Judges

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

ProPublica Forgets to Mention Federal Judge Being Impeached was Clinton Appointee

September 19, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

A Federal judge from Louisiana is under a cloud of impeachment and if he’s convicted it’ll be the first Federal judge impeached in almost 20 years. The story was covered by the new wire service named ProPublica, a service that claims to be non-partisan. Yet in two stories on this judge there is not one mention of the fact that he was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, nor that his corruption was known by the Department of Justice when Clinton made the appointment. I wonder why ProPublica didn’t find that relevant, don’t you?

A while back, I wrote of a new wire service that was starting up to be called ProPublica. This new service claimed that it was going to be a non-partisan service but the fact that it was being funded by left-wing billionaires made me wonder about the veracity of that claim. I have to admit that I haven’t paid much attention to ProPublica since my first look into it, but this judge story piqued my interest. So, I gave ProPublica a look see.

I found at least two stories about this corrupt judge on ProPublica, both written by Christina Jewett. One from September 16 and one from the next day.

Both of Jewett’s stories have all the requisite facts about Judge Thomas Porteous’ questionable actions. Both stories tell of the envelopes of cash the judge took from attorneys and representatives involved in cases before him, the free rooms in Vegas he accepted, the wild gambling there, the fact that he filed his own bankruptcy papers under an assumed name, that he didn’t report these gifts on his taxes, etc., etc. We even get a paragraph informing us that authorities suspected this misconduct before he was named to the Federal bench.

Continue reading “ProPublica Forgets to Mention Federal Judge Being Impeached was Clinton Appointee”

00Publius Contributor - Abortion - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Entertainment - GOP - Judges - Media Bias - News - President - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

Whoopi Thinks Slavery Still In Constitution?

September 13, 2008 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

**Video Below the Fold**

On ABC’s “The View” on September 12, Whoopi Goldberg asked Senator John McCain if she should worry about being made a slave again once he becomes president. Newsflash, Whoopi: There was this little fracas we call the Civil War where six hundred thousand Americans died and that resulted in the elimination of slavery from existence. Oh, and Whoopi, it happened nearly 150 years ago! Just trying to help you with that whole “history” thing, Whoopster.

Apparently, Whoopi is unaware that slavery was removed from the Constitution, because during a discussion about the Law of the Land on the TV talk show, Whoopi wondered if she should “worry” about being cast into chattel slavery should John McCain get in office and institute his desires that strict construction of the Constitution be observed by his judicial picks.

The subject of how McCain would handle the Roe v Wade abortion situation is what prompted Whoopi to blurt out her uninformed view of the Constitution.

Continue reading “Whoopi Thinks Slavery Still In Constitution?”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Unreported: Montana Governor’s ‘Senior Counsel’ Not Licensed to Practice Law in State! (Democrat, of Course)

September 3, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

There is an ethics squabble going on in Montana perpetrated by the senior counsel to the Democrat Governor of Montana, Brian Schweitzer. It has been revealed that the Governor’s “senior counsel,” a man named Eric Stern, has been caught trying to “back-door” the judge in a case in which he is involved on behalf of Governor Schweitzer. The ethics violation is bad enough, but it has also been discovered that, even though he is claimed to be an attorney and the Governor’s senior counsel, Eric Stern, is not licensed to practice law in the state of Montana. This seems to say that Eric Stern is practicing law without a license, doesn

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Chgo Sun-Times Takes Stand Against The Constitution

June 29, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

With more fallout from the Supreme Court’s latest 2nd Amendment ruling, the Chicago Sun-Times has published an op ed wagging a finger at the Supremes saying that the Heller decision will be a “tax on Chicago citizens,” and that it is a tax to be “paid in blood and money.” The Times scolds the Court with all sorts of dire warnings and worries that blood will flow in the city but, as with D.C., the violence in Chicago with its extreme gun ban often causes the city to top the lists of the most violent cities in America. So, why the Sun-Times imagines the current 25-year-old gun ban is worth keeping is anyone’s guess.

The Sun-Times, though, is filled with woe at the Heller decision and offers the downright stupid solution of more gun banning despite the singular fact that their “solution” has miserably failed in every city it has been tried — including the very one they claim to care about. Not to mention that the Times seems to have no clue about the Constitution nor any respect for the citizenry of that same city.

