Friday, September 18, 2020

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead at 87

 By JACK CROWE  | The National Review | September 18, 2020 8:05 PM 

Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., November 30, 2018. (Jim Young/Reuters)

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away Friday at age 87 from complications related to metastatic pancreatic cancer, the Court announced.

“Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature,” said Chief Justice John Roberts. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her — a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”

Ginsburg was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton in 1993. She immediately staked out a position on the court’s progressive wing and in recent years emerged as an icon on the activist left for her strident positions on abortion rights, gay marriage, and other major progressive causes.

Her death leaves eight justices on the court just weeks before the 2020 presidential election. It may prompt a heated partisan battle over the question of filling a vacant seat so close to a presidential election — a seat that has the potential to cement a conservative majority for decades to come.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday evening that the seat should not be filled ahead of the election, citing the American public’s right to influence the direction of the court through the election.

Ginsburg survived four previous bouts with cancer and the disease reemerged earlier this year in the form of lesions on her liver.

“I have often said I would remain a member of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam,” she said in a statement in July 2020. ” I remain fully able to do that.”

Ginsburg died surrounded by her family in Washington, D.C., the court said. She will be buried in a private ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.



McConnell: Trump's Supreme Court nominee 'will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate'

Ginsburg, 87, died Friday.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said unequivocally Friday night that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee to fill the vacancy of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg “will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

Ginsburg, 87, died Friday from complications surrounding metastatic pancreas cancer.

“The Senate and the nation mourn the sudden passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life,” McConnell said in a statement Friday.

“In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term. We kept our promise,” McConnell continued. “Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year.”

McConnell added that “by contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary.”

“Once again, we will keep our promise,” he said. “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

In May 2019, McConnell, R-Ky., made clear that should a vacancy materialize in the midst of the 2020 election cycle, the GOP-majority Senate would likely “fill it.”

McConnell’s comments last year were met with criticism from Democrats who accused him of hypocrisy, based on the treatment of former President Barack Obamas Supreme Court nominee and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals chief Judge Merrick Garland.

Obama nominated Garland to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away in 2016, but McConnell and Senate Republicans refused to hold a hearing or vote on his nomination, citing the imminent 2016 presidential election.

Speaking to Fox News last year, McConnell suggested his stance was not hypocritical -- because in 2020, Republicans would control both the White House and the Senate, unlike Democrats in 2016, who controlled only the White House.

"You have to go back to 1880s to find the last time a Senate controlled by a party different from the president filled a vacancy on the Supreme Court that was created in the middle of a presidential election year," McConnell told Fox News.

But the nomination and confirmation process for the latest addition to the high court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, took 89 days total for confirmation. It took 57 days from Kavanaugh's nomination to his confirmation hearing.

There are 45 days until Election Day.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Friday night said Ginsburg’s vacancy should not be filled until “we have a new president.”

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice,” Schumer, D-N.Y., tweeted Friday. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”

There was an active vacancy after the death of Scalia in 2016, but the next presidential term could be even more significant for Supreme Court nominations.

Ginsburg’s death leaves a vacancy; and several other justices are over 70, including Justice Stephen Breyer is 82; Clarence Thomas is 72; and Justice Samuel Alito is 70.

Meanwhile, President Trump last week announced a list of more than 20 people he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court.

Top contenders, prior to Ginsburg's passing, included Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals;  Judge Britt Grant of the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals; Judge Amul Thapar of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit;  Judge Steven Colloton of the 8th Circuit U-S Court of Appeals; Judge Allison Eid of the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals;  Judge Raymond Gruender of the 8th Circuit U-S Court of Appeals; Judge Thomas Hardiman of the 3rd Circuit U-S Court of Appeals; Judge Raymond Kethledge of the 6th Circuit U-S Court of Appeals; Judge Joan Larsen of the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals; Judge Barbara Lagoa of the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals;  Justice Thomas Lee of the Utah Supreme Court; Judge David Stras of the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals; Judge Allison Jones Rushing of the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals; and Judge Don Willett of the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

Meanwhile, Ginsburg, who passed away late Friday, was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1993 by President Bill Clinton, spent more than two decades on the bench, and is survived by her two children Jane Carol and James Steven Ginsburg.

Ginsburg battled two forms of cancer in the past, but her health began to take a downturn in December 2018 when she underwent a pulmonary lobectomy after two malignant nodules were discovered in the lower lobe of her left lung.

On Jan. 7, 2019, the Court announced she would miss oral arguments that day for the first time since she joined as she continued to recuperate from that surgery.

Fox News' Shannon Bream, Bill Mears and Chad Pergram contributed to this report. 

Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @BrookeSingman.

If He is Ahead on Election Night, President Trump Should Declare Victory


Earlier this month, a Michael Bloomberg funded data and analytics firm, Hawkfish, laid the groundwork for the left’s war on the legitimacy of November’s Presidential election results.

In an interview with Axios, Hawkfish’s CEO, Josh Mendelsohn said:

“We are sounding an alarm and saying that this is a very real possibility, that the data is going to show on election night an incredible victory for Donald Trump,” he said.

“When every legitimate vote is tallied and we get to that final day, which will be some day after Election Day, it will in fact show that what happened on election night was exactly that, a mirage,” Mendelsohn said.

“It looked like Donald Trump was in the lead and he fundamentally was not when every ballot gets counted.”

Democrats Will Not Concede The Election

Bloomberg’s cronies didn’t even try to hide their intentions in their interview, making it clear exactly what this effort was really all about:

“The group is also trying to sensitize state and county elections officials, news and social media organizations, and the courts to the perils of premature results — and to the possibility of Trump and his team applying challenges and political pressure to reject a high share of mailed-in ballots counted after election day.”

Bottom of Form

Let’s be absolutely crystal clear here: Democrats are trying to pressure government officials and media organizations into not calling states for Trump on election night because they intend to litigate the result – no matter what the numbers say.

The left learned a valuable lesson from 2000. The moment on Election Night that networks called the Presidency for George W Bush – and the moment Al Gore called Bush to concede – Democrats lost a powerful messaging tool.

Instead of a seeking to get to the bottom of an unknown outcome, Democratic challenges to the results in Florida felt more like an opportunistic attempt to steal an election.

Who can forget the Sore-Loserman signs, hats and t-shirts that popped up everywhere between the election and Gore’s second concession in mid-December?

The longer the challenges to the Florida vote went on, the more frustrated Americans became with the challenges and the more they began to sour on Gore.

This is something the left desperately wants to avoid in 2020, which is why they are trying to get out in front of the issue and discourage any outlet from calling the election for President Trump on Election Night.

President Trump Should Declare Victory If He Wins On Election Night

If President Trump is ahead handily, which I expect to be the case, and it appears he will win the Presidency, then President Trump should absolutely declare victory on Election Night.

And right of center news outlets like Fox News and OAN should also declare him the winner.

The most reliable and trustworthy votes are those cast in-person, whether via early vote or on Election Day. The presumption of victory – albeit a rebuttable one – should lie with the most reliable and trustworthy results.

If the results on Election Night, which will be a combination of votes cast that day (which will favor Trump) and those cast in-person and early (which will favor Biden) show an overwhelming victory for President Trump, then that’s exactly what should be called.

This doesn’t mean that Joe Biden cannot win the Presidency on the basis of mail-in votes, but it does mean that the presumption should be in favor of the most-trustworthy ballots: those cast in-person.

If Joe Biden and his campaign team want to launch a legal challenge to the results, they are free to do so.

But they should have to carry the burden of establishing that the mail-in ballots on which they are relying were cast by actual registered voters in compliance with the laws of the states in which they were cast.


Christopher Barron is President of Right Turn Strategies. He is a contributor to The Hill, and a regular on the Kennedy Show on FOX Business and Unfiltered on Headline News. He was a media surrogate for the Trump campaign and organize d LGBT for Trump.





PA Supreme Court Rules Mail-In Ballots May Be Counted Three Days After Election


Head of Fox News Decision Desk: Why results in swing states likely won't be known on election night

Thursday, September 17, 2020

President Trump Celebrates Constitution Day by Announcing a Commission on 'Patriotic Education'

 By Reagan McCarthy | 

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

President Trump celebrated the anniversary of Constitution Day at the National Archives, along with Vice President Mike Pence, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, HUD Secretary Ben Carson and others.

“On this very day in 1787, our Founding Fathers signed the Constitution at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. It was the fulfillment of thousands of years of Western Civilization. Our Constitution was the product of centuries of tradition, wisdom, and experience,” President Trump said. “No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel the engine of progress.”

The president shredded the radical left’s mission to “demolish” institutions, while they wage a war on law enforcement:

“Yet as we gather this afternoon, a radical movement is attempting to demolish this treasured and precious inheritance. The left has launched a vicious and violent assault on law enforcement – the universal symbol of the rule of law in America. We are here today to declare that we will NEVER submit to tyranny. We will reclaim our history, and our country, for citizens of every race, color, religion and creed.”

President Trump touted the importance of patriotic education, condemning the ahistorical 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory. He plans to sign an executive order creating a commission to help patriotic education flourish in America.


