Bernie Sanders: "You know what we need? We need to limit that pesky First Amendment."

Yes, that pesky First Amendment has been driving Democrats bonkers ever since the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions came down from the Supreme Court, basically holding that people can spend money on political advocacy and and give money to as many candidates as they want to.

So let's just limit the First Amendment.

One day before the U.S. Senate votes on a constitutional amendment to restore limits on big money in politics, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called the drive to undo Supreme Court decisions that gutted campaign finance laws “the major issue of our time” and said Monday’s showdown vote is “a pivotal moment in American history.”

The Democrats like to poke fun at the GOP controlled House of Representatives taking meaningless and purely symbolic votes to repeal Obamacare. And that's fair. Those votes are fairly meaningless and symbolic because they won't pass the Senate, and they for danged sure aren't going to be signed by the President.

But lemme get this straight: The Democrats think they're going to get a two-thirds majority in the Senate and in the GOP House, and then they're going to get three-fourths of the State Legislatures to ratify an amendment to curtail the First Amendment?

Good luck!

While they're at it they should go ahead and propose an amendment to the Second Amendment, too.

NY Times Legal Analyst Writes Column to Make Democrats Feel Better About Things

That's basically all I can think of to say about her piece analyzing the Noel Canning case, because there's no other logical explanation.

Protip for all you non-legal scholars out there: When one side loses a case 9-0, it's not a victory.

Friday Afternoon Cocktail Hour

You made it.

Enjoy your weekend.

News Roundup for September 5, 2014

Happy Friday. It's a great (Amazon humidity level) day in South Carolina.

In looking around the internet, I see that George Will has an interesting piece on why Putin and his ambitions to expand Russia are a greater problem than ISIS. 

In other news: This is why we should have the death penalty. I can't even tell you how much this upsets me.

To end on a lighter note, we here in South Carolina officially have the best State flag.

Y'all be good out there.

Remember how South Carolina was going to be the "Wild West" after guns were allowed in restaurants serving alcohol?

Yeah, apparently all that anti-gun hysteria was nonsense.

State law enforcement and restaurant officials say they know of no problems since the law went into effect seven months ago. The law allows permit holders to take guns into places that serve alcohol but allows businesses to prohibit guns and doesn't allow permit holders to consume alcohol.

No problems, huh? I guess everyone who thought that there would be saloon shootouts is going to admit they were wrong.

[via TTAG]

Obama Really Isn't Into Attacking ISIS

After another American was beheaded in what is basically a taunt to the United States, you might have thought that the President was going to come up with a St. Crispin's Day kind of speech and make the case for why we need to destroy ISIS. I mean, at some point, when your citizens are being beheaded, you have to kind of push-back on that.

Yeah, that didn't happen.

"We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL's sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem," said Obama. (emphasis mine)

Excuse me?

I don't understand how you can say you're going to make people beheading Americans and conducting mass executions in the name of Islam a "manageable problem". These people have to be completely defeated, not made manageable.

I know that Obama campaigned on ending the war in Iraq. I know he doesn't want to go back and start a big fight over there. However, we're already in a fight. These people are killing Americans over there, and pretty soon, they're going to be killing Americans over here.

How is it that the President was all good with bombing in Syria and Libya, but he can't bring himself to do the same thing in Iraq?

History will not be kind to this man.

27 Maps That Explain America

Happy Tuesday. Hope all y'all enjoyed the weekend.

Here are some interesting maps. The one that totally blows me away is this one: Half of America's population lives in the blue-shaded counties. Half.

The next time someone advocates for getting rid of the electoral college, show them this map.

Another map that is particularly nice for South Carolina is this one. Apparently, people are moving here. Not good news for New York and Illinois.

Friday Open Thread

Game Day - Take it All In

GAME DAY!

Enjoy it.

Obama's Big Mistake

Back in high school, I had a friend who was fairly smart. However, instead of working relatively hard and making great grades, he was always looking to circumvent the rules. He spent almost all of his time and energy trying to find loopholes in school rules and regulations.

More often than not, his actions would get him in trouble with teachers and administrators. He constantly pushed back against almost all authority, constantly pushing the envelope of what was allowed. Basically, he spent most of his time and energy fighting the system, rather than trying to work within the confines of the school rules.

It caused a lot of bad blood between him and the school officials over what were essentially unnecessary conflicts. He ended up graduating, but refusing to participate in the ceremony. If my friend had spent his time simply studying and working to get along with people, he would have been a top student, and he would have probably been the valedictorian, speaking at his graduation, rather than skipping it.

I see that same characteristic in our current President.

Ever since he lost his super-majority in the Senate, he's gotten absolutely nothing done. He goes on and on all the time about how the mean ol' Republicans won't work with him on anything, but the fact is, he doesn't want to work with them, either. Accordingly, our President now spends all his time trying to figure out how much he can get done without Congress. He's doing everything he can to simply avoid Congress on almost every issue. He's unilaterally changing the ACA, fighting the Halbig case so he doesn't have to ask Congress amend the law, raising the minimum wage via executive order and so on. His famous "pen and phone" line is emblematic of his mentality to simply fight/ignore the Legislative branch of our government.

This isn't how to win friends and influence Congress. (Or enact policy.) Another example is evident today, in the realm of the climate change argument.

Just today, the President has now decided that he's going to try and do some strange end run around the fact that the Senate has to ratify treaties. Apparently, the President wants to cut carbon emissions in an international treaty, but he knows the Senate won't approve it. Therefore, rather than going to the Senators and trying to cut a deal and give them something in exchange, the President is now just going to try and do what he can without the Senate.

In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.

Our President isn't even trying to convince the Senate to go along with this. They've told him "no", but he's undeterred. He's going to try and figure out some way to enter into a treaty without actually entering into a treaty. That will be quite a trick.

