The Rabid Conservative

Think Right, Act Right, Be Right.

Posts Tagged ‘scotus

Hillary Got it Wrong–SCOTUS Question

leave a comment »

The Court has the power of “Judicial Review”, which means that the it’s the court’s job to apply standing legislation, and most importantly, the Constitution, to various situations where the law doesn’t spell out what should be done.

Well, part III of the debate process happened last night. And with Trump’s performance in his Three-on-One debate, this little gem stood out:

la-na-pol-presidential-debate-st-louis-photos-040

Beth Miller: Good evening. Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize size as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice?

Hillary Clinton: Thank you. You are right. This is one of the most important issues in this election. I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real life experience. Who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but maybe they tried more cases. Actually understand what people are up against. Because I think the current court has gone in the wrong direction. I would want to see the Supreme Court reverse Citizens United and get dark unaccountable money out of our politics. Donald doesn’t agree with that. I would like the Supreme Court to understand that voting rights are a big problem in many parts of the country. That we don’t do always do everything we can to make it possible for people of color and older people and young people to be able to exercise their franchise. I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality. Now, Donald put forth of the names of people he would consider. And among the ones that he has suggested are people who would reverse Roe v. Wade and reverse marriage equality. I think that would would be a terrible mistake and take us backwards. I want a Supreme Court that doesn’t always side with corporate interests. I want a Supreme Court that understands because you are wealthy and you can give more money to something doesn’t mean you have more rights or should have any more rights than anything else. So I have clear views about what I want to see to change the balance on the Supreme Court and I regret deeply that the senate has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama, a highly qualified person. They have not given him a vote to be able to have the full complement of nine Supreme Court justices. I think that was a dereliction of duty. I hope they will see their way to doing it, but if I am so fortunate as to be president, I will immediately move to make sure that we fill that. We have nine justices and that they get to work on behalf of our people.

Donald Trump: Justice Scalia, great judge, died recently and we have a vacancy. I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of justice Scalia. I am looking for judges and have actually picked 20 of them. So that people would say: Highly respected. Highly thought of and actually very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody. But people that will respect the Constitution of the United States. And I think that this is so important. Also, the Second Amendment which is totally under siege by people like Hillary Clinton. They’ll respect the second amendment and what it stands for and what it represents.

Now, class, did you find the right answer in what the candidates said? Which one? If you said Trump, you’d be right, not for all the rhetoric, but for these two statements (emphasis and editing mine):

Clinton: I believe the current court has gone in the wrong direction. I want a Court that understands voting rights are a big problem, that will stick with Roe v Wade, marriage equality, doesn’t side with corporate interests, understands that because you’re wealthy, you don’t have more rights. I want to see a change in the balance on the Supreme Court.

Trump: I am looking to appoint judges…that will respect the Constitution of the United States.

If you look at the Supreme Court’s own page, it will talk about judicial review. Not about promoting causes that one candidate things are important. Not changing the balance because decisions are not palatable. But applying the law as it stands.

So Trump answered this question, and once you pare down the fluff, succinctly – judges that will respect the Constitution.

If this were a game show, Hillary would have gotten a big ugly buzzer.  She got it wrong.  And she stepped up with the statements of judicial activism rather than the law. Why?

Because, on the left, causes are more important than law. We see it with Black Lives Matter in their sense of entitlement while gunning down police officers. We see it in the entire LGBTQ+, etc etc alphabet soup that now wants to redefine the human race as having about seven genders, rather than two. We see it with abortion and gay marriage. They’re not concerned about the rule of law, they are concerned about using the judiciary to change law (rather than going through Congress).

It’s important to understand what the Courts are supposed to do and not what we wish them to do.  Trump wins on that one.

 

To my vulgar speaking, deplorable friends.

Advertisements

Written by The Rabid Conservative

October 10, 2016 at 11:30 am

Posted in Political

Tagged with , , ,

My Cheaper Insurance

with 2 comments

This past weekend, I received an upsetting letter from Humana One regarding my family’s medical insurance. I had been expecting higher premiums, but nothing had prepared me for the full effect of ACA aka Obamacare.

