Out and About on a Wednesday

Bobby Jindal has announced his candidacy for President. Along with Walker, Jindal is top of the list for me. Some say Jindal waited too long to announce – and that might be correct. But, we’ll see how it plays out.

Toy models of the “General Lee”; the car from Dukes of Hazard, will now lose their Confederate flag.  Because Reasons, I guess.  Just remember that if you find one with the rebel flag – especially if its still in the box – keep that. 20 years from now it’ll be worth a bucket of money. And while our kids are now safe from the horrific danger of seeing a rebel flag atop a Dodge Charger, you can easily purchase for them a replica Nazi dagger or a bust of Stalin…

I was looking at annual GDP growth rates and the most interesting thing I came away with is that post-recession, Reagan’s worst year is better than Obama’s best year.

In a completely surprising development, it appears that the Obama Administration – the most transparent Administration, ever – fudged around with the numbers on the Office of Personnel Management hack – almost as if they were trying to lessen the negative political impact of the hack.

It looks as though Obama’s deal with Iran now includes us providing advanced nuclear technology to Iran. My guess is that the final deal will assert that we don’t immediately have to turn over an Ohio-class SSBN to Iran. Look, I get it that Obama’s policy is that once we make friends with Iran all will be well…but does he have to look so desperate for it? You know, even good friends shouldn’t be allowed to walk all over us…

Valerie Jarret’s family is chock full of commies. Its not that big a deal as the difference between Joseph Stalin and any run of the mill American Progressive is one of degree, not kind. Progressives are Progressives – all of them are opposed to us and want us out of the public square. Some with more extreme prejudice than others, but all of them want the same political result as regards those who hold to any semblance of conservatism.

Liberal says voters must demand new gun control laws – which, I guess, is a way of saying, “you idiot voters are the problem”. There is zero chance that the voters will demand new gun control laws – that battle is over and done with and the people won it. Call it strange or wrong or what have you, but the broad majority of American voters has concluded that restricting the ability of sane, law-abiding citizens to obtain weapons won’t stop insane and/or law-breaking citizens from doing evil deeds. No proposed gun control law other than a UK-style, door-to-door confiscation of weapons could possibly have prevented the event in South Carolina from happening…and as we’ve seen in Norway and Paris and elsewhere, even having very strict gun control laws is no assurance against evil deeds.

The GOP leadership is rather screwing us over on Obama’s trade deal. They are doing it because the money-bags in corporate America want it done because the deal will allow said money-bags to vastly increase their profits…with part of that increase coming from either out-souring our jobs or in-sourcing cheap, foreign labor. To be sure, this is Obama’s trade deal – so it is a Democrat thing, as well. Bottom line, it is a Ruling Class thing – and kudos to those Democrats and Republicans who voted against it. Some in the GOP are very mad about this and I understand that – and perhaps it is time to start thinking in terms of a Third Party. Rolling around in my mind is the notion of a Christian Democrat party which would command immediately 40-50 House and 5 or so Senate seats…meaning it would be a party with the power to decide who is House Speaker and Senate Majority Leader; and, of course, in return for such support, it would demand certain, specific actions. Worth a thought – 2016 is mostly about making sure that Hillary doesn’t become President…but if in the long run we don’t get a Party which will actually do as we, the people, command, then we’re doomed as a movement.

 

Advertisements

46 thoughts on “Out and About on a Wednesday

  1. Retired Spook June 24, 2015 / 5:51 pm

    New York’s Safe Act (Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement) went into effect in January,, 2013. One of the requirements of the Safe Act was that people who owned “assault rifles” (AR-15/AK47 type rifles with scary looking features) had to register them with the state. Estimates of such weapons in New York ranged from hundreds of thousands up to as many as a million. In 2-1/2 years, 23,847 individuals have registered a total of 44,485 such weapons. The remainder are apparently telling Governor Cuomo and the New York legislature to piss off. Civil disobedience at its best. Time to send the state police door to door.

    BTW, the state was so embarrassed by the level of compliance that they only released the numbers after being successfully sued for failing to respond to a FOIA request.