If the President spent half the time actually trying to compromise and work with Congress that he spends trying to come up with ways around Congress, he might actually get something done. He needs to understand that you can't always get everything you want when there's divided government. Out of all the campaign promises he's made and broken (and there's a lot) the number one promise he's broken is that he would be a pragmatic "uniter", ending our bitter partisanship. He's absolutely done the opposite. As I referenced in my last post, steamrolling the ACA through Congress is what created the Tea Party.

For all of the soul-searching that leftists do about how our foreign aggression "creates" terrorists, they sure don't seem to realize how political aggression created the Tea Party.

But instead, this current President looks like he's going to be end up like my friend from high school. He's going to struggle against the system, and he's going to engender lots of bad blood, and ultimately, it's all going to be a big waste of time and effort, never really reaching his potential. At the rate he's going, he'll probably end up skipping graduation to go play golf.

"I think liberals really do not understand emotionally the extent to which the Tea Party was created by the Affordable Care Act and the feeling that its government was simply steamrolling it. "

"From the Tea Party's perspective, you had an unpopular program that should have died in the same way, and for the same reasons, that Social Security privatization did: because sensible politicians saw that, no matter how ardently they and their base might desire it, this was out of step with what the majority of the country wanted."

Obama Waited 30 Days to Authorize Foley's Rescue

Here's a hypothetical for you: You're the President. You get some intelligence about the location of the whereabouts of a captured American held hostage by ISIL. How long would you wait to order a raid to rescue an American citizen held hostage by ISIL?

Our President waited "almost 30 days."

Anthony Shaffer, a former lieutenant-colonel in US military intelligence who worked on covert operations, said: “I’m told it was almost a 30-day delay from when they said they wanted to go to when he finally gave the green light. They were ready to go in June to grab the guy [Foley] and they weren’t permitted.”

Another US defence source said: "The White House constantly goes back and forth on these things. These people are a bunch of academics who endlessly analyse stuff and ordering up another deep-thinking paper but can't decide what to order for lunch."

This makes me angry. I don't care about Obama playing golf. I don't care about Obama raising money. That's fine. Just make decisions.

I want him to make good decisions and act in the best interest of our country and my fellow citizens. This thirty day delay to authorize a rescue mission just flies all over me.

Intelligence goes bad over time. The longer you wait to act on intelligence, the less likely it is that the hostage will be there. An "almost 30 day delay" is hard to understand. It's now understandable that Foley wasn't there once the mission finally got the green light. It had been about a month since they got the tip.

I don't really even see how this is a "hard" decision. We have soldiers who have signed up to defend America and protect our citizens. That's is their job. This is what they do. They know the risks. If something had gone wrong, it would be horrible, but it's worse to just dither. And this delay absolutely reeks of political calculation.

You get the intelligence, the military plans a mission, you say "go". I don't know how I could delay that long and then still look grieving parents in the eyes.

We're not talking about just a terrorist bad guy. We're talking about an American citizen who was being held captive.

He's dead now.

By the way, a British newspaper broke this story. Nice job, American press.

Monday Game Week Links

Happy Monday.

A few things going on this week:

Rick Perry will be in Columbia fundraising for SC Republicans in various different places. He'll be at First Citizen's Cafe on Main Street on Wednesday to raise money for the SC GOP in general, and on Thursday, he'll be at Doc's BBQ for Kirkman Finlay.

In case you want to attend any outdoor events, it looks like the tropical storm is going to miss South Carolina. So the weather should be nice all week.

Oh, and there's a football game that will be played on Thursday.

2014 Gamecock Football Prediction

Ok, campers. We are at T-minus six days and counting to the kickoff of the South Carolina Gamecocks 2014 season. As I've done in years past, I'm going to give you a game-by-game prediction for the entire season before it starts.

However, before I get into this year, I'm going to recap my previous predictions, just so you can see how they shook out. All numbers exclude the bowl game. I'm just talking about the regular season.

2011: My prediction was 11-1 . Actual result was 10-2.

2012: My prediction 10-2. Actual result was 10-2.

2013: My prediction was 11-1. Actual result was 10-2.

So, with the exception of 2012, I have a track record of being one game too many too optimistic. I guess that's probably true, as I freely admit my bias towards the Gamecocks. Anyway, here's my 2014 season prediction, for whatever it's worth.

8/28 Texas A&M vs. South Carolina

This game will be the kickoff of the entire college football season. It's a Thursday night game, so the entire college football world will have it's eyes on this game. TAMU will come in ranked at #21, and the Gamecocks will come in ranked #9. This will be a great test right out of the gate for both teams. It's a conference game, so there isn't any tune-up game in week one to work out the kinks. Both teams need to hit the ground running to be successful.

We know that TAMU will have a good offense. Coach Sumlin likes to throw the ball around a lot, so we'll really see how good our secondary is (or isn't) in the first game. Having said that, I think this is going to be a game that has become somewhat of a normal recipie for a Gamecock victory under Spurrier. When confronted with an opponent who likes to throw the ball most of the time and use tempo, look for the South Carolina offense to really grind the clock with a heavy dose of running the ball. I think South Carolina will win the time of possession battle, keep the TAMU offense off the field, and wear down the TAMU defense. The rushing attack will be interspersed with Dylan Thompson throwing some deep balls to keep the Aggie defense honest, but in the end, I see this being a solid win for South Carolina. A&M will be starting a new QB, so look for our defense to try and force some mistakes.

South Carolina 1-0

9/6 East Carolina vs. South Carolina

Once again, the Gamecocks will face a team that likes to thrown the ball a lot, however there will be less talent on the ECU compared to TAMU. I think the Gamecocks will play fairly conservatively, keeping the ball on the ground and controlling the tempo of the game.

South Carolina 2-0

9/13 Georgia vs. South Carolina

This game. It's always big. Barring some crazy injuries to one of the teams, this game will be a dead heat in Vegas. Big implications here. Both teams will probably come in undefeated, which makes it a top ten match-up. ESPN College Gameday will probably be here for this game.

