Alito, the Supreme Court, the Law and sympathy

In the firefighters case (Ricci vs DeStefano) decided in the U.S. Supreme Court June 29, 2009, Justice Alito addresses “sympathy:”

“The dissent grants that petitioners’ situation is “unfortunate” that they “understandably attract this Court’s sympathy.” Post, at 1, 39. But “sympathy” is not what petitioners have a right to demand. What they have a right to demand is evenhanded enforcement of the law—of Title VII’s prohibition against discrimination based on race. And that is what, until today’s decision, has been denied them.”

Sotomayor overturned.

The Supreme Court ruled today (June 29, 2009) that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race.  This reversed a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor supported as an appeals court judge.

Sotomayor: racist and sexist.

You can read more here:

Rep. Michele Bachmann refuses to fill out most of census

I know for my family the only question we will be answering is how many people are in our home. We won’t be answering any information beyond that, because the Constitution doesn’t require any information beyond that.  Rep. Michele Bachmann, June 17, 2009

Shelly Lowe, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Census Bureau, said Mrs. Bachmann is “misreading” the law.  She
quoted part of the U.S. legal code that says anyone over 18 years of age who refuses to answer “any of the questions”
on the census can be fined up to $5,000.

Shelly Lowe, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Census Bureau, said Mrs. Bachmann is “misreading” the law. She quoted part of the U.S. legal code that says anyone over 18 years of age who refuses to answer “any of the questions” on the census can be fined up to $5,000.  It is interesting how Shelly Lowe changes  what Rep. Bachmann says, ignoring the reference to the Constitution.

It is terrible that Shelly Lowe did not bother to read the Constitution of the United States because the last time I checked, it is still the supreme law of the land, although many in the Supreme Court, Congress and the Executive branches ignore it when it suits them.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. [modified by the 14th Amendment, section 2.] The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five and Georgia three.

Now if you actually read the Constitution it discusses an Enumeration, nothing more.  Given the nature of the United States Constitution, it is one of enumerated powers.  Powers not listed are not granted.  Would the Supreme Court agree?  Given the history of legislating from the bench since the 1930s, who knows, but the so-called Justices who choose not to are exposed as the power-hungry people that they are.

The US Code  states you can be fined for no answering questions, see below for the exact specifications.  Many would argue, including Rep. Bachmann, that you have to answer the question regarding numbers of people in your household, but that the Constitution requires nothing more.  Shelly Lowe believes otherwise and that the US Code can trump the Constitution.

§ 221. Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers

(a) Whoever, being over eighteen years of age, refuses or willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs or is related, or to the farm or farms of which he or his family is the occupant, shall be fined not more than $100.

(b) Whoever, when answering questions described in subsection (a) of this section, and under the conditions or circumstances described in such subsection, willfully gives any answer that is false, shall be fined not more than $500.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious beliefs or to membership in a religious body.

Sotomayor stated her “wise woman” statement many times

The Obama administration claimed that Sotomayor’s statement about a wise latina woman making a better decision than a white man were “a poor choice of words” earlier this week.

Unfortunately for the Obama administration’s honesty deparment, she has used the phrase repeatedly so her poor choice of words continued over years.  Her filings to the Senate show it was a regular refrain over years.  See

At least the sexist, racist, bigot Sonia Sotomayor was a consistent sexist, racist bigot.  Kudos to Sotomayor for consistency.

Since when can you get out of huge national debt by creating trillions of dollars of new debt

Since when can you get out of huge national debt by creating trillions of dollars of new debt?  It all really is so backwards and skewed as to sound like absolute nonsense when some of this economic policy is explained.  [And the government is going to] bail out debt ridden states  [so it can] get in there and control the people.  Sarah Palin, June 4, 2009


Giant Sucking Sound of money leaving your wallet

It turns out that Ross Perot’s giant sucking sound was not the sound of jobs leaving the US for Mexico.  Instead it was the sound of 1 out of every 6 dollars being sucked from the pockets of people who earned the money and given as handouts to people who did not.

Some relevant points:
government spending on benefits will top $2 trillion in 2009
* Benefits, such as Social Security, food stamps, unemployment insurance and health care, accounted for 16.2% of personal income in the first quarter of 2009, the highest ever (since 1929 when records started)

One of Ayn Rand’s quotations from years ago is very apropos:  Observe that any social movement which begins by redistributing  income, ends up by distributing sacrifices.

There is only one way for a scheme to take earned money from one group and give it to another will end, just as the scheme in the U.S. South which took the earnings from the slaves and gave it to the planation owners ended – badly.  It has happened any place where one group believed they had the right to make sacrificial sheep out of another group, no matter how good they thought their purposes were.
Anyone who disagrees is deluding themselves into ignoring the fact that no matter how hard they attempt to deny it or no matter how hard they want to believe their motives are pure, they are the plantation owners using force to make another group work for them.  It was wrong in the South and is wrong now.  But at least the racist, sexist bigot Sonia Sotomayor seems to approve of schemes like that of the South which classify people according to gender and ‘race.’
Personally, I thought we were always part of the human race, but apparently there still exists racist, sexists, bigots think otherwise.