Over at instapundit, Ed Driscoll raises a couple of interesting points
Does Biden remember saying in 2006, “I do not view abortion as a, um, as choice and a right. I think it’s always a tragedy. And I think that it should be rare and safe, and I think we should be focusing on how to limit the number of abortions. And there ought to be able to have a common ground and consensus as to do that.”
Or does Biden remember this moment in 1982? Biden voted to overturn Roe v Wade in 1982 saying women don’t have ‘sole right’ to say what happens to bodies. President had said in 1974 that he thought the Roe v Wade ruling ‘went too far.’
In an even remotely sane world these nagging inconsistencies would cost a candidate big time. Either he doesn’t remember saying these things, taking these positions or he thinks that we won’t.
I do believe we can take this as yet one more indication of just how far left the Democrats have moved. Joe biden, with his finger forever in the wind, with them.
Print This Post
Robert Stacy McCain has an interesting article up over it is place and in it he makes a great point in response to Joe Biden’s saying that Roe was the law of the land for 50 years.
McCain comes back with the point that Plessy v Ferguson was the law of the land for 58 years, too.
And he furthers the point that I made yesterday as regards the actual wording of the Constitution:
But again, the problem is that Biden speaks of “constitutional principle” and “a fundamental right” when no such thing is to be found in the actual Constitution and when, as I say, abortion had previously been outlawed everywhere the English common law prevailed.)
(Emphasis is my own.)
As I suggested yesterday, a literal reading of the Constitution was all that was required to remove Roe. And by the way, it was also the only thing that was really required to remove Plessy.
I said earlier today that Roe v Wade was a bad Supreme Court ruling. Here, I will explain why…
Understand this going in…. I’m not talking about the politics, and for the moment I’m not going to talk about the value of the lives that have been wasted in the last 50 years, either.
I’m going to start this discussion with a quote from Larry Kudlow:
Fortunately, while the majority of Americans regard themselves as pro-choice, 55% according to the Gallup poll, inside that number, 67% support first trimester abortions, but only 36% second trimester and only 20% third trimester.
That is why the far-left position of unrestricted abortions represented by Mr. Biden and his allies will never be popular throughout the country. Biden is trying to scare people that the world is coming to an end. It’s a familiar tactic of his, but it won’t work. When the dust clears, folks will see this court decision changes very little, if anything.
Except, it upholds the originalist constitutional view and re-empowers state legislatures and the voters who elected them. This is how it should be.
Precisely so.
Note the phrase, “the originalist constitutional view”. A loose translation would be looking at the Constitution and reading it precisely as it is written.
You see there is a portion of the Constitution called The Bill of Rights. Within that Bill of Rights is the 10th amendment, which runs like this:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
A loose translation of that would be if it doesn’t say it explicitly in the Constitution, the federal government is prohibited from meddling with it. Those questions are left specifically to the individual state governments, or to the people.
Now, nowhere within the Federal Constitution is there any mention of abortion. Therefore if the subject is going to come up in government at all, it starts at the state governments, and not in the federal government. By the very definition listed here, the 73 Supreme Court exceeded its constitutional authority.
Understand this, too. The overturning of Roe v Wade does not prohibit abortion. The states may individually do that, but I suspect that around half of them will not. All this ruling does is return that question to the individual states which is the original view of the constitution.
What the justices have done collectively is uphold the Constitution as written. That’s their job. A job that the court back in 73 should have done, and didn’t.
The pro-abortion people back in 73 decided that they didn’t want to take the time to go through all of the states individually and try to make their case. Moreover they didn’t want to go through all the states trying to amend the constitution. Much easier to in effect amend the Constitution by Supreme Court ruling by people who do not respect the originalist view.
Trouble is it will eventually be overturned, because in reality the ruling in Roe exceeded the Court’s constitutional authority.
You will notice almost immediately that I have not made any political arguments here, nor have I made any arguments about the idea of abortion. I haven’t even made any comments about Biden’s comments today because it’s not needed for this discussion.
This post is about the Constitution and the mechanizations that the 73 court was supposed to follow, and didn’t.
These other topics may or may not come up in these spaces going forward, though I suspect that some of them will.
The point I’m trying to make here is that even when viewed strictly as a constitutional matter, Roe v Wade was a bad ruling. That ground alone was all that was necessary to reverse it.
In short, the Supreme Court finally did its job…that is, it made its ruling here based solely on the wording and intent in the Constitution itself.
I’ll have more to say over the next day or two, but for now, let me just say this:
We are about to see prime examples of the respect that the left has for our “democracy”.