Both teams will try to run the ball, and Georgia will certainly have success doing so with their big horse in the backfield. This is already set for the 3:30 CBS game, so it's going to be a day game. I'd prefer a night game, but the atmosphere will be electric anyway. I think this one is going to come down to a turnover or two, because these teams are so evenly matched. You could really pick this one either way, but since the game is being played in Columbia, I'm going to take the home team in  a very close game.

South Carolina 3-0

9/20 South Carolina at Vanderbilt

This will be the first road game of the season for South Carolina, and this I'll actually be making this trip. I've been meaning to cross Vanderbilt off my list of SEC stadiums to visit, so I'll be doing that for this game. (Only Knoxville and Missouri will remain on my list in the SEC East.) Vanderbilt is plucky, has gotten better over the years, but so has South Carolina. I think South Carolina will go into their first road game with some confidence having edged past Georgia (or alternatively, fired up having lost to Georgia). Either way, I think South Carolina wins by two scores in Nashville.

South Carolina 4-0

9/27 Missouri vs. South Carolina

Revenge will be on the minds of the Missouri Tigers, since South Carolina absolutely broke their heart last year in a 2OT game, that culminated in a missed Missouri field goal. I don't know how good Mizzou will be this year. No one really predicted them to be good last year, but they were. I think that maybe Mizzou will come down to earth a little, and I think that the South Carolina defense will get the best of Matty Mauk. I predict two INTs for the Gamecock defense to set up short fields for the offense.

South Carolina 5-0

10/4 South Carolina at Kentucky

The second road game takes the Gamecocks to Lexington, Kentucky to take on the Wildcats. This ain't basketball, so South Carolina wins easily.

South Carolina 6-0

10/18 Furman vs. South Carolina

Spurrier won't let the team lose focus against Furman. He's undefeated in his career against FCS teams for a reason - he treats every game the same. Furman won't be any different. Look for USC to get an early lead, and then take out all the starters in an effort to avoid any injuries. Big game next week on The Plains.

South Carolina 7-0

10/25 South Carolina at Auburn

This will be the toughest game of the year so far. I would rank Auburn on par (or slightly better than Georgia) and when you throw in the fact that it will be on The Plains, this game has trouble written all over it. South Carolina has never beaten Auburn since joining the SEC, and I don't think this will be the game that snaps that streak. I think the Auburn rushing attack will be relentless, and ultimately, too much for the Gamecocks to handle. Unless Auburn makes some big mistakes they win this one.

South Carolina 7-1

11/1 Tennessee vs. South Carolina

This will be a revenge game for South Carolina. Had the Gameocks not lost to Tennessee last year, they would have gone to Atlanta. However, the clunker of a game in Knoxille last year had the Gamecocks watching the SEC championship game like the rest of us - on TV. Now, I look for the Gamecocks to pounce on Tennessee and extract vengeance.

South Carolina 8-1

11/15 South Carolina at Florida

I think Georgia will still only have one loss at this point (to South Carolina), so this will be the chance for the Gamecocks to punch their ticket to Atlanta with a win. We did exactly that in 2010 behind Lattimore and Garcia. I don't know what this Florida team is really going to look like, but I know the Florida defense is going to be nasty. This could be a low-scoring slugfest, which suits Muschamp just fine. While I'd really like to pick this as a win, my head says that Florida will hold serve at home behind the Gator faithful. I think South Carolina will make a few crucial mistakes and lose by one score.

South Carolina 8-2

11/22 South Alabama vs. South Carolina

The Gamecocks come home for a game against an FBS opponent this week. Coming off a loss to Florida and looking ahead to Clemson, they'll need it. A workmanlike win that should see lots of time for the backups.

South Carolina 9-2

11/29 South Carolina vs. Clemson

Look y'all. Clemson had the best chance to beat us (for a long while) last year and the year before that. Two years ago, Carolina started Thomson as a backup (without Lattimore), and beat Clemson up in Death Valley. Last year, Clemson had a great team, but still couldn't win. This year, Dylan Thompson returns to Death Valley to see if he can be one of the few Gamecock QBs to win two games in Death Valley.

He will. The streak will continue. Six in a row.

South Carolina 10-2

Post-Season/Final Thoughts

I'm not sure if 6-2 will be enough to win the East. I could see Georgia losing only one game. Heck, I could see Florida losing only one conference game. All I can tell you is that which ever team wins seven games will take the division title. I think seven is the magic number. If South Carolina finds a way to slip past Auburn or Florida on the road, then I think we'll get to Atlanta. I just don't think we can lose both of those games and make it to the Georgia Dome at the end of the year. That will be somewhat disappointing, but 10-2 with a sixth straight win over Clemson is enough to keep this Gamecock fan very happy.

I'm Busy - Go Visit My Favorite Food/Beer/Grilling Blog

Had a full day of litigation and transactional work, but being busy is a good problem to have.

Lots of things going on, so the blog will be light today. Don't worry, there will be lots of content upcoming, as I have to do my traditional Gamecock Football Prediction Post. I also have a few posts in mind, but the real trick these days is finding the time to actually get them down.

Meanwhile, go over to one of my favorite food/beer/grilling blogs on the interwebz, and check out what Mike is doing.

Here's a teaser:

Can you tell why I like his blog so much? Mike's pretty much the go-to guy for grilling, beer, and photography. I'm pretty good on the grill, but I'm absolutely horrible behind the camera.

American Journalist Executed - What Is Our Response?

In the wake of an American journalist being publicly executed by ISIS, I thought of this:

What will be the response from the United States today when one of our citizens is publicly slaughtered by a foreign power that has wrought so much death and misery on others?

What should our response be?

100k Pageviews

Just last night, this little rambling blog o' mine broke the 100,000 pageview barrier. I know that's not that much of an accomplishment for most blogs, but it's pretty big for a small-timer like me.

Therefore, I wanted to say thanks to everyone out there who stops by to read my musings from time to time. I started this blog on a lark,  (at the suggestion of my wife) and I've found that I've really enjoyed it.

In addition to helping me sharpen my thoughts about things, I've felt that I've had to be more involved with current events to stay up on blogging. I've certainly learned more than I've taught.

It has been wonderful to make some connections with other really talented and smart bloggers who I've had the opportunity to meet in person. I am looking forward to continuing to keep the blog rolling indefinitely. If there's anything you, as a reader, would like to see more (or less of) let me know. I'm always interested in improvement.

Evening Open Thread

Talk about whatever you like.

Journalist Thought Foam Earplugs Were Rubber Bullets

Can you identify this?

In what is now exhibit number 8,465,786,251 in our continuing saga of how journalists know absolutely nothing about anything remotely related to firearms, an intrepid reporter covering the Ferguson riots thought some foam earplugs were rubber bullets.

Is it asking too much for a journalist to have some basic competence in firearm knowledge? Am I reaching for the stars here?

Hey guys? I think Russia and Ukraine are at war.

I was going to try and make a joke, but there's not really anything funny about this.

Ukraine said its artillery partly destroyed a Russian armoured column that entered its territory overnight and said its forces came under shellfire from Russia on Friday in what appeared to be a major military escalation between the ex-Soviet states.

Yeah...armored columns going "poof" tend to indicate something more than a minor disagreement. I wonder what Fred Thompson's character in The Hunt for Red October would say about this.

Argument Clinic - Open Thread

Do you want to have just one argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?

Open thread. Argue about whatever you like.

Newberry Man Married to Four Different Women - All at the Same Time

Newberry County Sheriff James Lee Foster said between 1988 and 2013 Pixley engaged in a “matrimonial crime spree” and married four different women without the benefit of divorcing any previous wives.

Why would he want to do such a thing?

Protip from Permanent Press: Having one wife at time is probably a good guideline to follow - for your own protection.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2014/08/13/3617691/sheriff-newberry-county-man-engaged.html?sp=/99/205/&ihp=1#storylink=cpy

Your AR-15 is dangerous and unusual, and isn't protected by the Second Amendment!

So says a federal judge, anyway. This was a case where Maryland banned ownership of certain rifles in thewake of the Sandy Hook shooting. Among the long list of banned rifles were AR-15s and AK-47s.

Naturally, this law was challenged on Constitutional grounds. However, the judge held that these types of rifles were not protected by the Second Amendment, because...get this...the AR-15 is dangerous and unusual.

Upon review of all the parties’ evidence, the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right, and is inclined to find the weapons fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual.

(emphasis mine.)

Wait. How did "dangerous" become a disqualifying factor? All rifles are kind of dangerous, if you ask me. That's kind of the point though, isn't it? If a rifle isn't at least a little dangerous, it's not really worth having, is it? I don't even get this "dangerous" thing. The danger of a weapon has almost everything to do with the person holding the weapon, and very little to do with the weapon itself.

Moving on to the real part, this judge ruled that the AR-15 is "unusual". I'm not sure how you would call the most popular rifle in America "unusual". That's just stupid. This is an example of Judge that had already reached a conclusion and simply wrote an opinion that ended up where she wanted it to.

Robin Williams: All Too Ordinary

You probably have already seen the news yesterday that Robin Williams died in what appears to be a suicide. Obviously, the man was a legendary comedian and actor. Whatever word you want to use: genius, icon, force of nature, etc. Robin Williams was it. Having the ability to stand up in front of a group of people all by yourself and make them laugh is a terribly hard thing to do, and he did it with ease.

He also played serious roles, which is something that most comedians attempt, but few succeed at. His roles in Good Will Hunting, Dead Poet's Society, and August Rush were all great characters in which he didn't play his typical comedic role.

Even some of his comedic roles had depth to them. For instance, on the surface, Good Morning Vietnam allowed Williams to have fun with his character, but the movie also addressed the more serious and darker side of war. (As an aside, this is my favorite scene from that movie.)

Although everyone will likely be writing something along the lines of what I just wrote and remembering their favorite scenes or bits, it's important to remember that this extraordinary man was afflicted with depression, which is all too common.

For some unknown reason, even though Williams was capable of giving so much joy and laughter to millions of people throughout his career, there was something dark inside him that he couldn't escape. It's important to remember that there are so many ordinary people out there who face this same pain every day. People die from depression, and although their deaths don't make the newscasts, their deaths are no less tragic.

Accordingly, while we should take this moment to celebrate and remember the extraordinary work of a man who was a true one-of-a-kind, we should also remember that the depression that he suffered from is all too ordinary.

What's the Geotechnical Term For "Really Bad Idea"?

I'm a lawyer by trade, so I don't really try to opine on engineering matters. Even though I'm not an engineer, I don't think that building a dam in Mosul was a very good idea. Here's why. Apparently, the dam in Mosul is built on:

“a foundation of soluble soils that are continuously dissolving, resulting in the formation of cavities and voids underground that place the dam at risk for failure.”

Right. Continuously dissolving soil. What the hell does that mean? Is that the technical term for quicksand?

I think the geotechnical term for this is: Constructed in one of the worst possible places to locate a dam. Not being an engineering type, I sent this article over to a friend of mine who is actually a structural engineer. His response?

"Sounds like a big dam problem. " 

Indeed.

Really Sad News: Rhett Wolfe Passed Away

A link to his obituary is here, and there is a piece in The State, as well. I knew Rhett professionally and personally. He was a wonderful man who will be greatly missed.

Rest in peace.

Princess Diana's Shotgun

Happy Friday.

Did you know Princess Diana had a shotgun?

It was a wedding present. It's a Westley Richards, which is a bespoke shotgun and rifle maker. Notice the engraved date? That's her wedding date. Pretty good gift if you ask me.

Thoughts on Halbig, the ACA, and Suing the President

Had an interesting post bring up some thoughts over at Brad's blog. This is what got my train of thought rolling:

"I think what he [The President] did was react to criticism and complaints, and try to make the implementation less onerous and painful to those complaining, or likely to complain. To give the law a chance to start working, if only partially. Whether he had the authority to postpone implementation of parts of the law is something I don’t know enough to judge." -Brad

Complaints and criticism of a law do not convey authority to the executive branch to delay enforcement of existing law. I hope that's a fairly non-controversial statement. If you disagree with that proposition, then you'll be happy to know that in a Caskey Administration, I may choose to simply delay enforcement of the capital gains tax, or delay enforcement of the minimum wage laws. How does that sound? Not so great, right?

