26 July 2007

Liberal Attempts to Hijack the Constitution

Really can anyone actually trust these idiots? The liberals are so upset that the Supreme Court has taken a more moderate, if slightly right leaning, approach to ruling on the cases that it hears. The translation of this means that the decisions are interpreted more by the what was meant when laws were written rather than what they should be today, according to the deciding judges' political views, a power play by people we call activist judges. The problem that liberals have with strict interpretation of laws is that, when they are unable to get the legislation passed that they fight tooth and nail to enact, usually ones that are horrible, they've had the luxury of having a pretty left leaning court to come in and make a new law or reverse a sensible one for them. Let's look at the example of the failed amnesty bill, one that would have granted citizenship to people who illegal (as in broke the law) to get into our nation (violated our sovereignty). A criminal act to be sure. After all, why wouldn't you just follow the laws to come into the nation unless you had something to hide. Keep in mind people like this when you think of why it's important to enforce our laws on immigration. Today we saw Reid apologize to John Cornyn (R-TX) after a tempter tantrum last night over the fact that Sen. Cornyn had the audacity to ask for money to help secure the border. The Democrats keep this type of nonsense up in order to pander to Hispanics for votes at the cost of our laws and our security. Let's also examine the ridiculous ruling in Hazleton, PA today, a town approximately 1 hour from my home of Bethlehem, PA. This ruling overturned a law, enacted by elected officials that would have fined and punished businesses and landlords who knowingly engaged in business with those who are illegally in our country. Keep in mind of course, that they are NOT CITIZENS, which is key to this whole argument. Pay special attention to this quote from the Illegals' lawyer, "The fact that we won vindicates the right of citizens to rely on the federal constitution to protect our rights." THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT APPLY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT NOT NOT CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY. Yet a judge, appointed by Liberal Bill Clinton somehow says that they are not to be treated as if they were non-criminal citizens of our nation, which is complete foolishness. This will be struck down by the Supreme Court, make no mistake about it, how can you possibly misinterpret our constitution as to believe that it includes citizens of all other nations who break our laws? Let's also keep in mind this little gem at uber-liberal New York Times that spells out just how much liberals hate when they do not get their way, clamoring and fully expecting a win by Hitlery and begging her and their slimy Congressmen to hijack the Supreme Court. If they were truly worried about what was popular, would they have even attempted that amnesty deal? Wouldn't they put up something like that to referendum, or anything they try to pass to referendum to determine if that was really what people want? They are desperate to force out all opposing views from the nation. Imagine if right wing people were clamoring for President Bush to create and appoint two more judges who leaned to the right? Sheer outrage, a Nazi move, they'd undoubtedly say. However, this is precisely their aim. They are party who seeks ultimate power, the party who seeks to silence opposing voices, and to make sure that government is the almighty. They are the party who banned Robert Casey from their convention in 1992 for having the audacity for straying from the party's line of pro-abortion, to hell with everything else he did. Meanwhile, we are the party of diversity, whose candidates range from a war hero who supports amnesty, a strong national security advocate and great leader who is also pro abortion and pro gay rights, a moderate former governor who rescued the Olympics and who developed plans for universal health care, a former governor who physically transformed himself and drove bipartisan reform after the Clintons ransacked his state, and a certain former Senator with charisma who goes against the traditional grain of conservatives by backing the trial lawyer lobby. We are the party of diversity, of ideas, and of promise. We are the party of our forefathers who gave their lives to create this nation and realize the sacrifice, however unwanted, must continue forever in order to preserve our great union. We need to get this message out and we need to be more vocal in our efforts.

No comments: