The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
This bastard needs to be impeached! If we had a Congress that had a pair he would be. The facism of this regime is just incredible!!
Eric holder received his law degree for the Closed Before Srikeing School of law.
That’s why he has NO clue as to what the First Amendment says.
2012 America:
In which the highest law enforcement official in the land doesn’t possess even a Junior High level understanding of BASIC Constitutional bedrock issues.
After reading the article and watching the video, I don’t think the headline is accurate. He doesn’t seem to be saying the First Amendment allows govt to force...but otoh I don’t understand WHAT he said. Homeless schizos on the NY subway have made more sense.
Catholics: 2nd Amendment Allows Us to Protect our Hospitals from Holder's Goons
This administration believes it can do anything it wants without constitutional and/or congressional authorization.
See my tagline.
Nothing would be a surprise from this crowd.
He’s walking thru it. He will stink for days.
He’s walking thru it. He will stink for days.
Up is down. black is white. war is peace....
Orwell was not a mere novelist he was a modern day prophet delivering predictions in novel form!
Welcome to the Obamanation!
Congress should be recalled and indicted for misprision
of felony for allowing this travesty.
This country has been seized by coup d’etat.
Justice is a joke.
The rule of law is dead, buried in John Jay’s grave,
stabbed in the heart by SCOTUS.
Something people need to realize: Muslims and Muslim groups are exempt from Obamacare altogether because an imam has claimed that insurance is gambling and that Islam forbids gambling.
People want to make the contraception issue about whether or not the Catholic teaching is mainstream, whether women need contraceptives, etc. But if the government is going to refuse Catholics the right to practice their religion because its views are not “mainstream”, then they should be asking whether Muslim views on insurance and/or gambling are “mainstream” - and require Muslims to participate in the “mainstream” things they despise.
But they won’t. They never will. Obama’s government will never require Muslim organizations to buy swimming suits for their women to wear around town. They will never require Muslims to buy a pork processing plant. Etc.
The real story of this Obamacare mess is seen most clearly by the fact that the government is SIDING WITH ISLAM AND AGAINST CATHOLICISM. If the government was going to remain religiously neutral then they would do the same thing for Muslims as they do for Catholics as they do for atheists as they do for Amish as they do for Hindus, etc... The Muslims objected to insurance, so the government said, “Never mind.” The Catholics objected to contraception and abortion so the government said, “You have to participate in these things anyway.”
This is a sharia-compliant law. It institutes legal preference for Islam and imposes what amounts to a dhimmi tax on non-Muslims. It affirms government protection of MUSLIM religious freedom while trashing NON-MUSLIM religious freedom.
We need to ask the right questions about this. Specifically, we need to be asking why Muslims are exempt on conscientious grounds if Catholics aren’t also exempt on conscientious grounds.
Insane. I’d rather have Geoffrey Holder as the attorney general. Imagine him laughing his big, booming laugh every time Congress asks him a question. It would definitely be more fun.
Let’s see if I have this straight: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
Really means that we can prohibit the free exercise of religion so long as it is mandated by the government.
While: “ the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Really means that we can infringe on the people’s rght to bear arms, so long as the US government caused gun violence in another soveriegn nation.
The liberal mind is truly a wonderous thing.
B.S. This is ridiculous. They will get no support for this.
It’s in contract law that this mess is going to be overturned.
The government mandate of a PRIVATE SECTOR TRANSACTION subjects the issue to contract law.
A contract has a presumption of mutual consent. If one party can claim coercion, then the contract is null and void.
I wonder which nations’ Constitution Mr. Holder is reading?
I wonder if he is getting help with his interpretation from Justice Ginsberg?