The executive (on multiple occasions) has unilaterally delayed the enforcement of the employer mandate. That's a fact. No part of the ACA allows this.

I think it's fairly obvious that he did it solely for political purposes, but I would certainly concede that to be my opinion. Nevertheless, the motive for delaying enforcement of the law is irrelevant for our purposes here.

Some more history: The Republicans do not like this law. They have never liked this law. Not one Republican voted for this law. In fact, the law had to be pushed through Congress using arcane rules to avoid a conference committee after the election of Scott Brown, on the platform of opposing the ACA.

Congress basically ignored the will of the people and did an end run around the normal procedures of legislation to produce this law. It's now the law, after surviving a constitutional challenge ending at SCOUTS, on a 5-4 decision.

So here we sit. The supporters of this law are now so dedicated to holding onto it, they are willing to chuck principles aside to keep it.

For instance, people are willing to simply let the executive pick and choose what parts of the law he wants to selectively enforce so as to not subject the public to the full force of the law as written - which would arouse the anger of the public, and be politically negative for Democrats. This is short term political gain, for long term bad precedent. It's bad precedent to allow the executive to selectively enforce any law. If you think selective enforcement of the law is OK, then you really haven't thought it through.

Additionally, the Halbig suit: The relevant statutory language says that only state exchanges get the subsidy. It's clear. That's what the text of the law says. However, if you do that, then the law essentially collapses, as a significant number of states didn't set up exchanges.

Obviously, the people who wrote the law never considered that states might simply refuse to set up exchanges. (To quote Rick Perry: "oops") The non-lawyer defenders of the ACA are now reduced to saying "Hey, man, it was a typo" while their lawyers are saying "Ummmm yeah....this text is ambiguous, so we need to rely on Chevron Deference to the IRS in it's rule-making authority here" (What the Fourth Circuit did.) To me, the first argument is laughable, and the second argument is weak to the point of being almost laughable.

Now, Brad may not have heard about this lawsuit, but people have been talking about it for a long time. Pretty much since the law was passed, and as Nancy Pelosi said "We learned what was in it". This isn't new.

Halbig only became a problem now that lots of states have refused to set up exchanges. But normally, issues like Halbig aren't a problem, because the executive just goes back to Congress and they pass a new law to make some changes. However, the executive doesn't want to do that, because that would mean negotiating with the Republicans, and that's apparently not on the table.

Accordingly, rather than openly acknowledge the problem and concede that the law needs additional legislation, you have the executive defending a tenuous legal position and hoping the Courts will hold their nose and bail him out, since he doesn't want to involve the legislative branch in the legislative process and involve the will of the people again.

Keep in mind, Halbig isn't a constitutional question. It's simple statutory construction. The Supreme Court has pretty consistently ruled that statutory construction pretty much starts and ends with WHAT DOES THE FOX TEXT SAY? We write down laws with words, with a commonly understood meaning for a reason, sports-fans.

It's the job of courts to read statutes as written. If they need fixing rather than reading, that's the job of Congress. I really don't think that SCOTUS is going to bail out the administration on this. I can bore you with some law on this, but just take my word for it that this isn't a controversial issue when you boil it down to the statutory construction. If SCOTUS grants cert, my guess is they'll uphold the statute as written and basically tell the government to go fix it on their own - using the legislative process. That's just my guess. Anything's possible. (By the way If you don't believe judges should be originalist/textualist, then I don't see how you can also want them to be life-tenured & unelected, but that's a whole 'nother debate.)

Now....why are the Republicans doing this? They want the law enforced as written to highlight how horrible it is and to highlight the bad precedent being set here. Ulysses S. Grant said: "I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution."

That's basically the premise here. You want the ACA? Then take it. Take it good and hard.

Having said that, I think the Congressional suit against the President is stupid. Congress doesn't need to sue the President. Congress is the most powerful branch of government. They are just refusing to flex the muscle. It's called the power of the purse. (Stuff Madison Said, Vol. II)

"But as Mr. Obama’s second term nears an end, some experts say the president’s words were a fantasy."

...says The New York Times in discussing the failure of the Obama Administration to deliver on it's promises of high speed rail.

I think this would apply to a lot of things he said.

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit Twitter followers!

What Happened to Bubba Watson?

I follow golf fairly causally, which means I pretty much know who wins the major tournaments.

Sometimes I'll watch a little golf, but that's usually because there's nothing else on. However, I know Bubba Watson, and I always kind of thought of him as a madcap, hangin' loose, fun guy. I mean, he is one of the "Golf Boys" who make funny music videos. He's even got the actual General Lee from The Dukes of Hazzard. Heck, when your name is "Bubba" you can't really be that uptight. I think that's a rule somewhere.

Accordingly, I was really surprised when Will Vereen brought this to my attention via Twitter.

I find Bubba Watson extremely unlikable. http://t.co/5mq10frT6o
— Will Vereen (@wolverine280) August 7, 2014

Apparently, Bubba was too uptight to participate in a long drive competition during a practice round? This doesn't sound like the Bubbba Watson I know. That sounds like the behavior of an Assistant Principal at a middle school.

What's changed in Bubba? I don't know, but I have to agree with Will. I find this version of Bubba Watson unlikable as well. Someone needs to tell Bubba: "Lighten up, Francis."

NCAA Reverses Long-Standing Prohibition on Cookie Cake Icing

Over the weekend the University of South Carolina self-reported 22 violations of NCAA rules. One of the violations were impermissible iced decorations on a cookie cakes that were given to recruits.

See, it's OK to give recruits cookie cakes, but if you put some icing on that cookie cake, then it becomes a violation of NCAA rules. Obviously, that rule makes total sense. We can't have cookie cakes and icing, because that would just devolve into chaos.