Thursday’s landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision gutting a Washington, D.C., handgun ban can best be viewed, from Chicago’s perspective, as a tax on Chicago citizens… A tax to be paid in blood and money.

Oh, the gnashing of teeth.

Because of the court’s ruling, Chicago residents, in the not too distant future, likely will be able to buy handguns and keep them in their homes for the first time in more than 25 years… That new freedom will come at a high cost for our citizens.

First of all Sun-Times, the Second Amendment is not a “new freedom.” It is well over a 200 year-old “freedom.” No, not even a freedom but a right bestowed upon us by God and not in your power to remove.

Continue reading “Chgo Sun-Times Takes Stand Against The Constitution”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Judges - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

The Constitution LIVES – 2nd Amendment Finally Upheld

June 26, 2008 by

I am sure I’ll have more to say as time moves on, but for now here is an AP story with the news…

Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense in their homes, the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms restrictions intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

See the rest at Breitbart.com

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Patriotism - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

Ohio Judge With Posters of Che and Obama in His Office?

June 16, 2008 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

The AP had a short newsbreak story on Lorain County Common Pleas Judge James Burge who ruled that the state must stop the method of executions in the state, saying that the “lethal injection procedure doesn’t provide the quick and painless death required by Ohio law.” Accompanying the short story is the picture we post here showing the judge in his office where he proudly displays two posters, one with murderer, insurrectionist and communist Che Guevara upon it and the other is the famous “Hope” poster put out by the Barack Obama campaign.

This makes one wonder about the lack of reaction to this photo seen today from the media. Let us imagine if this judge happened to be considered a conservative. Supposing this judge had a poster of a right-wing dictator — maybe even Hitler — displayed side-by-side with a John McCain for president poster or a George W. Bush poster. So, what would the media be doing today should such a picture coupling McCain with a murderous, oppressor on the right be making the rounds? Who can doubt that the media would be completely out of it’s mind (and rightfully so, by the way) about a judge that would seem to be celebrating a right-wing dictator?

Yet, here we have a judge, a public official, proudly showing fealty to a monster of the left, Che Guevara, a man that despised the U.S. and everything it stands for, without the media raising even a whimper! In fact, they publish it as if this judge deserved to be given respect.

My comparison between Che and Hitler is exact, too, even as Che wasn’t quite up to the criminal totality of Adolf Hitler, it wasn’t because he didn’t want to be, it was just because he didn’t have the power to be a Hitler redux.

If you need any other proof that the media is blind to the anti-Americanism that is leftism, this is it.

**Update**

I want to clarify a point here. I have had someone question what I mean about Hitler being a “right-wing dictator.” My use of Hitler was in response to how the media would see an opposite of a Che Guevara type. I am not implying that Hitler was a conservative, or right-wing. Hitler’s ideology is clearly the perfect example of the ultimate destination of leftist thought. He was a socialist, and the quintessential left-winger, not a conservative.

Continue reading “Ohio Judge With Posters of Che and Obama in His Office?”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Islam - Islamofascism - Judges - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Supreme Court Creates Killing

June 12, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

In a 5 to 4 decision, the idiots on the Supreme Court have decided that terrorists are covered by our Constitution, no matter where they are captured and held.

This is as wrong headed a decision as can be imagined and two of the Justices, Scalia and Roberts, were scathing in their dissent.

But, here is the real result of this ruling. No, it doesn’t “help” the murderers and terrorists get habeas corpus, or find rights, it will kill them on the battlefield. What battlefield commander will waste his time trying to figure out what rights the terrorist he is facing has or doesn’t have?

The proper and reasonable decision to make on the battlefield will be to automatically kill EVERY captured person as soon as you do a quick interrogation. After all, anything else will simply just get the commanders on the line in trouble with the “law.”

And, I cannot say I’d blame any American soldier on the battlefield. Just kill every one of those captured without regard for their status. Their innocence? Immaterial. Kill them anyway.

This is what the dolts on the SCOTUS have wrought.

So, here’s hoping that more of these people are merely executed on the field and left for dead instead of brought into custody, introduced to American rights, and then released into OUR country as they await their undeserved day in court. As they are let go HERE in THIS country while those who would assist them to destroy this country pretends to get them their day in court, they then will have access to THIS country where they can wreck their terrorist agenda.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Creates Killing”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

CNN’s Jeffery Toobin Says Past Liberals on Supreme Court are ‘Surprisingly Moderate’

June 5, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

If we needed more proof that CNN’s legal analyst, Jeffery Toobin, is one of the most disingenuous legal minds of our day, the Saginaw News helped us out with that quest. Toobin made an appearance at a Midland, MI event this week where, among other comments, he ridiculously claimed that the left leaning Justices that sit on the Supreme Court are “surprisingly moderate.”

We will remember one of Toobin’s other recent absurdities when he claimed that the GOP likes voter I.D. laws because they “stop Democrats from voting,” despite the fact that all evidence shows that requiring an I.D. has not stopped anyone from voting.

In his remarks in Michigan, Toobin predicted that Barack Obama will eventually become a Supreme Court Justice because the Court “needs that kind of person, that kind of mind.”

One might wonder if the “kind of mind” Toobin means is the kind that would say that Americans who support the Second Amendment and are religious are “bitter”? If THAT kind of mind is something the SCOTUS needs, obviously the Constitution isn’t important to Toobin!

Toobin also tried to raise fears in the audience that if John McCain became president he’d try to fill the court with right-wing fanatics.

He pointed to a little-covered May 6 speech by GOP presidential candidate John McCain, one spoken in code, that indicates McCain will accelerate the court’s conservative bent that the current President Bush began.

What Toobin disingenuously didn’t mention to his audience was the fact that if McCain becomes president, he will have a solidly Democrat controlled Congress (both Houses) and he will not have the power to seat Constructionist or conservative judges.

Continue reading “CNN’s Jeffery Toobin Says Past Liberals on Supreme Court are ‘Surprisingly Moderate’”

00Publius Contributor - Abortion - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Judges - News - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

Tennessee Democrats Torpedo Will of The People

April 22, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

If you can’t win the people over, lie cheat, hide behind arbitrary and arcane rules of government or use the courts to defeat the will of the people. That is the Democrat Party’s call to arms. Democrats love the people, fight for the little guy… unless those fools don’t agree with Democrats. Then, suddenly, “the people” have no say, are ignored and will find that their votes are meaningless. In short Democrats aren’t much on democracy and as the Blue Collar Muse reports, this same Democrat Party method holds true in Tennessee.

In Tennessee Senate bill SJR127 serves as the latest example of Democrats hiding from the people, thwarting their will, and using arcane rules of the Tenn. House of Representatives to doom legislation that most Tennesseans want passed. Even worse, the whole thing begins with activist judges knocking down the voice of the people.

In 2000, The Tenn. Supreme Court ruled that common sense abortion legislation passed by the state’s legislative branch was “unconstitutional.” As Ken Marrero of the BCM notes, “things like a 48 hour waiting period and full disclosure of the impact of having an abortion to any woman seeking one were thrown out. It is vital to note that none of this legislation prevented, in any way, a woman’s access to abortion. Just the opposite.”

“Once again,” Marrero says, “a small group of appointed individuals, set aside the will of the people as expressed through their duly elected representatives.”

Continue reading “Tennessee Democrats Torpedo Will of The People”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Founders - Judges - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent

April 7, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

In 2003, then Justice of the Supreme Court Sandra Day O’Connor famously posited that our judicial system should take into account foreign court rulings when deciding American cases prompting outraged conservatives to denounce her idea as endangering American sovereignty and destroying the Constitution of the United States of America. This year, the Roberts led SCOTUS has made an important decision that will serve to forestall that possibility.

In October of 2003, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor gave a speech in Atlanta where she predicted that “over time we will rely increasingly, or take notice at least increasingly, of international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues.” Naturally, Americans who revere the Constitution were outraged over the thought that we’d place foreign court rulings before our own law of the land, essentially allowing foreigners to decide questions of American jurisprudence.

The fear over allowing foreign precedent or areas of jurisdiction to overlap into ours raises discussion of the very differences between our system of government and legal traditions and that of the rest of the world. Should we rely on foreign precedent, for instance, the very concept of innocent until proven guilty is put into doubt because foreign rulings will not generally be based on that bedrock principle.

Further, should American courts recognize the kangaroo courts of The Hague and the so-called “International Court of Justice” (or the World Court), foreign institutions such as these would have the authority to incarcerate American citizens for their politically motivated, anti-American “trials” at any time. After all, should we cast away our Constitutional rights by allowing foreign rulings to take precedence over our system, this will be bound to occur. What would stop such a thing from happening, anyway?

