kagan’s Handwritten Notes To Bell On Critical Race Theory

Elena Kagan Notes SC 300x224 Exclusive: Kagans Handwritten Notes to Bell on Critical Race Theory

Breitbart News has discovered previously unknown handwritten notes from Elena Kagan to radical professor Derrick Bell, sent to Bell as Kagan worked on his seminal 1985 article on Critical Race Theory in the Harvard Law Review (99 Harv. L. Rev. 4).

The notes, which were not among materials presented to the Senate during Justice Kagan’s confirmation hearings, are preserved among Bell’s papers at the New York University archives.

Kagan’s work on Bell’s article was revealed in 2010 by Harvard Law School professor Charles Ogletree, after President Barack Obama nominated her to the Supreme Court. Ogletree cited her “phenomenal edits” on Bell’s “classic” article.

Bell’s article, “The Civil Rights Chronicles,” combined exposition and fiction to argue that the Constitution was–and remains–tainted by white supremacy, and that the United States awaited “a common crisis that will overcome racism” through radical constitutional reform.

Unlike then-Harvard Law Review president Carol Steiker, who corresponded with Bell via typed letter (apparently on a 1980s-vintage dot matrix printer), Kagan chose to write to Bell exclusively on yellow notepad paper. She did not explain her choice to write by hand, save to suggest in one note on Aug. 30, 1985 that she was pressed for time.

Read More at breitbart.com. By Joel B. Pollak.

Situation For Senate RINOs Hatch, Lugar Worsening

Orrin Hatch Official Portrait SC Situation For Senate RINOs Hatch, Lugar Worsening

After 6 terms in the United States senate, long time RINO Orrin Hatch will face his first primary battle after failing to attain the necessary 60% of delegate votes at Saturday’s Utah Republican convention. After falling 32 votes short of the required total on the final ballot, Hatch will take on conservative Republican Dan Liljenquist on June 26th.

In 2010 Hatch watched nervously as Utah colleague Robert Bennett was removed from the Senate in his own primary contest, a victim of having too often sold-out the conservative Republican base. Concerned with mounting criticism of his own predilection for confirming Marxists to the Supreme Court from his seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, his perpetual votes to raise the debt ceiling, and his vote in favor of TARP, Hatch has spent much of the past 3 years feigning the role of dedicated conservative and champion of the right.

He voted against Supreme Court confirmation for both Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor once the strength of the Tea Party movement had become apparent and trouble appeared on the horizon for Bennett, even though he had earlier helped to confirm Kagan as Solicitor General and put Sotomayor on the federal bench. He also introduced a Balanced Budget Amendment, although it was of course little more than a gesture as he knew full well it would not come to pass with Obama in the White House.

But this sudden conservative bent has neither fooled nor deterred members of FreedomWorks Utah which led the way to Bennett’s defeat and spent $700,000 over the past 2 years to rid the Senate of Hatch as well. “I despise these people,” said Hatch of the conservative Freedom Works. “These people are not conservatives. They are not Republicans. They’re radical libertarians and I’m offended by it,” continued the 78 year old senator as he seeks a 7th term. It seems that authoritarians who spend a lifetime in power expecting the little people to bow, scrape, and support their every whim become a bit incensed when they are actually challenged.

And it’s no wonder Hatch has such contempt for his detractors. After all, he has been forced to spend some $6 million in defense of a Senate seat that Orrin believes he should literally OWN outright until death! How dare some unwelcome group mount a challenge to what is “his” apparently by divine right!

Indiana Senator-in-name-only Richard Lugar is in an even tougher position than Hatch, trailing primary opponent Richard Mourdock in the latest polls. Lugar’s favorability rating has fallen 10 points since the beginning of the year, now barely matching that of his opponent. And Mourdock’s campaign raised more than Lugar’s over the last quarter.

Of course, the fact that it has been 35 years since Obama’s favorite Republican actually lived in the state he purports to represent in the U.S. Senate might have something to do with Lugar’s falling popularity. And, as a supporter of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1993 and one of only 4 “Republicans” voting to confirm BOTH the gun-grabbing Sotomayor and Kagan to the Court, Lugar earned an “F” rating from the NRA.

Conservatives must continue to remove RINOs from elected office. Relics like Hatch and Lugar who vote only to ensure their continued acceptance by members of the liberal D.C. media must be replaced with true conservatives sworn to embrace the Constitution and remove by any means those who would destroy it.