Forum: How Will The Supreme Court Rule On Same Sex Marriage?

Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: How Will The Supreme Court Rule On Same Sex Marriage?

 The Glittering Eye : Beats the heck out of me. On the one hand I don't see how Justice Kennedy could decide for the plaintiff in Obergefell v. Hodges without reversing his own opinion in U. S. v. Windsor in which he held that the power to define marriage was within the province of the states. On the other that does seem to be the way the wind is blowing. It's also hard for me to see how any of the Catholic justices on the Court could rule in favor of the plaintiff without being excommunicated.

It certainly seems to me as though we're poised on the edge of a torrent of official religious persecution in which the only conscientious position that a lot of people will be able to take will be to go to jail.

The Independent Sentinel : I don't know how the Supreme Court will rule. I haven't followed the arguments closely enough but if they redefine marriage, there will be serious repercussions for religious organizations and churches. It will light a fire that will be very difficult to put out.

My hope is the Supreme Court will leave it to the states and not make it into a civil right. Sorry, but I don't see sexual orientation as a civil right. I do think LGBTs are legitimately a protected class, however.

The majority of citizens have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and want it to remain so. After thousands of years, why should marriage be redefined? LGBTs have children and they deserve to have equal rights. I'd rather see them obtain these rights through legal unions with all the rights of a married couple. Just don't call it marriage and make it into a civil right.

Others have rights too.

 JoshuaPundit : Although I hope I'm wrong, I figure they will likely rule in favor of same sex marriage in both cases. And I also see  it as having very little to do with the law or the Constitution per se.

 I think the old rule of follow the money applies.  Homosexuals are now an enormous fund raising target for the Democrat Party, as well as yet another protected group to be riled up to provide lots of cash and muscle for candidates down for the agenda. That by itself trumps any regard for the Constitution.

There are also two other powerful groups that want legal same sex marriage, and both are favored by President Obama and his party.

As I've pointed out before, some of the most vociferous advocates for same sex marriage are family law and trial lawyers, especially the people teaching family law in academia. Not only are they big donors, but they have a stake of their own in this. As many freely admit, the ultimate goal is to redefine traditional marriage entirely as a series of legal contracts. And why not? They're the ones who will be pocketing the handsome fees for a whole new round of divorces, custody battles and the drawing and redrawing of marital 'contracts' once same sex marriage, polygamy and polyamory become the law of the land.

And finally, one group favored by the White House that quietly favors this are America's Islamists - groups like CAIR, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) And The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC). Simply put, they see it as a wedge for sharia and polygamy,which it is. That's pretty much how things have gone in Europe.

 Given the huge amount of NSA spying that has occurred  during the Obama Administration, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one or more of the justices was being blackmailed to vote the way the regime wants. You'll remember that General David Petraeus was blackmailed to endorse the regime's Benghazi fiction because they had knowledge of his extramarital affair months before Benghazi occurred. Later, they made the knowledge public to discredit him when it suited them. This president has been involved in that kind of sleaze before throughout his political career.

So with this kind of weight pushing and this much money at stake, I think the Obama regime will do everything in its power to get the Supremes to push this through. All they need is one Justice, since Elena Kagan isn't going to do the ethical thing and recuse herself. They could care less about Evangelicals, or religious Catholics and Jews, because most of them don't vote Democrat anyway.

I'm much more interested in how people of faith will react once this goes down.


Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason : There are two questions before the Supreme Court. The first is asking the Court to determine whether the 14th Amendment requires states to issue same sex marriage licenses under its equal protection clause. The second is asking for a determination on whether a state that doesn't allow same sex marriage must recognize the marriages of same sex married couples from other states.

Currently thirty-seven states have passed laws or amendments to their constitutions defining marriage as being limited to a union between one man and one woman. The fact is, a majority of Americans have voiced their belief that traditional marriage should be preserved as it has been defined for thousands of years.

I would like to believe that the nine Supreme Court justices; 7 of which are of the Catholic faith and 2 Jewish; would understand the importance of faith in the founding and history of our Constitutional Republic, and in the preservation of the family as the foundation of a civilized society.

I would like to believe the justices understand the laws of our country are not laws handed down by men but are “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” enshrined in our Constitution for our protection from tyranny.

I would like to believe the justices understand that marriage should not be re-defined or undefined.

I would like to believe the justices understand the 14th Amendment came about as a result of the Civil War to give former slaves the full rights and privileges of all American citizens, and has nothing to do with same sex marriage.

I would like to believe the justices are aware that ruling in favor of same sex marriage being protected under the 14th Amendment would leave the states unable to pass laws to protect those who oppose same sex marriage from legal attacks, and force individuals to engage in activities against their faith, beliefs, or traditional values.

I would like to believe the justices understand according to the Tenth Amendment that “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.” The issue of marriage should not be debated in the federal realm at all.

I would like to believe all of this, but what I know is that the left is using same sex marriage, among other issues, to destroy American society. We have a generation of youth who have been taught that there is no difference between heterosexual and homosexual relationships and that everyone should have the right to marry whomever they choose. The left believes the time is now to undefine marriage while it has the support of our youth.

I would like to believe the justices know the left is using the federal courts because they have not won in the states.

How will the Supreme Court rule on same sex marriage? I honestly have no idea.


Wolf Howling :The Supreme Court is currently considering same sex marriage in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges. I expect that they will decide the case by discovering that a right to gay marriage has been hiding for a century and a half in the Constitution.

I also expect the Court's decision to break the camel's back as these supremely arrogant judges force left wing social policy down the throat of this nation and begin a final, direct assault on the rights of conscience of the religious in our land. If you thought the activist Roe v. Wade decision caused turmoil, I can assure you, you haven't seen anything yet. As Bookworm Room pointed out some time ago, unlike with abortion, this decision will, for the first time in our nation's history, make it unlawful to live by the same Judeo-Christian beliefs that girded our nation at and since the Founding.

As I pointed out in The Supreme Court: Originalism, Judicial Activism, & America's Future, there are two schools of Constitutional interpretation, originalism and activism:

Originalists attempt to interpret the Constitution by determining what the people who drafted it and voted for it understood it to mean at the time. An intellectually honest originalist does not announce new policy, he or she interprets history and precedent. That is a bit oversimplified - originalism is certainly not always that clean and can become muddled as precedent builds (and see the discussion here). But because there is always a strong bias to stay limited to what the Constitution says and what the drafters meant, it provides a carefully circumscribed role for unelected judges, thus paying the maximum deference to democracy.

When a Court stops interpreting the meaning of the Constitution and starts to impose its own policy views under the color of a "living constitution," it transforms into a Politburo legislating by fiat. Judicial activists and the left who champions them are the people who see an activist Court as a way around democracy and an irreplaceable tool to remake society.

The left has been relying on judicial activism for the past century to work fundamental, unconstitutional and non-democratic changes to our society, and they have engaged in what has amounted to a jihad on the Judeo-Christian religions. Finding that a right to homosexual marriage has been hiding in the Fourteenth Amendment for the past 147 years would set the stage for the last step in that jihad.

The Fourteenth Amendment holds, in relevant part, that "[n]o State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" - the so called Equal Protection clause. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868, in the wake of the Civil War and the abolition of slavery, for the purpose of insuring that blacks were treated to no legal disability in this nation. There is no evidence whatsoever that those who passed this law intended its provisions to extend to homosexuality. To the contrary, homosexuality was then under legal disability throughout most of the states. To claim now that the Equal Protection clause includes homosexual marriage in its ambit is to make an utter mockery of the Constitution and our system of government. This is not a nation of laws; it is now a nation subject to the whims of activist judges who, in acts of supreme arrogance, corrupt our entire government when they impose social policy at odds with the will of the people of this nation and their elected representatives.

What should happen is that the nine members of the Supreme Court should examine intent of those who drafted and voted for passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. That would inevitably lead to the conclusion that homosexuality is not a "right" enshrined in the 14th Am., and that that there is no Constitutional right to homosexual marriage. The only way to change that at the federal level is through a Constitutional Amendment as set forth in Article V. Barring that, because the Constitution does not concern itself with homosexuality or marriage, this is an issue of social policy that, per the 10th Amendment, should be left to the states. Period.

But what we have on the Court today are at least four judges who live to impose their left wing social policy preferences on our nation, and Justice Kennedy, who has shown himself ready to join the four in support of homosexuality and against the rights of the religious in this nation. Two years ago, Kennedy and the other four struck down the Defense of Marriage Act and refused to hear an appeal seeking to uphold California's referendum on Section 8, defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Last year the Supreme Court let stand a New Mexico decision punishing a Christian photographer targeted by the gay mafia for refusing to photograph a gay wedding ceremony. The handwriting is on the wall on this one. We'll see what follows after.

 Well, there you have it!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Tory Tsunami; Cameron Sweeps UK Elections

 

British PM David Cameron and the Conservative Party rolled to a decisive victory in yesterday's UK elections.

Reminiscent of the U.S. 2014 midterms, the polls had it completely wrong while the bookies once again had it right.

According to the polls, this was supposed to be one of the closest UK elections in years. Defying those predictions, odds that had Cameron and the Tories as a ten to one favorite were easily available.

One might almost think the British media running the polls, almost all of them filled with Leftist Labour voters had a vested interest in presenting Labour as a sure thing.

The conservatives won 331 seats, 5 more than they needed for the 326 seats rquired for a majority in the House of Commons. Labour was crushed, getting only 232 seats, while the Liberal Democrats won only 8 seats and UKip ended up with just one.

To give you an idea of how bad this was, all three opposition party leaders,Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and Nigel Farange resigned once the results became known.

A note of caution for American readers and others unfamiliar with British politics. The Conservatives could be more accurately described centrists, with most of them leaning slightly left except when it comes to fiscal matters. The party most Americans would call real conservatives, The United Kingdom Independent Part (UKip) was soundly crushed, getting far less votes than expected. Part of the reason for that is that Cameron adopted one of their chief issues, Britain's membership in the EU which has become increasingly unpopular. Cameron has promised a nationwide referendum on whether to stay in the EU or leave.

The other big winner last night was Alex Salmond and the Scottish National Party(SNP). They may have lost last September's referendum, but they swept all but four parliamentary seats, which particularly hurt Labour. The SNP is now the third largest party in Britain with 56 seats, and they dominate Scotland.

Salmond, who won a seat in the new parliament had this to say: "There's going to be a lion roaring tonight, a Scottish lion, and it's going to roar with a voice that no government of whatever political complexion is going to be able to ignore."

Pish, Jimmy. Sheer pish.And here's why, which leads us to another huge issue in Britain:

Brit PM David Cameron had promised the Scots a number of goodies if they voted to stay in the UK, and now will come the task of delivering. It's called 'devolution of powers' in the local lingo, and what it means is more autonomy for Scotland and the right to set its own tax levels, perhaps. The details were deliberately left kind of foggy.

The Brits plan to draw up a white paper - a parliamentary agenda of sorts - by the end of November, setting out the proposed new powers Scotland's parliament will gain. And a new "Scotland Act" law would then be published if all goes according to plan by January 25, 2015 for the House of Commons to vote on.

However, since there's a new a UK general election due in May 2015, the legislation would not be passed until the new parliament takes over. Cameron is something of a weasel and as a Tory isn't going to get too many votes in Scotland anyway, so what Scotland finally gets at the end might very well be a lot less than they've been led to believe.

Another interesting paradox..since this is a 'devolved system' Scottish MPs in Britain's lower house, the House of Commons get a vote on spending and other budget matters in England while, since Scotland already has semi autonomy and its own independent parliament, English MPs have no voice in how these things are run in Scotland because the Scottish Parliament handles them.

In his victory speech, Cameron underlined his stance on devolution..note what I emphasized:

British Prime Minister David Cameron said he would press ahead with a planned referendum on the country's membership of the European Union and he promised Scotland the most devolution "anywhere in the world" after his resounding election victory.

"Yes, we will deliver that in-out referendum on our future in Europe," Cameron said as he addressed the media after visiting Queen Elizabeth to start the process of forming a new government.

Cameron said he would move ahead as fast as possible with a plan to give more powers to Scotland, which voted overwhelmingly for the pro-independence Scottish National Party.

"In Scotland, our plans are to create the strongest devolved government anywhere in the world with important powers over taxation, and no constitutional settlement will be complete if it did not offer also fairness to England," he said.

One of the reason Scotland's independence referendum lost decisively was because of the fear of losing the generous social welfare benefits Scotland gets under the present system, since the Scottish MPs in the UK parliament can leverage their votes for all sorts of gimmees the entire country pays for, while Scotland's own parliament retains the power to control much of Scotland's affairs.

Scotland in general is far more to the Left than England, which is why Labour getting wiped out there was so devastating to them. Scotland used to be known for its entrepreneurial spirit and business expertise, but these days a lot of Scots like cradle to grave socialism and a huge welfare state, especially if the cost is largely shared by others.

What Cameron is saying here it that he plans to give Scotland a lot more autonomy, with all that implies. And since the Tories get few votes in Scotland and there's a hard core of Conservative politicians who want this essentially unfair arrangement ended, he'll pay no political price at all for doing so.Passing legislation to limit the SNP's voice in affairs that don't directly concern Scotland would give Cameron and the Tories even more of a majority than they already have.

So what does all this mean?

First of all, it's a political win for Barack Obama. Contrary to his horse manure about not wanting to interfere in democratic elections, this president has stuck his nose into four or five elections besides Israel's, providing money, expertise and troops on the ground to his favored candidates. While he lost in Israel, he won in the UK, endorsing Cameron openly as his 'close partner' and providing experienced soldiers including his campaign manager Jim Messina to assist the Tories. What the president will get for that is anyone's guess, but I would expect that it means Cameron's support for Obama's fatuous Iran deal among other things. The rumor also is that Miliband didn't appeal to President Obama personally in some way.

Another interesting factor was the Jewish vote, especially since former Labour leader Ed Miliband is Jewish - at least in terms of ethnicity.So given that Jews have tended to vote to the left in the UK as they do in America, you would have expected Labour to take the majority of the Jewish vote.

They didn't. In fact, some polls indicate that Labour got, at most, just over 20% of the Jewish vote. That made a big difference in constituencies where Jews are prominently represented and the margin was razor thin, like Finchley, Golders Green, Hendon, Brent Central, Ilford North, Hornsey and Wood Green, Hampstead and Kilburn, Harrow East, Harrow West and Hove.