Continue reading “A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Military - News - Patriotism - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Anti-War Judge Won’t Allow Foster Child to Join Marines

March 8, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Children’s Court Commissioner Marilyn Mackel of Simi Valley, California is against our actions in Iraq. With that said, this activist judge felt she had the right to prevent a foster child under her jurisdiction from joining the Marines. This refusal is an obscene abuse of power based solely on her hatred for the U.S. military. And she’s done this before.

The L.A. Daily News gives us the outrageous story of young Shawn Sage, a foster child, who appeared before judge Mackel to ask for permission to sign with the Marines for an early enlistment. Sage is 17 and would have been eligible for a $10,000 signing bonus upon signing. The young man has long dreamed of joining the Marines and is shocked that this judge denied him permission to join.

“The judge said she didn’t support the Iraq war for any reason why we’re over there,” said Marine recruiter Sgt. Guillermo Medrano of the Simi Valley USMC recruiting office.

“She just said all recruiters were the same – that they `all tap dance and tell me what I want to hear.’ She said she didn’t want him to fight in it.”

According to the L.A. Daily News, Makel also denied another young foster child who wanted to join the Navy because she feels that all military recruiters are liars and just want “another warm body.”

As Mr. Sage stood before the judge he had the backing of several members of the military as well as his brother and his foster parents behind him. Yet regardless of all the adult support this young man had for his quest, this out of control judge ruled against his right to join our nation’s military.

But something good may be coming from this episode despite of all this military-hating judge’s actions. The legislature is stepping in and doing their job deflating some of this un-American judge’s power. As a result of this judge’s untoward acts, Shawn Sage submitted a proposal to a local California lawmaker’s write a bill challenge and Mr. Sage’s proposal has since become Bill AB2238.
Continue reading “Anti-War Judge Won’t Allow Foster Child to Join Marines”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Family - Judges - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

Our Weakened Sense of Right and Wrong

March 7, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

There is a growing number of Americans who have the conception that too many judges are weak on crime, that their judgments all too often mollycoddle criminals. It’s hard to quibble with such a conception, unfortunately. But we cannot merely cast blame on our judges and move on as if there is no other area of concern. While perhaps heightened, judges often are a reflection of our greater society and what they are reflecting is a sever degradation of our moral center.

A recent story about a small case in Winona, Texas, embodies all that seems broken not only with our judicial system, but with our education system, our immigration laws as well as the attitudes that so many of our youth employ towards their elders in society as a whole — It reflects the permissiveness in all.

The Tyler Morning Telegraph reported a tale of truancy, the courts and deportation last week that encapsulates much of what is wrong with this country today and it all boils down to rampant disrespect. Disrespect for our immigration laws, for education, for the courts, even for basic societal comportment.

The Morning Telegraph’s story centered around an astonished Smith County Justice of the Peace who resided over several truancy cases of twin teenaged sisters from the John Tyler High School.

Justice of the Peace Mitch Shamburger ruled over the cases of Brias and Lluva Amante, found them guilty, and fined them for repeatedly skipping class. Neither ever showed much respect for either the judge, the law or the seriousness with which they should be approaching their schooling. The twins persisted in snickering and giggling during each of the cases they were involved in showing disrespect to the judge.

Continue reading “Our Weakened Sense of Right and Wrong”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - History - Judges - Society/Culture - Thomas Brewton

The Judiciary: Tyranny’s Active Agent

January 3, 2008 by

-By Thomas E. Brewton

Have the Constitution’s checks and balances come unglued?

The First Things website carries a provocative essay by Richard John Neuhaus. The essay explores the contention that, as Anti-Federalists feared in the 1787-89 Constitutional ratification debate, the judiciary has come to be the dominant power in the Federal government.