    • M. Noonan June 24, 2015 / 8:00 pm

      Were I a NY gun owner, I think that outside 2A concerns, what might have got me to non-compliance is concern that the information would in gov’t files, thus open not just to hacking, but to whomever a Progressive in government decides to release the information to.

  2. Cluster June 25, 2015 / 7:45 am

    You want a war? You got a war. Right on. Right on. Right on.

  3. Cluster June 25, 2015 / 7:53 am

    So I heard O’Reilly’s memo last night which I agreed with 100% and of which I posted above. I then surfed around just a bit and found this from Louis Farrakhan:

    “I don’t know what the hell the fight is about over the Confederate flag. We need to put the American flag down. Because we’ve caught as much hell under that as the Confederate flag,” comments that were meant with cheers and applause. He added, “Who are we fighting today? It’s the people that carry the American flag.”

    Hard to believe where Obama and the progressives have taken this nation in the last 6 years, but if they want a war – I am in 100%. BRING IT ON.

    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/24/farrakhan-i-dont-get-debate-over-confederate-flag-we-need-to-put-the-american-flag-down/

    • Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 8:06 am

      Hard to believe where Obama and the progressives have taken this nation in the last 6 years

      It’s hard to believe where they’ve taken us in the last 6 MONTHS. I guess we’re finding out what he meant by “fundamental transformation”, and what Michelle meant when she said we were going to have to change our culture — our history.

      Rush nailed it a couple days ago when he said it wouldn’t be long before they’d go after the American flag. We’re witnessing a politically correct purge of everything that offends the Left in one fell swoop. They’re seizing every opportunity and every trigger point to do what they’ve wanted to do for most of a century, and public opinion, driven by the agenda media is backing them up.

      Although I’ve been accused of it by several of our former trolls, I DON’T want a war, but it’s beginning to look more and more inevitable. I certainly wouldn’t go to war over the stars and bars. I think 150 years is long enough to fight the Civil War, but the Left is not going to stop with the Confederate flag, and the next civil war is going to make the first one seem like a walk in the park. They were talking on CNN the other day about wouldn’t it be fair to get rid of the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument because both men owned slaves. Can you imagine the slippery slope that kind of rhetoric will lead to? IMO, Obama’s last 2 years are going to be a culmination of every Leftist wet dream you can think of, and I don’t like to think about how it might end. Roses and lollipops are not what come to mind.

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 8:35 am

        They are intentionally ripping apart the institutional fabric of this country and viciously demonizing any opposition for the sole purpose of amassing power and the Democratic Party and the MSM are aiding and abetting. It could get ugly.

      • Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 8:58 am

        There are still a couple of Liberals I’m on speaking therms with, and I think the next chance I get I’m going to ask them where they think this ends, because I don’t think it does. That’s one of my biggest criticism of the Left – enough is NEVER ENOUGH, but for most of my life it’s been incremental. The last push we had like this was the mid-60’s with the War on Poverty and the Great Society, and we all know how those worked out — TRILLIONS of dollars of wealth transfer.

      • Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 9:54 am

        Cluster, one of the key paragraphs from the NR article:

        You have to credit the Left: Its strategy is deft. If you can make enough noise that sounds approximately like a moral crisis, then you can in effect create a moral crisis. Never mind that the underlying argument — “Something bad has happened to somebody else, and so you must give us something we want!” — is entirely specious; it is effective. In the wake of the financial crisis, we got all manner of “reform,” from student-lending practices to the mandates of Elizabeth Warren’s new pet bureaucracy, involving things that had nothing at all to do with the financial crisis. Democrats argued that decency compelled us to pass a tax increase in the wake of the crisis, though tax rates had nothing to do with it. A crisis is a crisis is a crisis, and if a meteor hits Ypsilanti tomorrow you can be sure that Debbie Stabenow will be calling for a $15 national minimum wage because of the plight of meteor victims.

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 10:23 am

        Debbie Stabenow will be calling for a $15 national minimum wage because of the plight of meteor victims.

        That is their logic. As insane as it is.

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 10:35 am

        Here’s another true statement from the article:

        What’s going to happen between now and November 8 of next year will be a political campaign on one side of the aisle only. On the other side, it’s going to be something between a temper tantrum and a panic attack.