The Labour Party in Britain, like the SLP, is extremely anti-Israel and borderline anti-semitic. It panders openly to the UK's Muslim vote.

 

Ed Miliband is a totally secular Jew who was raised as a red diaper baby by his parents. As such, when he became Labour party leader he did very little to curb the anti-Israel sentiment in the Labor Party. Instead, he went out of his way to show he was out to prove his anti-Israel credentials. During the Gaza war, he issued ridiculously one-sided statements condemning Israel’s defensive actions and calling PM David Cameron’s ‘silence on the killing of hundreds of innocent Palestinian civilians’ was ‘inexplicable’. He had nothing to say about Israel's civilians huddling in shelters because of Hamas's missile attacks.

During the months of increased anti-Semitic attacks and statements in the UK, Miliband was silent until things got bad enough that he had to issue a few desultory statements.

When Labour backbenchers in parliament put together a non-binding motion calling for unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state Miliband put considerable effort towards whipping his MPs in support. That motion was proposed by a Labour backbencher who just a month before had compared the Israeli army to ISIS.

Britain's Jews exist in a situation were they are outnumbered over ten to one by Muslims, and while not all Muslims hate Jews, the Qu'ran and Hadiths are rife with anti-Semitism. Attacks on Jews and Jewiah institutions almost approaches the level in France.

Miliband was counting on over a third of Britain's Jews to vote for Labour out of Leftost solidarity while still getting the Muslim vote. Instead, he was reminded of how Jewish he really was as many Muslims sat home rather than voting Labour and taking a chance of having a hated Jew as prime minister. Meanwhile Jews, many of whom see Israel as a possible haven the way things are going in the UK deserted Labour in droves. A similar phenomenon is being seen in France with increased support among Jews for Marine Le Pen and the National Party and even here in America (albeit to a lesser degree) with increased Jewish openness to the GOP.


Stay tuned...

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher's Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

"One of the problems with defending free speech is you often have to defend people that you find to be outrageous and unpleasant and disgusting." - Salman Rushdie

My belief is that art should not be comforting; for comfort, we have mass entertainment and one another. Art should provoke, disturb, arouse our emotions, expand our sympathies in directions we may not anticipate and may not even wish." - Joyce Carol Oates

Those who claim to be hurt by words must be led to expect nothing as compensation. Otherwise, once they learn they can get something by claiming to be hurt, they will go into the business of being offended. - Jonathan Rauch



This week's winning essay,The Right Planet's – Garland and the Moral Equivalency Penchant is his examination of the recent terrorist attack in Garland and what the divide in the reaction reveals about our present attitudes on free speech and freedom of expression..especially when it comes to Islam. Here's a slice:


Two Muslim terrorists were killed after firing on a security guard outside a Draw Mohammad Contest in Garland, Texas, on Sunday. NBC News reported the two assailants were roommates from Phoenix, according to Buzzfeed News.

The attackers have been identified as Elton Simpson, 30, and his roommate, 34-year-old Nadir Hamid Soofi. Simpson had been under investigation by the FBI for the past 10 years.

Like clockwork a number of Muslims and liberals, et al., saved their moral outrage for the those who hosted and attended the Muhammad Art Exhibit, yet not so much the two unhinged individuals who attempted to indiscriminately murder people because they were “offended.”

Pamela Geller, who headlined the “art exhibit” in Garland, addressed the whole moral equivocation argument we so often hear from liberals and Muslims in an interview CNN’s Alisyn Camerota, who suggested offensive anti-Islamist speech should not be allowed in modern-day Western society.

Like clockwork a number of Muslims and liberals, et al., saved their moral outrage for the those who hosted and attended the Muhammad Art Exhibit, yet not so much the two unhinged individuals who attempted to indiscriminately murder people because they were “offended.”

Pamela Geller, who headlined the “art exhibit” in Garland, addressed the whole moral equivocation argument we so often hear from liberals and Muslims in an interview CNN’s Alisyn Camerota, who suggested offensive anti-Islamist speech should not be allowed in modern-day Western society.





Some have compared this sort of moral equivocation, as evidenced in the Tweet above by a NYT reporter, to a woman who dresses provocatively and is subsequently raped: “Well, she had it coming.” And there is no shortage of similar examples of this sort of nonsense and equivocation (see here).

 

I’m sure we all have been offended by something in our lives, maybe even greatly offended. I can think of few art exhibits, movies, concerts, and the like, I’ve attended that were so far over the top I simply walked out. Yes, I was offended. But I didn’t come back with a gun and start blowing people away because I was greatly offended. As much as I have found some things offensive, people have a right to be offensive, as long as it doesn’t infringe on the unalienable rights of others or cause them grievous harm.

For example, some gay pride parades, and similar events, are often times intentionally provocative. If you have children, you may not want them exposed to such blatant over-the-top sexuality and nudity. But, once again, obviously it does not give anyone the right to kill the people participating in such events because one might be disgusted or outraged. Think about it: if two people shot up a gay pride parade, would your initial response be to question the “common sense” of the parade?


More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Michelle Malkin's Debunking Obama's Bilious Baltimore Babble submitted by Don Surber. It's a superb skewering that shows no mercy to our president's usual attempt to excuse the inexcusable.

Here are this week’s full results. Ask Marion and The Independent Sentinel were unable to vote this week, but neither was subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting :

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes!-The Right Planet – Garland and the Moral Equivalency Penchant


• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – Joshuapundit-Deep In The Heart Of Texas - Jihad As A Brand Name (Updated)


• Third place with 1 2/3 votes –Bookworm Room – Muslims Aren't The Only Ones Engaged In An All Out War Against Christianity


• Fourth place with 1 1/3 votes –The Noisy Room – The Continuity of Government – The Mystery of Peters Mountain


• Fifth place with 1 vote –The Razor – Why An Alcoholic Supports the Legalization of Illicit Drugs


• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote –Don Surber – Bernie Sanders brings wealth of 19th century ideas to Democratic presidential sweepstakes


• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote –VA Right! - How Bill Janis Lost my Support in the Virginia Senate Race (VA-12)


• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –Nice Deb – Community Organizer in Chief Pays Lip Service To Fallen NYPD Officer


• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –Ask Marion – Why The Gun Is Civilization

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 votes! –Michelle Malkin – Debunking Obama's Bilious Baltimore Babble submitted by Don Surber


• Second place with 1 2/3 votes –Andrew McCarthy/PJ Media -Beware Baltimore’s ‘No Justice, No Peace’ Prosecutor submitted by Nice Deb


• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Real Clear Defense – ISIS Tactics Are Similar to Nazi Germany's | submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD


• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Ben Crystal/Personal Liberty –Intolerance will not be tolerated submitted by The Noisy Room


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Fred's Blog – Woodrow Wilson And The Administrative State submitted by The Right Planet


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Sean Davis/ The Federalist-PunditFact: A Case Study In Fact-Free Hackery submitted by Bookworm Room


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Gateway Pundit – It Begins: Democrats Hand Out Anti-Semitic Flyer at Maryland Meeting submitted by Rhymes with Right


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – FOX News – ‘We will not obey’: Christian leaders threaten civil disobedience if Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage submitted by The Watcher


• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote –Marc Thiessen/WAPO – The Baltimore Democrats Built submitted by The Watcher


• Fifth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Daniel Halper/Weekly Standard –Frankenhillary submitted by The Watcher

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Our Weasel Of The Week!!

