Disparate Impact Regulation Tossed by Federal Judge

Disparate impact is a dismal theory of political racial policy used by the Obama Administration to accomplish political ends and punish businesses.

It makes the bad assumption that statistics can explain the results of, principally, lending practices and housing and business practices "without showing evidence of actual discriminatory intent."

This is like being declared guilty before being proven innocent, the opposite of the foundational American legal principle of innocence until proven guilty.

See  WSJ, Nov 4, 2014, Opinion Section:  http://online.wsj.com/articles/disparate-impact-rejected-1415059893

FEC Desires to Regulate Conservative News Media?

This is a two part post.  One for alarm and one for caution.

AT THE FEC, Chairman Lee Goodman is claiming that some commissioners (the democrat ones) are starting to believe that there is too much conservative speech and that that poses a challenge to the left's stranglehold on the conventional national media.  The Washington Examiner had this coverage of Chairman Lee Goodman's warning yesterday:  FEC-chair-warns-conservative-media-drudge-hannity-face-regulation-like-pacs/article/2548163

My inquiring mind wondered what other coverage there was, so I searched for "fec to regulate media" using Google.  The above link was first.  In the first three pages of results, not one mainstream outlet appeared, except for Fox news.  But plenty of "new" media results came from pjmedia, Daily Caller, Breitbart, Infowars, prisonplanet, lonelyconservative, Freerepublic, allaccess, etc.  Nowhere do ABC, NBC, CBS or PBS show up.

So I searched for "FEC Chairman Goodman."  Similar result except for a Washington Post article.

Still don't think the media is highly liberal biased?

Good background on this comes from Lee Goodman himself, in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece he wrote on February 4, 2014.  FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman: The Feds Flirt With Reining in TV Talk

I remember reading that piece and feeling quite chilled.  I hope you do too.  Wither the 1st Amendment if the liberals on the FEC get their way?

ON THE OTHER HAND:  Breitbart News has this article where they ask where all the fire is.  Perhaps there is no reporting by MSM because there is only smoke.  I was surprised to find this piece, but it raises the vital issue about how much fact-checking goes on these days, no matter who the reporter is or has allegiance to.

From Breitbart: What-in-the-world-is-lee-goodman-even-talking-about/

Slippery Slope 2 - Rewriting History on 2nd Amendment

History is changing before our eyes.  And in many cases it is for the cause of progressivism and secularism and against religion and classical social morals.

Here is an example of how to cheat children out of their heritage, as sent to me by a friend:

--------

The propaganda press really hopes to secure itself from harm ..... However, he who gives up a little freedom for a little security soon has neither.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/12555/ap-history-textbook-rewrites-second-amendment/

"An AP (advanced placement) history textbook has rewritten the Second Amendment. 

"Here’s the Constitution’s wording: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” 

"Here’s the AP history textbook’s reworking of the text:  “Second Amendment: The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia” 

"The revision interprets the Second Amendment in a way that concludes that the only way it’s constitutional to “keep and bear arms” is for a person to be part of a “state militia.” 

United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination gets it backwards as the following article points out: “The 2nd Amendment says that a militia is necessary to protect a free State, so in order to be able to have a militia, the citizens have a natural right to keep and bear arms and the government cannot infringe on that right."
----------

Note also, looking at the picture of the textbook page on the link above, you can see that the 1st Amendment has been paraphrased also, to the detriment of its original meaning. 

Added Sept 18:  More revisionist history involving this book:  Publisher-of-ap-history-book-containing-questionable-second-amendment-summary-has-direct-ties-to-common-core-and-theres-more

Added Sept 18:  The sad state of teaching revisionist history continues:  sc-school-teacher-tells-students-constitutional-cops-confiscate-guns 

Slippery Slope - Ist Amendment Danger from Congress

Eagle Rising blog has a good article on some impending legislation in the US Senate.  The Media Shield Law could start a further slide down the slope to tyranny by defining who is or is not a reporter.

See here:  Media-shield-law-heralds-death-1st-amendment

See here for how the LA Times seems to argue for the government-in-charge viewpoint.  I am all for protecting journalists, but how to define who is a journalist is probably best left to the public to decide.
Here:  National-shield-law

I think the 1st Amendment covers it.  It is clear and sufficient.

More cogent and simple comment on Feinstien's anti-freedom arguements:
Here:  Feinstein-wants-to-define-journalist

When one looks to Webster's 1828, they will discover a journalist is simply "The writer of a journal or diary." In other words, in the modern era, a blog is nothing more than a journal.

When one looks to Webster's 1828, they will discover a journalist is simply "The writer of a journal or diary." In other words, in the modern era, a blog is nothing more than a journal. Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#ixzz2f5SdsNlQ
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#SfYfRZUp6KtpAT1V.9

When one looks to Webster's 1828, they will discover a journalist is simply "The writer of a journal or diary." In other words, in the modern era, a blog is nothing more than a journal. Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#ixzz2f5SdsNlQ
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#SfYfRZUp6KtpAT1V.99

When one looks to Webster's 1828, they will discover a journalist is simply "The writer of a journal or diary." In other words, in the modern era, a blog is nothing more than a journal. Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#ixzz2f5SdsNlQ
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#SfYfRZUp6KtpAT1V.99

When one looks to Webster's 1828, they will discover a journalist is simply "The writer of a journal or diary." In other words, in the modern era, a blog is nothing more than a journal. Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#ixzz2f5SdsNlQ
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/feinstein-wants-define-journalist/#SfYfRZUp6KtpAT1V.99

Judge Janine Takes Obama to Task over Syria

She says it all:

Judge Jeanine's Opening Statement Sept 8, 2013

Obamabots Support WW3

Those crazy comedy guys and gals at SCN (Second City Network) has struck the "wow, right on" button with this satirical sketch about World War III:
Second-city-mocks-obamabots

Give today, before its too late! You too can be a glassy-eyed follower!