  4. Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 9:02 am

    Looks like it’s fish or cut bait time with Greece’s creditors:

    June 25, 7:05AM EDT

    Greece’s creditors gave the country’s leader, Alexis Tsipras, until 11 a.m. Brussels time, or 5 a.m. Eastern Time, to deliver an acceptable plan, the Financial Times reported Thursday. If a deal is not done by then, the lenders’ own proposal will be presented to the Eurogroup of eurozone finance ministers as a “take it or leave it” choice for Greece, the FT reported, citing two senior eurozone officials. “The level of frustration is so high. I don’t see a deal,” one official said, the FT reported. An hour after the 11 a.m. deadline, it was still uncertain whether the Greek premier had submitted a new plan for economic overhauls. However, Tsipras’s meeting with leaders of the lender institutions broke up around noon Brussels time, with market participants waiting to hear the outcome of the talks. Austria’s finance minister, Hans Jörg Schelling, said the Eurogroup will look at new proposals on Greece, hoping to reach a compromise before 4 p.m. Brussels time, or 10 a.m. Eastern, according to media reports. That would be just in time for the EU summit of European leaders that kicks off in the late afternoon. Schelling stated that Sunday is the final deadline to reach an agreement on Greece’s bailout.

  5. Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 9:39 am

    Got this in an email from a friend this morning. The intention of ObamaCare condensed down into 4 sentences:

    1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured.

    2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured.

    3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.

    4. The extra charges are required so that the original insured, who became uninsured, and then became re-insured, can pay enough extra so that the original uninsured can be insured, so it will be ‘free-of-charge’ to them.

    • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 10:21 am

      This just in – SCOTUS upholds the ACA subsidies

      • Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 10:34 am

        I’m watching it on TV. Yes means no, up means down, established by the state does not mean established by the state. He who controls the language controls the agenda, and 6 people in black robes have re-written yet another law. As bad as this decision is, the ramifications for the country are a drop in the bucket compared to what the ramifications will be if SCOTUS comes down on the side of same sex marriage, which I suspect they will.

      • M. Noonan June 25, 2015 / 10:58 am

        I’m pretty sure that SSM will be imposed on all 50 States by the SC – for much the same reason they have now, for the second time, re-written the ObamaCare law to make it semi-workable: the Ruling Class wants these issues settled and to go away. Do you really think the GOP Leadership wanted to deal with ObamaCare? No more than the Democrat leadership wanted to re-open the debate…giving time for the people to be heard and objections made is in no one’s interest, right? So, the SC just got everyone in DC off the hook…and has now set precedent: “hey, Congress, you can screw up you’re lawmaking all you want, and we’ll fix it for you, later”. This isn’t a democracy or a republic – this is a bunch of nitwits just getting through day by day.

      • Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 11:12 am

        I’m pretty sure that SSM will be imposed on all 50 States by the SC – for much the same reason they have now, for the second time, re-written the ObamaCare law to make it semi-workable: the Ruling Class wants these issues settled and to go away.

        The problem is, they’re not going away, and making SSM legal across the country is going to open a can of worms like nothing we’ve ever seen. Glenn Beck had an attorney on his TV show a couple nights ago who is representing a lay minister who was fired from his job after it was discovered that he made comments during a lay sermon in church confirming his belief in traditional one man/one woman marriage. Just the beginning. The Left’s assault on religious freedom is going to turn on the afterburners.

      • M. Noonan June 25, 2015 / 11:27 pm

        It will – and, just perhaps, this will be the ill the GOP will be willing to fight on…after all, freedom is popular, even today. The left will go after religion in general, Christianity in particular and Catholicism with a vengeance over this. If the GOP wants to have any sort of a base by 2020, they’ll have to fight to defend us.

  6. Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 11:18 am

    Well, at least we can still buy Nazi flags and Che T-shirts.

    • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 11:26 am

      Bring back the Hammer & Sickle baby!! Now that’s progress!

    • Amazona June 27, 2015 / 2:14 pm

      Well, at least we can still buy Nazi flags and Che T-shirts.

