Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Revised Questions For Judicial Nominees

I have yet to read or hear the fullness of (Federal) judges or candidates for Federal elective/appointive offices (Especially to the Federal Bench) responses to the following questions.
1. Do you agree or disagree that the original Constitution of the United States could not be ratified without a Bill Of Rights, that resulting in the latter document being the first ten amendments to the first?

2. Do you agree or disagree with President Thomas Jefferson that the intent of the authors of the Constitution (ie As the above-noted "Package Deal") is to be considered when involved in interpretation of that document?
3. As to the Second Amendment, do your agree or disagree that we can clearly understand the intent of those authors be understood from the comments of Presidents Jefferson, Washington and Madison---And, the other patriots who established our Republic? (Provide copy to nominees!)
4. Do you agree or disagree with the statement that the "Shall Not Be Infringed" clause of the Second Amendment is the strongest statement of a limit-to or prohibition-against Federal acts in violation of the above-noted "package deal"?
5. Will you obey or resist the ruling of the Supreme Court Of The United States in declaring the rights under the Second Amendment as due every citizen without regard to membership in  a "militia"?
6. Will you obey or resist that Court's making that ruling binding, through the 14th Amendment, on the States?
7. How (If at all) have Federal judges considered/addressed the noted "shall not be infringed" clause as contained in the Second Amendment to our nation's Constitution?

Islam's Teachings: Updated

Some Teachings Of The Koran

  verses which preach cruelty, incite violence and disturb public tranquility (i.e., 2:193; 8:39; 2:216; 9:41; 9:123; 66:9; 9:73; 8:65; 8:66; 47:4—15; 8:12; 69:30—33; 8:15—18; 25:52; 9:39; 9:111; 3: 169—171; 4:100; 48:29; 49:15; 2:154; 3:157—158; 8:59—60; 9:2—3; 9:29; 8:67; 4:84; 29:6; 29:69; 61:9—13; 9:36; 9:5; 9:14; 9:20—22; 4:95—96; 8:72—74; 3:142)
* verses which promote, on grounds of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities (i.e., 4:101; 60:4; 58:23; 9:7; 8:13—14; 8:55; 25:55; 5:72; 9:23; 9:28; 3:28; 3:118; 4:144; 5:14; 5:64; 5:18; 5:51)
* verses which insult other religions as well as the religious beliefs of other communities (i.e., 5:17; 4:157; 5:116—118; 98:6; 68:8—13; 38:55—57; 22:19—21; 22:56—57; 5:36; 15:2; 72:14—15;41:33; 4:125; 25
Listed below are a few passages from the Quran that clearly compel Muslims to violence.  
Quran 2:191 “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.
Quran 3:28   “Muslims must not take the infidels as friends
Quran 3:85   “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.
Quran 5:33   “Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam.
Quran 8:12   “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Quran.
Quran 8:60   “Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels.
Quran 8:65   “The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them.
Quran 9:50   “When opportunity arises kill the infidels where you find them.
Quran 9:30    "The Jews and Christians are perverts, fight them.
"Quran 9:123  “Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood.
Quran 22:19  “Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies.

Quran 47:4    “Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them.

Dealing With Those Waging Jihad: Updated

The lessons of history and current events demonstrate that the only means of "communicating" with those Muslims waging Jihad is by the application of over whelming and deadly force as at: Tours (732 AD); Las Navas de Tolosa (1212 AD); Granada (1492 AD); Lepanto (1571 AD); Chocim/Khotym (1621 AD); Vienna (1683 AD); The USA's campaigns against the Islamist-Pirates of the Barbary States (1805-1815); Navarino (1827 AD); Israel’s various and defensive wars from 1948 on (Just in case you ask, I am not of the Jewish Faith nor do I have any financial interests in the State of Israel); Multinational mini-campaigns against the Islamist Pirates operating off the Muslim Sudan.

To these I add the most excellent shooting down of the worm who assassinated a ceremonial guard on Canada's Parliament Hill and by the armed citizen who shot down the Muslim  swine who beheaded a lady in Oklahoma!


FROM George Santayana: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”.

Saturday, January 28, 2017

New Dictator For DNC

Ms. Sally Boynton Brown (Idaho Democrat State Chair?) is a very active candidate for position of Chair of the DNC. She does, very exactly, represent the policies and "principles" of that Party as marched (Goose Stepped?) towards the constitutional election of President Trump and the even greater GOP victories in taking control of so many State Houses and State Legislatures.

