Justice and Constitution via Wikipedia Entry

Readability

Justice and Constitution via Wikipedia Entry

Today on Morn­ing Joe came the full court press for Gay Mar­riage. At the table for the “repub­li­can” side is Nicole Wal­lace & Steve Schmidt archi­tects of the great GOP defeat of 2008 where they don’t bother to have a sin­gle per­son to chal­lenge them on their bias.

The amaz­ingly weak argu­ments pre­sented were some­thing and Nicole Wal­lace claim that you could not find young con­ser­v­a­tives at CPAC who opposed Gay Mar­riage was so bla­tantly false that only a MSNBC audi­ence could fall for it.

The attempt to cre­ate rather than report news like the MSM ignor­ing the vast amounts of young peo­ple march­ing every Jan­u­ary for life is inde­pen­dent of the real­ity of the sit­u­a­tion, but while the panel bliss­fully ignores the con­se­quences of the debate every­one passed over the sin­gle most egre­gious and out­ra­geous state­ment that was made con­cern­ing the upcom­ing decision.

Wal­ter Isaac­son that the Supreme Court jus­tices would make their rul­ing based not on what the Con­sti­tu­tion or the law says, but on what a par­tic­u­lar Judge might fear their Wikipedia Entry might look like in a year or two.

Run that through your head for a sec­ond, this jour­nal­ist (journo-​list), this acclaimed author and head of a “non-​partisan” orga­ni­za­tion is sug­gest­ing that Supreme Court should rule based on the fear of what some­one might put in a Wikipedia entry in a few years and not a sin­gle per­son at that table took excep­tion to the con­cept of jus­tice by Wikipedia Entry

Imag­ine for a sec­ond if things like the 1st amend­ment or the 2nd amend­ment or free­dom of reli­gion took place were decided not by the writ­ten con­sti­tu­tion, not by law or prece­dent, but on the fear that some­one might think of them as “not pro­gres­sive enough”.

If you aren’t hor­ri­fied by this, then frankly you don’t deserve the right that our fore­fa­thers fought for.

As for the inevitabil­ity of this issue, there is a wild card to be played, and that card will be deployed from 4000 miles away but that’s a dif­fer­ent post.…

***********************************************************

[olimome­ter id=3]

The good news is as of yes­ter­day we have reached over 90% of last week’s paycheck.

The bad news is last weeks’ pay­check was $27

As the weekly pay­check goal is $300 this is a def­i­nite prob­lem but one must walk before we run, if you would like to help us run for­ward con­sider hit­ting DaTip­Jar below, I need 14 of you will­ing to kick in $20 in order to make that weekly pay­check hap­pen. Remem­ber 60 peo­ple kick­ing in $20 for twelve months gives you full-​time blog­ging and report­ing on a local state and national level to fight the MSM.

Is that a bar­gain or what?





Today on Morning Joe came the full court press for Gay Marriage. At the table for the “republican” side is Nicole Wallace & Steve Schmidt architects of the great GOP defeat of 2008 where they don’t bother to have a single person to challenge them on their bias.

The amazingly weak arguments presented were something and Nicole Wallace claim that you could not find young conservatives at CPAC who opposed Gay Marriage was so blatantly false that only a MSNBC audience could fall for it.

The attempt to create rather than report news like the MSM ignoring the vast amounts of young people marching every January for life is independent of the reality of the situation, but while the panel blissfully ignores the consequences of the debate everyone passed over the single most egregious and outrageous statement that was made concerning the upcoming decision.

Walter Isaacson that the Supreme Court justices would make their ruling based not on what the Constitution or the law says, but on what a particular Judge might fear their Wikipedia Entry might look like in a year or two.

Run that through your head for a second, this journalist (journo-list), this acclaimed author and head of a “non-partisan” organization is suggesting that Supreme Court should rule based on the fear of what someone might put in a Wikipedia entry in a few years and not a single person at that table took exception to the concept of justice by Wikipedia Entry

Imagine for a second if things like the 1st amendment or the 2nd amendment or freedom of religion took place were decided not by the written constitution, not by law or precedent, but on the fear that someone might think of them as “not progressive enough”.

If you aren’t horrified by this, then frankly you don’t deserve the right that our forefathers fought for.

As for the inevitability of this issue, there is a wild card to be played, and that card will be deployed from 4000 miles away but that’s a different post….

***********************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

The good news is as of yesterday we have reached over 90% of last week’s paycheck.

The bad news is last weeks’ paycheck was $27

As the weekly paycheck goal is $300 this is a definite problem but one must walk before we run, if you would like to help us run forward consider hitting DaTipJar below, I need 14 of you willing to kick in $20 in order to make that weekly paycheck happen. Remember 60 people kicking in $20 for twelve months gives you full-time blogging and reporting on a local state and national level to fight the MSM.

Is that a bargain or what?