My family of 5 is in relatively good health. Maybe once a year one of my three children needs an antibiotic for strep or an ear infection, common things. I go to my annual exam if I particularly feel like it. My husband has a few more issues, but we pay for it out of pocket anyway because I had a high deductible plan. Basically, we are a profit for any insurance company. My husband’s employer’s insurance is a joke as it would consume nearly one of his two week paychecks for the premiums. I found our $11,900 high deductible policy on line. It worked for us. It covered the routine exams at 100 % and would keep us from losing our house if something major happened. There were no copays. Once we met our deductible, everything else was covered at 100% for the rest of the year for the whole family. The deductible might seem high to some, but paying 20% coinsurance per incident on some of those other plans out there could easily cost more and with a higher monthly premium, too.

Now back to the letter. My high deductible plan cost $431 a month, but to comply with ACA my new premium is $1003. That’s 232%. Was the ACA plan better? Oh, it covered more. It included things like abortion and maternity. I happen to be a committed wife. I’m 41 years old. My husband had a vasectomy. I will never be in the position to use these forced improvements to my policy. Also, my deductible was raised to $12,600. Then, the abortion provision began to urk me. Forcing me to pay for something that is an absolute affront to my faith is disgusting.

What is the going rate of liberty today? According to the subsidy calculator on Colorado’s health exchange site, it’s about $890 a month. Oh, I argued with the Humana One representative about whether the subsidy was a government hand out or not. If someone else’s tax money is paying for my insurance, it’s a hand out. I don’t want it. That might perplex some folks, but I don’t want it.

Last year, I studied several Supreme Court cases with my children. One sticks to mind with regards to ACA – Wyman v James. The gist of this case? If one accepts government aid, the government can enter one’s home. No thank you. I don’t want it.

My solution is fairly basic. I’m depositing the money that I would have paid to premiums into a bank account. I’ll pay for any medical expenses from it. I refuse to enroll in ACA. I called Rep. Lamborn, Sen. Udall, and Sen. Bennett to inform them of my situation. I don’t expect much from any of them. I’m telling everyone I know. The rest I trust in God. He has never let me down. Maybe this last point is what the supporters of ACA don’t understand. The government is not my God. God shall supply all my needs.

 

—-

Note from the Editor: Hello folks, this post was authored by my wife and newest author and contributor to The Rabid Conservative. When you have a moment, feel free to comment and welcome her to the blog.  I think I can say we’re all looking forward to hearing her perspective on things (that way, it’s not just me all the time, right?)  Good first writeup, Nic)

Written by mrsrabidconservative

September 6, 2013 at 5:08 pm

In Short – SCOTUS is actually taking up the Obama Birth Certificate matter??

leave a comment »

So, the Supreme Court, starting today is going to actually have a look at this:

To see if the guy written thereon can have this:

I never thought that such a Hail Mary would go this far, but evidently, there are a bunch of people out there who really REALLY think that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president. So today, SCOTUS is going to look over the legal challenge and see if there’s something there.

Now, me, I don’t particularly buy all the hyperbole about Obama’s place of birth. Personally, I think it’s an overcooked turkey, personally. But still, SCOTUS is going to look at it, which tells me that either SCOTUS thinks there might be something here, or they want to put this to bed once and for all.

Either way, it should be interesting to see – considering the story has been buried for months without so much as a glimmer in the main stream media. I’m surprised that the LA Times ran this piece this morning, considering they buried the Ayers tape – but that’s another matter.

So what happens if it actually is found that Obama can’t be president? Yeah, I know, snowball in hell, but…let’s just say…

Well, this is a very enticing question because it’s a question of a procedure that has really never been used. Say the president-elect, come January, become unable to assume the office of President. Who gets it?

I would say, Joe Biden. Since the people don’t actually vote for the president, but rather, choose electors who pledge their votes to a candidate, the line of succession would apply to the president-elect and vice-president-elect, as it would to the president and vice-president formally. Biden would be sworn in as President and then would select a Vice-President, which would have to have the approval of Congress, if one wasn’t chosen before inauguration. If such a selection would have be made before January 20th, then it would fall, again, to Joe Biden to make his selection.

Let’s say the both got wiped out – what then? Well, it goes to whatever the Electoral College says. And if no candidate gets 270 votes, then, constitutionally, it goes to the House to select the President from the top three vote winners and the Senate for the Vice-President out of the top two. And if it didn’t get resolved by January 20th, then Speaker Pelosi would step up as Acting President, since she’s third-in-line as Speaker of the House. Wouldn’t that be a kick in the pants?

Have a good day, y’all.

-R

Written by The Rabid Conservative

December 5, 2008 at 10:20 am

%d bloggers like this: