novatownhall blog

Where you are held accountable for your convictions and record

Browsing Posts in Justice

Oh, yes, the time is long overdue to have term limits on Congress and judges. Why would we only limit the Executive Branch without having the same constraints on the Legislative and Judicial branches? Why indeed. It appears that the need of limits is really making its case known in these modern times. You see, politics is a “scratch your back, you scratch mine” type of forum. Unfortunately, bias does not belong in any of these branches and when the party trumps the people, the system is surely broken. Case in point is the recent decision on subsidies for ObamaCare sign-ups.

It appears that two conflicting court decisions are at issue: the U.S. District Court (just below the Supreme Court) where a 2-1 decision was handed down stating that subsidies could only be given through state exchanges. By the way; this court had 4 Obama judge appointments placed after Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option in the Senate. The other court, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ( which is supposedly equal to the District Court ) held that the subsides could be granted by HealthCare.gov. What the 4th based there opinion (why would they have an opinion and not a sound ruling?) on is that Congress (read Dems ONLY) had the INTENT to make subsides available for all. Unfortunately, that is not what the law READS.

Here is my beef. We are no longer a nation ruled BY LAW. We have become a nation ruled by the intent of someone’s opinion of how they interpret the meaning of someone else’s thought. Words use to have meaning but, if you read this site enough, you will realize that Dems/liberals don’t use definitive definitions but, rather, however something should be interpreted at the time (which seems to change as constantly as wind direction). So it appears that all branches of government have been corrupted and no longer seem to function as their assigned duties prescribe. An old joke: “What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?” Answer: “A good start!” Don’t get me wrong; lawyers were a needed and noble profession once. Anymore it is a stepping stone for self glorification. It has become corrupted in too many ways and lawyers are ever mindful of side-stepping the rule of law and perverting it. This isn’t the entire profession but a good portion of it. It seems that those same lawyers become judges…..with political ideology and leanings, where law is NOW being made instead of interpreted AS WRITTEN. There is no separation of powers anymore because we no longer have checks and balances as established by the Constitution. Since lawyers won’t clean up their own house, term limits, review boards for misconduct and dismissals are our next line of defense.

Yes, the left is going bonkers for Ginsberg’s “blistering” dissent from the Supreme Court majority’s ruling in Burwell v Hobby Lobby.

Let’s take those “8 Best Lines” seriatim:

Ginsburg wrote that her five male colleagues, “in a decision of startling breadth,” would allow corporations to opt out of almost any law that they find “incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

The first thing to note is that Dana Liebelson does not consider Justice Breyer male. Interesting. Maybe she knows something we don’t.

But be that as it may, if such laws are incompatible with sincerely held religious beliefs, then they are clearly in violation of the First Amendment unless they protect the rights of others, and should be overturned by the Court. But then, the requirement from which Hobby Lobby and Conestoga won relief is NOT A LAW. It is merely a REGULATION written by a nameless bureaucrat. Also, the regulation does not protect anyone’s rights — the employees of these companies can still obtain the abortifacients they desire.

The exemption sought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would…deny legions of women who do not hold their employers’ beliefs access to contraceptive coverage.

Those women obviously have jobs, or this would not be an issue. Therefore, they can pay for them themselves.

Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community.

Irrelevant — they can go work for someone else if they do not like their employer’s benefits package.

Any decision to use contraceptives made by a woman covered under Hobby Lobby’s or Conestoga’s plan will not be propelled by the Government, it will be the woman’s autonomous choice, informed by the physician she consults.

In which case, it should be her autonomous PAYMENT, too. If you want to choose the tune, you can choose to pay the piper.

It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month’s full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage.

No, it really doesn’t “bear note”. If one cannot afford an IUD, one can choose to use other forms of birth control. Or, choose not to have vaginal sex.

Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah’s Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today’s decision.

Sure. Why not? Again — if you don’t like it, get another job.

Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.

Well, that’s easy — just approve them all. Duh.

The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield.

No — it is the legislature (in passing the law in the first place) that planted the mines, and the executive branch (in writing such heinous regulations) that is going for a stroll therein. They deserve to have it blow up in their faces.

Sorry about the delay, Supervisor. I wanted to get this posted when it came out but the ADHD sent me to other realms. Here is the story in the WaPo I personally want to thank those 686 petitioners that put us on another wild goose chase, wasting hard earned tax dollars that could have been much better served. Wasted money, end result the same as the first time, and much more egg on your faces. Like all liberals, you whine about things that are against your agenda and then you whine some more when you don’t get your way. I’m sure you will have plenty to complain about. Sour grapes from prunes is what I see. I guess the next exercise is to lie some more during next election and, possibly, get someone out of state to run for Sterling supervisor. Oh. You already tried that, didn’t you? The new losers are the same as the old losers, just recycled. I don’t need to name names. And, yes, this is what is known as justice!

I always have issue with not broadening rule on cases to stave out like cases. Narrowly put, the SCOTUS ruled that you cannot force someone to go against their religious beliefs; in essence. The liberals are livid. Ginsburger had the descent. Why is it that liberals think the Constitution doesn’t mean what it says, but rather has some hidden meaning that only they can decipher? I, personally, trust the Constitution’s understanding and believe the SCOTUS interpreted things correctly. This was a no-brainer from the beginning so I really don’t want to focus so much on the outcome but rather the process these things go through.