Here’s the first one.
From national review this morning:
Who’s policies restricted drilling and refining in America? Under Trump the US was energy independent and exporting energy to Europe.
Biden reversed all that and gave Putin a pipeline to boot, giving him leverage over all of Europe. WHY?FTA: As of May 2022, spare capacity and refining capability are highly constrained, according to the International Energy Agency, which reports that “global oil inventories declined by 45 [million barrels] in March and are now 1.2 billion barrels lower since June 2020.”
Even before he was elected, Biden offered a “guarantee” that he would “end fossil fuels.” Since assuming office, he has taken a hard stance against domestic fossil-fuel production. While he has sometimes encouraged American oil companies to produce more oil, that encouragement has, to say the least, been undermined by continued attacks on a sector he seems all too willing to scapegoat. Recently proposed SEC rules on climate-change-related disclosures to investors are just one example of the administration’s attitude toward oil companies, and whether or not they are approved, they are hardly likely to encourage investment in domestic-energy production.The same could be said of the signal sent by the president in his first day in office, when he revoked the Keystone XL’s pipeline permit and instituted a (since-halted) moratorium on new oil and natural-gas production on federal lands. The fact that American oil production tends, in many cases, to be cleaner than overseas production — and could thus play a significant role in decreasing global emissions — is apparently lost on the administration.
Congress and the Biden administration should reverse course on their harmful energy policies by introducing common-sense reforms to reduce prices in the short and long terms. Temporarily halting summer-blend requirements, for example, could reduce the cost of gas by as much as 15 cents per gallon. Reducing barriers to and approving key infrastructure projects, such as Keystone XL, would also alleviate price concerns by offering the promise of bringing more supply to market, something that would, if only at the margin, lower prices today, and would have the potential to lower them more in the future.
As Americans continue to feel the impacts of high gas prices, lawmakers must look past politics and offer solutions that address the root of the problem. While gas prices are largely a result of global markets, policy decisions affect future supplies and investments. The ill-considered energy agenda being pushed forward by the White House has hurt American companies and consumers alike.
My only relatively mild disagreement with this is that politics are at the center of it. And at the center of those politics is the global warming myth which is being used as a political tool by some.
It’s long past time to recognize that the devotion to the global warming myth is precisely how we got into this current situation, and that what is needed to eliminate the problem is a 180 on energy policy.
I’ve got a bunch of questions about January 6th that has not come up in the stalinist show trial. No surprise I suppose, but I take that as indication that they really don’t want the truth of what happened, they just want to be able to score political points trying to save their backsides in the upcoming electoral bloodbath election.
I actually have more questions than these but let’s start here:
+ The leftist press is making a big deal out of the idea that their polling suggests 60% of Americans think that January 6th was planned. The question they’re not asking is planned by whom?
+ If it was an insurrection why is it that nobody shot back when Ashley Babbitt got murdered?
+ How well does anyone suppose the argument about “insurrection” is going to hold up when we have video of the security guards holding open the doors and guiding people inside?
+ Who was it who opened the 20,000 lb security door door with the Cyber lock on it that only a very few had the combination to?
+Why did Nancy Pelosi turn down the extra security that she was urged to use, not once, but repeatedly?
+ And finally, this January 6th stalinist show trial committee consists only of people handpicked by Nancy Pelosi. That’s the first time anything of the sort has occurred in our country’s 200 plus year history. How is it the Democrats are getting by with this? If there’s any more solid indication of Democrat party desperation and willingness to break the rules to get their way, I can’t think of what it would be.
** And here’s a bonus question for those that are really paying attention. How is what Stephen Colbert’s people did any different than the protesters on January 6th? Why the different treatment?
My money is on monkey pox becoming a serious thing in the news about mid-october or so.
At which point we will undoubtedly hear “Well we can’t do a regular in person election, we’re going to have to do mail-in voting again.”
I’m tellin,’ ya..
I’ve spent the morning reading through commentary from leftist zealots about the US Supreme Court decision handed down yesterday, which ruled that the concealed carry law in New York state is on constitutional. Not only does it violate the second amendment but it also violates the 14th.
If you want to see what’s giving me a headache this morning, look at some of the stuff they managed to capture over at Legal Insurrection.
This ruling is a prime example of why Clarence Thomas is a national treasure.
Meanwhile, the mega moron known as Keith Opberman is screaming that we need to dissolve the Supreme Court, apparently because he didn’t get his way.
Apparently the message finally got across to these idiots, nobody’s buying what they’re selling.
So the one point that they were banking on so very heavily to save their backsides come the midterms? Turned out to be a giant nothing burger.