      Too funny !!!!

  7. Retired Spook June 25, 2015 / 12:34 pm

    Ya gotta love Justice Scalia.

    • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 1:30 pm

      Jonathan Gruber was very clear on why subsidies would only be available through State exchanges, and it was because the Federal Government needed a weapon to use against the States to force compliance. Well, when that didn’t work, CJ Roberts comes to the rescue yet again. And keep in mind both the Oregon and Hawaii State exchanges are now defunct after costing those State tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars. And then there was this news just a few weeks ago:

      http://personalliberty.com/almost-3-billion-in-obamacare-subsidies-unaccounted-for-in-cms-audit/

      Progressives must be proud. What a great country they are creating. Bernie Sanders 2016 !!!!

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 1:50 pm

        j6206 displays the simplicity of the progressive mind and I hope his post is left up as an example. You see to a progressive, the few million people that are now getting free health care INSURANCE is all that matters to them because it makes them feel good. They are not concerned at all with rural hospitals closing, with doctors retiring and the availability to actual CARE shrinking, with premiums and deductibles skyrocketing, or with billions of dollars being wasted. To the simplistic, juvenile mind of a progressive, “feel good” policies are wonderful. Results don’t matter.

        SORRY, THERE’S SIMPLY NO POINT IN HAVING A DIALOGUE WITH THEM AT THIS POINT//MODERATOR

      • Amazona June 27, 2015 / 1:59 pm

        Yeah, but every now and then someone decides to let them back in. They make a mess and are purposely disruptive till they are axed, all is well, and then someone decides to leave troll droppings on the blog again, and we start the dance all over again.

        The only actual discourse I can remember among the Left and the Right on this blog—or anywhere else, for that matter—was the extensive debate on Natural Born Citizen, a couple of years ago.

      • j6206 June 25, 2015 / 3:16 pm

        SORRY, WE’RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS AGAIN. YOU’RE NOT WELCOME HERE//MODERATOR

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 5:07 pm

        So what data did you present?

      • Cluster June 25, 2015 / 5:18 pm

        It’s a shame progressives don’t educate themselves a little more:

        Since the beginning of 2010, 43 rural hospitals — with a total of more than 1,500 beds — have closed, according to data from the North Carolina Rural Health Research Program. The pace of closures has quickened: from 3 in 2010 to 13 in 2013, and 12 already this year. Georgia alone has lost five rural hospitals since 2012, and at least six more are teetering on the brink of collapse. Each of the state’s closed hospitals served about 10,000 people — a lot for remaining area hospitals to absorb.

        The Affordable Care Act was designed to improve access to health care for all Americans and will give them another chance at getting health insurance during open enrollment starting this Saturday. But critics say the ACA is also accelerating the demise of rural outposts that cater to many of society’s most vulnerable. These hospitals treat some of the sickest and poorest patients — those least aware of how to stay healthy. Hospital officials contend that the law’s penalties for having to re-admit patients soon after they’re released are impossible to avoid and create a crushing burden.

        http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/12/rural-hospital-closings-federal-reimbursement-medicaid-aca/18532471/

        And I will tell you Jude that this is the last dialogue you and I will ever have. You are a complete loser, and a second class citizen not worthy of the air you breathe.

      • tiredoflibbs June 25, 2015 / 7:52 pm

        Drone j2606 simply regurgitates the dumbed down talking points…. “Millions are insured that were never before”. They are “insured” but they can’t afford the rising high deductibles BEFORE the insurance kicks in. Wow, who would have thought that? They may as well not have insurance with deductibles in the thousands. But it makes them feel good that these people have insurance. They tout that, regardless how simple minded it is. They ignore the fact that these people still can’t afford health care that obamacare is driving more upward than before. Nether will continue to cherry pick data that the want to hear while ignoring reality.

        http://www.cnbc.com/id/102204181

        I’ll provide a link to many such articles but we all know that these useful idiots will continue to regurgitate dumbed down talking points made specifically for them.

      • Cluster June 26, 2015 / 8:17 am

        You can never have a rational conversation with “today’s” progressive. They are irrational people, over emotional, under informed and should not be considered as worthy Americans.

      • M. Noonan June 26, 2015 / 9:49 pm

        The Progs have been around since the 18th century – leading the so-called “Enlightenment”…I like what Empress Maria Theresa (who’s own son was quite the Progressive) had to say on the subject:

        They (the enlightenment philosophers) condemn the past for its ignorance and prejudice, while knowing nothing at all about the past and not much more about the present.

        They have never known much – all they have done, at their best, is develope a facile contempt for things as they are, picked up a few slogans to ridicule morality, and then took off like a shot towards whatever they wanted in the first place. There is no thinking involved – just hatred and invective.

      • Amazona June 25, 2015 / 10:47 pm

        OK, hold your nose for a moment and proceed as if Mr. Numbers is making a valid point, that “….millions of people now have health insurance that didn’t before…”. Let’s not clutter up the discourse with inconvenient questions such as why these millions didn’t have health insurance before, because honest answers from many would be that they simply chose to spend their money on something else, such as tats and piercings and pot, but now that it is being paid for by OPM they might as well jump on that gravy train.

        The real question is how much did it cost to get these people covered by health insurance? How many MANY millions more, who used to have health insurance they liked and could afford, have been forced into inferior plans costing them more, just to get this alleged number of uninsured insured?

        Total up the cost of the web site, nearly a billion bucks paid to cronies of the Obamas for something that never worked, but which was never refunded. Go on to the administrative costs in 50 states to try to find a way to make this bureaucratic monstrosity work. Then you can get to the costs to the companies that pay for health insurance (our costs went up and will go up another 20% next year, meaning that we will have to pass on some of those increases to our employees) and the additional costs to those who pay for some or all of their insurance costs. We can finally get to the huge increase in deductibles on the new federally mandated plans. None of these costs deal with the less tangible costs of simply having plans that provide less while costing more.

        And compare these outrageous and totally unnecessary costs to what it would have cost to simply let those who could afford insurance but chose not to buy to continue to be uninsured (it’s called being “pro choice”) and then subsidize the costs to the relatively few who were truly priced out of the arena of insurance.

        I have described the Obamacare mentality as one in which someone with a perfectly nice car, a used car but a higher-end car with some nice bells and whistles, discovers that he needs new tires—-so instead of just buying new tires he sends the car to the crusher, dumps it without getting a penny out of it, and replaces it with a low-end Kia with a four cylinder engine, in plain beige, that does less, is less safe, is less comfortable, and costs more….and then brags about how smart he is.

        The sane and rational approach to a problem is to isolate the problem, analyze the problem, and then solve THE PROBLEM. The Left’s approach is become aware that there might be a problem, start with figuring out how this could be used to advance Leftist agendas of social engineering and increasing government control over the people, and then sweep in and wipe out everything remotely connected with the problem so it can all be replaced with something less desirable, less functional, more expensive, and more intrusive into personal liberty. Maybe somewhere along the line the actual problem that started the process might actually be solved, or at least mitigated, but in the meantime many billions of dollars have been spent (much of it funneled into the pockets of those inventing and overseeing the process) and many millions of people have been damaged, with the only real result being less freedom and autonomy.

        And jnumbers cheers and sneers.

      • M. Noonan June 25, 2015 / 11:25 pm

        Had to have a CAT scan the other day – cost me $400+. Last time I had it done, cost me, I think, $60. Thanks, ObamaCare deductibles!

        The fact that the Supreme Court has twice had to re-write this law – and Obama has had to issue hundreds of waivers and exemptions to it – demonstrates how bad this law is. Now, as to why the SC decided to pull Obama’s chestnuts out of the fire – as I said: it is a Ruling Class thing. No one in DC wanted to re-confront this issue. Obama doesn’t because he’s so arrogant he can’t accept the fact that his signature achievement is fundamentally flawed. The Democrats don’t want to because the GOP now controls Congress and the corrupt deals the Democrats made might be undone…or, worse in their view, now become the GOP’s political payoffs thus leaving the Democrats out in the cold. The GOP doesn’t want to because the leadership knows the GOP base wants only to end the law – some are willing to recast it, but none are willing to keep it as it is…but making any substantive change means a fight with Obama and the GOP leadership has proven since 1/20/09 that they simply will not fight Obama; they are afraid to. So, this dog of a law stays on the books – starting in 2017, whomever is President is going to have to make substantial changes to the law just so that it will work, at all…but the longer we wait, the worse will be the problems we have to fix.

