Category Archives: Constitution

Chelsea Handler slams President Trump for calling rifles entertainment: “Grounds for impeachment”

This egomaniac probably believes that the only “real entertainment” comes out of Hollyweird.

From Yahoo: Chelsea Handler is speaking out after Donald Trump defended semi-automatic AR-15 assault rifles as “entertainment.”

On Wednesday morning, the president’s interview with Piers Morgan for Good Morning Britain aired. In it, he explained that he doesn’t support gun control or weapons bans because gun owners “have a tremendous amount of fun.”

“Well, a lot of them used them for entertainment, they do,” Trump said when Morgan challenged asked “why anyone in America needs a semi-automatic AR-15 assault rifle at home.”

“Are guns entertainment?” Morgan shot back.

“For some people, it’s entertainment, they go out and they shoot and they go to ranges and they have a tremendous amount of fun,” Trump responded.

He also said that people would be “sitting ducks” without firearms and claimed that the 2015 attacks in Paris “would never have happened” if Bataclan concert-goers had been armed.

Trump’s comments angered Handler, one of his many celebrity critics. The comedian argued that the president’s description of semi-automatic assault rifles as “entertainment” is “grounds for impeachment.” She also called on politicians to back gun control and “stand up to the NRA.”

Many of her fans agreed, though, as some noted, being against gun control wouldn’t actually be grounds for impeachment. Gun control critics, however, called out Handler.

Handler may get her wish, as Congress may indeed launch an impeachment hearing against Trump over concerns of collusion and other alleged constitutional violations. Just days ago, his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton, tweeted that “the president is not above the law,” which was seen as a call for Congress to take action.

——————

This womyn needs to get herself to the range and shoot a Browning 9mm hi-power. Now that’s what I call entertainment!

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

1.0
01
Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Atheist loses lawsuit to remove ‘In God We Trust’ from U.S. currency

A piece of good news, at last, in the contemporary American wasteland.

Do you remember a man named Michael Newdow?

Newdow, 65, is the Californian atheist who’s been jamming the courts with lawsuits.

Newdow’s most recent lawsuit was to have “In God We Trust” removed from U.S. currency on the grounds that the motto is a government endorsement of religion and so violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Last year, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Newdow — the judges found that the motto on currency “comports with early understandings of the Establishment Clause” and did not coerce people into practicing a religion.

See DCG’s “Lawsuit demands US remove ‘In God We Trust’ from money“.

“In God We Trust” was first put on an American coin in 1864, and added to both coins and paper bills in 1955. A year after, in 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower signed a law making the phrase the national motto.

Leah Klett reports for Christian Post, citing Fox News, that on June 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected, without comment, Newdow’s appeal.

In 2013, Newdow had partnered with the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation to sue the U.S. Treasury over the motto on currency. In his petition to the Supreme Court, Nedow, a lawyer whose clients are other atheists, had argued that:

  • The government violated his clients’ “sincere religious belief” that there is no God and turned them into “political outsiders” by placing the phrase “In God We Trust” on their money.
  • The placement of “In God We Trust” on money “has real effects on real children” and subjects atheist children to the same sufferings  historically endured by black children as “second class citizens”.

In the words of Newdow’s petition, which refers to “God” as “G-d” — a Jewish practice:

Petitioners are atheists. As such, they fervidly disagree with the religious idea that people should trust in G-d. On the contrary, their sincere religious belief is that trusting in any G-d is misguided. Defendants have conditioned receipt of the important benefit of using the nation’s sole ‘legal tender’ upon conduct proscribed by Petitioners’ atheism (i.e., upon Petitioners’ personally bearing – and proselytizing – a religious message that is directly contrary to the central idea that underlies their religious belief system).

Unless this Court ends the flagrant governmental preference for belief in G-d (and the implicit concomitant denigration of Atheism), the organizations, adults and children bringing this case will spend the rest of their lives – as they have spent their lives so far – as secondclass citizens.

Mat Staver, founder and chairman of religious liberty law firm Liberty Counsel, praised the court’s rejection of Newdow’s petition: “Our national motto ‘In God We Trust’ has been on all U.S. currency for more than 60 years and it will remain there, despite ridiculous attempts by atheists to remove it.”

Newdow’s past litigation includes:

  • Several failed litigation challenges against the “under God” phrase in the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance. In 2004, after suing for the removal of “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance, his case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. But the court did not decide on the merits of the case but instead said Newdow had no standing to sue. See my post, “‘Under God’ stays in Pledge of Allegiance“.
  • Attempts to stop prayers being read at the inauguration of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush.
  • Attempts to prevent government leaders from saying the phrase “So help me God” in the 2009, 2013, and 2017 presidential inaugurations.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Can you pass this 100-question U.S. Civics Quiz?