Yes, once again, It's time to present this week's statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week's nominees were all spectacularly disgusting and it was a very close race, but the votes are in and we have our winner winner...the envelope please...

 

Jew Hater, Plagiarist, Terrorist Groupie And Utterly Failed Former President Jimmy Carter!

JoshuaPundit : You know, I will actually miss Cwazy Unkie Jimmah just a little bit when he slithers off this mortal coil.  This Saudi-bought pimp weasel really is in a class by himself, and he continues to be the gift that keeps on giving.

Jimmah's latest exploit involves support for terrorism, something he's certainly done before.  He went  to Israel and asked for the Israelis to allow him to travel to Hamasistan, AKA Gaza. They were fine with it, but when this senile waterhead demanded meetings with Israeli PM Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin they both turned him down flat. That's hardly surprising, considering Unkie Jimmah's record of relentless anti-Israel activity and support for terrorism directed against Jews.

But Unkie Jimmah went ballistic, throwing a tantrum and claiming he never wanted to meet with them anyway, particularly Netanyahu because 'it would be a waste of time.'

Then he ambled over to the territory occupied  by Palestine's unelected dictator Mahmoud Abbas for a photo - op and interview in Ramallah. Among other gems, he extolled the virtues of his old pal Khalid Mesha'al, the leader of the admittedly genocidal Hamas, calling him"a man of peace."  Unkie Jimmah has never figured out why Europe, The U.S. and even Egypt have labeled Hamas a terrorist group for years.




He then called for new elections “ all over the Palestinian area and east Jerusalem and Gaza and also in the West Bank.”  That probably didn't endear him to Abbas, who's in year 10 of a four year term but his statements were directed more towards Europe (where's there's a push on to legitimize Hamas) and the anti-Israel media.
After shooting his mouth off, he then cancelled his trip to Gaza citing 'security concerns' believe it or not. Perhaps Hamas aren't so peaceful after all?
This isn't the first time Carter has tried to intervened directly  to help to help terrorists. While he was president, he was a particularly rabid fan of Yassir Arafat even though he knew he murdered Americans and had two of our diplomats kidnapped and tortured to death.
And as far as Khalid Mesha'al goes, this isn't the first time  Jimmah has tried to give him a helping hand. Among his other antics, our ex-president met with Mesha'al to advise him on how much ransom to ask for kidnapped Israel soldier Gilad Shalit, believe it or not.
Like I said, the gift that keeps on giving. Jimmy Carter'a end destination is Obviously Dante's lowest circle of Hell, the abode of utterly failed politicians. But until then, he'll continue to soil himself in public.

Soiling himself is putting it mildly. But then again, what we honor with the statuette of shame is exactly those people whom best exhibit these despicable qualities. And while ex-president Carter may be aged, he is a weasel superstar, with enough chops from his past evil to just manage to blow past two particularly accomplished and vile weasels who simply haven't racked up his kind of record - yet.

And don't make the mistake of thinking he's irrelevant. Aside from creating the basis for a number of foreign policy problems we now face, He's contributed sonething else, a Weasel legacy. By trashing his own country worldwide, aiding and abetting terrprism, breaking what used to be a long upheld tradition of not publicly criticizing sitting presidents and giving support to our country's enemies, Cwayzie Unkie Jimmah is providing a true weasel example to follow for our next failed president.

Barack Hussein Obama will almost certainly act out far worse once he leaves the White House. But Cwayzie Jimmah can take credit for paving the way.

Well, there it is! Check back next Tuesday to see who next week's nominees for Weasel of the Week are!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum, and  remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Watcher's Council Nominations- Varmint Hunting In Texas Edition

Message to jihadis...don't mess with Texas. As lots of other scum before you have found out, it doesn't end well.

Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

This week, The Pirate's Cove, Blazing Cat Fur, Maggie's Notebook and Wolf Howling earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning

Simple, no?

It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let's see what we have for you this week....

Council Submissions

• The Noisy Room – The Continuity of Government – The Mystery of Peters Mountain


• Don Surber – Bernie Sanders brings wealth of 19th century ideas to Democratic presidential sweepstakes


• Joshuapundit-Deep In The Heart Of Texas - Jihad As A Brand Name (Updated)


• GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – Little Satan Reset


• The Right Planet – Garland and the Moral Equivalency Penchant


• Bookworm Room – Muslims Aren't The Only Ones Engaged In An All Out War Against Christianity


• The Glittering Eye -The Golden Thread


• VA Right! - How Bill Janis Lost my Support in the Virginia Senate Race (VA-12)


• The Razor – Why An Alcoholic Supports the Legalization of Illicit Drugs


• Nice Deb – Community Organizer in Chief Pays Lip Service To Fallen NYPD Officer


• Rhymes With Right – Playing The Waiting Game On Open Records Request Regarding Shoreacres Election Regulations


• The Independent Sentinel – When Will Al Sharpton March for the White Police Officer Shot in the Face by a Black Thug?


• Ask Marion – Why The Gun Is Civilization

Honorable Mentions

• The Pirate's Cove - The Black Heart Of The Green Movement


• Blazing Cat Fur - Pamela Geller attacked by terrorists — then the media


• Maggie's Notebook - “Stripped Away of Opportunity?” What Hopelessness is Not


• Wolf Howling - NYFD, Radical Feminism & The Left's War On Standards

Non-Council Submissions

• Ben Crystal/Personal Liberty –Intolerance will not be tolerated submitted by The Noisy Room


• Michelle Malkin – Debunking Obama's Bilious Baltimore Babble submitted by Don Surber


• William McGurn/WSJ – Baltimore Is Not About Race submitted by Joshuapundit


• Real Clear Defense – ISIS Tactics Are Similar to Nazi Germany's | submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD


• Fred's Blog – Woodrow Wilson And The Administrative State submitted by The Right Planet


• Sean Davis/ The Federalist-PunditFact: A Case Study In Fact-Free Hackery submitted by Bookworm Room


• The Belmont Club – Immunity Zone submitted by The Glittering Eye


• Investigative Project on Terrorism – Hamas Accused of Bulldozing Salafist Mosque Amid Rising Tensionssubmitted by VA Right!


• Andrew McCarthy/PJ Media -Beware Baltimore’s ‘No Justice, No Peace’ Prosecutor submitted by Nice Deb


• Gateway Pundit – It Begins: Democrats Hand Out Anti-Semitic Flyer at Maryland Meeting submitted by Rhymes with Right


• Marc Thiessen/WAPO – The Baltimore Democrats Built submitted by The Watcher


• FOX News – ‘We will not obey’: Christian leaders threaten civil disobedience if Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage submitted by The Watcher


• Daniel Halper/Weekly Standard –Frankenhillary submitted by The Watcher

Enjoy! And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!And don't forget to tune in Friday for the results!

Our Weasel Of The Week Nominees!!

It's time once again for the Watcher's Council's 'Weasel Of The Week' nominations, where we pick our choices to compete for the award of the famed Golden Weasel to a public figure who particularly deserves to be slimed and mocked for his or her dastardly deeds during the week. Every Tuesday morning, tune in for the Weasel of the Week nominations!

Here are this weeks' nominees....


Joe 'Laughing Boy; Biden,Court Jester and Vice President Of The United States!

 The Noisy Room : My nomination this week is for Uncle Joe Biden.

Iran would have enough enriched uranium within three months to be
able to make up to eight nuclear weapons if negotiations with the
international community blow up, Vice President Joe Biden said late Thursday, noting that "the path has already been paved" for that
outcome.

Biden's remarks at a dinner for the Washington Institute for Near
East Policy played off concerns by critics, including Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that the Obama administration is
negotiating an agreement that paves the path for Iran to get a
nuclear weapon.

"Let's get something straight so we don't kid each other," Biden
said. "They already have paved a path to a bomb's worth of material.
Iran could get there now if they walked away in two to three months
without a deal."

While saying the obvious and yet not admitting that they will have the
bomb even /with/ the deal and just as fast, he then countered by
claiming that Obama would not allow Iran to get the bomb. As if inking
the agreement will just magically make the nukes disappear. According to
Biden's mushy logic, Iran is going to get the bomb if that agreement is
not signed in blood. The nuclear cake is baked. For being a general
dunderhead who can't get even the smallest fact straight without
mouthing the opposite or at the very least something monumentally
stupid, Biden should get the golden weasel. It goes with his hair plugs.

 
Secretary Of The DNC And Mayor Of Baltimore Stephanie 'Let 'Em Loot' Rawlings-Blake!

 Don Surber : After Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake denied ordering police to allow looters to steal property and destroy police cars and stores, liberals called conservatives racists for quoting her accurately. On Sunday  -- a week late and millions of dollars in damages short -- Mayor Looter refused to apologize for saying:

“I made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. It’s a very delicate balancing act. Because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de-escalate.”

By de-escalate, she meant escalate. This policy earned her the Weasel of the Week award.

Having been caught inciting and encouraging riots, she told "Meet the Press":

Chuck Todd: “Do you regret using the phrase ‘space to destroy'?”

Mayor Weasel: “You know, I certainly think that it was taken out of context. Let me say this: I’m from Baltimore, my parents are from here, I’m raising my daughter here. I’m a public defender. As city council person, as mayor, I’ve always worked to strengthen my city. We fought to get those stores in our community. I would never condone rioting. Just period. I would never condone it.”

Todd: “So wish you didn’t use that phrase?” 

Mayor Weasel: “I certainly used the wrong phrase to talk about what was clear that there were people who took advantage of the peaceful demonstrator’s First Amendment right, and they used it to destroy our city. And I don’t condone it, and we’ll make sure that those individuals will be held accountable.”

Baloney. Most (likely all) looters will get away with it. She encouraged looting. She wants to drive free enterprise out of Baltimore so that socialistic policies expand. Still a weasel.

And Chuck Todd would never allow a conservative to weasel like that.

 

Jew Hater, Plagiarist, Terrorist Groupie And Utterly Failed Former President Jimmy Carter!

JoshuaPundit : You know, I will actually miss Cwazy Unkie Jimmah just a little bit when he slithers off this mortal coil.  This Saudi-bought pimp weasel really is in a class by himself, and he continues to be the gift that keeps on giving.

Jimmah's latest exploit involves support for terrorism, something he's certainly done before.  He went  to Israel and asked for the Israelis to allow him to travel to Hamasistan, AKA Gaza. They were fine with it, but when this senile waterhead demanded meetings with Israeli PM Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin they both turned him down flat. That's hardly surprising, considering Unkie Jimmah's record of relentless anti-Israel activity and support for terrorism directed against Jews.

But Unkie Jimmah went ballistic, throwing a tantrum and claiming he never wanted to meet with them anyway, particularly Netanyahu because 'it would be a waste of time.'

Then he ambled over to the territory occupied  by Palestine's unelected dictator Mahmoud Abbas for a photo - op and interview in Ramallah. Among other gems, he extolled the virtues of his old pal Khalid Mesha'al, the leader of the admittedly genocidal Hamas, calling him"a man of peace."  Unkie Jimmah has never figured out why Europe, The U.S. and even Egypt have labeled Hamas a terrorist group for years.



He then called for new elections “ all over the Palestinian area and east Jerusalem and Gaza and also in the West Bank.”  That probably didn't endear him to Abbas, who's in year 10 of a four year term but his statements were directed more towards Europe (where's there's a push on to legitimize Hamas) and the anti-Israel media.

After shooting his mouth off, he then cancelled his trip to Gaza citing 'security concerns' believe it or not. Perhaps Hamas aren't so peaceful after all?

This isn't the first time Carter has tried to intervened directly  to help to help terrorists. While he was president, he was a particularly rabid fan of Yassir Arafat even though he knew he murdered Americans and had two of our diplomats kidnapped and tortured to death.

And as far as Khalid Mesha'al goes, this isn't the first time  Jimmah has tried to give him a helping hand. Among his other antics, our ex-president met with Mesha'al to advise him on how much ransom to ask for kidnapped Israel soldier Gilad Shalit, believe it or not.

Like I said, the gift that keeps on giving. Jimmy Carter'a end destination is Obviously Dante's lowest circle of Hell, the abode of utterly failed politicians. But until then, he'll continue to soil himself in public.

 Well, there it is. What a despicable group of  Weasels...ANY OF THEM COULD WIN! Check back Thursday to see which Weasel walks off with the statuette of shame!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum.

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Deep In The Heart Of Texas - Jihad As A Brand Name (UPDATED)

 

By now, many of you know about a terrorist attack that took place in Garland, Texas during the Mohammed Art Exhibit and Contest. A law enforcement officer was shot and two jihadis killed.

The exhibit and contest itself involved speakers and drawings of Mohammed competing for a $10,000 prize.

What basically happened is that two jihadis - Ellis Simpson and Nadir Soofi - attacked the community center with AR-15s to try and kill off as many attendees as possible, after sending a tweet announcing "“The bro with me and myself have given bay’ah to Amirul Mu’mineen. May Allah accept us as mujahideen, make dua,”

This was essentially a pledge of allegiance (bay'ah) to 'Amirul Mu'mineen' the 'prince of believers' which is another name for Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi the head of Islamic State. Then they went off to kill some infidels for Allah.

They managed to shoot and wound one policeman, but both of them took the dirt nap thanks to an off duty cop working security. From what I heard a number of attendees also were strapped and prepared for action....silly jihadis,this is Garland, Texas,not San Francisco or DC!

The event itself was put together by Pam Geller and her American Freedom Defense Initiative to reportedly make a stand for free speech following violence over Muhammad drawings like the Charlie Hebdo attack.

As some of you may recall, I don't support this kind of activity for some very practical reasons, among them that there are far better uses of resources. But if Pam Geller wants to sponsor a 'draw Mohammed' cartoon contest that's her right and her prerogative.

