Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Liberalism Has to be a Mental Disorder, It's the Only Explanation Plausible IMO
3/17/2014 7:14:26 PM
This lady has a valid point, one I share. If she is racist prove it. Let's have that discussion.

Woman from the ‘White Man March’ wants to know why Raw Story ‘justifies genocide’

By Tony Ortega
Monday, March 17, 2014 11:51 EDT
Laura_Fitzgerald
Topics:

On Saturday, a small number of people gathered in several locations for a “White Man March”to demonstrate against diversity efforts and what they label “White Genocide.”

One of those events took place in Knoxville, Tennessee and drew maybe a dozen people. One of them, however, reached out to Raw Story.

Her e-mail address indicates that her name is “Laura Fitz-gerald,” but in her videos, she goes by the name “Minnie Ervia,” and she’s originally from Australia.

Laura sent us a video she shot at Knoxville’s protest. You can see several people behind a large banner that reads “DIVERSITY” = GENOCIDE. A few counter-protesters can be seen laughing and jeering at Laura and her friends, and a few of the counter-protesters posed for photographs in front of the banner.

Laura can be heard shouting that what they were doing was not unlike the people of Japan wanting to keep that country Japanese.

We asked her about that comparison after thanking her for sending the video. We pointed out that keeping America “American” doesn’t really equate to keeping it white. The original inhabitants, after all, were the Native Americans, not white people.

“C’mon man, no other people are told that diversity and multiculturalism is a strength, and that if they don’t accept it they are labeled hate words like ‘racist’,” she replied. “You know as well as I that they only demand All White countries and Only White countries to accept the melting pot! Or are you going to tell me now that melting pots are promoted in all countries?…’Anti-racists’ only demand White countries turn themselves non-White because of their history. Why are you JUSTIFYING GENOCIDE??”

Whew. That’s what we get for asking.

But we are gluttons for punishment. We asked Laura what she wanted done about diversity in the United States. If she thinks this country’s rich mix of ethnicities is somehow “white genocide,” what does she propose be done about it?

“We are a group of dissidents putting out a consistent message to expose the anti-White system,” she e-mailed back. “WE are Samizdat and We are Tearing down this Wall. We are Forcing a conversation on White Genocide. Whether right or wrong, WHAT psychopath tries to stop Freedom of Speech when a group just wants to talk about Genocide. Genocide is a CRIME or is it normal to denounce people when they want to talk about a Crime. If it’s folly then PROVE IT, or just do the usual…. THAT’S HATE, NAZI, WHITE SUPREMACISTS, ETC. Remember, We are charging the anti-White system with criminal charges, We are not having a theoretical debate. You either can assist or lay complicit in your silence.”

Got it. OK.

So here’s the video that Laura sent of Saturday’s demonstration. She’s the one filming and talking about Japan…

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/17/woman-from-the-white-man-march-wants-to-know-why-raw-story-justifies-genocide/

To see videos click above link:


And here’s a video Laura/Minnie did last year, explaining her views…


Tony Ortega
Tony Ortega
Tony Ortega is Raw Story's executive editor. From 2007 to 2012 , he was editor-in-chief of The Village Voice. He also worked at Voice Media Group's other newspapers in Phoenix, Los Angeles, Kansas City, and Fort Lauderdale. He lives in New York City and is originally from Los Angeles.

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+1
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Liberalism Has to be a Mental Disorder, It's the Only Explanation Plausible IMO
3/18/2014 10:02:18 PM

Five Gun Rights Cases to Watch

What the courts still have to decide about the Second Amendment

"The Second Amendment right is not unlimited," Justice Antonin Scalia cautioned in the majority opinion in Heller. "It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." For example: "concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

The Supreme Court hasn't taken up any new Second Amendment cases since McDonald, but that doesn't indicate a lack of interest. The Court receives thousands of petitions for review—or certiorari—each year, but it replies to only a few hundred. It has recently plucked a handful of Second Amendment cases from the submissions pile, asking for responses from the relevant parties.

"The fact that the Supreme Court has been requesting responses," lawyer C.D. Michel wrote at calgunlaws.com in February 2012, "shows the Justices are paying unusually close attention to the Second Amendment issue." Michel went on to theorize that "the Court is interested in further clarifying the scope of Second Amendment rights but is searching for the right case vehicle to do so." Meanwhile, other cases are percolating through the lower courts that may soon end up getting SCOTUS' attention.

