Last Saturday, hundreds of Orange County voters lined the Pacific Coast Highway, showing their support for traditional marriage, free speech, and California’s Proposition 8 (see video, below). Prop 8 is designed to protect this kind of benign free speech.
If Prop 8 fails and Barack Obama wins, you should expect this kind of demonstration to be illegal. Check out Steve Calibresi’s look at how dramatically different the U.S. courts and Constitution would look after four years of Barack Obama in the White House. Teaser:
Speaking in July 2007 at a conference of Planned Parenthood, [Barack Obama] said: “[W]e need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”
Not a pretty picture.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Kurt, what should the criteria be for selecting federal judges?
Doran –
The criteria are pretty clear. Every federal judge, upon taking office, must sincerely take the following oaths:
“I, _______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
“I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (name of position) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
Mr. Obama’s unconstitutional emphasis on “young teenage moms . . . poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old,” is an invitation to judicial bias against Americans who are NOT teenage moms; poor; “African-American” (whatever this term means); gay; disabled or old.”
If taking the oath is all that is required, the “advise and consent” language in the Constitution doesn’t really mean much, does it?
Back to Prop 8: At least 1,500 Prop 8 supporters, black, white and every other variety, crowded onto the California State Capitol west steps at noon PDT, today, to support the passage of that proposition. The crowd was enthusiastic and anxious to do what it takes. It was a delight to be in such a crowd–the support this measure has across the ethnic spectrum was obvious.
The black ministers who spoke made it clear that the opposition using the term “civil rights” to advance their cause was offensive to those whose civil rights truly had been abridged. This issue, they said, was not about civil rights, it was about “special rights.” They also questioned whether one could lose civil rights they had never had. Interesting comments.
Opposition was hardly visible in the capitol of the most liberal state in the union. At the end of the rally, a few hardy souls– six or eight– ventured onto the steps with signs, chanting “No on 8″. They were quickly surrounded by a large crowd chanting “Yes on 8″; we hope that indicates how the voting will go.
In typical MSM style, the reporters for Sacramento radio stations in took attendance at that rally at 11:15, 45 minutes before it began. The crowd had just begun to gather. So one reporter stated on the air. Claiming 300 people were in attendance. One fifth the actual number at the time the event got underway.
MSM math should be a special college course. When it’s a liberal event, they do the numbers in reverse, multiplying attendance by several times. It is such a common phenom. that it becomes laughable. You hear about a liberal event and divide the reported attendance by four or five.