What I'm far more concerned about is what this reveals about our country's continued tolerance for jihadis and Islamist radicalism. This pair were known jihadis whom had been on the FBI's radar for years, yet they were able to operate freely and even purchase weapons:

Ellis Simpson was born in Illinois and converted to Islam at a young age, court documents show. The government began investigating him in 2006, recording conversations between him and a paid informant.

In May 2009, according a federal court document, Simpson told an FBI informant: “It’s time to go to Somalia, brother.” He added: “It’s time. I’m tellin’ you man. We gonna make it to the battlefield…it’s time to roll.”

Simpson was arrested by the FBI in January 2010 after a lengthy investigation (4 years? WTF?). He was charged with lying to agents in connection with terrorism. Authorities suspected he was trying to fly to Somalia, but Simpson claimed at the time he had intended to travel to South Africa to go to school and study Islam there.

They had him on tape telling an FBI informant the real story. And he was facing up to eight years in prison. But then guess what happened? One of those wonderful Obama appointees stepped in:

 

Following a bench trial, a judge dropped the terrorism enhancement, citing insufficient evidence. The judge, Mary H. Murguia, said in March 2011 that the government had failed to prove that Simpson intended to wage violent jihad in Somalia. Murguia reduced the charge to making a false statement to federal officials and sentenced Simpson to three years of probation. Authorities also returned his passport, which they had confiscated after his arrest.

Yes, even though the FBI had Simpson on tape with an informant talking about how he was going to Somalia to fight the jihad, this clueless Obama appointed judge let him off the hook. And nicely gave him his passport, so he could sneak overseas for jihadi training if he wanted.

Simpson then moved to Phoenix and found himself a nice radical mosque to hang out at. That's where he met up with Nadir Soofi, whose story is similar. They became roomates, spending their days fantasizing about fighting for Islam and killing infidels. Yesterday, they put their plans into action.

And that to me is the real story here.

We are allowing jihad to get a major foothold here in America, especially since Barack Hussein Obama and his team took over. We have allowed over 600,000 Muslim immigrants to come to America since 2009, many of them without adequate vetting and more on the way. That's especially true of those coming from Somalia or Syria claiming refugee status.

We aren't monitoring Muslim Brotherhood front groups adequately, let alone prosecuting them even when we have open and shut cases regarding material support for Islamist terrorism.

 

With a few exceptions, we aren't blocking Islamist propaganda and websites from overseas. We aren't monitoring mosques or the imams running them. We aren't vetting the imams trolling for converts in our prisons, which is probably where Ellis Simpson, pictured above was recruited.

We aren't even vetting our police or military for jihadis, which is why Major Nidal Hasan was able to murder so many at Fort Hood. And we certainly aren't securing our borders.

In fact, trying to do anything but the politically correct cha cha in these areas in a sure way to end your career in law enforcement, the military or the government these days.

Thanks to our failure to confront it and combat it actively, Jihad has become a brand name here in America, our government is aiding and abetting it and even worse, we're allowing it.

Is it any wonder we have these so-called 'lone wolf' attacks?

Expect more of these. This one turned out well thanks to an off duty traffic cop with steel nerves, a firearm and excellent aim. We might not be that lucky in the future.

-Selah-

UPDATE: ISIS has posted a death threat agaonst Pam Geller and 'those who protect her.. Everyone who houses her events' on JustPasteIt:

Bismillah Ar Rahman Ar Raheem

“The New Era”

To our brothers and sisters fighting for the Sake of Allah, we make dua for you and ask Allah to guide your bullets, terrify your enemies, and establish you in the Land. As our noble brother in the Phillipines said in his bayah, “This is the Golden Era, everyone who believes… is running for Shaheed”.

The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah in the heart of our enemy. Our aim was the khanzeer Pamela Geller and to show her that we don’t care what land she hides in or what sky shields her; we will send all our Lions to achieve her slaughter. This will heal the hearts of our brothers and disperse the ones behind her. To those who protect her: this will be your only warning of housing this woman and her circus show. Everyone who houses her events, gives her a platform to spill her filth are legitimate targets. We have been watching closely who was present at this event and the shooter of our brothers. We knew that the target was protected. Our intention was to show how easy we give our lives for the Sake of Allah.

We have 71 trained soldiers in 15 different states ready at our word to attack any target we desire. Out of the 71 trained soldiers 23 have signed up for missions like Sunday, We are increasing in number bithnillah. Of the 15 states, 5 we will name… Virginia, Maryland, Illinois, California, and Michigan. The disbelievers who shot our brothers think that you killed someone untrained, nay, they gave you their bodies in plain view because we were watching.

The next six months will be interesting, To our Amir Al Mu’mineen make dua for us and continue your reign, May Allah enoble your face.

May Allah send His peace and blessings upon our Prophet Muhummad and all those who follow until the last Day.

Abu Ibrahim Al Ameriki

Quick, somebody call White House spokeshole Josh Earnest - can we call it a terrorist attack yet?

I notice Texas isn't on the list of states...who says these people are incapable of learning?

Actually, there's something to that. When we start treating these people like the mortal enemies they are instead of tip-toeing around the fact that there's a mainstream reading of Islam and the Qu'ran that condones this behavior - in other words, when we start dealing with reality and refuse to tolerate any manifestation of that reading and that behavior - we will begin to deal with this threat as it should have been dealt with from the very beginning.

There are aspects of Islam that are simply not compatible with a free society, although there are Muslims who certainly are. It's high time we stopped appeasing the others at every turn, but that won't happen until President Barack Hussein Obama is out of the White House.

And yes, I know exactly what that statement implies.

Forum:What's Your Reaction To The Baltimore Police Being Criminally Charged?

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What's Your Reaction To The Baltimore Police Being Criminally Charged?

Wolf Howling :I outlined the basic facts of the case here on my blog.

Three days prior to the arrest of Mr. Gray, a memo was sent through the Baltimore City Police Department mandating that suspects being placed into the police van be placed in a seat and secured with a seat belt. Mr. Gray was simply lain on the floor of the vehicle. Mr. Gray continued to complain and act agitated while in the van. At some point, and perhaps twice, he requested medical aid, which requests were ignored. Within 30 minutes, Mr. Gray was taken from the van by paramedics where he expired a week later as the result of an 80% severing of his spine at the neck. There were no other injuries to Mr. Gray. As Bookworm Room has pointed out, there is some basis to suspect that Mr. Gray's reported prior exposure to lead may have left him particularly vulnerable to the type of injury that caused his death.

On 1 May, Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced that six Baltimore City Police officers have been arrested and charged in the death of Freddie Gray. Of the six officers, three are white, three are black, one is a woman. Two of the officers have been charged with crimes relating to wrongful arrest. Three others have additionally been charged with involuntary manslaughter. The driver of the police van has been charged with second degree murder.

So, on the facts above, what is my reaction to the police being criminally charged?

As a threshold matter, Freddie Gray deserves justice, period. That is beyond question. It will certainly mean civil damages for his death. Whether his death involved criminal wrongdoing such that others deserve punishment is a separate question. Equally, those involved in Freddie Gray's death are entitled to justice. They need to be prosecuted to the degree to which they are culpable, and spared any punishment if they are not.