Here are five important cases that could expand Second Amendment liberty and clarify some of the core issues left unresolved by Heller and McDonald. The cases involve who can legally obtain weapons, what kinds of weapons they can own, how they can use them, and where they can use them. Two of them have filed certiorari petitions with the Supreme Court, though whether they'll be taken up remains to be seen.

NRA v. BATFE

This case is about who can legally obtain guns. It challenges the 1968 federal prohibition on licensed gun dealers selling handguns or handgun ammo to adults between the ages of 18 and 20. People in that age range can buy long guns, such as rifles or shotguns, and they can legally possess handguns. But they are barred from purchasing any of these items from licensed dealers, restricting their ability to obtain what they are permitted to own.

The case has dragged on since 2011, necessitating the addition of a new plaintiff (since the original pair of complainants have reached age 21). Two lower courts considering the case decided that 18- to 20-year-olds have no rights under the Second Amendment, never mind Heller.

The petition for certiorari requests the Supreme Court to decide "whether a nationwide, class-based, categorical ban on meaningful access to the quintessential means to exercise the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense can be reconciled with the Second Amendment." That question has potential relevance beyond the age cohort at issue: There are legal limits imposed on the gun rights of convicted felons and those adjudicated mentally ill, for example.

The lower courts' opinions in NRA v. BATFE show they are not taking the Second Amendment very seriously. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, which initially granted the government's request to dismiss the case in September 2011, thought that since "Congress identified a legitimate state interest-public safety-and passed legislation that is rationally related to addressing that issue," neither the Second Amendment nor equal protection of the law mattered. The court's reasoning went like this: Congress did it, they thought they had their reasons, that settles it.

A panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals then decided that the Second Amendment didn't really have bearing on this case. Why? Certain types of people had been barred from gun ownership even back in the Founding era. Additionally, in the 19th and 20th centuries various laws prevented minors from owning weapons when the age of majority was still 21. (In the Founding era, though, 18- to 20-year-olds were part of the armed militia.)

The Fifth Circuit also seemed to invent a new comparative responsibility doctrine for applying full constitutional rights. The Second Amendment, the judges found, only "protects 'law-abiding, responsible' Citizens." And "Congress found that persons under 21 tend to be relatively irresponsible."

In a failed attempt to get the Fifth Circuit to rehear the case en banc, a dissent from Judge Edith Jones in the 8-7 vote wondered when else courts would ever decide that a constitutional right did not apply to "a law-abiding adult class of citizens," mocking the decision's extremely weak version of "intermediate scrutiny," its basis for determining whether the government's restriction furthers an important state interest in a directly relevant way.

The Supreme Court has not defined what level of judicial scrutiny should apply to Second Amendment cases. It has rejected as a guideline mere "interest balancing," in which a court decides whether the benefits of a given restriction outweigh its costs to the citizen. Same with a "rational basis review," in which the government merely has to prove that the rights-restriction is rationally related to furthering some state goal.

Lower court application of "intermediate scrutiny" to Second Amendment cases has curtailed the expansion of gun rights in many post-Heller cases. Alan Gura, the lawyer who won both Heller and McDonald before the Supreme Court, says that the doctrine here "is not the intermediate scrutiny that's usually applied in constitutional cases, such as gender-based discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause." Under real intermediate scrutiny, Gura contends, "post-hoc rationalizations are insufficient, and the government bears the burden of showing a substantial fit between an important interest and the regulation at issue." Yet under Second Amendment intermediate scrutiny as applied by lower courts, "the legislative excuses or police declarations are given presumptive weight, and the burden is laid upon the challengers. Sometimes the government is required to come back with more evidence, but this appears to largely be a pro forma step. Most (but not all) laws survive this analysis." Continues ....http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/18/five-gun-rights-cases-to-watch

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+2
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Liberalism Has to be a Mental Disorder, It's the Only Explanation Plausible IMO
3/21/2014 1:45:01 AM
Once Again, The Left Says You Don’t Own Your Own Body

So much for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.


Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Once upon a time, those words had meaning. So long as what you were engaged in did not harm anyone else to a reasonable extent, you were allowed—and perhaps even encouraged—to engage in such behavior.