So what is in essence a third attempt at impeachment against Donald Trump goes down in flames. Apparently, the American people recognize a stalinist show trial when they see one.
Which is precisely by the way, why Fox didn’t run with it.
Interesting, how they shut this little stalinist show trial down so close on the heels of the revelations of who was involved with the Stephen Colbert fiasco. One gets the impression that with that on the table they’d like the whole thing to disappear.
I did a post on this a couple of days ago but I said we’d be revisiting this because I knew there would be some additional details coming out. Turns out I was right of course. Watch:
The double standards surrounding this case are staggering, even within the parlance of left-wing activism as it has been practiced the last few decades.
The question becomes how much longer the American people are going to be willing to put up with this. The Un-American left is radicalizing Joe and Jane America, but not in the way they’d like to.
Mark this well…. They will keep pushing and pushing and aggravating an aggravating until such time as they bring out the ugly side in the majority of Americans, at which point they’ll claim they’re a victim
My friends, remember this if nothing else:
The same people telling us that conservatives are being bamboozled, we’re not following the science, yada yada yada, are the same ones that were screaming, Russian collusion for 5 years, that inexplicably believe that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden make good presidents, there are 457 different sexes, men can get pregnant, the inflation will only be temporary, that Joe Biden and the Democrats trying to shut down the American oil industry isn’t having a devastating effect on prices, (and thereby the price of everything else) but even if it is, it’s a good thing, that government can solve all of our problems if we just stop trying to protect our rights, and I’ll respect you in the morning, just use more whipped cream.
If we judge by actual results instead of by rhetoric, and stalinist show trials, Guess who wins?
First, let’s consider the case of the attempted murder of Brett Kavanaugh, United States Supreme Court Justice. You probably haven’t heard much about this because the mainstream media has been trying to cover it up and ignore it.
And the thing of it is, the Democrats approve of these threats. Consider Charles Schumer:
Now you would think the threats against a sitting Supreme Court Justice would be major news but our friends at the mainstream media have gone out of their way to avoid covering this story.
Then there’s this little tidbit with Stephen Colbert’s producer and staffers being arrested for illegal entry in the US capital. And as it turns out, they were allowed into the building by none other than Adam Schiff who has spent the last year or so telling us about how such actions amount to an insurrection.
We know now that the plan was for Stephen Colbert’s staffers to harass anybody who dared support Donald Trump. Kevin McCarthy for example.
It should be noted that none of Colbert’s staffers are currently in jail, where they damn sure would be if they had gone in to harass Adam Schiff for example.
If Justice was equal, Adam Schiff would be stinking up a jail cell right now along with Stephen Colbert’s people and Charles Schumer.
It’s obvious to just about everyone with a pulse anymore that there is a double standard being applied to these cases. The rule of law means nothing to these people, nor does common decency.
Not only are the staffers not going to be spending a year and a half in solitary confinement without even being charged like the people involved with the protest on January 6th were, but Adam Schiff isn’t going to get even a slap on the wrist for it.
Welcome to Berlin, 1933…. Today’s Democrat party.
Yeah, he said it…
There isn’t a law on the books anywhere in human society that can change the human heart for the better. All it can do is make the human heart worse by giving evil legitimacy, or in the case of gun control, giving evil power to overcome good once all the law-abiding citizens are stripped of their firearms.
That is why I am on record as saying that laws and governments should not run afoul of the values of the culture that gave it life. Not because I think that law will reinforce morality, even assuming that morality can be codified. But, because law can be twisted from its original purpose, and is powerful enough to override our cultural conscience and that which we already know as a matter of instinct to be right and wrong. Thus, the law can be more destructive of morality than it is supportive of it. When a law does not run afoul of the morality of the culture it is at best neutral. When a law does run afoul how’s the value of the culture it destroys at least a piece of the culture.
Ask yourself, are there unjust laws? If there are, then law cannot be the final arbiter of right and wrong.
Quoting:
“Nine days ago Joe Biden accused ExxonMobil of making “more money than God.”
“Forbes has compiled a chart comparing the last ten quarters’ net profits for ExxonMobil and Apple. Apple, in orange, appears to make five times more money than God in blue.”
Joe Biden’s publicly stated goal was to shut down the oil industry. And his actions would seem to back that up at least in so far as the American petroleum industry. Which is why we went from being a energy exporter, going to Saudi Arabia with our hats in our hands, begging for them to pump more crude.
His complaints about oil company profits, are easily demonstrated as bogus, but they do serve his purpose of shutting down the American oil industry.