Without exaggeration, it can be said that most of the activist, anti-traditional measures of government have been judicially imposed. Those have been predominantly aimed at outlawing Judeo-Christian morality, notably Roe v Wade and measures to banish spiritual religion from education and politics, while encouraging an accelerating descent into the cesspool of sensual gratification.
Continue reading “The Judiciary: Tyranny’s Active Agent”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Founders - History - Judges - Media Bias - Military - News - Patriotism - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

New York Times Hopes For SCOTUS Gun Grab

December 2, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

The “paper of record” once again makes like a broken record with another prosaic call to take away guns from the average American. The New York Times again displays its complete disregard of the Constitution in an editorial titled, “The Court and the Second Amendment”, claiming our founding law is out of date and doesn’t “confront modern-day reality.” In another editorial filled with extreme language, untrue definitions and arrogance, and cementing its reputation against self-defense and American principles, the Times addressed the recent decision by the Supreme Court to soon take on the DC Gun banning reversal case. Hitting all its best low notes and filled with propaganda laced verbiage, the Times again made the case that you, Mr. and Mrs. America, are too stupid and filled with bloodlust to be trusted with a firearm… quite despite that musty, stupid old, out of date Constitution thingie.

It’s hard to believe such a small editorial can have so many lies, distortions and misconceptions but the Times really packed them into this rant. Nearly every paragraph has something that is either incorrect technically, or just plain propagandistic. I’ll take each paragraph one at a time here:

By agreeing yesterday to rule on whether provisions of the District of Columbia’s stringent gun control law violate the Second Amendment to the Constitution, the Supreme Court has inserted itself into a roiling public controversy with large ramifications for public safety. The Court’s move sowed hope and fear among supporters of reasonable gun control, and it ratcheted up the suspense surrounding the court’s current term.

The Supreme Court “inserted itself into a roiling public controversy,” New York Times? Like most cases, this one came TO them, the SCOTUS didn’t go out to actively seek this case. And, notice the soft selling of their attempts to advocate for a reversal of the Constitutional right by calling the issue a “public safety” issue? No, it is a rights issue, not a “public safety” issue, Times, and you know it. By trying to reframe this debate as a “safety” issue, you are purposefully trying to pretend it has nothing to do with your plans to eliminate a Constitutionally guaranteed right to self-protection. It is also amusing that you call your gun grabbing “reasonable.” I am sure that totalitarians everywhere, in every age termed their desires to disarm the public “reasonable” before they undertook that outrage. It was quite a smooth propaganda effort there, though, Times, so props for trying to hide behind misleading language. I am sure your attempts at subterfuge might fool some.

Continue reading “New York Times Hopes For SCOTUS Gun Grab”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Exploiting Justice O’Connor’s Tragedy for Political Points

November 28, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

I have to say, this little L.A.Times editorial really takes the cake for insensitivity. It should receive some sort of award for being one of the most gauche pieces I’ve seen from the extreme leftists masquerading as “journalists” for a long, long time. Yes, the Times deserves condemnation for exploiting someone’s tragedy to make a mere political point. In “Sandra Day O’Connor’s loss, and ours,” the Times laments that because of the former Justice’s husband’s Alzheimer’s disease, Sandra Day quit the bench so we lost her to the court and that loss has resulted in the court being “radically tilted to the right.” Imagine exploiting John O’Connor’s disease like this? If a Republican had written this editorial, imagine the hate that would be spewed against him?

This is really a shocking editorial.

From Arizona last week came the sad news that John O’Connor, husband of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, has grown romantically attached to another patient in an Alzheimer’s facility where both live. For Justice O’Connor, the pain of watching her husband drift away must at some level be balanced by the notion that his new relationship brings him some measure of happiness and peace. Their son reported she was gratified that her husband “was relaxed and happy and comfortable living here.”

Undeniably this is sad news but is it something we need to know? Is it our business that this man’s brain disabling disease has caused his unknowing infidelity? Shouldn’t this be left in the realm of personal family tragedy not open for public consumption? Where is the public’s need to know here? But wait until you see where the L.A.Times takes this story…

John O’Connor’s fading connection stands as a reminder of the capriciousness of this tragic disease and, in this case, of its consequences not just for the O’Connor family but for the nation.

Their loss is our loss? How is that, you wonder?

Continue reading “Exploiting Justice O’Connor’s Tragedy for Political Points”

00Publius Contributor - Islam - Islamofascism - Judges - Media Bias - Military - News - Patriotism - President - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Barnyard Justice and the Animal’s Court

November 26, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Tuck yourselves in, children, for tonight I’m going to bring you a nice bedtime story. It’s all about our nice friends in the animal kingdom and how they dealt with their nemesis, the wily and ravenous wolf.