But over the years, we’ve seen our liberty dissolve thanks to establishment politicians on both sides of the aisle. These so-called “leaders” are so deeply entrenched in suckling on the teat of the American taxpayer—bettering themselves, their families, and their friends along the way—that they care not about the blatant erosion of our liberty over the years. Rather, they simply cater to the special interests that keep them in power until they either lose an election or decide not to seek another term (in both cases most likely landing a cushy lobbying position immediately thereafter.)

Healthcare “Reform”

While, on the surface, the left’s recent support and subsequent passage of what they claim to be healthcare “reform” is commendable, the fact remains that the Affordable Care Act—better known as Obamacare—is political grandstanding at its finest.

From “we have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” to “if you like your plan, you can keep it”, the execution of the law has been dishonest and laughable at best. Despite the fact that lawmakers rushed the passage of the bill, President Barack Obama seems to blatantly disregard the lawmaking process outlined in the Constitution, using his executive authority to illegally augment the disaster of a bill every couple of weeks – something which, under the law that exists in this country, is supposed to be left up to Congress. Seemingly, and probably smartly from a purely political standpoint, the president is trying to kick the realities of the bill down the road, past each encroaching election.

But taking a step back from the reality that the bill is haphazard legislation at best, we can still see that the left is blatantly dishonest in their desire for providing better healthcare in our country. You might ask why, and I’m about to tell you.

We All Know Smoking is Bad

According to lung.org, about 160,000 Americans died from lung cancer in 2012—more than those who died from breast cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, and prostate cancer combined. One can only imagine how much treatment costs are for those suffering from such an awful disease. It certainly puts a strain on our healthcare system for a disease that, in most cases, is completely preventable.

For practically as long as human history has been recorded, men and women have smoked substances to relax and fraternize. Smoking is nothing new. Many of the smokers of today, however, get addicted to cigarettes; and their bodies become reliant on nicotine. Quitting becomes difficult.

Seeking a safer alternative that helped smokers get their fixes, a Chinese company created the first electronic cigarette about a decade ago. The device vaporizes flavored liquid containing nicotine. This allows smokers to inhale a vapor charged with their vice.

But Are Electronic Cigarettes Bad?

The verdict remains on whether electronic cigarettes are really what they claim to be: a “safer alternative” to smoking cigarettes. The FDA is debating whether to ban such products from the market altogether.

Common sense teaches us that it’s probably “safer” to inhale a vapor than to inhale incinerated materials that have been scientifically linked to cancer. But the FDA is under the purview of the federal government, a place where common sense does not live. Despite the fact that the FDA has approved all sorts of things that are not healthy, one has to wonder how many people really care what the bureaucracy ends up having to say on the matter.

But even before the FDA weighs in—possibly criminalizing the products—liberals are already making sure that law-abiding Americans aren’t able to pursue happiness. Recent bans of electronic cigarettes have started popping up across the country, perhaps most notably in New York City. Similar bans are moving forward in places like Philadelphia as well.

What This All Means

What do places like Philadelphia and New York City have in common? They are bastions of liberalism. Those in power in those cities do not care about the individual’s right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. How can cigarettes be legal when these lawmakers push forward legislation intended to deter people from seeking a safer alternative to their addiction?

More importantly, how can the left claim that they care about the health of American citizens when they hastily pass a bill that they don’t read (and that was written by healthcare lobbyists)?

Anyone with any semblance of common sense at their disposal would likely agree that despite the lack of research on the relatively new products, electronic cigarettes are a safer alternative to their traditional counterparts (liberals, unfortunately, do not fall into that category). Letting people use the devices, over time, is likely to take at least some sort of strain off of our healthcare system.

But that’s a solution that would help reduce costs and improve services—a concept as foreign to liberals as can be.

Photo credit: planetc1 (Flickr)


Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/electronic-cigarettes-great-healthcare-yet-still-bad-left/#xFIp8fLO8VzSqCco.99

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Liberalism Has to be a Mental Disorder, It's the Only Explanation Plausible IMO
3/21/2014 12:20:12 PM

Rush Limbaugh Says ‘Democrats Are Living in Mortal Fear’ of the Day This ‘Huge’ Story Is Widely Reported


Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday took a shot at the mainstream media and even some conservative outlets for underreporting on the success of Gov. Scott Walker (R) in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a member of the executive committee of the National Governors Association, speaks to the media after meeting with President Barack Obama at the White House Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2014, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a member of the executive committee of the National Governors Association, speaks to the media after meeting with President Barack Obama at the White House Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2014, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Limbaugh cited an Associated Press report run Wednesday on page A14 of the New York Times about the Wisconsin Assembly passing Walker’s $504 million tax-cut plan. As previously reported by TheBlaze, Walker intends to use part of Wisconsin’s projected $977 million surplus to pay for property and income tax cuts.

“He introduced a bill in January that would send $406 million to technical colleges to reduce their property tax hit and cut income taxes by $98 million by reducing the lowest bracket to 4 percent from 4.4 percent,” the report states. “The end result would be a $131 reduction a median home’s tax bill this December and $46 in annual income tax savings for the average worker.”

The bill now heads to Walker’s desk for his signature.

Limbaugh mocked the report for giving the success story just ten lines, though he also said he was “amazed” the story ran in the New York Times at all.

“The solution to this country’s problems gets ten lines in the New York Times,” Limbaugh said. “I’m amazed they even ran the story. But it gets ten lines. I think this is one of the biggest and under commented on — and including in conservative media. This is simply huge what Scott Walker has done.”

Limbaugh explained that Walker took over one of the “bluest of blue” states and completely transformed it for the better with conservative policies.

“They did everything they could, not just to destroy Walker’s political career, they tried to destroy his reputation and his political life,” he added. “He persevered, he overcame, he dominated and he won.”

Down from 9.2 percent in 2009, Wisconsin had an unemployment rate of 6.1 percent in January, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports. Walker also announced earlier this year that the state had added 106,100 private-sector jobs in his first three years in office.

“The schools have been reformed, so the unions do not control every aspect of it now. There is a surplus of nearly a billion dollars in this economy,” Limbaugh continued. “And he’s returning half of that to residents of the state in the form of a property tax cut and income tax cuts — and it gets ten lines in the New York Times.”

Comparing Wisconsin’s situation to that of the rest of the United States, Limbaugh said most states are struggling.

“We’ve got the answer in practical and real political terms, and real-life experience,” he added. “The blueprint for how to win elections and the blueprint for how to govern after you win elections, the blueprint for economic revival, the blueprint for employment revival, the blueprint for budgetary solvency! It’s amazing, it is a huge story.”

“The Democrats are living in mortal fear that this is gonna be discovered,” Limbaugh said. “They are living in mortal fear that the Republicans are going to get their butts in gear and learn from this and try to replicate it. So far there’s no sign of that.”

Listen by clicking this link http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/20/rush-limbaugh-this-huge-story-has-democrats-living-in-mortal-fear-and-even-conservative-media-are-underreporting-it/

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Liberalism Has to be a Mental Disorder, It's the Only Explanation Plausible IMO
3/29/2014 1:13:18 PM
Have you paid attention to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid lately? He has gone senile right before our very eyes. He has grown very wealthy while "serving the people" and had so much money coming in he wanted to share with his grand daughter. Now many grands help out their grands and so forth. But very seldom do they STEAL to do so and then claim it was an oversight. What a freakin' Joke!

FEC NOT SATISFIED WITH HARRY REID'S EXPLANATION OF 'HOLIDAY GIFTS' TO GRANDDAUGHTER




On Tuesday, Reid announced he would reimburse his campaign, Friends of Harry Reid, the $17,000 they gave his granddaughter for “holiday gifts,” but the Federal Election Commission is not satisfied.

A spokeswoman for the FEC acknowledged that Reid’s plan to reimburse the money may not be sufficient to keep the FEC from auditing or penalizing him. The organization wrote Friends of Harry Reid to demand that they “include a brief statement or description … to clarify” why $17,000 was given to his granddaughter, Ryan Elisabeth Reid.

Reid has until April 25th to offer a clear explanation for his actions.

He has said that he has done no wrong: “No, in fact, it wasn’t (wrong). As I said, I just wanted to avoid — and I’m very fortunate that I can write that check, so it’s all done.”

A spokeswoman for Reid stated that the money paid to his granddaughter was for jewelry given out as "holiday gifts" from the campaign. Reid said that he “thought it would be nice to give supporters and staff thank-you gifts that had a personal connection and a Searchlight connection.”

Reid’s granddaughter, listed only as Ryan Elisabeth on the disbursement reports, hails from Las Vegas. She is the oldest child of Rory Reid, Reid’s oldest son, who ran for Nevada governor in 2010.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/27/FEC-Not-Satisfied-with-Reid-s-Explanation-for-Holiday-Gifts

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!