CivicsQuiz.com has a U.S. Civics Quiz of 100 questions.

Most questions are taken right from the U.S. Naturalization Exam.

To take the quiz, click here, then report to us on your score!

I got a score of 95. How did you do?

Of the 5 questions I got wrong, I strenuously object to Question #2. Also, the supposedly correct answers for Questions #65 and #66 contradict each other.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Gun control, Chiraq style: 44 shot – 8 fatally – since Friday night

New Chiraq Mayor Lori Lightfoot is going to have her hands full…

When I originally scheduled this post early Sunday afternoon it was 42 shot, 6 fatally. By 9:00 pm the numbers had gone up to 44 shot, 8 fatally. I’m sure the numbers will be higher by Monday morning.

From MyFoxChicago: At least 42 people have been shot in Chicago since Friday evening, the large majority of whom were wounded in a rash of violence during the first 12 hours of the weekend, leaving six people dead by early Sunday morning.

A 26-year-old woman was shot and killed in Fuller Park in the weekend’s latest fatal gun violence incident.

She was outside in the 4900 block of South Princeton Avenue about 4 a.m. when gunfire erupted, Chicago police said. She was struck in the chest and pronounced dead at the University of Chicago Medical Center.
Saturday, a man was found with a fatal gunshot wound in Albany Park on the Northwest Side.

Officials found 20-year-old Piotr Rbaliczek in a vehicle about 6:29 a.m. in the 4300 block of North Mozart Street, police said. He had been shot in the neck and was pronounced on the scene. The circumstances of the shooting remain unclear.

Earlier, authorities responding to a ShotSpotter gunshot detection alert discovered a homicide at 4:11 a.m. in the 7700 block of South Morgan in the South Side Gresham neighborhood, according to police.

Christopher Walton, 29, man had been shot in the chest and he later died at the University of Chicago Medical Center, police and the Cook County medical examiner’s office said.

Late Friday, two people were killed in separate Humboldt Park shootings.

Read about all the shootings here.

Guess the thugs missed the message that women of color are now in charge of Chiraq, which will somehow magically transform!

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Obama in Brazil: US gun laws don’t make sense; you can even buy a machine gun!

From Daily Mail: Former president Barack Obama has claimed US gun laws ‘don’t make sense’.

The Democrat – who pushed for tighter restrictions during his two terms in office – said it was too easy ‘to buy machine guns.’

Obama made the comments on stage during a sit-down interview at VTEX DAY, a digital convention in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on Thursday.

Speaking about the Sandy Hook school shooting that saw 20 children and six adults massacred, he described it as the ‘hardest day of his life’.

‘The worst thing for me was that I could not bring their children back or promise that we would change the laws,’ he told the 10,000-strong crowd.

‘Gun laws in the United States don’t make much sense. Anybody can buy any weapon, anytime without, you know, without much if any regulation. They can buy over the Internet. They can buy machine guns.

Obama’s comments come just months after Brazil passed laws making it easier for people to buy and carry guns. Far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro signed the temporary decree in January came amid a record wave of murders.

Obama – considered by many as the ‘most anti-gun president in American history’ – made several attempts to limit the size of gun magazines, expand background checks of gun buyers during his two terms in office.

But they all proved unpopular in Congress and failed to pass. The 44th US President has repeatedly described his inability to tighten gun laws as the ‘greatest frustration of his presidency’.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Problematic: 41% of college students believe hate speech should not be protected by the Constitution

Who gets to define what is “hate” speech?

From Daily Mail: Some 41 percent of college students say hate speech shouldn’t be protected under the First Amendment, according to a new survey.

Just 58 percent said that hate speech should be protected under the amendment, which guarantees American’s a right to freedom of speech, according to the survey of 4,407 students by the Miami-based Knight Foundation.

‘There is a new class of students on college campuses, increasingly varied in background and ideology, who are grappling with the reach and limits of free speech and what it means in the 21st century,’ said Sam Gill, Knight Foundation vice president for learning and communities.

‘Studying their views is key to understanding the impact that they may have on rights that are fundamental to our democracy,’ he added.

Opinions split dramatically along gender lines, with just 41 percent of college women saying that protecting free speech was more important that inclusivity, compared to 71 percent of college men.

