Supreme Court Stays Execution In A Sign Of A Broader Halt

by Linda Greenhouse - October 30th, 2007 - The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 — Moments before a Mississippi prisoner was scheduled to die by lethal injection Tuesday evening, the Supreme Court granted him a stay of execution and thus gave a nearly indisputable indication that a majority intends to block all executions until the court decides a lethal injection case from Kentucky next spring.

There were two dissenters, Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito Jr., but neither they nor the majority gave reasons for their positions.

This man, Earl Berry, whose execution was halted, killed a woman leaving church, abducting her and savagely beating her to death with his bare hands . . . . 20 years ago. The unelected tyrants on the Supreme Court want to stop all executions while they haggle about the horribly important issue (to them anyway) of the chemical composition of the drug administered to kill him. They are concerned that for the few seconds that it takes to kill him this man (who beat his victim to death) may be distracted from his imminent death by musing about the particular cruelty of one drug versus another in the drug cocktail he is administered. Of course what the tyrants on the Supreme Court are concerned about is minuscule compared to the cruel and unusual punishment he inflicted on his victim, but then the Justices have a simple way of dealing with that. "Screw her, she's dead" was the way Ginzburg, Breyer and Stevens expressed it with their usual liberal level of articulate discourse.

Turning Kids Into Sex Offenders

by John Stossel - October 17th, 2007 - Townhall.com

Imagine how DeMarcus Blackwell felt when he was told that his son Chris had engaged in "sexual contact and/or sexual harassment" at school. School officials in Waco, Texas, said Chris rubbed his face in the chest of a female teachers' aide.

Well, before you can imagine this father's reaction, you need to know one other fact: His son was 4 years old when the "sexual" incident occurred.

What got Chris into trouble was giving the aide a hug.

Today, we have an absolutely insane group of politically motivated liberal-progressive-socialist District Attorneys who are brain-washed in law school into irrational self righteous certainty of their beliefs. Nifong in Durham is a perfect example of this mindless group of powerful people who have abandoned common sense. They prosecute people for political correctness, not criminal guilt or innocence.

This article describes a situation where two young men, a 12 and a 13 year old, were prosecuted for "felony sex abuse". FELONY SEX ABUSE! The reality? They were playing a game called "Slap Butt Day", a new version of the ancient game of tag. The girls were playing the game voluntarily, and they too were slapping other players on the butt without regard for which gender they represented. The girls were not prosecuted because they are not white males, the politically correct targets of modern hate mongering by District Attorneys.

These two boys were kept in jail for SIX DAYS before their parents could get them out on bail. During this time, jail officials strip searched the kids repeatedly, every time the parents and their lawyers came in to talk with the kids. Strip searched them like violent criminals. It took six months to get charges dismissed even after all the girls signed affidavits describing what really happened and asking the boys not be prosecuted.

The District Attorney even tried to convict the boys of "dry humping" the girls. The truth on this one? They never touched the girls but simply jumped up and down in front of them to act stupid. It was not intended as a sex act . . . . and anyway, they never touched.

Our criminal justice system has passed the point where these can be considered isolated incidents and mistakes. Our system has become a major source of tyranny. Where are our judges? When are they going to rein in these out of control D.A.s?

My expectation is they don't even think this tyranny is a problem. Welcome to the rule of judges.

Court Rules Against Target in Web Site Accessibility Lawsuits

by Evan Schuman - October 3rd, 2007 - eWeek.com

When a federal court judge issued rulings Oct. 2 that the $60 billion retailer Target needed to stand trial on charges that its Web site is not sufficiently accessible to visually-impaired shoppers, it sent a strong signal to much of the e-commerce space.

[snip]

U.S. Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, sitting in the Northern District of California, issued two critical rulings. The first was that the case was certified as a class action for a group of visually-impaired U.S. consumers, acting under the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). The court also held that Target.com is required by California law to be accessible.

Tyranny prevails again.

In America, you cannot decide who your customers will be. Government tyrants will decide who your customers will be. Like the insane ruling where a judge ruled that the dressing room for a strip club had to be made wheel chair accessible . . . . for employees who HAD to be able to climb a pole (something no one in a wheel chair could do) to do their job, this ruling takes us closer and closer to a socialist tyranny. Judges have abandoned common sense and today rule with arrogant disregard for anything that will crush small business.

Small business is the real loser in this suit. Target will find a way to comply. Many small businesses will be held to the same standard and will fail, forcing them to choose between staying off the Internet or going bankrupt trying to provide services to the handicapped that are in opposition to the intent of the Internet experience. Judges have tried repeatedly to force TV to provide options for the visually impaired. How? This is the same problem. The Internet is a visual medium. For certain types of material it can be as impossible to provide Internet useful information that is accessible to the visually impaired.

This is an insane ruling, but then our judges are masters at pretending idiot based decisions are simply too sophisticated for non legal people to understand. Actually they are idiot based decisions and sneering at non legal people is the technique by which the judges avoid answering for how stupid they are.

Our courts are dominated by judges who are pro socialism and hostile to free enterprise.

Welcome to the "rule of judges".

Law Of The Sea Treaty Doesn't Hold Water

by Phyllis Schlafly - September 24th, 2007 - Townhall.com

The Law of the Sea Treaty is the globalists' dream bill. It would put the United States in a de facto world government that rules all the world's oceans under the pretense that they belong to "the common heritage of mankind." That's global-speak for allowing the United Nations and its affiliated organizations to carry out a massive, unprecedented redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries.

Like Jimmy Carter before him, George W. Bush has become a strong supporter of global government and their socialist agenda. Maybe like Clinton, Bush thinks he can become President of the World if he supports this movement.

Bush has not been as bad as either Gore or Kerry would have been. I don't think there is anying more positive than that you can say about George W. Bush. Talk about the lesser of evils.

You can be sure the tyrants on our courts will love this treaty. With this one move Bush can subvert everything positive he has done to reverse the tyranny of the courts. At least it is consistent with his attempts to throw open our borders and subsume our culture through the invasion of Mexico's huge population. Consistent and stubborn are traits that both friends and enemies of Bush recognize well.