A federal judge has stuck down Washington D.C.’s gun ban because, you know, Constitution and such.
From Fox News:
A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowing to carry firearms outside their home in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists.
Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. wrote in his ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that the right to bear arms extends outside the home, therefore gun-control laws in the nation’s capital are “unconstitutional.”
“We won,” Alan Gura, the lead attorney for the Second Amendment Foundation, told Fox News in a phone interview. “I’m very pleased with the decision that the city can’t forbid the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right.”
Gura said he expects the District to appeal this decision but added, “We’ll be happy to keep the fight going.”
The decision leaves no gray area in gun-carrying rights.
A judge with reading comprehension skills. Amazing.
Liberty lovers need to take a lesson from leftists. They never give up. No matter how established a law is (and since the late seventeen hundreds, the 2nd amendment has been pretty darned established), they keep right on fighting away in hopes that something will stick. You remind your statist friends of this the next time you hear them say that conservatives should stop trying to overturn Obamacare because “it’s the law.”
It’s not like the Justice Department has anything better to do than introduce industry-crippling, idiotic mandates on legal businesses. It’s not like there’s any corruption at the IRS, EPA, NSA, VA, or any other branch of the government they need to be investigating. Oh wait…
from the Hill:
The Justice Department moved Friday to open up the nation’s cinemas to the visually and hearing impaired with a slate of draft regulations requiring movie theaters to offer closed captioning and audio description technology.
"This proposed rule will allow all Americans, including those with disabilities, to fully participate in the moviegoing experience,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in unveiling the plan.
The DOJ’s bid to amend the Americans with Disabilities Act comes four years after the agency signaled plans to move forward with new regulations, drawing more than 1,000 public comments.
The agency is seeking to require all theaters with digital screens to comply with the new regulations six months after the rule is finalized. The proposal asks for comment on whether a four year compliance date is appropriate for theaters with analog screens, or whether regulations for those movie houses should be shelved until a later date.
Estimates of the costs of the rule fall somewhere between $177.8 million and $225.9 million over 15 years, the agency said.
Under the rules, captions would be delivered directly to the seat in a manner only visible to only a requesting patron. Audio description, transmitted via a wireless headset, allows individuals who are blind or have low vision “a spoken narration of important visual elements of a movie, such as actions, settings, facial expressions, costumes and scene changes.”
The Justice Department has nothing to do with Justice any more. They’re merely a regulation enforcement agency.
It is difficult to count the Constitutional violations in this one article. A Boy Scout group from Iowa was detained for four hours at gunpoint and had their property stolen by border patrol agents because one of the scouts took a photo of a border agent.
A central Iowa Boy Scout troop just returned from a three-week trip they will likely never forget.
About 10 days into the trip, an innocent action by one of the nearly two dozen Scouts at the Canadian border into Alaska set off a chain of events that lead to a U.S. border official pointing a gun at a scout’s head.
Boy Scout Troop 111 Leader Jim Fox spelled out what happened to him and the Mid-Iowa Boy Scout Troop 111 as four van-loads of Scouts and adult volunteers tried to drive from Canada into Alaska.
Fox said one of the Scouts took a picture of a border official, which spurred agents to detain everyone in that van and search them and their belongings.
“The agent immediately confiscated his camera, informed him he would be arrested, fined possibly $10,000 and 10 years in prison,” Fox said.
Fox said he was told it is a federal offense to take a picture of a federal agent.
Not wanting things to escalate, Fox said he did not complain.
Another of the Scouts was taking luggage from the top of a van to be searched when something startling happened.
“He hears a snap of a holster, turns around, and here’s this agent, both hands on a loaded pistol, pointing at the young man’s head,” Fox explained.
Fox said that had them all in fear.
Ultimately no one was hurt or arrested, and after about four hours they were allowed to continue their trip into Alaska.
First of all, it is nota crime to photograph a Federal agent. Secondly, had these young men been drug cartel members or human traffickers the Border Patrol would have sent them on their way or even given them room and board.
It’s a sad day in America when boy scouts are treated with less dignity than MS13 gang members.