However, in a stunning reversal of it's long-standing prohibition on iced cookie-cakes, the NCAA has informed South Carolina that icing on cookie cakes will "no longer be a violation".

You can all sleep easy.

Top Five Venn Diagrams

If you hadn't noticed the Google Doodle today, it's John Venn's 180th birthday. To celebrate, I'm giving you my top five favorite Venn diagrams.

1. Parenting.

2. Social behaviors.

3. Literary.

4. Cooking.

5. Religious.

Not Quite the Red Baron

...but still, it's got some style.

Fly by and talk about whatever you like - whether you've got style or not.

Funny Litigation Correspondence

Happy Friday.

For all the law-geeks out there, here's something that's probably only humorous if you're a lawyer.

I thought it was pretty good.

Women on "The View" Have Clarity on Guns and a Woman's Self-Defense

Take a look at this ad. Then read the rest of this post below the jump. Lots to unpack here.

Done? Ok, go below the jump.

Same Sex Couples Apply For Marriage License in Greenville County

Remember my post about the 4th Circuit's decision that overturned Virginia's same-sex marriage ban? If you don't you can see it here.

Well, it didn't take long for same-sex couples in South Carolina to read the tea-leaves. Yesterday, couples lined up for marriage licences in Greenville County. My guess is that they know they'll be denied, and this will form the basis for their suit, which would likely be successful.

Wednesday Open Thread

Not feeling so great. I'll get something up here later.

Two Recent Civil Rights Victories and Implications for South Carolina

Last Thursday, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia struck down what was essentially a blanket ban on carrying a handgun in DC. [Opinion here]

Basically, DC let you have a handgun in your home for self-defense, but DC had a longstanding ban on possession of a handgun outside of your home. The relevant part of the opinion is here:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional.

Frankly, I'm not sure if this means you can openly carry in DC or not. The ruling doesn't say what an individual can do - it only says that the District cannot enforce it's existing laws until the District sets up a Constitutional licensing system. I think to be safe, you would probably not want to carry openly. To me, that's just asking for unnecessary heat.

Also, note: this opinion doesn't touch the specific bans on carrying into specific places like the Capitol grounds, government buildings, etc. Those prohibitions are still legal.  Finally, this ruling prohibits the District from applying the law to non-residents based solely on the fact that they are non-residents. Once a licensing system is set up, I think this will change.

In an update, the District is asking for a stay of this ruling while they either appeal to the next level and/or work to put together a licencing system.

ALSO...IN OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS VICTORIES

Yesterday, a three judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld (2-1) the trial court's decision to strike down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage. [Opinion here]

This is important because the 4th Circuit covers South Carolina. That means there is now established precedent in our federal circuit for invalidating state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage. I would be very surprised if Plaintiffs from South Carolina are not already in the process of bringing an action. Based on this ruling, I would be surprised if South Carolina's law survives.

To sum up, same-sex marriage advocates and gun-rights advocates both had good days in court, while governments seeking to abridge the rights of citizens had bad days in court.

More freedom is a good thing. As Instapundit says, "in my ideal world, happily married gay couples would have closets full of assault weapons."

With these two decisions, we're one or two steps closer to that now.

Rise and Grind - Obama's Personalized Golf Balls

Happy Monday. Rise and grind.

After the birth of our daughter, I took the rest of the week off from blogging. However, I can't stay on permanent vacation, so I'll be back to at least one post a day here. I'll start out with something simple and light, and we'll work up to some more meaty topics as time goes by.

Apparently, a guy fond one of President Obama's lost golf balls and put a picture up of it. It's cool that President Obama has some personalized golf balls [picture at link], but it isn't that surprising.

All the same, it makes me wonder if other Presidents did the same. I'd love to see a collection. Ike played a lot of golf. I wonder if he personalized his golf balls.

Announcing Margaret "Molly" Lamb Caskey!

Normally, I try to avoid the "This is what I did today" type of blog posts, because I know that no one really cares about what I personally did today. However, I am breaking my own rule because (1) it's my blog, I can do whatever I want; and (2) I am proud to celebrate the birth of my second child, Margaret "Molly" Lamb Caskey!

Molly was born this afternoon and is happy, healthy, and perfect. My lovely wife is doing splendidly, and our two year old son is thrilled to be a big brother.

Left to Right: Henry, Mary, Molly

Pretty big day 'round these parts.

Federal Appellate Court Rules Most ACA Subsides are Illegal.

Oh, sure. Interpret the actual language of the statute. That's crazy.

Basically what happened here is the law says subsidies can only be paid to policies written on state exchanges. Obama then rewrote the law to include the federal exchange because...he wanted to.

This Court said ruling said such subsidies can be granted only to those people who bought insurance in an Obamacare exchange run by an individual state or the District of Columbia — not on the federally run exchange HealthCare.gov.

Expect some shrieking from the left in 3....2....1...

How To Have An Awesome Backyard Summer Party

SERIOUS BACKYARD STYLE: BBQ, beer, and a jazz band.

Powerful Ad Warning Drivers to Slow Down

It's really well done, with an outside the box kind of premise.

"Hey Jude" by Wilson Pickett and Duane Allman

Friday afternoon open thread.

Relax and unwind.

h/t Rock N Roll Breakfast

Uber Comes to South Carolina, Bringing Controversy

Uber is here in South Carolina, but state regulators aren't on board.

I'm a free-market guy, so I'm in favor of letting people engage in commerce without the state getting involved. I'm not 100% sure how the liability insurance works, but if it's a good product people will use it. If it's not, people won't use it. If you're not worried about Uber being "regulated" by the State of South Carolina, should you be free to use them? Is that a crime?

Also, how much of this controversy is simply disguised protectionism of the taxi industry?

I'm content to let the market sort it out. Anyone out there strongly for or against regulating Uber drivers?