More than two-thirds (68 percent) of respondents said they felt that students can’t openly express their views due to a climate on campus that has people fearful of offending their peers. Just 31 percent disagreed that such a climate exists.

These opinions of young Americans on the matter of freedom of speech are problematic – if well intended, said Ken Paulson, the director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University. ‘Protecting hate speech is actually the reason we have a First Amendment,’ he told DailyMail.com. ‘We don’t need protection for freedom of speech if everyone agrees with one another. The protection we need is for speech that others may find offensive.’

The survey comes as more colleges are opting to cancel or not invite controversial speakers to their campuses due to student outrage.

For example, Middlebury College in Vermont apologized to students earlier this year after getting a negative reaction to inviting a conservative speaker to campus. College officials also promised to do more to prevent invitations to such speakers going forward.

‘The big difference between today and a decade ago is that the conservatives are the big driving force behind freedom of speech on campuses,’ Paulson said.

The report also found that more than half (53 percent) are in favor of protecting freedom of speech, while 46 percent say it’s important to ‘promote an inclusive and welcoming society.’

‘The Constitution was not designed to keep your feelings from being hurt,’ said Paulson, also the former editor-in-chief of USA Today. ‘It was designed so every American could say or do whatever they wanted and do so without being punished. To understand freedom of speech you have to understand that it’s the minority being protected against the majority and the government.’

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Nevada’s Democrat governor vetoes bill to abolish Electoral College

Our Founding Fathers created a federal republic, wherein the national government shares political power with state governments, instead of a centralized political system like China or the United Kingdom where political power is in the central government, and whatever powers are exercised by regional and local governments have been delegated to them — and thus, can also be taken away — by the national government.

To enable and uphold the American federation, the Founders created the U.S. Senate, in which each constituent state is represented by two senators, no matter the size of the state’s population. The Electoral College is another institution to prevent presidential elections from being determined by states with very large populations.

Cognizant that human passions can descend into mob-like behaviors, the Founders had another reason for the Electoral College: to prevent a tyranny of the (irrational) majority. The Founders’ fear of majority mob-rule was borne out less than 3 years after they created the Electoral College in 1787 when the French Revolution plunged the country into a decade of chaos and bloodbath.

Still in denial that Hillary Clinton had lost the 2016 presidential election and convinced that she had secured a majority of the popular vote, Democrats are mobilizing to abolish the Electoral College via the National Popular Vote interstate compact. To date, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation to give their 189 Electoral College votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote. The pact will only take effect if states holding the majority of the Electoral College’s 538 electoral votes join the agreement.

On May 21, 2019, by a 12-8 vote, the Nevada State Senate passed a bill to give the state’s 6 Electoral College votes to the winner of the presidential election’s national popular vote. Earlier, Nevada’s State Assembly had passed the bill 23-17. The addition of Nevada would boost the National Popular Vote interstate compact’s electoral votes to 195.

Happily, Nevada’s Democrat governor Steve Sisolak, who is threatened with a recall petition, surprised his critics by doing the right thing.

Gov. Steve Sisolak

As reported by The Hill, yesterday, Governor Sisolak vetoed Assembly Bill 186 that would have pledged Nevada’s Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

Sisolak said in a statement:

After thoughtful deliberation, I have decided to veto Assembly Bill 186.

Once effective, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could diminish the role of smaller states like Nevada in national electoral contests and force Nevada’s electors to side with whoever wins the nationwide popular vote, rather than the candidate Nevadans choose.

I recognize that many of my fellow Nevadans may disagree on this point and I appreciate the legislature’s thoughtful consideration of this important issue.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

3.0
01
Please follow and like us:
error0
 

How’s that gun control working in Washington State since new laws were passed?

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee speaks, Thursday, Feb. 2, 2017, at the Capitol in Olympia, Wash. Inslee was urging the passage of bills enforcing safe gun storage and enhanced background checks when buying or selling assault weapons. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren) ORG XMIT: WATW110

Washington State has some strict gun control laws. Presidential candidate demorat Gov. Jay Inslee signed a bunch more of new laws on May 7 saying, “Our state is a leader on #gunsafety but more work is needed to protect our students & the people of WA. That’s why today I am so happy to sign bills that ban untraceable ghost guns, keep guns away from our most vulnerable Washingtonians & improve gun safety overall.”

Some of their gun control laws include the following (from Wikipedia):

Statutory law prohibits firearms to persons under 21 years of age.

Police may temporarily seize guns from people a judge deems a threat to themselves or others.

In November 2018, voters approved I-1639 that includes increased background checks, firearm safety training, waiting periods before semiautomatic assault rifles may be purchased or delivered, and require certain secured firearm storage or trigger-locks, and criminalize certain firearm storage if it results in unauthorized use.

So of course, shootings must be down since the new laws were enacted, right? Wrong.

In the last month, Seattle has had more than one reported shooting a day somewhere in the city; two of those incidents resulted in death.

Here’s a summary of recent shootings in Washington:

Deadly shooting in Seattle fourth shooting scene across Puget Sound area in 12 hours (May 29)

Woman, 2 Children Hurt In Shooting At Seattle’s Pritchard Beach (May 27)

Two more shootings after fatal Central District incident in Seattle (May 11)

Suspect arrested in fatal shooting of Everett woman (May 25)

Man allegedly hiding drugs in butt accidentally shoots himself in testicles (This man has 13 felonies yet somehow obtained a firearm; May 22)

East Central (Spokane) shooting victim crawled through window, was discovered by residents who’d never met him (May 22)

Rockford shooting suspect arrested in Washington state (May 8)

Fight among three generations of men escalates into gunfire (In Everett; May 29)

Woman shot in the face at Marine Park in Tacoma (May 7)

Overnight shooting in Tacoma (May 7)

Silly demorats…

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Illinois demorats advance bill declaring a “fundamental right” to an abortion

From Daily Mail: House Democrats in Illinois have advanced a measure to replace the state’s abortion law with less restrictive language that gives people ‘a fundamental right’ to make decisions about their reproductive health.

The State Journal-Register reports a House committee approved the legislation late Sunday on a party-line vote, sending it to the House floor. All committee Republicans voted no.

Among other provisions, the bill requires private health insurance companies that cover pregnancy-related benefits to cover abortion.

Supporters say the measure is necessary to counter other states’ action to restrict abortion procedures and the appointment of U.S. Supreme Court justices who oppose abortion.

Republicans criticized Democrats, who control the Legislature and the governor’s office, for holding the hearing on the Sunday night of a holiday weekend and posting notice just one hour before the hearing.

Under the measure, reproductive health would be declared a ‘fundamental right.’

Women would have the right to ‘use or refuse reproductive health care’ during their pregnancy.

The action in Democratic-leaning Illinois follows actions in a series of Republican states to limit access to abortion.

A woman would gain additional routes to sue if she believes her rights are violated, the Chicago Sun-Times reported. And local governments would be barred from limiting access to contraception and health procedures, although they could pass rules that increase access to care.

A new Alabama law would make it a felony to perform most abortions, and doctors who carry them out could face sentences of up to 99 years in prison.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Thousands in Illinois may still have firearms despite having FOIDs revoked

From MyFoxChicago: (AP) – Tens of thousands of Illinois residents whose gun licenses have been revoked could still be in possession of firearms, according to an analysis of state records by the Chicago Tribune.

The failure of the system was underscored in February when a man killed five former colleagues and wounded five police officers in Aurora, Illinois, using a gun he kept despite the revocation of his Firearm Owner’s Identification card in 2014.

Local police departments are supposed to ensure that those whose licenses have been revoked surrender their permits within 48 hours and fill out a form stating their guns have been passed to a legal gun owner or the police.

But since 2015, nearly 27,000 Illinois residents whose FOID cards have been revoked haven’t updated authorities on what they have done with their firearms, the Tribune reported. That means authorities do not know whether 78% of those revoked cardholders still own guns.

“I will say the depth and breadth of the problem did take me back just a bit,” said acting Illinois State Police Director Brendan Kelly, who has made FOID revocation compliance a priority since he took office this year. “The only way we are going to be able to take a bite out of this problem is just laying it all out there: the good, the bad and the ugly.”

FOID cards can be revoked for a number of reasons: felony convictions or indictments; convictions involving domestic abuse; being subject to an order of protection; being deemed a mental health risk; dishonorable discharge from the military; or being found to be in the country illegally.

Local police departments are informed by state police when a card has been rescinded, but most don’t prioritize checking on the status of remaining weapons due to a lack of resources, officers or background information.

Failure to ensure compliance over so many years has created a substantial backlog that will require a coordinated, costly effort to resolve.

A bill pending in Springfield would raise cardholder fee from $10 for 10 years to subsidize a task force to follow up on revocations. The legislation would also mandate fingerprinting to obtain a FOID card, a step supporters say would significantly increase the chance of identifying an applicant’s criminal background.

Gun rights advocates say the measure would be an unconstitutional encroachment on Second Amendment rights and have vowed to challenge it in court if it passes into law.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0