Possibly Not the Best Person Whose Opinion to Ask

"11 Foreign Countries Wage War Against Arizona and American Sovereignty"

Maggie's Notebook has this video about the potential interference of adjudicating Arizona's border enforcement law by foreign nations and the seeming complicity of Eric Holder and the oxymoronically named Obama justice department.



Though the video's headline speaks of "impeaching" Obama. I am not ready to go that far. But it does seem as if the only way to rid ourselves of this biased and perhaps incompetent Attorney General Eric Holder is to fire his boss.

Cross posted at LCR, Lady Cincinnatus .

Black Panther President Praises Osama bin Laden

This just keeps getting better and better! Put your hands together for Osama bin Laden!


Please tell me again why we don't want guys like this intimidating voters?

H/T Daily Caller

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Leaders of a "Nation of Cowards" "Acting Stupidly"?

Remember when President Obama said that a police department was "acting stupidly" in the arrest of a belligerent Cambridge professor, before he even knew the facts of the case? And remember when Eric Holder called us a "nation of cowards" because we did not want to have open discussions on race?
Would it be fair to say then, that Eric Holder is both stupid and a coward for not pressing charges against the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia on account of their race? Is he too cowardly to pursue this case because of race? Because, as far as I can see, this was indeed a "slam dunk" civil rights violation case. There were witnesses, pictures and even video of voter intimidation and the case was dismissed.

Individuals within the Justice department (Obama Justice Department - there's an oxymoron for you!), such as J. Christian Adams have resigned because they were instructed to drop the case and not bring these individuals to justice.

If Eric Holder wants the nation to have a dialogue on race, let's start one here.What reason did you have in not pursuing justice against these men with a small mountain of evidence pointing to their guilt, other than their race?

Mr. President: If you think the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" when they arrested your friend, before you ever heard the particulars of the case, why don't you acquaint yourself with the stench coming from your "Justice Department", and when you have all the facts, tell us if you think Eric Holder "acted stupidly" in NOT prosecuting these men.

A "nation of cowards" waits with baited breath.



H/T Weasel Zippers
Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel, Say Anything, Lady Cincinnatus

Support the Navy Seals

Capturing terrorists is not an easy business. It is unconscionable to persecute these men for doing their job. The fact that the terrorist was not beaten to a bloody pulp shows great restraint on the part of his captors.

H/T Jawa Report

Would a "Wise Latina" Really Have Said That?

I really haven't dissected Ms. Sotomayor's remark here, but you've heard it enough times every where else that it is practically un muerto caballo!

But, here's a couple things I really haven't heard any place else, so here's my take on it.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life."

First: Would a truly "wise" Latina have said that? Remember, that it was not a casual remark, but a scripted part of her speech that she repeated over a number of years. It may have had the intended effect on her immediate audiences, but the "wisdom" of saying that a wise person from one ethnic group would "reach a better conclusion" than someone of the opposite sex or different ethnicity escapes me!

Second, even if it were true of a superior or municipal court judge, appellate court justices are not supposed to be focused on the outcome of the verdicts, but whether or not the law and the Constitution were followed by the lower courts in reaching that outcome.

Here, forgive me, I'd rather have an analytical justice, conversant in the law and the Constitution to examine the process, not empathize with the outcome!

So, unless the "richness of her experience" is pouring over Constitution law and mountains of legal texts, I would say that a justice with a good analytical mind trumps the mushy, squishy richness of her diverse upbringing!


As a bonus, here's video of Sotomayor answering an off the wall question, before funnyman wannabee Al Franken finishes asking it:



She must have had a copy of the question before hand. Had I been a candidate for SCOTUS and someone asked me a stupid question about a fictional TV lawyer, I'm sure I would have sat in stunned silence for at least a few moments, as the audacity of some fool asking such a worthless question sunk in. Here, she doesn't even wait for him to stop talking before she jumps in to answer! Clearly a scripted moment, with Sotomayor in on the script!

Political (Read: Obama) Appointees Get Civil Rights Case Dropped

Remember last November, the report of Black Panthers wielding billy clubs intimidating voters in Philadelphia? The Justice Department was pursuing them for Civil Rights violations. That was before Hope and Change™ came to town!

Justice Department political appointees (read: Obama appointees) overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Just how bad was the intimidation?

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

"Worse than Mississippi", sometimes known for using dogs and fire hoses to keep "certain individuals" from voting or eating at a lunch counter, or riding in the front of a bus!

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.

The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20.

Oh, so these guys were Democrats? Well, then...never mind! What was it that Orwell said in Animal Farm? Some are more equal than others???

H/T Mark Hemingway
Cross posted at Say Anything

The Judicial Temperament of Justice Sotomayer

Justice is blind, but apparently not color blind!

The Judicial Temperament of Justice Sotomayer may be exemplified by her ruling in Ricci vs. DeStefano, the New Haven firefighter case.

One hundred and eighteen people took the tests; 56 passed. Nineteen of the top scorers were eligible for promotion to 15 open lieutenant and captain positions. Based on the test results, the city said that no minorities would have been eligible for lieutenant, and two Hispanics would have been eligible for captain. (The lawsuit was filed by 20 white plaintiffs, including one man who is both white and Hispanic.)

