Top 7 for the Week of June 29th

This week, Ashley and I talked about:

  1. Obamacare ObamaTax
  2. Eric Holder: Attorney General Fail
  3. Another Government’Backed Solar Company Bites the Dust
  4. DC Schools Prove Money Doesn’t Fix What’s Broke
  5. NAACP: Poor People Are Too Dumb To Make Their Own Choices
  6. Google Cookies Diss Your Privacy
  7. Food Stamps Are Fun! (And Make You Pretty)

Plus we have a rant, a Dude of the Week, and a dirty joke guaranteed to make you laugh.

Happy listening!

Listen to internet radio with Top 7 on Blog Talk Radio

Verbal Vomit on Supreme Court’s Obamacare Ruling

So the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was ruled constitutional today, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided with the libs on the bench. I mean, even wishy-washy Kennedy voted to strike down the individual mandate.

I was sleeping in a little this morning, because it’s summer and also because I stayed up too late watching Doctor Who on my ipad last night, when Leif came over and nudged me awake before he set off for work. He was so awesome and sweet and told me I was pretty and that he loved me. Then I realized what day it was. Obamacare Decision Day.

“Oh no! You know, don’t you?”

“Yeah.” He stroked my hair.

“It’s not good, is it?”

“Nope.” He gazed lovingly at me.

“Give it to me straight.”

“Constitutional. Roberts wrote the majority opinion.”

“Whaaaa….?”

“I know. They’re calling it a tax, and therefore Congress has the power to levy it.”

Gah.

So then I did what any chick that works in social media does and took to Twitter to voice my thoughts. Because do opinions matter if they’re not posted on a social networking site? Didn’t think so.

Here are my original tweets, with commentary added in the parentheses:

Ok. Reaction. 1-I feel like throwing up. Apparently it’s Constitutional to tax me for breathing. (It’s possible I was slightly hung over. But I did feel punched in the gut.)

2- WTF, Justice Roberts?? You are no longer my 3rd favorite. (Favorite is Scalia. Second is Thomas. Third is now up for grabs. Probably Alito.)

3- Roberts is a VERY smart man. What’s he playing? (Seriously, Justice Roberts – WTF?)

4- I think I’m going to be sick. (Again, possibly from that last glass of wine last night, but this Obamacare standing thing wasn’t helping.)

5- Well, this pretty much guarantees a President Romney, huh? (Le sigh.)

6- Aaaaaand I’m back to being sick. (Can I vote for Ann instead? I like her better. Sorry, Mitt.)

7- I’m going back to bed. *Pulls covers over her head*

Then I realized I had to get up and write and comment because if I don’t, I don’t get paid, and health care costs are about to skyrocket. And you know, personal responsibility and all that jazz.

So I officially turned in my two cents to The Stir, where I’m sure commenters will call me a racity racist for agreeing with the black man on the bench (Clarence Thomas, Second Favorite). I’m not quite sure how that works, but it seems that whenever the haters disagree with me about something I get called a racist. Get some better insults, people! Racist is so 2009.

Anyway, my friend Matt Cover (say Co-ver, not like the blanket) pointed out, “Roberts DOES NOT say that anything that looks like a tax is ok, only that this provision is a tax, and therefore ok.” Ok … I can see that. I still don’t like it.

I also read this from Erick Erickson (no relation), wherein he makes the case that, “While Roberts has expanded the taxation power, which I don’t really think is a massive expansion from what it was, Roberts has curtailed the commerce clause as an avenue for Congressional overreach. In so doing, he has affirmed the Democrats are massive taxers.”

They are massive taxers. And Obama ran on that whole “no tax increases for the middle class” thing. Not looking good for him this November. Or for other politicians that supported this behemoth of a bill without even reading the frickin’ thing.

Go donate to the Romney campaign. Seriously, use that link, because I get some sort of credit for referring you. Maybe I can win a stuffed seal like I did that time I sold 200 boxes of Girl Scout cookies in third grade!