Barnyard Justice and the Animal’s Court

The forest is aflame with terror. Animals were being eaten at a voracious rate by the wily wolf and his carnivorous henchmen. For a time, the barnyard watched from a distance barely noticing. Eventually they became uneasy, yet they were still secure that they were safe inside their fences. But, soon enough, the terror was visited upon the barnyard animals, too. It came to pass that all involved decided that it was time that both communities did something about wily wolf’s reign of terror so the accused was brought before the animal court.

Wise judge Owl banged the gavel and called the court to order.

The stalwart Cow brought the accused into the courtroom to face justice.

The sly Weasel, representing the accused, took his place beside his client and winked his weasely wink.

The accused, the wily Wolf, stood proudly unrepentant and faced the court. He glanced at the jury with a slight snarling smile and nodded his head self assuredly. He unconsciously licked his lips and stared hungrily at the animals in the jury box making the Hens and Ducks there feel somewhat uncomfortable though they didn’t know why.

“A whoo-whooo, I bring this court of the Animal Kingdom to order”, said wise judge Owl as he banged the gavel.

“Yer honor”, interjected the sly Weasel, “I move fer a dismissal for the reason dat dis here pillar of the community, my client the wily Wolf, is being maliciously maligned by the court of public opinion and that these jurors could not possibly be unbiased seein as how they have been brainwashed by the powers that be against my innocent and shy client, the wily Wolf.” With that the sly Weasel sat down confident of his perspicacity.

“Motion denied,” Said the wise owl. “The court will now take opening statements.”
Continue reading “Barnyard Justice and the Animal’s Court”

00Publius Contributor - Book Reviews - Judges - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

Judging Clarence Thomas

November 17, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Michael M. Bates

Much of the reaction to Clarence Thomas’ new memoir, My Grandfather’s Son, has centered on the justice’s anger. You have to credit the mainstream media credit with consistency. Sixteen years after his confirmation to the Supreme Court, he’s as disliked by them now as he was in 1991.

A Hearst Newspapers’ columnist finds the book “the ultimate, most revealing act of hostility.” A Washington Post Writers Group essayist asserts that in his volume, “Thomas reveals himself to be a Shakespearean archetype, consumed by rage.”

On National Public Radio, the account is described as “a book of complete bitterness and rage.” Over at the Washington Post, readers were first told that “Justice Thomas Lashes Out in Memoir” and a few days later learned: “To read Clarence Thomas’ book is to be struck anew by the blast-furnace of his anger.”

I read Justice Thomas’ memoir today. It’s captivatingly interesting and gives hope there are yet thoughtful, honorable people in Washington. The impoverished black child from the Jim Crow South matured to be his own man and observes himself candidly, warts and all.
Continue reading “Judging Clarence Thomas”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - News - Religion - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Christmas Under Assault: Dumping the Christmas Tree for a ‘Family Tree’

November 15, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

In a further erosion of our American traditions and holidays, Lowe’s Hardware stores has decided that they aren’t in the business of selling Christmas trees anymore. They have decided, instead, that the big seller for 2007 will be the erstwhile “Family Tree” — that Christmas thingie being so gauche and offensive and all, you see. In fact, in their 2007 holiday catalog, Lowes uses the word Christmas a grand total of two times. And on their website, the tree listings all avoid the word in their descriptions.

Take a look at the first page of their “Family Tree” section in their new print catalog:

One of their tree products is even upside down for some unfathomable reason. Described as the “Holiday Living 7.5′ Pre-lit Switchit Cashmere Hard Needle Bavarian Fir tree,” this tree has what is generally the top of the tree affixed to the stand so that the wide base is what ends up in the air.

I suppose this might be considered funny by some and might be a novel thing to have to such folks, but it certainly does not evoke the Christmas spirit and absolutely doesn’t run along traditional, nor respectful, lines.
Continue reading “Christmas Under Assault: Dumping the Christmas Tree for a ‘Family Tree’”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - History - Judges - News - Society/Culture - Thomas Brewton - Uncategorized

Are Federal courts again going to override states’ Constitutional rights?

November 14, 2007 by

Cloning Roe vs Wade
-By Thomas E. Brewton

A New York Times editorial dated November 10 argues that the task of moving stem cell research to the next level cannot be left to the states…As this page has argued before, stem cell research is of such importance and promise for the entire world that it deserves to be carried forward by a national program underwritten by federal funding.

Impelling the Times’s editorial pronouncement was the recent defeat in New Jersey of a $450 million bond issue for local stem cell research, a measure championed by the state’s socialist governor Jon Corzine. So far, liberals don’t have the votes in Congress, either.

