Our favorite pundits have grown up.

Posted On: Thursday - September 5th 2019 8:18AM MST
In Topics: 
  Pundits  Liberty/Libertarianism  Anarcho-tyranny

My, how you've grown!

It just so happened to be columns I've read recently from 2 of Peak Stupidity's favorite pundits that really made me wonder "why has it taken you this long?" The question is in regard to their, assumed, based on what they've just written, naivety regarding the state of the justice legal system in the U.S. of A.

On the left there, you've got Ann Coulter remarking, regarding the ctrl-left:
The only problem is that no one on their side believes in good faith, fair process or common sense. Here’s the reality: We don’t trust the other side, nor should we.
In her latest great (as usual) column, Ann Coulter To The Left: We Can’t Entrust Our Liberties To Your Dirty Hands, is Miss Coulter really just now realizing that the left doesn't play fair and the American legal system, infiltrated by the left at the high levels, doesn't care about Constitutionality? In a few examples she gives, Ann shows us the unfairness and the ctrl-left's unwillingness to play by the rules that Conservatives and Libertarians play by:
In 1994, nearly 60% of Californians voted to deny government services to illegal aliens. Proposition 187 was approved 59% to 41%, with the votes of 56% of African Americans, 57% of Asians—and even a third of Hispanics. It won in every county of California except San Francisco. In heavily Latino Los Angeles County, Proposition 187 passed by a 12-point margin.

Liberals said: No problem, we’ll take the case to a left-wing, Carter-appointed federal judge who will overturn the will of the voters! District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer held that the perfectly constitutional law was “unconstitutional” and, today, California taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars on food, housing, education, health care and prison cells for illegal immigrants.

In 2008, Californians voted against gay marriage. Again, this was California—not South Carolina—and voters decided, 52% to 48%, that “marriage” is not between a mailbox and a chimpanzee, a rhododendron and refrigerator, but only between a man and woman.

Liberals said to themselves: No problem. We’ll just find a gay district court judge to overturn the vote. This will be a piece of cake.

They also said, Not only are we going to reverse the vote, but we will name and shame the people on the other side (except African Americans, who voted overwhelmingly for Proposition 8, much to the embarrassment of progressives). People found to have donated to the marriage initiative would be driven out of their jobs, fired from high-tech firms they founded, and chased from Mexican restaurants.
[sorry, missing a bunch of Coulter's italics and links.]
Her conclusion:
It’s not the underlying issue in any of these examples that’s the problem—it’s the flouting of the democratic process. I’m not saying: We trusted you and got a bad result. I am saying: We trusted you, but you abandoned the Constitution and the law to get the result that you could not win honestly.
Ya' think?!, as they say now. That's been going on for decades now.

On the right (side of the picture, that is), I just read a series of unz/vdare posts by John Derbyshire that bemoan this non-adherence to Constitutional principles by the ctrl-left. (From unz, because there are good comments, please read: Do We Have Government of Laws, or Not?, Unequal Justice In New York: Sheldon Silver Still Free,and Justice Delayed Twelve Years In Knoxville Horror Slayings.) In the most general of these columns, the first one above, Mr. Derbyshire relates the story of Conservative Congressman Steve Stockman of Texas is being railroaded by the Feds - 10 years prison for "fundraising irregularities." Hell, there are so many Federal laws that YOU CAN'T NOT BREAK ONE every day of the week, especially if you are in that Feral swamp itself. Mr. Derbyshire refers to an article by a VDare colleague*:
My colleague makes a good case that Stockman was stitched up for taking on the Deep State while being too much of a National Conservative—translation: not enough of a cuck to the cheap-labor donor lobbies—to get any support from the Republican Party.

James then contrasts Stockman’s fate with the numerous non-prosecutions or gentle wrist-slaps delivered to Establishment darlings like Hillary Clinton, Al Sharpton, and Ilhan Omar, who have displayed an approach to the people’s laws about campaign-finance, taxes, and immigration far more careless—to use the mildest possible adjective—than Steve Stockman’s.

James notes that this pattern doesn’t just apply to the politically powerful. When there’s a street rumble involving Antifa, arrests are made, charges are brought, and convictions are handed down … but hardly ever against the Antifa goons.
In the 2nd article we've linked to by Mr. Derbyshire, he dicusses the lack of justice for the NY policrook, Sheldon Silver:
And all that time, since he was found guilty the first time four years ago, Sheldon Silver hasn’t done an hour of jail time. Not only is he a free man; he’s been drawing a state pension from his assembly years of nearly $7,000 a month.

This guy is 75 years old. If this current appeals panel re-affirms his conviction and he appeals to the Supreme Court, he might easily string this out for a couple more years. If they overturn his conviction and the feds go for a third trial, Silver could be in his eighties before anything happens to him, if anything ever does.
This is nothing new, John. Anyway, his 3rd article on modern American "justice" is on the horrific "Knoxville Horror" double-murder/torture case perpetrated by 5 black guys against a young white couple. NO, it HASN'T been in the national news much. Why do you ask?

OK, by this point I've just gotta say something to Mr. Derbyshire and the other intelligent patriotic Conservatives out there:

Where the hell have all the Conservatives been when Libertarians have been talking and writing about the travesty of the American justice legal system? They have had lots of words deriding them for harping on “muh Constitution” and calling them “Libertards” when they get into too much detail on the intricacies of our Founders principles and “muh rule of law” and shit.

Whatdya’ expect was gonna happen when the other side took over, Conservatives? Do you think they have this respect for the ideals of the Founders of this country? They cared a lot only when it got them out of jail on technicalities for acts of destruction over the last 50 years. Now that they have control, the principles you’ve been taking for granted don’t mean a hill of beans to them.

Peak Stupidity, in our Liberty/Libertarianism section, has a post that explains that Libertarians and Conservatives have a lot to learn from each other.

All of this writing by these 2 excellent pundits would be great examples for a dictionary under the heading Anarcho-Tyranny. Though I will give Ann Coulter plenty of credit for being a Libertarian, having written much about Constitutional principles and how important it is they be followed, I still see her as sounding pretty naive, along with Mr. John Derbyshire, in thinking this is something quite new. I'm glad you've grown up, you two. Join the party, pals!

* By colleague there, John Derbyshire is referring to the excellent VDare writer (part of the meat & potatoes of the site) Jame Kirkpatrick. For more on Congressman Stockman and more on Anarcho-Tyranny, here - Unequal Justice And The Persecution Of Steve Stockman, Proud Boys, Andy Ngo—Is U.S. ALREADY A Third World Country?.

No comments

WHAT SAY YOU? : (PLEASE NOTE: You must type capital PS as the 1st TWO characters in your comment body - for spam avoidance - or the comment will be lost!)