Commercial Airliner Shot Down In Ukraine

BREAKING: Adviser to Ukraine's Interior Minister says passenger plane carrying 295 shot down.
— The Associated Press (@AP) July 17, 2014

Not good. It sounds like people are pointing fingers at Ukrainian separatists (the pro-Russian folks) within Ukraine. However, there's going to be some finger-pointing for a little while.

However, I expect Putin to come out and say that he's now compelled to go into Ukraine and stop all of this, since Kiev clearly cannot control their own people.

I just hope there wasn't an Austrian Archduke on that airplane.

"A 27-year-old medical professional named Shaneen Allen drove peacefully out of her home state of Pennsylvania and into neighboring New Jersey. Today, she faces the prospect of three years in prison."

Like I always say, be careful when you leave America.

“So far, Russia has failed to take any of the steps that I have mentioned. In fact, Russia’s support for the separatists and violations of Ukraine’s sovereignty has continued.”

So, President Obama is gonna up the sanctions. Get real tough, so to speak. I guess a few travel restrictions didn't really get their attention, huh? I'm sure that this new sanction will be super-duper, tough.

NEW SANCTION: "The new measures will severely restrict access to American debt markets for the targeted companies."

Ooooooh, snap! We won't loan some Russian companies some money.

That's the kind of tough sanction that's sure to cripple the Russian Bear, because nothing says you're serious like refusing to finance your adversary. Hey, you! Quit beating up on that small kid, or I'll...I'll refuse to loan you money.

Yup. I'm sure that this set of sanctions will work. Seriously, you guys.

Is This a Thing?

Todd Kincannon is suing the Office of Disciplinary Counsel in federal court.

Is this a thing? It could be. Or is it just a stunt?

I don't know Todd Kincannon, other than what I've seen on Twitter. He certainly pushes the limits of propriety in his political speech. But not everything has to be everyone's cup of tea. He seems to relish political confrontation.

However, filing a complaint in federal court isn't something you just do for kicks or as a stunt.

Before forming any sort of opinion at all, I'll be interested to see what the defendants' response is to the complaint.

via Insty

Rolling Stone Confirms That They Don't Know Jack About Guns

The magazine that is the authoritative source about firearms has a new piece out about the "The 5 Most Dangerous Guns in America".

No, it's not Guns & Ammo. It's Rolling Stone. I mean, when you think of expert analysis on firearms, you automatically (or at least semi-automatically) think of Rolling Stone. Or am I alone here?

Anyway, the firearm experts over at Rolling Stone have come up with a list of the most dangerous types of firearms. I'm sure this was published after extensive research and serious thought. You ready? They're about to drop some knowledge on you. Seriously, they're about to tell you "These firearms are causing the most harm." You ready? There is a lot of knowledge (and some music) below the jump.

Spurrier Interviews at SEC Media Days 2014

Here you go.



 Enjoy.

"I didn't care if people stole the newspaper. I just wanted them to read it."

That was Brad Warthen's best line from his interview on the radio last night.

He was discussing what motivated him while at The State, and he had this line to make the point that he didn't care if his opinions pleased the newspaper's advertisers or not. He didn't write things or take positions to try and sell newspapers. He just wanted to be read. (I can relate to that in a way.)

I thought that was the best line of the program.

Federal Judge Continues Blogging

“We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark. The real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.”

A Federal Judge refuses to quit blogging.

Good for him. We could use more men who aren't afraid to step into the light.

Friday Cocktail Open Thread

Talk about whatever you like.

This Will Get You Ready For Some Football

If this doesn't get you up for some college football, you don't have a pulse.

New York Lefty Is Exposed to Guns and Finds He Kind of Digs Them

This post is for people who don't like guns. This post is for people who think that gun owners are idiots or hicks. This post is for people who think that gun owners are absolutely wacko.

Lots of y'all who read this blog are gun people. I'm not making this post for you. Go find another webpage. For instance, you gun folks might like this. (I did.)

I may be a New York lefty—with all the experiences, prejudices and attitudes that one would expect to come along with that, but I do NOT believe that we will reduce gun violence—or reach any kind of consensus—by shrieking at each other. Gun owners—the vast majority of them I have met—are NOT idiots. They are NOT psychos. They are not even necessarily Republican (New Mexico, by the way, is a Blue State). They are not hicks, right wing “nuts” or necessarily violent by nature. And if “we” have any hope of ever changing anything in this country in the cause of reason—and the safety of our children—we should stop talking about a significant part of our population as if they were lesser, stupider or crazier than we are.

You can read the whole thing here. Go do it.

SC Supreme Court Issues Opinion In Harrell vs. Attorney General

REVERSED! You can read the opinion here. I'll have comments later.

Why the President Isn't Visiting the Border

In case you were living under a rock the last week or so, you might have noticed that we have a bit of...how shall I put this? We have a weapons-grade disaster on the US/Mexican border.

And people are calling on President Obama to visit the border. I guess this is because they want President Obama to take some sort of action, come up with a plan, or somehow lead. But he's not really interested in going...and I'll tell you why.

He's voting present.

The President chilled in Denver playing pool yesterday. No big deal, it's not like he's got a busy job or anything.

If President Obama goes to the border, his base is going to expect him to declare that the illegal immigrant children aren't going to be deported. They want him to make some sort of executive pronouncement that these children are here to stay, and everyone in America is just going to have to deal with it. That's what the President's base expects.

But he can't really do that because the rest of America wants the President to close the damn border. The rest of America understands that we need to be compassionate to children, but the border has to be closed. And he doesn't want to do that.

So he's stuck between choices of either crossing his base or crossing the rest of America. Neither of those are palatable. So, he's doing neither. He's voting present.

So...the crisis will continue.

Did You Watch the World Cup Today?

Brazil went completely off the rails today.

Some Thoughts on Hobby Lobby and Why Liberals Fail at America

Now that the long holiday weekend is over, it's back to work. That meant I had a full day today, so no time for blogging until now. I haven't blogged much here on the Hobby Lobby case.