Mz. Brown would, as head of the DNC, "shut White people down when they want to interrupt".  It appears that any White statements as to "Black LIES Matter" or other Fascist mobs would be a forbidden interruption under her rule.

Of course, Democrats do not have to vote for her. Instead they can support Keith Ellison Mohammed who (As far as I know) has very much refused to condemn the horrid commands of his ideology, Islam, as support/command perpetual war (Jihad), murder, rape, the sexual abuse of very young girls, torture, beating wives, exile and other forms of genocide and other like crimes.

As a Republican I must thank such critters (And their co-actors) for supporting the future victories of my Party.

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Keeping Illegal Immigrant Families Together

Very early in the last century my father, then a child, legally immigrated into our Republic and that without any prior knowledge of English. Although his in-family language and much of his education was in Polish, immersion in our land quickly gave him a good command of English and laws, customs and mores. This is the basis of my comments as provided below.

There is no need to separate deported, illegal immigrant, families apart. The deported violators of our democratically-enacted laws need only take their children with them. Immersion in the culture of their parent's legal homeland will shortly learn that place's language and customs. (I suggest that the vast majority of such children of real families will have had that nation's language in daily use.)

It also appears that the laws of many (Most? Vast majority?) of other nations make the nationality of children that of their parents. Perhaps, the USA should do the same as to illegal immigrants---Even if, and only if, it requires an amendment to the Constitution. Of course, there are the questions: “Are illegal immigrants within the full jurisdiction of the USA as they, by that law breaking, avoided that status?”; And, “If that is the law, do their children automatically gain citizenship through the illegal presence of their mother in the USA?

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

(Left) Coast Vs. American Definitions

In  California                                        In Real America

Diverse or Lifestyle Choice                     Sinful and Perverted
Arsenal of Weapons                               Gun Collection
Delicate Wetlands                                   Swampland
Undocumented Worker                          Illegal Alien
Cruelty-Free Materials                           Synthetic Fiber
Assault and Battery                                Attitude Adjustment
Heavily Armed                                      Well-protected
Narrow-minded                                      Righteous
Taxes or Your Fair Share                      Coerced Theft
Commonsense Gun Control                   Gun Confiscation Plot
Illegal Hazardous Explosives                  Fireworks or Stump Removal
Nonviable Tissue Mass                          Unborn Baby
Equal Access to Opportunity                 Socialism
Multicultural Community                        High Crime Area
Fairness or Social Progress                   Marxism
Upper Class or "The Rich"                    Self-Employed
Progressive, Change                             Big Government Scheme
Homeless or Disadvantaged                  Bums or Welfare Leeches
Sniper Rifle                                           Scoped Deer Rifle
Investment For the Future                     Higher Taxes
Health Care Reform                              Socialized Medicine
Extremist, Judgmental, or Hater            Conservative
Truant                                                  Home schooled child
Victim or Oppressed                            Criminal or Lazy Good-For-Nothing
High Capacity Magazine                       Standard Capacity Magazine
Religious Zealot                                    Church-going
Reintroduced Wolves                           Sheep and Elk Killers
Fair Trade Coffee                                Overpriced Yuppie Coffee
Exploiters or "The Rich"                       Employed or Land Owner
The Gun Lobby                                   NRA Members
Assault Weapon                                  Semi-Auto (Grandpa's M1 Carbine)
Fiscal Stimulus                                     New Taxes and Higher Taxes
Mandated Eco-Friendly Lighting          Chinese Mercury-Laden Light Bulbs

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

"Due Process" Updated

Sunday, November 13, 2016

"Due Process" In Administrative Hearings

  1. Right to prior notice-of/access-to the: “Charges” against the citizen; Law/rules/regulations alleged to be violated; The names and other identifying information of all witnesses who have provided testimony or other evidence; Documents/physical-evidence as to the “charges”.
  2. The right to compel personal testimony of witnesses and to have that testimony given on oath/affirmation (Allowing for criminal or civil punishment for perjury/false-swearing if such is inflicted).
  3. The right to a hearing before a neutral hearing examiner.
  4. The right to a written decision from that examiner.
  5. The right to appeal any such decision to a court-of-law based on the facts, the law and state and federal constitutions.
When I was a "Hearing Officer" for a State "Department Of Corrections", these were the rights given convicted criminals for hearings as to revocation of probation or parole.

Certainly, the above should/must apply to "disciplinary" hearings conducted by universities/colleges!