There is not enough information yet to say for certain if the ends of justice are being served by the arrests of these six officers. My initial reaction, and I dearly hope that I am wrong, is that a lot of this is nothing more than a sacrifice to the racial grievance industry. This is not a planted evidence case, nor a case of brutality by the arresting officers. If they wrongly arrested, that would, in the normal course, be a matter for internal discipline as well as open the officers up to civil suit. But now a wrongful arrest on these facts is being used, in at least three cases, to end careers and criminally prosecute police officers? It appears that all three of them are the white officers, by the way. That seems utterly outrageous just on the facts available. Indeed, it seems a lynching, no less than that which happened to Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson.

Likewise, charging three officers with involuntary manslaughter, just on the known facts and the lack of established policy regarding transport, seems as if it is quite a stretch. It is far less of a stretch to the extent the charge of involuntary manslaughter is based on failing to timely render aid, if such aid was requested and may have in fact saved Mr. Gray's life. But it is not clear which evidence is being relied upon to support each charge against each individual.

Lastly, the driver of the police van, a black officer, has been charged with second degree murder. He, having sole custody of Mr. Gray from the time Mr. Gray was placed in the van until he was removed, injured, by paramedics, is likely at least guilty of involuntary manslaughter. That said, a charge of second degree murder, which requires some degree of intent or extreme recklessness, is likely an overcharge, just on the basis of the known facts.

So my reaction is mixed. At least one of the indictments - and perhaps as many as three - are or may well be warranted based on the available information. Several seem like nothing more than a lynching to satisfy the Al Sharpton wing of the left, who would dearly like to turn this into an indictment of racism and police brutality with which to, somehow, blame the right.

Baltimore City is a model of left wing urban governance and has been a social laboratory for nothing but left wing social policies for the past half century. The fact that Baltimore City, as well as its Police Department, are wholly owned subsidiaries of the left, and indeed, are led by minorities, is meaningless to the developing narrative. Already, Joan Walsh of Salon is tweeting that "there is no debate that tragically, black police officers often absorb the attitudes of their colleagues." Shades of white Hispanics. The left will do anything to insure that whatever comes out of the Baltimore riots, it will not be a platform for rational discussion of the problems besetting Baltimore and inner city blacks. And if justice actually occurs in Baltimore -- justice for Freddie Gray as well as the six officers -- I am afraid it will be purely by accident.

 JoshuaPundit : I'm sorry...it must be my depraved sense of humor but listening to Marilyn Mosby announce the charges as the crowd reacted like someone had just gifted them all with big screens made me laugh almost as much  as the videos of 'reporters' getting beaten up and mugged and still describing their assailants as 'protesters'  afterwards.

Mrs. Mosby is an elected official (as is her husband, Councilman Nick Mosby, who demanded  the Baltimore PD  'stand down' as the rioting broke out) whose offices depend on the votes of a city that is 68% black whom mostly see this issue through a racial prism. Regardless of what color they are, the police, even black cops, are seen as the enemy. She wasn't going to make the same mistake the mayor and president of the city council (both black) made of calling the rioters thugs and  then having to grovel and walk back their statements. The video of Baltimore Council president Jack Young appearing with a herd of Bloods and Crips to apologize and refer to the rioters as 'misdirected youth' makes me chuckle just thinking about it.

The sad part is the jobs that will be lost, the houses that were burned and the long miles people who live in the neighborhood  and were simply trying to work hard and keep things going  will have to travel to buy groceries or find a pharmacy thanks to these 'misdirected youth.' And imagine trying to sell a house here and move to a better neighborhood now.

State Attorney Mosby referred to the arrest as 'illegal' and used the term 'false imprisonment' in her remarks. OK,  but it seems to me that a number of the criminal charges involved are motivated by a political desire to appease the Mob and will be modified significantly later. And I understand that.

But what we have here, not to be harsh, was  a career criminal whose rap sheet included multiple arrests for things like burglary, assault and lots and lots of drug trafficking arrests.  As a matter of fact, Mr.Gray had an upcoming trial coming up this month based on a December arrest for  selling narcotics. He was a known drug dealer talking to someone on the streets in a fairly crime ridden area when he saw the police and took off running.

Chances are he was pursing his chosen career and realized that a fresh bust could affect his out on bail status, his coming trial and his chances of a plea bargain, so he simply went to try and dispose of his stash before he was caught.  Given his reputation, there was definite probable cause and since Baltimore, like many jurisdictions allows suspects to be held 72 hours before being charged,  I can't see his his arrest as illegal since he could have been interrogated and the area could have been searched while he was in custody.

 The main thing the police seem to be guilty of at this point is not securing Gray in a seat belt in accordance with a general order that came out 3 days before the incident,  and maybe  with getting him a medic in a timely manner. That could certainly be called  that negligence, but murder two? Among other things, the prosecutor will have to figure out some way to establish intent for that to stick.

Of course, if the trial's held in Baltimore, the jury will be composed of those 'protesters' and their allies and will likely resemble a carbon copy of some of the old Jim Crow jurisprudence we keep hearing about.  Or if it's held elsewhere and some or all of the police are acquitted, it can be used as more fuel for Seething Racial Grievance. So it's a win-win either way if you take my meaning.

The Glittering Eye : think there's been a rush to judgment. I understand the states attorney's motives but whether because she's inexperienced or ambitious or for whatever reason the theory of the case one would take from her public statements have painted her into a corner that will make it difficult to obtain convictions, particularly on the more serious charges. Note how many of the legal experts have pointed that out.

On the broader question the lynch mob mentality that has set in , not merely on the part of the demonstrators and rioters but on the part of the media and public officials is deeply concerning. We can only imagine the reaction that will occur if these officers are acquitted. That shouldn't be the case. The presumption of innocence should always be paramount.

I don't know what happened to Freddie Gray but neither do the demonstrators or the states attorney. We need to keep an open mind until we hear statements made under oath and read official statements on the forensic evidence. I'm beginning to fear for the republic.

 Laura Rambeau Lee,  Right Reason : Maryland State Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby announced criminal charges against six Baltimore police officers in the death of Freddie Gray, a 25 year old black man who died, apparently after suffering lethal injuries while in their custody.

Her announcement came after a night of rioting, looting and violence that left the city reeling and seething in racial anger for several days. It appears to have been a rush to judgment on her part to alleviate the demands of the mob.

In a city with a large black population, black female mayor, and black prosecutor it kind of rings hollow to allege systemic racism is to blame. We should be looking at the Democratic social policies that have run the city for nearly half a century.

When a society makes it easier for people to live on welfare, food stamps and cheap housing than strive to better themselves, the result is another generation of Democrat voters to keep the free stuff coming. The left cries for more money, that not enough funds are going to help the poor. Baltimore has one of the highest amounts of education funding per child in the country. More money does not equate with a good education. No amount of money will help the people living in the poor neighborhoods in Baltimore, or any city for that matter.

This is not systemic racism. What we are seeing is systemic destruction of the family. The left is bent on destroying America by attacking traditional values, instilling feelings of entitlement for perceived grievances, withholding valuable education children need to better themselves, and making them believe they are victims in a country where opportunities do not exist for them.

As we have seen so many times before, it may just come out that the police are found innocent of the charges. What then? The left will never permit a real discussion on the issues facing poor black families in America. In reality, they are slaves to a system created to maintain and grow the power of the left.

 GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD : Marilyn Mosby delivered a clear message when she stepped in front of the cameras to announce charges against six Baltimore police officers at a surprisingly early stage in the investigation.

Mosby deftly framed the serious charges leveled against the officers in a seemingly political context. On one hand, she promised Freddie Gray's family that she would fight ceaselessly to bring about justice in the case. At the same time, she made it clear that she is not the avenging angel of the African-American community. As in every constitutional democracy, one is considered innocent until proven guilty in the USA.


Well, there you have it.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

The Council Has Spoken! Our Watcher's Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

“In this country, the federal government can do pretty much whatever it wants to.” —Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.)

“Congress has not unlimited powers … but only those specifically enumerated.”—Thomas Jefferson

“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.” —Tenth Amendment, U.S. Constitution

“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” —Marbury v. Madison (1803)



This week's winning essay,The Right Planet – The Rightful Remedy: Nullification is a fascinating exploration of a doctrine that may be an important part of the news in the near future - nullification. Here's a slice:

So just what is nullification? It is the idea that a State or States have the right to nullify, or refuse to enforce, any federal law that is clearly unconstitutional. This is not some new and novel “legal theory.” It is the method recommended by the Framers to use when the federal government usurps power.

Naturally, nullification is quite controversial and utterly repugnant to those who champion big government and the centralization of ever more power in Washington, D.C.

A quick Google search brings up this WikiPedia definition for Nullification:

Nullification, in United States constitutional history, is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional. The theory of nullification has never been legally upheld by federal courts.

After reading WikiPedia’s take on nullification, I’m reminded of a quote by Thomas Jefferson: “The Constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may shape and twist into any form they please.”

It was Thomas Jefferson who wrote (emphasis added), “That a nullification, by those sovereignties [States] of all unauthorized acts done under the color of that instrument [the Constitution] is the rightful remedy.” Thomas Jefferson introduced the term “nullification” in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. James Madison wrote in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 that the States are “duty bound to resist” when the federal government violates the Constitution.

Thomas E. Woods, Jr., author of the book Nullification, elaborates:

But Jefferson didn’t invent the idea. Federalist supporters of the Constitution at the Virginia ratifying convention of 1788 assured Virginians that they would be “exonerated” should the federal government attempt to impose “any supplementary condition” upon them – in other words, if it tried to exercise a power over and above the ones the states had delegated to it. Patrick Henry and later Jefferson himself elaborated on these safeguards that Virginians had been assured of at their ratifying convention.

[…]

As Jefferson warned, if the federal government is allowed to hold a monopoly on determining the extent of its own powers, we have no right to be surprised when it keeps discovering new ones. If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, it will continue to grow – regardless of elections, the separation of powers, and other much-touted limits on government power. In his Report of 1800, Madison reminded Virginians and Americans at large that the judicial branch was not infallible, and that some remedy must be found for those cases in which all three branches of the federal government exceed their constitutional limits.

A mere 10 years following the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, the second president of the United States, John Adams, signed into the law the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Sedition Act made it a punishable crime to criticize the government or its officials. People were actually put in prison for merely being critical of the president or Congress—including Matthew Lyon, a Vermont congressman who had fought for independence during the Revolutionary War! Is this not a grossly unconstitutional act that violates the very letter of the “free speech” clause in the First Amendment? You be the judge. The onerous Sedition Act is what prompted the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, also known as the “Principles of 98.”

The most common rebuttal by those who oppose the use of nullification is to cite the “supremacy clause” from the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, clause 2). A good illustration of this argument can be found in a 2011 article that appeared at TalkingPointsMemo.com.

Via TPM:

"The concept of states’ rights mostly clings to one interpretation of the Tenth Amendment, which says that “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.” Tenthers would say this means a state doesn’t have to follow federal laws the state believes exceed the federal government’s constitutional authority."

"But this pretty clearly goes against the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, in Article 6" :

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

What is being implied by the above excerpt from the TPM article is a sentiment that has been echoed by others opposed to the idea of nullification—namely, that we cannot have the States picking and choosing which laws they want to obey or it would lead to anarchy. (Of course, unless it is liberals doing the nullifying … like nullifying federal marijuana prohibition statutes.) Actually, there is a lot of truth in that line of thinking. But it ignores a very important point that is clearly spelled out in the “supremacy clause.”

So, let’s just take a closer look at just what the “supremacy clause” says (emphasis added):

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme law of the land …

The key point in the “supremacy clause” that is consistently ignored by those who favor giving the federal government ever more power over the States is the phrase “in pursuance thereof .” What does “in pursuance thereof” mean? It means “the carrying out of a plan or action” (pursuance) “of the thing just mentioned” (thereof).

What was just mentioned?

THE CONSTITUTION!

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Stacey McCain at The Other McCain with – Anarchy In Baltimore submitted by The Watcher. When I first read this, my first impression was that it was one of the better commentary pieces written on the subject. Two Rebel Yells and a bottle of Georgia corn, Stace!


Here are this week’s full results. Only the Razor, Ask Marion and the Independent Sentinel were unable to vote vote, but none were affected and/or subject to the mandatory 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 1/3 votes!–The Right Planet – The Rightful Remedy: Nullification


• Second place with 1 2/3 votes – The Noisy Room – Loretta “I Refuse To Answer” Lynch Confirmed As Attorney General After Republican Betrayal


• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –Don Surber – Polygamy makes more sense than gay marriage


• Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes -Joshuapundit-GOP Senate Informs Obama He Can Get Away With Whatever He Wants


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –VA Right! - Obama Blames the Thugs in Baltimore? Here’s Why


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Nice Deb – Baltimore City Councilman Explains Lack of Police Response, Last Night: “We Asked Them To Back Off”


• Fifth place with 2/3 vote –Bookworm Room – Musings about the Leftist Man-God and his unshakeable belief in his infallibility


• Sixth place *t* with 1 vote –The Glittering Eye -Chasing Rainbows


• Sixth place *t* with 1 vote –Rhymes With Right – Seabrook Charter Amendment Election

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 2 votes! –The Other McCain – Anarchy In Baltimore submitted by The Watcher


• Second place with 1 2/3 votes – Victor Davis Hanson/PJ Media-The Fall Of The House Of Clinton submitted by Bookworm Room


• Third place with 1 1/3 votes – James Holmes/Real Cear Defense – J.R.R. Tolkien's Teachings on Strategy submitted by Joshuapundit


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –Christoph Reuter/Der Spiegel Online International – The Terror Strategist: Secret Files Reveal the Structure of Islamic State submitted by The Noisy Room


• Fourth place *t* with 1 vote –The Daily Caller -INSIDE THE RIOTS: Violence, Fire And Robbery As Crooks Attack Reporters submitted by Nice Deb


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Politically Short – Cultural Marxism submitted by The Right Planet


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Andrew Malcolm/Investors.Com – Seeking Latino votes, a sincere Hillary Clinton orders a burrito submitted by Don Surber


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes -Jackson Diehl/WAPO – Fulfilling the Arab Spring submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD


• Fifth place *t* with 2/3 votes - Megan McArdle/Bloomberg – Accused Gets His Say in Columbia Rape Case submitted by The Watcher


• Sixth place with 1/3 vote -In Due Course – Response To Tabarrok submitted by The Glittering Eye

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?