Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Justice Thomas Dissects SCOTUS Abortion Clinic Case Majority Holding

Excerpt of Clarence Thomas dissent of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt Majority holding

Scott Brown on Fauxcahontas

Senator Scott Brown echoes Donald Trump on Fauxcahontos Elizabeth Warren

Has former Senator Scott Brown spent too much time hanging around Republican presumptive Presidential nominee Donald Trump?  Or is he stooping to conquer?

Well, the attack on Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) "Cherokee" character may date back to the 2012 Senate campaign, the DNA angle is quite new and seems to compliment current Trump-eteering. After all, Trump did refer to his progressive bete noir as Pocahontas

Richard Posner on the Constitution

Richard Posner on the Constitution

Monday, June 27, 2016

Ted Cruz on Supreme Court Ruling on Whole Woman's Health Abortion Case

Senator Ted Cruz on Supreme Court's Ruling on Whole Womens' Health v. Hellerstedt Case

Considering the Consequences of SCOTUS Holding on Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt

Tony Perkins on SCOTUS Abortion Clinic Closing Case

Despite the statistics which Family Research Council President Tony Perkins recites regarding womens' health and abortion, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5 to 3 threw out a two provisions of a Texas law which imposed health regulations which put "an undue burden" on abortion providers that have resulted in clinics shutting down.

In the majority opinion for Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, Justice Steven Breyer wrote:

There was no significant health-related problem that the new law helped to cure.  We agree with the District Court that the surgical-center requirement, like the admitting-privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions, and constitutes an "undue burden" on their constitutional right to do so.

Per the SCOTUS majority, requiring an abortionist to have admitting privileges to local medical facilities in case something goes awry and to maintain surgical standards in abortuaries is an undue burden.  Using this logic, it seems the only reason Dr. Gosnell could be convicted is for illicitly writing drug prescriptions.

Prima facia, the ironically named Whole Womens' Health decision drops the veil on so called reproductive rights being a womens' health issue and points towards abortion on demand, despite the medical circumstances. 

Last year in Obergefell, the Supreme Court usurped the rights of states to contract marriages as they saw fit.  Now, the Supremes have essentially mooted the role of states to regulate for health concerns.  Between the burgeoning bureaucratic state and a Supreme Court which is acting more like a legislative body than an impartial arbiter of law, elites may cynically question why we need states anyways.

So we should stop using the politically correct euphemism of "Womens' Health" when referring to Abortion Rights. It will be interesting to learn where presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump stands on the issue.  While Trump has promised to only nominate  pro-life justices to the Supreme Court, Trump also repeatedly echoes accolades to Planned Parenthood for all that they supposedly do for womens' health. 

George Will on Leaving the GOP

George Will on Leaving the GOP

Margaret Thatcher on a United Europe

Margaret Thatcher on a united Europe

As a good Tory, MP Margaret Thatcher campaigned for continued inclusion in the European Common Market in 1975 (but note that her Euro Jumper still had the Union Jack most prominent).  

However, regarding British sovereignty, transparency and free markets, Thatcher would be an unrepentant Eur-skeptic, as demonstrated by her 1990 Prime Minister question time colloquy. 

Friday, June 24, 2016

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Imam Objects to Possibility of Female POTUS

Imam Abu Tauban Objects to Hillary Clinton and Female Presidents

In the wake of the Pulse Orlando Shooting atrocity, Fox News Channel sought interview  Imam Abu Taubah  who is associated with an Orlando Mosque and also operates the online Islamic Timbuktu Seminary.

Van Susteran asked if  the Orlando Shooting killer Omar Mateem had contact with the imam,  as the Orlando killer was said to be enrolled in the Tibuktu institute. Then the Fox News anchor switched to politics.  Imam Abu Taubah indicated that as a Muslim, he objected to the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.

Indubitably, it was newsworthy to but Imam Abu Taubah on the record concerning alleged connections to the Pulse slaughters. But treating the Imam as a political pundit and airing his rantings seems suspect.

It would be helpful if Fox News stressed that the Imam was born as Marcus Robinson and had a long rap sheet as a career criminal, which could have had him sentenced for life. This imam claims to have been a  covert CIA operative .  This are pretty shady links to give a prolonged one on one interview for a national news outlet.

Let me go "On the Record" (sic).  Such sourcing and amplifying unrelated views accounts for less import placed on watching the Fox News Channel.

But in the spirit of "We'll report, you decide." -- What say you?

