September 27th, 2020
The Two Strong Women Who Just Saved America
In just two weeks, two strong women have stepped up to literally save America from imminent destruction.
The first strong woman is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an ideological Leftist who used her seat on America’s highest court to promote anti-America, anti-democracy, anti-Western values and ideas, for decades. So filled with antipathy for America and freedom was Ginsburg that not too many years ago she openly wished for America to shed its current constitution and adopt the South African constitution, instead.
Think about what Ginsburg wanted here. She wanted the world’s most stable, fairest, most transparent, most open, most accountable government to dispose of its central founding document, and exchange it for one that is central to one of the world’s least fair, least accountable, least stable nations. A nation with no rule of law and a semi-official policy of genocidal racism (against former Europeans). South Africa is a hell-hole now, having gone from being the flower of Africa to now being just one more shit-hole African nation riven by thousand-year-old ethnic hatreds, terrible violence, official corruption, no justice, and lots of injustice.
Ginsburg openly stated that she wanted America to descend into South Africa’s low quality of life. And being such an ardent, strong ideologue, and despite her obvious aging to the point where one of the official Supreme Court photos shows her literally asleep in her black robe, Ginsburg clung to her power like it was life itself. But by waiting to retire from the Supreme Court only when she could be replaced by a woman who was going to be nominated by a woman president, Ginsburg overplayed her hand. She died in office last week and left a vacancy that is now going to be filled by the current president and the senate, per the plain words of the US Constitution.
And the person this president has nominated to replace Ginsburg, and whom the US Senate has indicated its majority will likely confirm, is another strong woman, Judge Amy Coney Barrett.
Unlike Ginsburg, Barrett is an American through and through, in every way. Unlike Ginsburg, Barrett loves America as it was founded, with both its warts and its promise, its equal opportunities for everyone and its justice for all. Unlike Ginsburg, Barrett understands and admires the US Constitution, which was designed to allow America to heal from the American Revolution, from slavery (America nearly fought a civil war over slavery in 1794), and any other problems that might arise among humans living there. Our Founders understood that humans never tire of creating problems for one another and for themselves.
Liberal, woman-hating, motherhood-hating misogynists oppose Amy Barrett sitting on the US Supreme Court. But she is here to literally save the day, save the country, save the planet. That is because Barrett is going to be the deciding vote in what is likely to be a litany of 5-4 votes over the coming two months. Most of these will be deciding if some state supreme courts like in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, can improperly usurp the role of the state legislatures for setting the date and time of Election Day. Per the US Constitution, only the state legislatures can decide anything about Election Day. And yet courts in these states (to begin with) have in classic liberal fashion engaged in tremendous over-reach and illegally declared that Election Day can go on and on and on until someone has created or found enough votes to finally declare victory. As opposed to simply counting up all the legal, valid votes that are filed by 8PM on Election Day and then calling the winner as a result of who has the most electoral votes.
Why is Barrett going to be the 5th vote in the narrow Supreme Court majority? Because Justice John Roberts has increasingly revealed himself to be a product of back room politics and America-Last-Money-First ideologies. Justice Roberts is no conservative. Hell, he is so unprincipled that he is barely a RINO, and he has made it quite clear that he sides with America-Last globalists over the interests and rights of the American citizenry. This means that in any vote about Election Day law and procedure, Roberts is likely to side with the anti-America liberals on the court.
And so it took two strong women to literally save America in 2020. One woman was a strong, but blinded ideologue whose over-ambitious political grasping caused her to over-reach and thereby not only fail in her own goals, but she set up the exact opposite result of what she wanted. Thank you for sticking around too long, Justice Ginsburg, and thank you for leaving us when you did.
And into Ginsburg’s breach stepped Amy Coney Barrett, a true woman of valor, in every way. Barrett, a shield maiden of Western Liberty, replaced the hammer and sickle waving old communist hag.
God loves America, clearly, as well as a big dose of irony.
God bless America, and God bless president Donald J. Trump.
Thank you, God, for bringing us to this time, this season, this hour.
[UPDATE February 24, 2021: Well, obviously I was wrong about Judge/ Justice Amy Coney Barrett. So were a lot of other people. Her decisions on the Court show that she has turned out to be just as much a DC Swamp Thing as anyone could possibly be. Some people wonder if she or her family are being threatened and therefore intimidated. Who cares. Barrett has no backbone or loyalty, and she is in fact helping implement the quick dissolution of the American Republic]
February 27th, 2014
Fernandez v. California was decided yesterday by the US Supreme Court. Everything about it is just…weird.
In a holding that is enraging advocates of private property rights, limited government, and citizen privacy, the Court’s conservatives were joined by two liberals to allow the police to enter a private home without a warrant, even if one resident says they cannot enter, because another resident said they could enter.
In other words, if the police get a resident of a home to grant permission to enter that home for the purpose of searching for something illegal, which the police now do not have to specify in writing, the police may enter. What they are looking for could be unknown, or undocumented. Maybe they are on a fishing expedition, just looking for anything they could use against the person who said they did not want the police to enter. It seems like planting evidence would be a lot easier, now. In any event, your home is no longer your castle, if a pissed off teenager inside decides to take out their misplaced teenage aggression against their loving parents.
Seems like a recipe for disaster.
Justice Ginsburg wrote a dissent, noting the obvious erosion in Fourth Amendment rights against illegal searches and seizures that result from holdings like this. Ginsburg is the court’s most liberal member, an extremist who has spoken out against the US Constitution she is sworn to uphold, and an authoritarian statist who otherwise just loves, loves, loves state power over citizens.
And here’s the really weird stuff: The facts involve “illegal guns,” which in California is anything down to and including a Daisy BB gun, and documented domestic violence.
The person blocking the police from entering the home to search it was the Mr. Wife-Beating Fernandez, a scumbag who held his cringing wife prisoner under brutal circumstances. After he was momentarily out of the picture and not a direct threat, she allowed the police to search the house, where they found the illegal guns (let’s be clear – California is on the path to making all gun ownership illegal, except by the police, which is otherwise known as a police state, a separate topic).
Thus did Mr. Macho Wife Beater get into even more and more serious trouble with the legal system, and thus did he subsequently attempt to suppress the evidence the police found, which really put him away behind bars for a while.
Ginsburg and other liberals typically trumpet the rights of domestic abuse victims, but here they are clearly ranking them beneath the rights of the gun-owning wife beater. Weird.
Conservatives like Alito typically champion the rights of gun owners and are split 50/50 on privacy rights. But here they are so obviously opening up the flood gates of potential abuse by police. No warrant? No documentation for probable cause? Husbands and wives typically cannot testify against each other, but here they are now allowed to defy one another in the family ‘castle’ so the state apparatus may enter at will.
Seems like a pretty huge detonation of American citizens’ privacy rights. Weird.