    • Retired Spook June 26, 2015 / 7:18 am

      Tired, as I said the other day — enough is NEVER enough for Progressives. I used to think it was about a quest for perfection, but Leftist thought has continually defined deviancy down to the point that I don’t think perfection is part of the equation. How ironic that they call it “progress”.

  8. tiredoflibbs June 26, 2015 / 8:47 am

    Apple co-founder: “we will be robots’ pets in the future”

    https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/apple-wozniak-robots-pets

    Well, for sure, Apple is now the pets of race hustlers, political correctness and cowardice after removing all Civil War related apps and games from their Apple Store – deemed offensive. I wonder if they (everyone not just Apple) are going to remove anything that is offensive – art, pictures, rap music, etc. I won’t hold my breath.

  9. dbschmidt June 26, 2015 / 8:22 pm

    Between the decisions of the SCotUS on ObamaCare and SSM it has become apparent–this is affront not seen since the Civil War. To those LIV that haunt places like this—I will use small words for your small minds. The Civil War, aka. the War of Northern Aggression had little, if nothing, to do with slavery. It was about States’ Rights to be, basically, left alone by the Federal Government.

    What this brings us is, with the decisions of the SCotUS, closer to an all-encompassing Federal Government. Original intent of the Founders was 13 States, now expanded to 50, which would be self-governed within a framework. Framework does not mean, nor imply, any type of ultimate authority.

    Under what we now know as the Federal Government—the vast majority should be dismantled and returned to the States. As much as I would not like to see another Civil War—it may be necessary; nevertheless, this time it would not be North v. South but rather the informed v. the LIV based on knowledge of how far we have been bent over the table not of our making.

    These should not be matters of “feelings” but those of law.

    • M. Noonan June 26, 2015 / 9:58 pm

      On the other hand, the reasoning used in the SSM decision now justifies anyone carrying a concealed handgun – even in Manhattan. Be some interesting cases coming out of this.

    • Cluster June 27, 2015 / 8:26 am

      We are living in surreal times – a plurality of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction, the President’s approval ratings are negative, the President lies as easily as he breathes, the GDP is contracting, the labor participation rate is at an historic low, average family income has gone down, health insurance premiums and deductibles are skyrocketing, inner cities are falling apart, muslim jihadists are running rampant and killing innocent people in the some of the most horrific ways possible, Iran and Russia are doing whatever they please with impunity, and yet America is celebrating an imposition by the Supreme Court that circumvented democracy and affects less than 3% of the population. We are seeing what happens when children run the asylum.

  10. Retired Spook June 27, 2015 / 11:54 am

    Great comment in a SSM thread over at the Blaze:

    Conservatives should applaud the SCOTUS , here’s why: aside from the chaos that’s about to ensue.

    We like to get government out of our private lives and SCOTUS has done it !

    Follow me carefully on this.

    Marriage no longer exist in the legal sense, because SCOTUS has backed themselves and therefore the federal government into a corner.

    The federal government has already been told by SCOTUS that they cannot define marriage. The states have been told that cannot regulate it or define it. If a state decides to remove all laws regarding marriage, the feds cannot force them to implement it, because there is no federal law defining it.

    Since marriage now has no definition and in the legal sense no longer exist, we are all free to declare we are married today, to anyone we wish, single tomorrow whatever fits our purposes.
    Lower your taxes, yes married,…. Get out of paying alimony, no, never married….
    This can be changed on the fly depending which gov, form you are filling out.
    Need free health insurance for a couple of friends, Yes, married to both of them. Raise my subsidies. yeah, its a win win win.

    And better still real marriage now returns to where it belongs, as a religious ceremony.

    I’d add that this decision plays right into the new concept of identifying to be whatever you want at any given time. The Left should be very happy — until they aren’t.