What do you think of the extended interview Fox News gave to "Imam Abu Taubah" (a.k.a. Marcus Robinson)?

A fascinating, newsworthy interview
Extraneous opinions meant to generate controversy
It is another guidepost in the credibility spiral of a once great news organization
Inclusion of the Presidential preference question Trumpets (sic) a populist political echo
Keeping the misogynist musing helps rally the womens' vote for Hillary
Keeping the Sanders support fostered the "feel the bern" with Hillary and Trump's trustworthiness
It is a pity to give a whack job a national platform to spew such antidiluvian opinions
No Opinion/don't know
Please Specify:
Survey Maker

Alas, there does not seem to be just one "right" answer.

Ambassador John Bolton on the Orlando Shooting

UN Ambassador John Bolton on the Orlando Shootings

Aristotle on Love

Aristotle on Love

Jeff Bezos on Disposition

Jeff Bezos on Disposition

Thursday, June 9, 2016

Baltimore Prosecution Excoriated for Eschewing Exculpatory Evidence in Freddie Gray Murder Trial

As the prosecutors began to present the case against Officer Caesar Goodson, the only Baltimore Police Officer charged with murder in the case of Freddie Gray, presiding Judge Barry Williams sternly chastised city attorneys for not turning over evidence that could exculpate the defendant. 

Officer Goodson has been charged with second degree murder with a depraved heart (along with manslaughter, assault, reckless endangerment and officer misconduct) for allegedly giving Freddie Gray a rough ride 45 minute police wagon ride after his arrest which led to Gray's death.  The government's key witness is Donta Allen, a convict who was a witness in the police transport with Freddie Gray.

Allen's testimony is suspect considering his checkered conviction record as well as because Allen changed his story several times.   However, prosecutors did not disclose to the defense that they had met with Allen. Prosecutors thought notice was unnecessary as no new information was produced.

While Judge Williams did not throw out the case and allowed opening arguments, the Judge blasted the prosecution for violating discovery rules and threw out Allen's testimony.

It  is widely believed that if Baltimore City Prosecutors fail to get a conviction in the third Freddie Gray murder trial, this may mean the end of prosecutions.  Indubitably, it will mean the end of spotlight seeking  Maryland State's Marilyn Mosby's (D-Baltimore) political career.  Officers are also suing the city for malicious prosecution.

Ludwig von Mises on Economics

Ludwig von Mises on Economics

Buddha on Anger

Buddha on Anger

Post Scriptus:  An intrepid reader insists that Gautama Buddha did not actually say this pearl of wisdom but that it stems from a 5th century commentator.  The aphorism still fits his wisdom.

William Blake on Forgiveness

William Blake on Forgiveness

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

Trump Surrogate Threatens Disloyal GOP Media Personality

[L] Salem Radio's Hugh Hewitt [R] Republican preumptive nominee Donald Trump

Recently, I was chatting with a convicted Trump-eteer who was incredulous at the assertion that the Trump campaign welcomes thug tactics to keep WINNING in their minds.  The Trump Campaign's Social Media Director Dan Scavino just exemplified the point with his threats of barring Hugh Hewitt from the July Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

Hugh Hewitt is a center-right radio host with Salem Media.  Hewitt was so trusted to be tough but fair by the RNC that Hewitt was picked as being the Republican panelist at several CNN hosted GOP debates.

Because of his role asking questions to the candidates, Hewitt declared his show to be "Switzerland" until after the California primaries.

Well, the Golden State primaries have come and gone.  Instead of coalescing the Republican party and focusing fire on Hillary Clinton's foibles, Donald Trump himself brought up a racial rant against Judge Gonzalo Curiel in the Trump University fraud civil case in Federal district court this November.  Compounding the problem, surrogates implied that Muslim and women judges might not be fair to the Donald. Thus, prominent Republicans, such as House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) distanced themselves from the inappropriate remarks.

Hewitt was critical that Trump failed to address the Curiel kerfluffle.  But as a former Presidential ghostwriter, Hewitt thought the Last Primaries Victory speech sounded pedestrian and flat.  Moreover, the radio pundit found it cringeworthy when Trump incorrectly echoed a shout out from his audience: "What about TPP? (the Trans-Pacific Partnership) by noting that the "PPP" was bad, like pee-pee.

Thus, Hewitt vexed that the GOP will get crushed unless the delegates do something.

