Friday Follies – Gov’t edition Part 2: Reid, Holder, FCC, M Obama and the 9th Circus of Appeals

February 28, 2014

Welcome to Friday Follies, government edition, part 2.

 It wasn’t planned this way but when you’ve got the likes of Michelle Obama, Harry Reid, Eric Holder, the 9th circus Court of Appeals and Obama donors over at the FCC pulling the levers of government power, I would be derelict in my duties if I did not provide them their appropriate places of dishonor in the Follies.

So…..”Tis that time once again when we take stock of the inane and foolish put upon us by those forced to navigate life with an amount of gray matter just slightly larger than that found in your average toad.”

#5 Technically Michelle Obama is not part of the government but considering how she is hell bent on using it to force her views on the rest of us she’s certainly acting like the government so she’s fair game. And the game she played this week was to announce with much fanfare the revision of those nasty food labels that are just too complicated for you, the American public to understand.

“So there you stood, alone in some aisle in a store, the clock ticking away at the precious little time remaining to complete your weekly grocery shopping, and all you could do was scratch your head, confused and bewildered, and wonder, is there too much sugar in this product? Is 50 percent of the daily allowance of riboflavin a good thing or a bad thing?

“This stream of questions and worries running through your head

And that’s a familiar scenario for far too many families and parents trying to do the right thing for their kids — and it’s simply not acceptable.

“So this is a huge deal….And it’s going to make a big difference for families across this country.”

Well, yes, Mrs. First Lady, there was one HUGE deal at the press conference but it wasn’t about the label, and it wasn’t facing the camera, and it really wouldn’t be appropriate to comment on, BUT if one were to comment on, it might relate to the size of the posterior of the person who thinks it’s somehow of great national significance that millions of dollars of precious capital now need to be spent on LABELS!

On second thought, considering that the current labels do require a rudimentary level of math and reading and considering how many ignorants voted for her husband, perhaps the new, easier to spoon feed to the kindergarten masses labels ARE needed.

#4 Attorney General Eric Holder followed the lead of his master this week when he told state Attorneys Generals that when it comes to certain types of laws, in this case state laws regarding gay marriage, that it’s all just fine and dandy for them to basically just ignore the law and choose not to defend it. (As he and several Democrat state Attorneys General have already done.)

“Engaging in that process and making that determination is something that’s appropriate for an attorney general to do,”

Of course the New York Times, CNN and the rest of the crowd praised Holder for his grand civil rights stance. For as many so called intellectuals that are supposed to be working under the pillars of our elite press, how are so many of them so stupid to not see that the undermining of the rule of law that Holder and Obama are doing today is laying the foundation for the complete crumbling of our Constitutional system tomorrow?

In their minds, it won’t be such a bad thing because the result is a bunch of good things that should have happened long ago.

Good now for them, but when the opposite assumes power, and it WILL happen, that rule of law that they helped destroy will no longer be their to protect them.

It’s more than dangerous, it’s outright seditious.

Holder’s and Obama’s picking and choosing of which laws to enforce, which laws to delay and which laws are worthy are not decisions taking place in a vacuum.

They permeate throughout our legal system and with each new abuse they undermine over 200 years of legal precedent and Constitutional order.

#3 Following up to last week’s top Folly whereby the FCC was going to monitor newsrooms across the country is the revelation the 4 of 5 of the main people behind that un-Constitutional “study”……..wait for it……..drum roll please…….almost…….were ALL OBAMA DONORS! Byron York, writing in the Washington Examiner points out that:

A significant problem with the now-suspended Federal Communications Commission plan to have government contractors question journalists about editorial decisions and practices was that it was a partisan exercise………The study, delivered in July 2012, listed five authors: Ernest J. Wilson III, Carola Weil, and Katya Ognyanova from USC, Lewis Friedland from Wisconsin, and Philip Napoli from Fordham University. (Weil is now with American University.)

Four of the five, it turns out, contributed to President Obama’s campaigns.

My, my, my, who’d have ever thunk it.