Implicit in the Times’s editorial is the tactic that led the 1973 Supreme Court in Roe Vs Wade to ignore individual states’ Constitutional prerogative to exercise police powers, which are maintenance of law and order and protection of public health and safety. When the public opposes a liberal-progressive-socialist cause, liberals use judicial activism to do an end run around elected legislators and impose their will upon the majority.

James Madison is generally agreed to be the most influential single delegate to the 1787 Convention which drafted the Constitution. Judicial activism that infringes upon the Constitutional prerogatives of the states contrasts starkly with what Madison wrote on this subject in Federalist No. 45:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects [the so-called police powers] which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
Continue reading “Are Federal courts again going to override states’ Constitutional rights?”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Frederick Meekins - Islamofascism - Judges - Media Bias - News - Race - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

Old Warhorse Losing His Kick

November 5, 2007 by

-By Frederick Meekins

As the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell at one time (whether deservedly or not) had a reputation as a voice of sober realism in the arena of American foreign policy. However, as he ages and heads into his sunset years, he is so increasingly muttering to himself about assorted forms of appeasement that he is coming to remind the citizen cognizant of the efforts to undermine this great nation more of Neville Chamberlain than as a soldier the statesman most perceived him to be throughout the early 90’s.

During the 1930’s, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain signed a pact with Adolf Hitler granting the German tyrant Czechoslovakia as part of what Nazi doctrine referred to as Lebensarum or “Living Space”. For his part of this deal, Chamberlain has from that point forward pretty much been branded a coward for thinking such a policy would appease aspiring despots and those out to undermine individual liberty.

As disappointing as he was, at least it was some lesser power’s real estate Chamberlain was giving away. For today, his globalist descendants are such proponents of policide that they are no longer content to carve up the helpless corners of the earth but rather long to dismantle the strong nation-states in which they themselves reside in the hopes of accruing more power into their own hands and control over the lives of those under them.
Continue reading “Old Warhorse Losing His Kick”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

More MSM Party Affiliation Amnesia

October 12, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Today we have another case in our long, long list of indicted Democrats who are mysteriously not identified as Democrats by the media. This time it is in the great state of Louisiana where two Democrat judges are caught up in Federal racketeering charges for taking bribes.

State District Judge Michael Walker, Democrat of Shreveport, stands accused of taking cash and goods in exchange for reducing bonds and for setting himself up as a one man justice department to speed criminals to get out of jail on an expedited schedule… all for a price. Caddo Parish Juvenile Court Judge Vernon Claville, also a Democrat, is accused in the same indictment of taking cash to help juvenile defendants to get released quick… again, for a price.
As the AP reports:
Continue reading “More MSM Party Affiliation Amnesia”

00Publius Contributor - Abortion - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Planned Parenthood Lies to City Board That New Building to be Abortion Clinic

September 18, 2007 by 5 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

This story has been going on for a few days in Aurora, Illinois. It seems Planned Parenthood told a teeny, tiny white lie to the City Planning Board of Aurora about what use a new building they were constructing near a residential neighborhood would be put to. In fact, they even misled city officials as to who they even were, and those officials are none too happy about it.

The city granted a building permit to a company called Gemini Office Development LLC to build what was being called a “medical office building.” It turns out, however, that Gemini Office Development LLC is actually a shell company for Planned Parenthood and this new building was not going to be just a regular, non-descript “medical office building” but a Planned Parenthood abortion mill, instead. Curiously, Planned Parenthood neglected to tell the city of its plans until the building was complete and they were ready to open for business.

Naturally, the community is a tad upset that they were lied to.

On a radio interview this morning, an Aurora city councilman was upset that the abortion advocates would build an abortion clinic near a residential community when such clinics often bring dangerous conditions with them. After all, says the councilman, when they build these facilities they use bullet proof glass and try to make them bomb proof, so obviously they know that their facilities have the potential to bring danger to the community.
Continue reading “Planned Parenthood Lies to City Board That New Building to be Abortion Clinic”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Immigration/Immigrants - Judges - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

US Cities that Break the Law for Illegals… on PURPOSE

August 18, 2007 by

Want to know if the city in which you live is purposefully going out of their way to break the law and allow illegal immigrants to suck free money, services and education from our taxes? Want to know if your city is trying to destroy the USA by giving every drifter, murderer, and rapist from just anywhere a “sanctuary” within their jurisdiction? Want to know how many states have passed laws that would prevent their own local police from assisting the Federal Government in apprehending and identifying illegal immigrants, even if they are criminals, and shipping them to their point of origin?