Hewitt did not suggest voting for Hillary. Nor did Hewitt vow not to vote for the eventual Republican nominee. But the radio host observed that it seemed that the plane was speeding towards the mountain on a collision course, which could well cost the Republicans the House, the Senate the Judiciary as well as the White House.

True to Trump form, Scavino threatened via Twitter that "hater" Hugh Hewitt should be banned from the Republican gathering in Cleveland.

Thin skinned, pugnacious and vengeful towards a media type who has been a loyal Republican since the days of Nixon.  In addition, Hewitt has a politically oriented national morning radio show sympathetic to Republicans and makes many media appearances on NBC, CNN and MSNBC. Smart--not.

Reacting to the hostile Scavino suggestion, Hewitt noted that he will be broadcasting during the RNC Convention in Cleveland and appearing on NBC.

Considering how Trump may still sting from blowing Hewitt's  nuclear triad debate question in December as well as the predicted Trump Train Wreck, Trump would not be expected to be BFFs. But to have a campaign surrogate suggest barring a reliable Republican from attending is Alpha-male insanity.

Trump loyalists love to note that Trump is not a politician and that he had plenty of success in the business world.  But this is neither boardrooms or "The Apprentice" sets; this is politics and governing.  In a free Republic,it is not as easy to control a message or dictate how others (legislators, bureaucrats, media) will act.

 It seems that Trump can not take criticism so he and his surrogates will lash out against offenders. Trump's troll like champions love that he will counter-punch.  But many times prudence is the better part of valor.  So instead of reinforcing Trump's Crooked Hillary line of campaign, the body politic will still murmur about racist remarks and another case in which the Trump campaign threatens a journalist.

If that's WINNING, it is dubious about who is actually being victorious. At the very least, I feel vindicated for perceiving thuggish Trump campaign tactics.

House Speaker Paul Ryan on Textbook Racism

House Speaker Paul Ryan on Donald Trump's Textbook Racism

Despite House Speaker's Paul Ryan's reluctant admission that he would vote for presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump in November, the House Speaker has sought to distance himself from the Manhattan Mogul's meandering mouth.

Speaker Ryan refused to be associated with Mr. Trump's injudicious attacks against Judge Gonzalo Curiel's character on the basis of race. 

 Ryan went further to illustrate that Trump's charges were a textbook definition of racism.

Ted Cruz on Donald Trump's Injudicious Jibes on a Sitting Judge

Ted Cruz on Donald Trump's Racial Attack on a Judge

Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump is involved in a civil case of fraud concerning the so called Trump University. The trial will be heard under Judge Gonzalo Curiel in Federal District Court November 2016. 

As Trump was poised to begin his general election campaign, Trump kept bringing up this pending litigation, citing that Judge Curiel was MEXICAN (despite the inconvenient truth that the judge was born in INDIANA and had a history as a federal prosecutor of going after the Mexican drug cartels). 

In a follow-interview with CNN's Jake Tapper on State of the Nation, Trump continually claimed that Curiel was Mexican and could not be impartial because Trump claims that he want to build a wall to prevent illegal immigration.

Thus Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was among the first Republican to note the inappropriateness of Trump's judicial jibes.

Well, if Trump feels that Judge Curiel is not impartial, then why not make a legal motion for the Judge to recuse.  For that matter, why did Trump's legal staff (since he always hires the best) allow Curiel to be transferred to the case in the first place.

Normally, when there is a motion for a judge to be withdrawn, there must be concrete proof of bias. To the public, Trump just smears the judge as being "Mexican" (which is incorrect).  If Trump's attorney file a motion on such racial grounds, there is standing case law that will immediately be rejected and the attorneys may be sanctioned.

But the Paralepsis Politician may calculate that it is better to smear in the court of public opinion, in which judicial ethics restrain Judge Curiel from directly defending himself.  Trump does have a history of filing specious libel suits, which have little legal merit but sufficiently sully the target.  

Trump certainly used the same strategy in besmirching the reputation of Senator Cruz regarding his eligibility to run for President in 2016.  Trump kept repeating that Cruz was not a natural born citizen, hence was ineligible to become President  Even though Trump was one of the few individuals who had standing to successfully file the case, Trump was content to impugn Cruz in the court of public opinion without doing anything of legal consequence.  Once Trump had eliminated Cruz as being a threat, all the vitriol was considered inconsequential.

No wonder Senator Cruz was not willing to carry Trump's water on this judicial jibe which was replete with racism. 

Goethe on Character

Goethe on Character