#2 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for taking to the floor of the United States Senate Wednesday and smugly declaring that the ads and stories being told about Obamacare are:

“Despite all that good news, there’s plenty of horror stories being told. All of them are untrue, but they’re being told all over America,”

After being appropriately pummeled for his outrageous claim, he went back to that same Senate floor and “clarified” his remarks with this attack:

What is going on with these two brothers who made billions of dollars last year in an attempt to buy our democracy is dishonest, deceptive, false and unfair. Just because you have huge amounts of money, you should not be able to run these false, misleading ads by the hundreds of millions of dollars. They hide behind all kinds of entities, Mr. President. It’s not just their front organization, Americans for Prosperity, but they give money to all kinds of organizations, lots of money. You see, when you make billions of dollars a year you can be as immoral and dishonest as your money will allow you to be. It’s too bad that they’re trying to buy America, and it’s time that the American people spoke out against this terrible dishonesty of these two brothers who are about as un-American as anyone that I can imagine.

Amazingly George Soros, public unions and trial lawyers didn’t make Harry’s cut of those trying to “buy our democracy”. Neither did the fact that the money the Koch brothers do spend on political activity is for advocating a SMALLER and less INTRUSIVE government thereby strengthening democracy and increasing the rights and liberties of ALL Americans.

The same Senator who claimed without an ounce of proof that Mitt Romeny didn’t file his taxes actually had the gall to use the words “dishonest, deceptive, false and unfair” regarding his political opponents.

But considering Reid’s of the same party that has as its leader a despot that repeated over and over and over “If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan……..If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” so as to “buy” a second term with his lies, are any of his comments really a surprise any more?

Yep, Harry, singling out two private American citizens as “un-American” will definitely get you in the pages of historic Senate Leaders. Historic, low, slimy, weaselly, disgusting, pathetic leaders, but hey, I understand, it’s all about your power right? As long as your words help along that agenda nothing else matters.

So go ahead. Attack the Koch brothers. Who by the way have done nothing but grow the company that their father, a Dutch immigrant, founded and created jobs and wealth for thousands upon thousands of hard working people around the world and have given away hundreds of millions to charity.

Tell us again Harry, how it was that YOU acquired your own millions? Oh yes, land speculation, stock manipulation and questionable quid-pro quo dealings with friends and operatives of friends. Yep, that’s wealth creation all Americans can be proud of.

There were two words in your attack that do however ring true, “un-American”. That is, if they are applied to you.

#1 But the top spot this week goes to that side show from California, the 9th circus circuit Court of Appeals that decided it was just fine and dandy for administrators at Oak High School in Morgan Hill, California to demand that students wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo turn the shirts inside out for “safety” reasons.

In one of the wackier links of logic I’ve ever read in a ruling, the 3 judges basically said that because their had been problems the previous year with Mexican students upset over an American flag being displayed while they were parading around with the Mexican flag it was just fine for the school to put the interests of those siding with a foreign government above the free speech rights of American students for “safety” reasons.

Here’s an idea. If you’re concerned about school safety how about addressing the thugs instigating the un safe behavior. How about instilling in your school, that no, we’re not all from the same parts of the world, but if you’re going to live in this particular part of it you by God better put America first or you can get the hell out?

How about THAT reasoning 9th circuit?

But don’t take my word for it. Even esteemed more liberal than not Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University had this to say in his own post on the matter:

“I fail to see why the court should not “second guess” officials when they are curtailing core free speech protections. The problem is not the tee-shirts but violent or unruly conduct by students. It is the conduct of the students not the content of the tee-shirts that should be the focus of the school in my view.”

It’s not just you Professor Turley. There are millions of us out here wondering the exact same thing.

Why do so many in the courts and our legislatures continue to coddle and protect the trouble makers at the expense of the rule of law and the rights of decent, law abiding American citizens?

Now that I’ve gotten you thoroughly depressed, here’s a bonus Anti-Folly story:

Last fall, Modesto Junior College officials tried to stop student and Army veteran Robert Van Tuinen from passing out copies of the Constitution because even though Van Tuinen was in public space he was not doing his handing out in the proper designated “free speech” space.

But rather than back down, Van Tuinen decided to sue on First Amendment grounds.

Monday the college agreed to a settlement of $50,000 to Van Tuinen and an agreement to revise it’s free speech policies on campus.

Van Tuinen’s not getting rich, much of the money will go to legal fees, but he’s done the rest of us an invaluable service by publicizing yet another case of the very real hypocrisy that exists on college campuses all across the country.

But for me, the best part of the story is the day that started all this, the day that Van Tuinen’s rights were violated, was non other than September 17th, 2013. Constitution Day.

As always, thanks for reading, have a great weekend and I’ll see ya round the corner.

Tags: , , ,

Comments are closed.


January 2020
« May