I voted early in Tennessee yesterday for the August 7 primary. We have open primaries in Tennessee (a horribly stupid idea), so I picked the GOP ballot. In the Senate primary, Joe Carr got my vote over Sen. Lamar Alexander, and I was happy about it
On the Governorship side of the ballot, however, the choices were much less desirable.
First up we have incumbent Governor Bill Haslam.
Bill Haslam is certainly better than Tennessee’s last governor. He rejected the Obamacare exchanges. That’s a plus. But he also embraced Common Core. He also implemented sales tax for Amazon, Apple, and any other online retailer with a hit of a presence in Tennessee. He supports a national bill to implement internet sales tax. So, it’s been a mixed bag with Haslam. He’s a typical Republican progressive.
Next up we have Basil Marceaux.
Basil Marceaux (dot com!) made a name for himself last year because of this mind-boggling appearance on our local news. He hasn’t gotten any better either. Every time he opens his mouth, it’s a struggle to understand a word of what he’s saying. Key issues for Basil are planting vegetation on public lands and getting rid of those evil gold-fringed American flags!
And then there’s this guy…Mark Coonrippy Brown:
Mark “Coonrippy” Brown became in YouTube sensation because of his videos with his pet raccoon. His notoriety also gained unwanted attention, however, and the state of Tennessee confiscated his raccoon citing a law that forbids individuals from owning wild animals. After sending a petition with over 50,000 signatures to Governor Haslam, Coonrippy was still unable to get his pet raccoon back. So, he’s doing the only thing left that he knows to do…run for governor of the State of Tennessee. His platform is…well…getting his raccoon back.
Needless to say, I didn’t vote for any of these men. I wrote in a candidate instead.
While I didn’t vote for him, it doesn’t mean I don’t want Mark Brown to get his raccoon back. Tennessee’s law against owning a raccoon is idiotic, but I don’t think that qualifies him to be governor.
Let’s jump in our time machine back to right before Obamacare passed. The House passed a version and the Senate passed their own version, and the bill went to conference to work out the differences. However, a conference bill never appeared because Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts died, and Republican Scott Brown was elected in his place. With Brown’s election, the Senate no longer had a filibuster proof majority with which to pass a conference bill.
Thus, the House was stuck with the Senate bill. The choice was to pass the Senate’s version of Obamacare or pass nothing at all because no new version of Obamacare would get through the Senate with Scott Brown now able to uphold a filibuster.
Take a look at this Politico article from 2010 during the time when the House and Senate bills went to conference (emphasis mine):
On a conference call Tuesday, Pelosi (D-Calif.) walked the party’s leadership team through differences in the two bills.
Other differences the speaker mentioned Tuesday include: replacing the Senate’s state-run exchanges with a national exchange established under the House bill, adding tougher mandates to make sure everyone secures health coverage and closing a gap in prescription-drug coverage next year. Senate negotiators have agreed to close the so-called doughnut hole, but they haven’t agreed on a time to implement those changes.
Nancy Pelosi was not happy that that Senate bill did not contain a Federal Exchange, and her goal in conference was to insert this provision into the Senate Bill. This change never materialized, and Nancy Pelosi ended up leading the House Democrats to vote for the Senate Bill as it was passed with no changes.
It is clear from this that Obamacare does not give the Federal Government the authority to operate an insurance exchange and that power rests only with the states.
I was searching for 2009 Senate debate over state exchanges and found this little gem from September 23. The debate here is definitely in the weeds, but the key portion is that Democrat Senator Max Baucus admits that the Affordable Care Act tax credits are for states that adopt exchanges.
Here’s the video:
Basically, Sen. Baucus and Sen. Ensign are debating whether or not the Senate Finance committee has jurisdiction to consider a specific amendment. In his answer, Baucus admits that “premium assistance tax credits” are conditional on whether or not the states adopted an exchange.
It seems the hypocrisy from our nation’s
Worst First Lady never ceases. She can’t even keep her message straight within a single speech.
from Washington Times:
Speaking at a party fundraiser in Chicago, Mrs. Obama said Democrats must triumph in the November contests if President Obama is to make progress on his agenda during the final two years of his term.
She also blasted special interest groups that funnel money to Republicans.
“So, yeah, there’s too much money in politics. There’s special interests that have too much influence. But they had all that money and all that influence back in 2008 and 2012 and we still won those elections,” she said.
Mrs. Obama then urged fellow Democrats to add even more money to the political system.
“There is something you can do right now today to make a difference, and that is to write a big, fat check. I kid you not,” she said. “I’m going to be honest with you. That’s what we need you to do right now. We need you to write the biggest, fattest check that you can possibly write.”
That’s right. Money in politics is evil…now get your checkbooks out and gimme all your money.
WOW! Obamacare architect: We purposely used the word ‘States’ so we could punish Republican governors
In case you’re not privy to what’s going on here, Obamacare was dealt a major blow this week when a court ruled that because the text of Obamacare explicitly says that states are the entities responsible for setting up Obamacare exchanges, the federal government cannot set up these exchanges (Another court had an opposite ruling on the same day). The lawsuit came after the federal government had, indeed, contrary to the law, set up these exchanges after 36 states rejected Obamacare by neglecting to do so.
The entire defense by those who think that the Federal government has the right to continue setting up exchanges and granting subsidies in spite of the law’s clear wording, is that the word “state” was an oversight or, perhaps, a “typo” and that it was obvious that lawmakers intended that the feds be able to set up exchanges as well.
One of the people pushing this silly narrative is an Obamacare architect named Jonathan Gruber. As we reported to you earlier today, after Mr. Gruber went on MSNBC to talk about “typos” and such, someone dug up a video of him clearly stating that the purpose of limiting the Obamacare exchanges to the states was so the feds could withhold federal money from states that rejected exchanges.
After the video surfaced, he hilariously claimed (NSFW) that he had made a “verbal typo” and that the word “states” was, indeed, ambiguous.
However, (and this is the good part), yet another recording of him has surfaced, where he says even more explicitly that the point was to punish conservative states (and as one might surmise, by extension, oust Republican governors).
Here’s what he said:
Here’s the money quote:
“I guess I’m enough of a believer in democracy to think that when the voters in states see that, by not setting up an exchange, the politicians in the state are costing the state residents hundreds of millions and billions of dollars, that they’ll eventually throw the guys out.”
In this one quote, he not only admits clearly that the repercussions of not setting up an exchange is no federal subsidies and that this should be remedied by by voting, but that he hopes that the politicians who don’t set up these exchanges (i.e. Republicans) will be punished by not winning elections.
Think about how sinister this is. The Federal Government takes money from the citizens of a state, then says “if you want some of this back, you must do what we say.” And they do all of this, knowing that the only states that will fight it are the ones controlled by Republicans.
There seems to be no end to the depravity of this administration.
No amount of idiocy or chaos that comes from Detroit should surprise us. The city, which has been exclusively under the control of
Socialists Democrats since 1962, is in upheaval. But this latest round of nuttiness is just plain ridiculous. Thousands of people who haven’t paid their water bill have taken to the streets demanding that the city’s water department (which is about $90 million in debt) give them free water.
On Friday in Detroit, hundreds of local residents and activists — and, somewhat inexplicably, Mark Ruffalo — gathered to protest what has become an only-in-Detroit kind of crisis: The city’s water utility has been shutting off service to thousands of homes, many with the elderly, the poor and children inside.
The story of how this has happened — and on the shores of one of the largest bodies of freshwater in the world — is not as simple as one of government incompetence or indifference to the poor.
The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department says that nearly half of its customers haven’t been paying their water bills, for a total of about 90,000 delinquent accounts, leaving the public utility with some $90 million in debt. But in a city of abandoned properties, squatters and tremendous poverty — 38 percent of Detroit lives below the poverty line — the department has had a hard time distinguishing empty homes from occupied ones, and customers who legitimately can’t afford to pay from those who’ve simply opted not to.
Wow. This is truly amazing. And it’s a perfect little microcosm of what’s wrong with socialism. Don’t misunderstand, I’m not even remotely suggesting that good-hearted people not help those who don’t have the capability of taking care of themselves. But this situation is a great deal more complicated than that. What the “water is a human right” crowd is actually saying is “I demand that someone else pay for the things that I want.” This mentality is the problem. And people don’t arrive at this conclusion on their own. It’s taught to them and it’s cultivated by politicians like John Read-the-bill Conyers pictured above. See, people understand that stealing is wrong. But, for some reason, they are taught that it somehow becomes magically acceptable when the government is the one that does it.
The latest on this story is that Detroit has relented and will turn the water back on for everyone through the end of July:
The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department has announced that it is stopping water shutoffs through at least the end of July, giving residents who legitimately can’t afford to pay a grace period to prove that to the department.
This is called a welfare cliff. Let’s follow the logic with this oversimplified but useful example: If a person’s water bill is $20 and they only have $19, they get free water and get to keep their $19. If a person has $20, however, they have to pay for their water, leaving them with no money. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why government programs like this encourage dependency.
Oh, and If you would like to pay for someone else’s water bill, you can by going here.
This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone because Buzzfeed is one giant hairball of plagiarism. They’ve turned stealing other people’s intellectual property into an art form.
Buzzfeed is conducting an internal review of editor Benny Johnson’s work after identifying multiple instances of what editor-in-chief Ben Smith described as “plagiarism.”
The instances were brought to Buzzfeed’s attention by Twitter users @blippoblappo and @crushingbort, who cited six instances in which Johnson lifted passages from sites like The New York Times, Wikipedia, Heritage Foundation and National Review Online without attribution.
“There are three serious instances of plagiarism in this post,” Smith told Poynter on Friday.
I doubt this will stop Buzzfeed from getting a kuzillion shares on Facebook today.
In an unbelievable act of government censorship, the Federal Election Commission has ruled that Paul Ryan’s leadership PAC is not allowed to buy and give away copies of Paul Ryan’s book.
from Red State:
Wisconsin GOP Congressman Paul Ryan’s leadership PAC, Prosperity Action, asked the Federal Election Commission for permission in advance of doing something fairly logical. They want to buy copies of Ryan’s published book, The Way Forward: Renewing the American Idea, to give away to supporters, in conjunction with a book tour. Of course they’d also help promote the book, since its author is also their candidate.
In an Orwellian reversal, the FEC responded to Ryan’s innocuous request with not one, but two drafts. The second, “Draft B”, would be a major policy change, calling the PAC’s purchase a “third party contribution” with “excessive personal use.”
Not only would “Draft B” represent a chilling restriction on a candidate’s ability to promote his (or her—Hillary) own book, but it also flies in the face of logic and common sense.
This FEC decision limits Ryan’s ability to promote his own book to two sentences on the website run by Prosperity Action. If that’s not censorship, no…of course it can’t be, it’s just enforcing a little-known campaign law used to prosecute John Edwards hush money paid by Bunny Mellon to conceal his mistress. To make this jump from a filthy payoff to book promotion, you’d need a pole that reaches over the Grand Canyon.
After Goodman’s remarks at the FEC meeting, Democratic Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub screeched “No one is banning books”. Of course not, you’re just banning promoting books, a ludicrous distinction.
The decision is so egregious that the chairman of the FEC is warning that these actions could actually lead to book bans in the future:
The chairman of the Federal Election Commission today blasted Democratic colleagues opposed to his effort to protect conservative media after they imposed rules on the publisher of Rep. Paul Ryan’s new book, opening the door to future book regulations — or even a ban.
“By failing to affirm this publisher’s constitutional right, statutory right, to disseminate a political book free from FEC conditions and regulations, we have effectively asserted regulatory jurisdiction over a book publisher,” warned Chairman Lee E. Goodman, one of three Republicans on the six-person FEC.
“That failure reveals a festering legal uncertainty and chill for the free press rights of books and book publishers to publish and disseminate political books free from government regulation,” he added.
These kinds of regulations should not be put on anyone, Conservative nor Liberal. It is not the job of the Federal Government to decide whose speech is appropriate, and that’s exactly what’s happening here.
Paul Ryan should ignore the FEC’s ruling and his PAC should promote the book any way they please. He should fight these bans on free speech all they way up to the Supreme Court if necessary.
Exit question: Why isn’t Paul Ryan standing up and loudly sounding the alarm against this Constitutional violation? Neither his website nor his PAC’s website have anything on their home pages about this.