And watch Ben Howe’s latest video featuring a compilation of Obama clips insisting that this is not a tax.

Top 7 for the Week of 1/13/2012

This week, Ashley and I talked about:

  1. California Crunchies at the Farmers’ Market
  2. So, You Want To Be an Iranian Scientist?
  3. The GOP’s Super PAC War
  4. The Supreme Court Sides with Religious School
  5. Marines Pee On Dead Terrorists (And This Is a Problem?)
  6. School Dress Codes … For Teachers
  7. Bacon = Cancer
We also have a rant, a dirty joke from Eli, our dude of the week, and we took our first live caller!
Happy listening!

Listen to internet radio with Top 7 on Blog Talk Radio

Should Elena Kagan’s Minority Status Matter?

Solicitor General Elena Kagan is busy this week being grilled by Senators in confirmation hearings before being rubber-stamped into theUnited States Supreme Court. With the majority being held by the Democrats, President Obama’s pick is practically a shoo-in.

Ms. Kagen will be the second justice nominated to the highest bench in the land by President Obama; the first was “wise Latina” Sonia Sotomayor. Side note: Sotomayor is extremely fun to say out loud. Try it. Super-fun, isn’t it?

Back to the topic at hand — Elena Kagan. More specifically, the fact that she’s a woman. The second woman appointed by the first black president. Extra points for Sotomayor though, since she has the wholeLatina factor too. Although, if you believe the rumors, Kagan has thegay thing going for her.

All of which I really don’t care about. I don’t care that there’s a Latina on the Supreme Court. I don’t care about a woman taking John Paul Stevens’s place on the bench. I don’t care that there’s a black man in the White House.

Read More

Supreme Court Rules Right to Bear Arms Constitutional After All

The Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment right of all Americans to bear arms for the first time on Monday, while reviewing a restrictive handgun law in Chicago. The 5-4 ruling does not affect gun control measures outside of firearm bans.

Which means that there are four justices on the bench that would have Americans abandon the most valuable tool they possess in defending their liberty. The Second Amendment ensures that we keep all of the other amendments we’ve grown so fond of — like the freedom of speech or the right to a fair and timely trial.

After all, those in power won’t dare take away our God given, Constitution-protected rights so long as We the People have the ability to resist. What happens if the government takes away our right to vote, or our right to practice our own religions, if the law-abiding citizens have no guns? We can call the lawyers, but is anyone really afraid of lawyers?

Do you really want to have to trust the government that much? Or wouldn’t it be better to know that if a group of power-hungry people were to get in control, we’d have the ultimate ability to resist them if need be? As Americans, we get to make one last stand against tyranny, rather than submit or be killed.

Read More

545 People

I love this article. It was written some years ago, but is timeless in America. Keep it in mind when you go the ballot box this election cycle.

By Charlie Reese

(Date of publication unknown)

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 235 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY

Don’t you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O’Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O’neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.

REPLACE SCOUNDRELS

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts – of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can’t think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it’s because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses – provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

Dennis Prager. Wow. Just Wow.

h/t Liberty Pundits

Elena Kagan for SCOTUS: Not a Battle Worth Fighting

My Latest at The Stir by CafeMom.com

On Monday, President Obama announced his nomination of Elena Kaganfor the Supreme Court of the United States. Nine players sit on the bench of the highest court in the land, and they play for life. It’s a more powerful position than behind the desk in the Oval Office when you think about it.

Those nine justices interpret our laws and our Constitution, and the buck stops with them. Because it’s the highest court we have, there’s nowhere to go for an appeal. The process for overturning a Supreme Court decision is messy and sticky and basically next to impossible.

Read More

Another Step in the RIGHT Direction

Today the Supreme Court knocked out significant campaign finance laws, all of which had been unconstitutionally enacted in the name of “fairness.”  The 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold) attempted to restrict electioneering by wealthy corporations and labor unions by barring them from using general treasury funds to pay for advertisements or other broadcasts that mention a political candidate.  Just a little bit of unconstitutional censorship, that’s all.

In a 5-4 vote, the Court lifted those restrictions.  Which means that companies will be able to run ads for candidates they like.  You know what kinds of candidates companies like?  The ones that make it easier for them to actually run their businesses, instead of trying to bankrupt them with mandated health care requirements and cap and trade.  If they can successful run a company, they can expand operations… and create jobs!  Remember, it’s better to have a job and no health care than no job and no health care.

From the White House, President Obama called the ruling a “major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

This from Mr. Closed Door himself. Obama doesn’t care about everyday Americans.  We’re all just serfs to him, here only to fund his playground of policies and bailouts.  Well we’re done Mr. President.  We’re picking up our toys, packing up our trucks, and going home to the Constitution. Don’t let the sand hit you in the teeth.

Eminent Domain

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. -Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution

I bolded the part that’s relevant to this post.  That bold part?  “No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”  That is what we call eminent domain.  It sounds boring, but it’s not.  One of the things that makes American uniquely America is our right to our property.  Hopefully you only know from watching shows like CSI (or my favorite of the moment- Castle) and not from experience, but cops need a warrant to search someone’s private property.  That’s the due process part of the amendment.  Can you imagine the violation and abuse of power if any law enforcement agent could come into your home and search it for whatever, whenever?  Hopefully, we’d still have some good guys in law enforcement, but don’t you think that sort of job would attract criminals?  That’s why we have due process of the law.

What about the private property being taken for public use?  That means that if a local government needs to build a courthouse, a school, a road, or some other public facility, and the best place to do it is on property owned by a private citizen, the government may not seize that land without just compensation.  A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court redefined what constituted “public use” of property in the landmark Kelo versus City of New London case.

Ms. Susette Kelo was a divorcee living in New London, CT, in a century old home that she had bought after her divorce and fixed up herself.  In 1998, she read in the newspaper that Pfizer Corp, the privately owned pharmaceutical company, was going to build a $300 million global research and development center in the area, and that her home would be bought out for a municipal redevelopment plan.  She said, “I read that residents in Fort Trumbull were going to be bought out of their properties and that those who refused to sell were going to be taken by eminent domain. That’s how it all started. I read about it in the newspaper.”

Ms. Kelo’s neighbor’s eventually accepted the money and moved out, and one by one, their houses were torn down.  But Ms. Kelo refused to be bullied by a government that would take her property for the benefit of a giant corporation.  Her case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of New London.  The majority opinion of the case was that, ” a city may claim private property under the Fifth Amendment so long as it does so as part of a clear economic development plan intended to benefit the community as a whole.”

So basically, the Supreme Court ruled that a government may seize the property of individual citizens whenever they feel like it’s a good idea.  I’m sure that’s exactly what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution after winning a revolutionary war against the oppressive British government (insert sarcasm here).

That was in 2005.  There has been more than enough time to see the dramatic economic improvements promised by the Pfizer Corp and the city of New London.  So what’s going on in New London these days?  Has it prospered with the redevelopment?  The city and state spent $78 million of tax-payer money to bulldoze the area in preparation for the hotels, condos, and strip malls that were to bring job creation and economic prosperity to the area.  Four years later, the site sits undeveloped.

In November 2009, Pfizer Corp. announced that it would be shutting its R & D center in New London, and transferring the 1,400 people working there to another facility.  The promised economic boom fell flat before it ever even got off the ground.  Ms. Kelo was forced to leave her home so it could be bulldozed and redeveloped into a wasteland of weeds and broken dreams.

What does this prove?  I don’t know if it proves anything, but it is yet another example of the Midas touch of government when it messes with the affairs of private citizens.  That is if Midas had turned everything he touched to chicken manure instead of gold.  I take that back.  At least chicken manure is good fertilizer.  What good is a vacant parking lot where Ms. Kelo’s home once stood?