The Crawfish apologizes for the tardiness and brevity of this week’s edition. Thanks to our local Glo-Bull Warming (thanx, Algore!) and some incorrect original installation, our television/internet/phone service was completely out for three days. Mrs. Crawfish was stuck at home for three days with two junior crustaceans and no cable or internet………not good!
A federal judge has ruled that Obamacare’s individual mandate is indeed unConstitutional, and since it is a key part of the whole bill, then the whole bill is unConstitutional. Since the judge upheld the Constitution, the Obama Administration immediately called him an “activist” judge, a term which is usually reserved for judges who make decisions that violate the Constitution because it doesn’t meet their political desires. This judge, however, used the actual words of Madison and even Obama himself in his brilliantly written decision. Then again, anyone who believes in the actual words of the Constitution is an “extremist” according to this Administration and the liberal media. They do love to completely twist the English language, don’t they?
How can anyone really take Democratic politicians seriously on Constitutional matters? One of their senior Senators, who has a history of opposing the 2nd Amendment and just about every other part of the Constitution, believes that the three branches of our government do not include the Judicial Branch. “We have a House. We have the Senate, and we have the President.” Upchuck Schumer, aka Chuckie the Gun Grabber…Constitutional moron.
Speaking of morons, we present (again) MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. Here’s his take on the unrest in Egypt: “Unrest in Egypt. Proving the Iraq war wasn`t needed, these protests in Egypt, as well as in Yemen and Tunisia, are all aimed at dictators supported by the U.S. The demonstrations have not yet turned anti-American, but they could. These are the events the Bush administration hoped to encourage by lying about weapons of mass destruction and invading Iraq.” Yep, “BLAME BUSH THE LYING BASTARD!” He actually believes that the Bush Administration WANTED an Iranian-style revolution in Egypt? Uh, Chris…Bush didn’t want Egypt to be run by a Sharia government, but your boy Obama does.
The Israelis know what’s going on in Egypt, and they know that the United States government is stabbing Mubarak in the back. Israel needs a stable Egypt that is not run my Islamic militants like the Muslim Brotherhood. Obama is handling this like the second coming of James Earl Carter. The only difference is that Carter was a dope who had no clue as to what he was doing and what the consequences would be. Obama is hoping that Egypt goes the way of Iran in 1979.
Mohammed ElBaradei is a former Nobel Prize winner. He also covered up for Iran’s nuke program and Saddam’s WMD programs for years. Now he is proclaiming that the Egyptian people are mandating that he and the Muslim Brotherhood form a new government. He also claims that the Muslim Brotherhood is in no way an extremist or terrorist organization. They only founded Hamas, assassinated Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel, and have carried out many attacks against Christians throughout Egypt. Their motto is: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Actually, The Crawfish agrees with ElBaradei, because that is not Islamic extremism. It is EXACTLY what that religion was designed to be when it was created by Mohammed the Pedophile.
This just in, the Obama Administration has lifted the banning of an Egyptian leader of the Muslim Brotherhood from entering the US. Coincidence, or do they expect him to be the next Egyptian Ambassador? Well, the Administration says it does see a role for the Muslim Brotherhood to play in the new Egyptian government.
It gets better. Did y’all know that the unrest in the muslim world is NOT caused by muslims? Nope, it is caused by GLOBAL WARMING! Al Gore’s cult really has lost their 3 remaining brain cells.
Soooooooo, as we really expected, the Corruptionois Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that stated, in effect, “Laws in the state of Illinois, especially when it comes to elections, do not mean what they say. They mean whatever the Democratic political machine of Chicago WANTS them to say.” The residency requirement in Chicago election law says that a candidate for city elected post must have resided in the city for the full year prior to the election. The state court of appeals said that since Rahm Emanuel had lived in DC and had rented out his home in Chicago (yes, OTHER people lived in that house, not the Emanuel family), that he had not actually resided in the city. Notice how the State Supremes worded their decision: “This court’s decision is based on the following and only on the following: (1) what it means to be a resident for election purposes was clearly established long ago, and Illinois law has been consistent on the matter since at least the 19th Century; (2) the novel standard adopted by the appellate court majority is without any foundation in Illinois law; (3) the Board’s factual findings were not against the manifest weight of the evidence; and (4) the Board’s decision was not clearly erroneous.” Yes, actually saying that the word “reside” means “to live in a place permanently or for an extended period” is a “novel standard”. The State Supremes believe that for 150 years the word has meant “owns property that other people live in”. If the state willfully violates its own election laws, then what are they doing in regard to federal election laws? Until they abide by their own laws, no Illinois ballot in any election involving any federal office should be counted.
I would go on a rant about Obamacare and the lies associated with it, but theblogprof does it soooo much better.
If y’all come across any weird/stoooopid/strange news stories that might be fodder for The Weekly Claw or The Weekend Claw, e-mail them to me at CrawfishsClaw@yahoo.com and I’ll consider ‘em. Yes, I will give you newshounds credit.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -James Madison
The Constitution of the United States