This suit started back in September 2012. It took that long to work up to the SCOTUS for ruling. During that period, healthcare was forced in full upon Hobby Lobby. Monies were taken but no restitution will be made back to Hobby Lobby. And what would have happened if the SCOTUS didn’t take the case? It would have been ruled from a lower court, where justice rarely comes to past since too many judges are completely political. My point is this: if the U.S. Government changes a law illegally, or takes executive action, from the initial time to its final conclusion, many lives and businesses are changed. Some will not come back to where they were before the acts were instituted. Time lost, money lost, goals not met, lives hurt or ruined. And where is the restitution? And where are the penalties, fines, incarcerations for the people and entities that caused the problem in the first place? Saying,things were done in good faith and on sound advice does not hold water when the effects put people in ruination. And what is to stop them from doing something similar tomorrow, to where we have to wait 2 years or more to get a final outcome? There must always be severe consequences to curtail this type of flagrant abuse. Yet, on the left, all I hear is silence on these type issues.

The speech just happened so I cannot post what he said. I will tell you the lies and deceit make my skin crawl. Obama talks about Boehner being held hostage by the Tea Party and Boehner will not act on immigration reform this year, even though there are enough bi-partisan votes in the house to pass it. Obama says it doesn’t make any sense because without fixing our broken system, 11+ million illegals won’t come out of hiding and pay taxes and fines, learn English and go on to a path of citizenship by going to the back of the line. It means that the border will remain unprotected. It means that illegals trying to get here will remain in harms way from cartels and coyotes. If Boehner would just put it to the House for an up or down vote, then immigration reform would take place and he would sign the bill. Now he has to get with Homeland Security and the Attorney General to find HOW MUCH he can get around Congress with his executive actions. He would rather it go the right way with Congress’ approval but he will not wait anymore to act and fix this problem. Oh yeah. And being a public servant, you are expected to take care of the needs of the public. The needs of the public.

I have seen nothing about the needs of the public from this guy and his administration. He has an agenda and he wants it completed before he goes bye-bye. Just like he wants immigration reform before the 2014 mid-term elections. Wonder why. He never says anything about Harry Reid not holding an up or down vote on bi-partisan issues presented to the Senate. Reason being, those votes don’t fit Obama’s agenda and would hurt the credibility of the Democrat party (can’t have that) while making things better for the nation. But Obama wants the GOP to help him with his agenda, which would invariably hurt the nation. Like he says, it makes no sense. And what about fixing our immigration system? He is talking amnesty for 11 million (at least triple that figure) so that we can have legal low wage, unskilled, menial labor. There is only so much grass to mow, so many house to clean, limited amount of fast food service businesses and just so much trenches to dig.

It isn’t that you haven’t heard this speech before. I will update when it comes available. In the mean time, pinch your butt cheeks and open your wallets cause here comes another round of Obama “helping”. Don’t forget to keep up your health insurance because you are going to need the service for all these diseases that keep cropping up in the U.S.

UPDATE: Here is a site with all related stories and the speech

San Fransico. Where the hippie movement took hold. Land of Pelosi and Feinstein. Where you have the right to walk around in public neckid…as long as you don’t touch your privates. Home of the homosexual elites. And the home of the Golden Gate Bridge. An engineering marvel in its own right with blood all over its soul. That’s right; it kills people on a regular basis, just by existing. But help is on the way. The board has approved a 76 million dollar net (50 million paid by us) to stop the suicides. A board member was heard saying that “..if the net saves but one life, then it was worth the cost”. I don’t know about all that.

Now the article talks about those being caught trying to jump, for the most part, decide not to try suicide again. Really? Were they given over to mental health institutions and cured? And this cop talks about as soon as they climb to the other side of the 4 foot barrier, it is like having a gun to their head that is cocked and ready to pull the trigger. Why would he say that? Since California has such onerous gun laws, why not make onerous bridge laws? Why a gun and not a bottle of pills? Or a noose? Who really cares. The bottom line is, you will not be able to come from all over the world and commit suicide (with a scenic view when the fog is in) from this wonderful bridge anymore…..unless you really try….with all your heart and soul. It just means that suicides will happen more in the bathroom, or bedroom, or roadway, or backyard tree, or skyscraper, or ocean and river, or any place else.

Another good thing about this net is that if there are 75 million tax payers in the U.S., my share is only 66 cents. I would rather save babies than nutjobs in SF with my money but I guess it is better than having to support sex change operations for misguided homosexual mental defectives. Oh, forgot, Obamacare is already doing that. Well, thee are still 2 years for these screwed up homosexuals to take the leap from the bridge if they so desire. 76 million dollars for a net on a bridge. How much for a net to cover the city? And how much more would it take to build the wall on the border? What a screwy America we live in. Oops. Just had a thought. Will this net be Constitutional, since it will take away an individuals’ freedom of expression? Time will tell.

This one really frosts my ass. The administration decides to have a prison exchange and release 5 real bad guys with the Taliban for 1 army sgt. POW. My son’s platoon either lost or wounded every man in it from Taliban fighters on his last tour. Obama initiated a surge that was not requested by the Pentagon that caused a greater loss of U.S. military lives. Now his SecDef “advises” Congress of the release, without needing Congress’s authorization, just to show “transparency”. And for what? You can pick the poison that suits you. I picked this one because it asks fair questions and gives accounts for those questions. Is this guy a traitor? I guess we will find out more as time goes on. Regardless, was it worth the price or does this administration have something more nefarious in mind? Kinda like releasing alien criminals BACK (they shouldn’t be in the country anyway) into the American population. Of course, this type behavior will continue with this administration until one of released/exchanged people hit those close to THEM! Then things will change, right? Pretty shameful and disgusting behavior on Obama’s part, if you ask me.