Go here…

Sanctuary Cities, USA

And if YOUR city is on this list DO SOMETHING TO STOP IT. Do it before it is too late.

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

AP Legitimizes Generbender With Idaho Inmate Who Castrated ‘Herself’

August 6, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Is it so hard to tell a male human being from a female one? I guess to the AP it is because in a story from the 31st, the tale they told of a male inmate castrating himself with a broken disposable razor blade became the story of a male inmate castrating “herself” with a razor blade. One wonders what the AP Stylebook says about that little gem?

BOISE, Idaho – An inmate who castrated herself with a disposable razor blade after prison officials refused to treat her for gender identity disorder should have female hormone therapy paid for by the state, a federal judge said.

Someone should inform the AP that a female cannot castrate herself. It is a physical impossibility. If’n ya gots something to castrate, you ain’t no woman in the first place!
Continue reading “AP Legitimizes Generbender With Idaho Inmate Who Castrated ‘Herself’”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Judges - Media Bias - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Stirring the Flames of Race Baiting Over School Segregation

July 30, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Reuters seems to be jumping into the fray over the Supreme Court’s latest decision on the issue of racial diversity in our schools. At least, it seems so because their latest story on the decision seems an advocacy piece against the Supreme Court and for forced “diversity” policies in our schools. In fact, Reuters seems only too happy to claim that the Supreme Court is causing “fear” in our innocent children in their piece titled, “Students, schools fear end of racial diversity.”

Reuters is obviously giving voice to this forced “diversity” and giving the bussing crowd the thumbs up in a report that also seems to say that black kids only “get in fights” when they go to predominately black schools.

LOUISVILLE, Kentucky (Reuters) – Seventeen-year-old Quantae Williams doesn’t understand why the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his school district’s racial diversity program.

He now dreads the prospect of leaving his mixed-race high school in suburban Louisville and returning to the poor black downtown schools where he used to get in fights.

That seems vaguely racist, doesn’t it?
Continue reading “Stirring the Flames of Race Baiting Over School Segregation”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Judges - Selwyn Duke - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized

Free Speech From the Mouths of Babes?

July 11, 2007 by

By Selwyn Duke

Last week the Supreme court handed down three free speech rulings that find favor with conservatives. One of them is Morse et al. v. Frederick, a case involving the free speech rights of students. At issue is a five year old incident wherein a Juneau-Douglas High School senior named Joe Frederick raised a 14-foot banner stating “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” and was subsequently suspended for “drug speech” by then school principal Deborah Morse. Writing for the majority in a five to four decision in favor of the school, Chief Justice John Roberts reasoned that the First Amendment should not be applied in this case because the student was encouraging drug use.

While I agree with the principal’s actions and take solace in the knowledge that educators’ hands won’t be further tied, the Supreme Court’s ruling does nothing to address what is the underlying problem. In fact, with the convoluted logic displayed by virtually all members of the court, it’s hard to find much to applaud in this judgment.

The real issue here extends far beyond this one case and harks back to a precedent set in 1969 in the Tinker v. Des Moines ruling, which divined from the Constitution a right to free speech in schools. Upon issuance of that decision the court stated,
Continue reading “Free Speech From the Mouths of Babes?”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Frank Salvato - Judges - Media Bias - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized

The Incredible Judicial Disparity: Berger v. Libby

June 11, 2007 by

-By Frank Salvato

If you needed any more proof that the American judicial system is completely – and alarmingly – subjective, look no further than the disparity between the sentences imposed on Sandy Berger and

I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby. In Washington DC’s version of The Peoples’ Court, it would seem that the deciding factors in how severe a sentence one gets depends on political party affiliation, the severity of the crime be damned.

This past Tuesday US District Judge Reggie B. Walton, a Bush 43 appointee, sentenced former Vice Presidential Chief of Staff I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby to 30 months in prison and fined him $250,000 for obstruction of justice and lying to a federal agent. Walton said he saw no good reason to allow Libby to remain free pending appeal. Walton also required Libby to serve two years probation upon release from prison.
Continue reading “The Incredible Judicial Disparity: Berger v. Libby”