If you go over to Brad's post on that case,I probably wrote more over there than I have over here. In any event, I've covered the legal aspects of the case over there, and I don't really care to rehash that aspect. What I've been mulling over the weekend was the absolute freakout that the left had over the decision. Frankly, it doesn't seem that earth-shattering to me. What really puzzled me was all the hair-pulling, wailing, and gnashing of teeth. I saw all that and thought....really? Um, ok.

It puzzled me that people are aghast to discover a law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) protects religious freedom. The whole reason you pass a law like this is to protect religious freedom and give them accommodations. That's the whole point. But then, this upcoming point was made on Ace's podcast, and it bears repeating here, on this much less frequented corner of the internet, because it clarifies the issue.

The whole point of RFRA is to make special provisions, and to make accommodations with different beliefs. Because normally, the majority of a group finds it annoying to have to make these accommodations.

Accordingly, we passed a law about it - the RFRA. For instance: If a guy at your job site is a Muslim, then he may have to take a break three times a day to pray to Mecca. Obviously, not everyone gets this break. The rest of you guys have to keep digging the ditch. But to get along with the Muslim guy and be tolerant, we've decided, with RFRA, that we are going to respect that this guy has a belief system that isn't what everyone else's belief system is. Therefore, we're going to cut him some slack from the general rule that you don't get three breaks a day to pray in the direction of Mecca.

And for the most part, liberals are seeming fine with some of these special exceptions. But as soon as you have just one special exception that goes against their belief system, they want to crush people and impose their will on them. And then when you point out that the law also protects this religious group, all the liberals start yelling: "What the hell!, Now we're making laws for EVERY SINGLE RELIGIOUS GROUP?? It's going to be like ANARCHY here!" Well....that's kind of what the law says. What did you think the law said?

And that goes into the main point: One of the things that most people think was a good quality in liberals is that they wanted to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. I did. I kind of thought that it was a good thing that liberals at least thought about that problem a lot. They always seemed worried about a small group getting steamrolled by the conventions of the larger group.

But...it turns out that liberals don't really think about that. They don't really care about small groups having their own little exceptions if it the small group isn't part of their voting coalition. It was never about principle for liberals. For them, it's purely a transactional process for members of their voting coalition. LIberals are not fighting about the principle of the minority, because when it gets extended to a Christian, they're aghast, and they want to overturn the RFRA. They don't believe in the principle of protecting this religious minority. This whole thing has been very revealing for me.

I've seen liberals basically say that they don't support pluralism of viewpoints in general. They support specific exceptions and accommodations for people in their voting coalition - and that's it. It's not that liberals are principled and good people, they've just decided to do favors for people who vote like them.

And I hear these liberals say, If only these trouble-making Hobby Lobby Christians could be could be forced, somehow coerced by the government, to behave properly, then we wouldn't have these problems!

They fail at America.

Independence Day Open Thread

Unbroken to the End

Louis Zamperini, an Olympic distance runner and World War II veteran who survived 47 days on a raft in the Pacific after his bomber crashed, then endured two years in Japanese prison camps, has died. He was 97.

Full piece here.

How To Celebrate Independence Day In Columbia

If you're a South Carolinian, you're probably getting ready to celebrate our nation's birthday tomorrow, since South Carolina is the "most patriotic state in the country". Here's what you need to know if you're not sure how to celebrate in the "Famously Hot" southern-style.

MEAT: The Ole Timey Meat Market is where you should be going to get your whatever you'll be grilling or smoking this weekend. Did you know they have bacon wrapped sirloin steaks? This is where I always buy my brisket and pork butts. If you're looking for some of the harder to find cuts of meat, this is the first place to go.

FIREWORKS: Since you're already over on Rosewood for your meat, you're already right next to Casey's Fireworks, which is the best place to get fireworks in Columbia. They've been around since 1949, and they have something for everyone. Everything from sparklers to mortar shells. This is the only place you need to go for things that go bang.

SIDES: For all your other sides, (if you don't want to make them yourself) The Gourmet Shop has you covered. You can get everything from chicken salad to cheese, to wine, to cigars there.

Enjoy your Fourth of July weekend!

New York Health Insurers Request 20% Rate HIke

A 20% increase over last year. I thought Obamacare was supposed to stop this. It's almost like this law wasn't really well thought out.

Kennedy's Concurring Opinion Explained In a One-Act Play

While waiting on hold (with a government office) I had time to compose this short play, which I call: Kennedy’s Concurring Opinion. I hope you all like it.

HHS: Welcome to our office here at HHS. Here, drink some coffee.

Hobby Lobby: I only drink decaf coffee, but I see you have some of that. Since you have that available, I’ll take that.

HHS: Decaf coffee is for other people, not you! Drink this regular coffee! Do it!

Hobby Lobby: Look, you’ve got plenty of decaf coffee for everyone. It’s right there. Can I just have some decaf?

HHS: We get to decide what kind of coffee you get. Now drink this regular coffee!

Hobby Lobby: Hey…I didn’t come here to argue. If this is going to be a problem, I’ll just leave.

HHS: No. You’re not going anywhere. You’re going to sit here and drink some coffee, and it’s going to be regular!

Hobby Lobby: Ummmm….can I speak to your supervisor or something?

Supervisor Kennedy: What’s the problem here?

HHS: This person won’t drink the regular coffee. They’re demanding decaf!

Supervisor Kennedy: What’s this marked “Decaf" right here?

HHS: That’s decaf coffee.

Supervisor Kennedy: Looks like you have plenty of decaf. And didn’t I just see you give decaf coffee to the last person?

HHS: Yeah, but the last person was wearing a suit, and this guy is sitting here wearing a t-shirt!

Supervisor Kennedy: Seems kind of arbitrary if you ask me. You’re telling me that you made all this coffee, and made both decaf and regular, so as to give it to people who came to your office, but you don’t want to accommodate this particular guy’s choice?

HHS: Yes.

Supervisor Kennedy: Give this guy some decaf.

/scene

My Latest Fig Post - Farm to Table at City Roots

You can read the whole thing here.