Mr. Dorman:

Not if you look at Snyder V. Phelps, where supposedly conservative Alito was the only justice unable to comprehend the meaning of the 1st Amendment in the 8-1 decision.

That’s one of the reasons I have never never understood the propensity of some conservatives to vote for third party candidates.

You’re just not thinking things through all the way. Do you actually think that SCOTUS is protecting the Constitution? It matters not one whit if Obama turns the high court irretrievably to the left–because the final destruction of the Constitution is already a foregone conclusion based on unchangeable precedent. At the federal level the ratchet turns inexorably leftward. The real problem with a third party is that they would quickly become as corrupt as the existing two. Look at what happened to the Tea Party Patriots if you doubt.

The only (slim) remaining hope is state nullification. If the states can manage to reassert their sovereignty there is hope. The prospects here are bleak, however. The federal government long ago seized supremacy that was never codified in the Constitution. They will not cede it willingly.

Yep. It’s pretty much over.

It’s because they’re bigots who can’t handle the diversity of having such a unique institution. Leftists, “Progressives”, whatever they’re calling themselves these days, are everything they claim to hate.

Because their minds are under the sway of the evil one. Our foe here is bigger than man. He the purveyor of deceit.

Now professors don’t even talk about the sanctity of the university and its principles; its main principle seem to be the defense of politically-correct thinking and the suppression of anything that smacks of its opposite.

The “long march through the institutions” has been nowhere more successful than in the Halls of Ivy. There’s a moral in there: If you oppose a principle, it’s less effective to combat the principle directly than it is to replace its defenders and practitioners.

That this was possible in the case of freedom of expression suggests that we relied upon a concentration of forces in assailable points. Note that it has not occurred in the case of firearms. Undertanding the reasons for the contrast could be critical to our hopes for a renaissance of freedom.

Why do you say this? I thought they were in a privately chartered bus.

anonymousse

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-shaming-lindsey-stone-jon-ronson

In the meantime, identify the SJW’s involved in these internet political mobs. Doxx them online and make their lives miserable.

And more:
** Obama: “They Bring a Knife… We Bring a Gun”
** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
** Obama to supporters: “I’m itching for a fight.”
Obama to UAW mob: “Fight for me!”
For the record because, civility.

Wonkette thinks referring to the record is is acting stupidly and will call you by name on it because, pompous, sanctimonious, condescending, holier than thou and because,
doesn’t have to worry about a HIJAB … for the moment.