Democrat Madness

By Daniel Henninger | Wall Street Journal 

Wonder Land: Political insanity can be defined as refusing to admit the reality of destructive violence. Images: Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly

How crazy does the violence have to get before it costs the Harris-Biden campaign the election? (Nomenclature update: On Monday, Kamala Harris referred in public to something she called the “Harris administration.” In a speech the next day, Mr. Biden himself referred to “a Harris-Biden administration.” If that’s how they want it, fine by me. From now on, it’s “the Harris-Biden campaign.”)

For weeks, analysts have been pondering whether the “law and order” issue elevated by President Trump and the Republican convention could have a material effect on voting this fall. Generally, they have minimized the issue. But like the hurricanes rolling in from the Atlantic Ocean, the waves of urban violence have apparently become impossible to ignore.

A Monmouth poll out this week finds 65% of respondents say “maintaining law and order” is a big problem. The poll’s self-identified party affiliations are 28% Republican, 41% independent and 31% Democratic. Here’s the election’s ticking time-bomb: Among “non-Republican” blacks and other minorities, more than 60% agree that civil disorder has become a big issue, while just 46% of white non-Republicans see it as a problem. Looks like where one lives explains a lot about the Democratic worldview. 

There’s more bad news at the wrong moment for Harris-Biden: Conclusive evidence has emerged that the American left is certifiably insane. 

After the shooting this week of two cops in Compton, south of Los Angeles, a small contingent of antipolice protesters stood outside a hospital chanting, “We hope they die!” Mr. Biden tweeted criticism of both incidents as “unacceptable” and “entirely counterproductive.” 

We don’t make the left-is-insane charge lightly. 

Up to now, the conventional liberal/media/Democratic story line has been that “most” of the protesters are peacefully objecting to racism and police practices. But it has become impossible not to see something else that falls between carrying signs and looting stores. 

It is common practice for these protesters, men and women, to stand inches from the faces of cops, especially black cops, screaming insults and personal obscenities with no letup. This behavior is a phenomenon worth thinking about. 

It wasn’t long ago that everyone but the genuinely insane knew that if you did this to a cop, odds were you would be a) arrested and/or b) popped with a billy club. 

But these protesters get up into the faces of the police, shrieking, because they know a) they will not be arrested, b) if they are arrested, they will be released quickly, and c) they will be released because the prosecutors in these cities probably won’t press charges. Instead, prosecutors are looking for reasons to cite the police for acts of violence. 

This is new—a status quo in which there is no fear of the police by protesters or common street criminals. A line in the sand has been washed away. 

This condition didn’t happen in the past 100 days. Democratic politics has been building toward precisely this redefinition of law and order for at least 20 years. 

Embarrassed and perplexed by the decadeslong persistence of crime and incarceration in inner-city neighborhoods, progressive legal theorists proposed “decriminalization” as an alternative. They essentially redefined crime as something closer to a behavioral problem. And they blamed the police function for incarceration rates. 

This argument appealed to many liberals (living in low-crime ZIP Codes) who have elected progressive prosecutors in Philadelphia, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Dallas, San Antonio, Seattle, Orlando, Fla., St. Louis, the New York City borough of Queens and elsewhere. 

An important political document in this evolution was released in July—the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force. Note that it appeared one month after the protests, looting and urban shootings began in May. 

Under the Biden-Sanders heading “Protecting Communities by Reforming Our Criminal Justice System,” the words “felony,” “homicides” or “gangs” appear nowhere. It’s almost entirely about one thing—the police and reducing their role. “Shootings” appears once—in regard to “police shootings.” 

Subsequent proposals on the official Biden campaign website overwhelmingly reflect these policies. The Democrats’ failure at their convention to mention the violence wasn’t just avoidance of an inconvenient reality. It was a conscious ideological choice. To restate a point made previously in this space: There will be no return to normal if Harris-Biden wins. 

The political problem for Democrats and Joe Biden surfaced by the Monmouth poll is that the post-Floyd protests put the progressive urban policing model to an unexpected real-world test, which it has failed demonstrably and disastrously. It has led not to what President-in-the-wings Harris this summer described as “reimagining how we do public safety in America” but instead a virtual collapse of the police function. 

The result is an abrupt spike in urban crime and moblike political protesters exploiting official restraints on police. It’s a perfect, still-raging storm of progressive failure. Which now means Democratic failure. 

So my argument: The Democratic left has turned certifiably insane, if one definition of irrational behavior is the refusal to recognize the damage being done, primarily to black and Hispanic neighborhoods, by catastrophic violence. Voters, it appears, have begun to notice. 


Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Cost of Recent Riot Damages Are the Worst in U.S. History

By Katie Pavlich |

For months Democrat "leaders" in cities around the country have refused to squash violent Black Lives Matter rioting in their cities. The damage to communities has been significant and devastating. 

Now, a new assessment first reported by Axios shows the financial cost of the rioting is on its way to at least $2 billion, making it the most expensive in history. 

The vandalism and looting following the death of George Floyd at the hands of the Minneapolis police will cost the insurance industry more than any other violent demonstrations in recent history, Axios has learned.

That number could be as much as $2 billion and possibly more, according to the Insurance Information Institute (or Triple-I), which compiles information from PCS as well as other firms that report such statistics.

The protests related to George Floyd's death are also different because they are so widespread. "It's not just happening in one city or state — it's all over the country," Loretta L. Worters of the Triple-I tells Axios.

"And this is still happening, so the losses could be significantly more."

Worse, the communities hit the hardest may never recover. South Los Angeles still lives with the consequences of the 1992 riots. From the LA Times

[Diamond] Jones said she felt like South L.A. had “never recovered from those riots because, if you look at our community, there’s still abandoned buildings, there’s still not a lot of jobs.” 

Look around, she said, and there’s still a shortage of grocery stores or restaurants that offer healthful food. 

“It bothers me that certain [affluent] communities, no matter how damaged they are, will be OK,” but it’s not the same for minority neighborhoods, said Jones, a marketing coordinator for Forever 21 and owner of the clothing brand Nior.

The Department of Justice has been working overtime to prosecute rioters. According to Attorney General Bill Barr, federal investigators are finding out who is behind the organization of the violence and where funding for rioting is streaming from.  

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

President Trump Signs Historic Agreements Marking the 'Dawn of a New Middle East'

By Katie Pavlich |

 Source: (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed al Nahyan and Bahrain Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani at the White House Tuesday to sign the Abraham Accords and usher in official normalization between the three countries. 

 "We're here this afternoon to change the course of history. After decades of division and conflict, we mark the dawn of a new Middle East," Trump said. "Today’s signing sets history on a new course and there will be more countries to follow these great leaders."

“On my first foreign trip as President, I had the honor of addressing the leaders of more than 54 Arab and Muslim nations in Saudi Arabia. My message that day was very simple: I urged the nations of the Middle East to set aside their differences, unite against the common enemy of civilization, and work together toward the noble aims of security and prosperity," Trump continued. "Today the world sees that they’re choosing cooperation over conflict, friendship over enmity, prosperity over poverty, and hope over despair. They are choosing a future in which Arabs and Israelis, Muslims, Jews, and Christians can live together, pray together, and dream together side-by-side in harmony, community, and peace.”

"This day is a pivot of history. It heralds a new dawn of peace," Netanyahu said. "For those who bear the wounds of war, cherish the blessings of peace." 

"Peace requires courage and shaping the future requires knowledge. The advancement of nations requires sincerity and persistence. We have come today to tell the world that this our approach and that peace is our guiding principle," Al Nayan said. 

"The declaration supporting peace between the Kingdom of Bahrain and the State of Israel is an historic step on the road to genuine and lasting peace, security, and prosperity across the region," Al-Zayani concluded.  

Earlier today President Trump indicated as many as six additional countries will normalize relations with Israel in the coming weeks.

We are watching a replay of the French Revolution

By William Haupt III | The Center Square

A protester leads a crowd of demonstrators toward the Multnomah County Sheriff's Office on Friday, Aug. 7, 2020 in Portland, Ore.  AP Photo/Nathan Howard

“Every generation rewrites history to reconcile its beliefs but it always repeats itself.”
– S.R. Hughes

The French Revolution was a decade of social and political upheaval beginning in 1789 and ending in 1799. It was a long, bloody coup by commoners to replace the monarchal class with institutions constructed by the state. The Revolution overthrew the monarchy with violent uprisings by citizens in the streets, which culminated in a dictatorship under Napoleon, a key leader of the civil unrest. It created an emperorship for those who catalyzed the rebellion, who had wished for a democracy.

By the end of the revolution the French government was bankrupt. Inflation, taxation, lawlessness and unemployment were out of control. The French had lost control of the country, and disruptive civil unrest continued. There were fears of a royalist restoration or a return of Jacobin. There were rumors cultish leaders planned to sell the country to The House of Bourbon, the kings that first ruled France. After a decade-long bloody coup, the French merely traded a king for Emperor Napoleon.

A spin off of the Enlightenment period, the French Revolution is one of the most glorified periods in history. For decades, historians compared the precepts of the French Revolution to those that had animated the American insurrection. But modern political scientists see this as a false comparison and support the time-proven opinions of English statesmen and American political mentor Edmond Burke.

“Kings will be tyrants from policy, when subjects are rebels from principle.”
– Edmund Burke

According to Burke, America’s revolt was to protect their institutions and traditions from the British. In contrast, the French Revolution was a radically politically driven uprising for the sole purpose of overthrowing traditional French institutions and the king. It was driven by a group who wished for equality with the nobility. They thought by replacing the government it would improve their status.

The primary causes of the French Revolution are overshadowed by the Enlightenment principles of the rights of citizens over authority. Since it followed America’s revolt, this bloody coup has been romanticized as a struggle to replace monarchies with democracies in Europe. Historians justified it since dissidents rebelled against an existing system to create one that they felt was more inclusive.

But a closer look at France and its judgmental use of its enlightened guillotine suggests something a bit different to modern historians. The revolution was not to displace a rogue regime, or abusive or a theocratic ruling class. It was faction class envy toward the Ancien RĂ©gime and nobility and a desire for their wealth, justified by the Enlightenment principles. Burke, who supported the American Revolution, condemned the French uprising as a “violent assault against legal authority.”

“The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts.”
– Edmund Burke

Few Americans agreed with Burke since it was Burke’s support for the colonies that brought about their revolution. Thomas Jefferson said the American Revolution had set the precedent for establishing a new constitution. Thomas Paine was so aghast by Burke’s remarks he authored a rebuttal, “Rights of Man.” John Adams agreed that America had fostered the “age of revolutions and constitutions.”

When Burke saw English conservatives supporting French citizens maiming and killing those who did not agree with them, he spoke against using the Enlightenment as an excuse for rioting and killing when it wasn’t necessary. King Louis XIV was working with the nobility to make changes in governing. He established new codes and had begun including commoners in his policy making.

Burke referred to English King John’s signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 that proved even in a monarchy it is possible to bring peaceful, lasting change. All modern democracies have methods to adopt changes in government and society through elections, and parliamentary protocols. That eliminates the need for lawless coups, and violent blood letting like that of the French Revolution.

“We must all obey the great law of change. It is the most powerful law of nature”.
– Edmund Burke

Since the end of the 2nd Great War we’ve witnessed many social and peaceful evolutions within free world democracies. Each generation has instituted personal reforms without disrupting the rule of law by rioting, burning down buildings and covering our streets with the blood of the innocent – until recently. Today, we are witnessing a reiteration of what went on during the French Revolution.

History is repeating itself in America today as we see new age socialists follow the same script as history's most violent leftist revolutionaries. It happens too fast not to be planned. It starts with hate that turns to violence which breeds fear. The leftist media justifies this division, chaos, cowardice, looting and burning in the name of social justice! When agitators get done knocking down statues, the gunshots start ringing and they knock down citizens, which the media hides from public view.

Seeing violent rioters subvert law and order is outrageous; but the complicit attitude of the socialist left is worse. They make no effort to hide their support for this postmodern revolution. They watch stores being looted and burned and people shot and maimed. If a first responder or Trump voter is killed, that is OK. But if it's one of their own who is injured while evading arrest, all hell breaks lose!

The socialist left has resurrected the French ingredients for baking another revolutionary cake. The greatest danger is the left controls the media and only select violent acts are reported, so the extent of this revolt is underestimated. But all one has to do is to check Twitter to see that every extreme-left world leader supports BLM and Antifa and prefers leftist Joe Biden over Trump this election?

“We learned it's best for us to support leaders who work within Chinese Communism.”
– Xi Jinping

If one were to read Charles Dickens' “A Tale of Two Cities,” they might think he wrote it about what is going on in America today. Its first line, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,” sets the stage for this classic that details the peace in London and the bloody chaos in Paris. It was a time injustice was met by a deadly vengeance without distinction between innocence or guilt.

The socialists can’t win elections on policy so they have aligned with those who are creating chaos and fear in cities across America to replace republicanism with socialism. We are watching a replay of the French Revolution and don’t know it! The left media claims this bloody carnage is a result of Donald Trump’s governing by the rule of law and all of our laws are unfair. It they elect leftists, the violence will stop! But like all lawless seditions, they’ll end up with something worse than they had.

Edmund Burke said, “Rage and frenzy will pull down more in a half hour than prudence, foresight and deliberation can build in a hundred years.” If we elect politicians who allow street savages to destroy property, kill and maim people in the name of social justice, we’ll prove to the world anyone is welcome to steal our liberty any time they wish. How much is our liberty worth?

“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
– Edmund Burke

William Haupt III is a retired professional journalist, author, and citizen legislator in California for over 40 years. He got his start working to approve California Proposition 13.