Unfortunately, no blacks scored high enough on the test to qualify for advancement, therefore, rather than promote the qualified, the city chose not to promote anyone.

The promotion exams were closely focused on firefighting methods, knowledge and skills. The first part had 200 multiple-choice questions and counted for 60 percent of the final score. Candidates returned another day to take an oral exam in which they described responses to various scenarios, which counted for 40 percent.

If the city had discriminated for or against any candidate based on race or skin color, that would have been unconscionable. But to discriminate again those men who passed the test and were eligible for promotion on the basis of what another group did or didn't do is equally wrong. Ms. Sotomayor, who has stated that "...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male." thought otherwise.

Her one paragraph contribution to the decision was considered light weight*. Unfortunately, when the case comes before the US Supreme Court, one of the justices will probably be Sonia Sotomayor.

Update: *Although I had this on good authority, in searching the document itself, I could not find any portion of the decision attributed specifically to her.

Cross posted at Say Anything

Kerry Swift Boat Supporter Guilty of Possessing Child Porn

Depravity knows no party lines.

Remember Wade Sanders? He was one of the "band of brothers"--Swift Boat veterans who supported John Kerry's presidential campaign and appeared onstage at the 2004 Democratic National Convention before Kerry's "reporting for duty" speech.

On the campaign trail, Sanders was one of Kerry's nastiest surrogates. In August 2004, he likened the president to a "trapped animal." In September, he compared Karl Rove and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth chief John O'Neill to Josef Goebbels. He repeatedly referred to the president and his men as "chicken hawks," an especially nasty term because it is slang for a child molester as well as a derisive term for a nonveteran who favors a strong defense.

Well, well, well! A man of such moral outrage and it turns out his own feet are made of clay!

Sanders acknowledged in court that he had "possessed computer files containing 600 images of minors, including a 21-minute video that depicted girls engaging in sex acts with an adult man."

He claims he was doing "research for an article", but decided to plead guilty since he "technically" was. Doesn't sound very much like the righteous indignation of the falsely accused, now, does it?

Perhaps the partisans who want to pretend that evil is the sole province of only one party will look at individuals like Sanders and Bernie Ward, and know that depravity transcends politics. If they ever come in contact with reality, anyway!

Hat tip James Taranto
Cross posted at Say Anything

O J Found Guilty, Faces Life

In the fifteen year too late department...

LAS VEGAS — O.J. Simpson has been found guilty on all charges of the armed robbery of two sports memorabilia dealers last year in a Las Vegas casino hotel.

Simpson could face life in prison.

See! Not all the news is bad! Overdue, maybe...but not bad!

Cross Posted at Say Anything

Acquited Marine Will Sue John Murtha for Libel

Ex-Marine (I say that deliberately) John Murtha will have his day in court soon if Justin Sharratt has his way!

WASHINGTON, PA (KDKA) ― A local Marine cleared in the deaths of civilians in Iraq says Congressman John Murtha made public comments that were unproven, untrue and unfair.
Now, Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt is planning to file suit in federal court against Murtha on Thursday morning.
The suit accuses the congressman of slander and violating the Marine's right to a fair trial and due process.

Murtha shot off his mouth without knowing any of the facts of the case. The man has no excuse.

...Three years after the deaths, seven of eight Marines have been cleared, including Sharratt. There's now a website, JustinSharratt.com, to let the world know that he has been cleared.
The eighth Marine is still waiting for his day in court.

Seven of eight slander Marines cleared. One to go.

Update: If you are interested in donating to a legal fund supporting this marine, you can go to:

Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt

or donations can be sent to:

Justin Sharratt Fund for Justice
P.O. Box 44
Canonsburg, PA 15317-0044
Please make checks payable to: Justin Sharratt Fund for Justice

Hat tip Protein Wisdom
Cross posted at Say Anything

Clinton Appointed Federal Judge Being Impeached

Bad enough, the libs don't want to say who appointed him, but apparently they knew he was a crook when he was appointed!

Warner Todd Huston writes:

A Federal judge from Louisiana is under a cloud of impeachment and if he’s convicted it’ll be the first Federal judge impeached in almost 20 years.

Sounds newsworthy!

The story was covered by the new wire service named ProPublica, a service that claims to be non-partisan. Yet in two stories on this judge there is not one mention of the fact that he was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, nor that his corruption was known by the Department of Justice when Clinton made the appointment.

Yikes! Where is a Resident Partisan Scold when you need one??

...A while back, I wrote of a new wire service that was starting up to be called ProPublica. This new service claimed that it was going to be a non-partisan service but the fact that it was being funded by left-wing billionaires made me wonder about the veracity of that claim.

The stories tell about $80,000 of unaccounted for cash that drifted into the judge's accounts. (Isn't that almost what William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson had in his freezer?)

It turns out that President Bill Clinton put this corrupt judge on the bench in 1994, even though the Department of Justice knew this guy was a crook. Heck, even the Associated Press mentioned that this judge was a Clinton appointee. Yet strangely, the fact that this corrupt, bribe taking, gambling addicted, thief of a judge was a Clinton appointee didn’t seem relevant to ProPublica. I wonder what that says of ProPublica’s claims that it just wants to report the facts in a non-partisan manner?

Wow! When you are to the left of the AP in your bias, that's really saying something!

Hat tip Stop the ACLU
Cross posted at Say Anything