    • Amazona June 27, 2015 / 2:12 pm

      This will probably slop over into all law, everywhere. For example, in contact disputes case law has repeated many times that the natural or usual definition of a word is the definition to be used in a given dispute. As one example, it seems that if the bylaws of a corporation address leaving shares to a spouse, what would have been a simple matter of transferring ownership of part of the company can be thrown into chaotic and expensive litigation, if the word “spouse” is no longer defined by law.

      It will be fun to see how the IRS handles this—-it seems they can no longer disqualify marital exemptions if there is no right of the government to define marriage. Maybe this will end up being yet another building block of Agencies as the newest (and most powerful) branch of government, with the power to override Congress, the Court, and states’ rights.

      I think the thing that bothers me the most about this ruling is the success of the semantic infiltration and of muddying the waters so much that even justices of the highest court in the land are bewildered and confused. The ruling is based on the belief that everyone has a right to be married, and I don’t think anyone disagrees with that. I have known two older women who married homosexual men later in life, and there should not have been any restriction on that.

      What happened to the justices, who are supposed to represent the best legal minds in the country, is that they got suckered in by a bait-and-switch, and instead of ruling that homosexual COUPLES should have the same rights to enter into committed two-party relationships with the same legal restrictions and benefits of marriage they defined all committed relationships as “marriage” and then smeared and smudged all prior definitions and cultural understandings of the word to make it fit their somewhat confused ruling. So now, as Spook said, there is no definition at all.

      I am embarrassed for the Court. I expected the Lefties to fall in line with the general Leftist agenda, but the wording of the ruling and their decision to translate their confusion and gullibility into law does not make them look very bright.

    • Cluster June 27, 2015 / 9:26 pm

      The left is never happy. There is always a grievance – it’s just who they are. And I love the author’s take on SSM. He’s right. The definition of marriage has just been obliterated. The only requirement is love. Wouldn’t it be fun to mess with this ruling and start applying for marriage licenses using all kinds of combinations of “love” based relationships and create chaos in the courts?

  11. Cluster June 27, 2015 / 9:38 pm

    SSM polls very badly in the black community and I have always wondered how blacks feel about the Democrats party almost single minded focus on this issue. I think there might be some gains to be had for the GOP here. (not that I am a current fan of the GOP) Here’s an interesting read from American Thinker and the excerpt below needs to be heard and understood by all conservatives.

    Absent the propaganda, African Americans are about as conservative and libertarian as it gets. Filled with the ire of slavery and ever more anti-authoritarian, perhaps they will one day forever leave the Democratic Party and join with other conservatives to reestablish the promise of a free America, for everyone.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/06/when_erasing_symbols_of_slavery_dont_forget_the_democratic_party.html

  12. Amazona June 27, 2015 / 10:24 pm

    As David French said, over at NRO, (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419871/there-are-two-americas-and-only-one-truly-free-david-french?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral) (emphasis mine)

    “Our great cities embrace a curious and constricted kind of diversity, in which people of all races, sexual orientations, and personal proclivities are celebrated and embraced — so long as their minds belong to the collective.”

    This is the Left’s definition of “diversity”–that is that there is no belief or activity that is not acceptable,as long as it is undertaken by people in absolute unwavering ideological lockstep with the Left. Let a gay vegan black man espouse Constitutional government, state sovereignty and reining in federal and judicial power, and you will quickly see just how much “diversity” the Left will tolerate.

    • M. Noonan June 27, 2015 / 11:42 pm

      I think it was Allen West (I may be mistaken, but if not him, then another prominent African-American conservative) who said that the only people who ever called him N-word are liberals. Liberals don’t like dissent

      • Cluster June 28, 2015 / 7:56 am

        Don’t like dissent?? That’s putting it mildly. They despise dissent. They are intolerant fascists. Look at the manner in which they have attacked Scalia, a SC Justice who was simply expressing his interpretation of the Constitution in his dissent and the long knives were brought out.

        And I love David French’s comment of “minds belonging to the collective” – the “collective” is the safe space for fragile minds.

Comments are closed.