Thursday, December 19, 2013

Judicial Tyranny within the United States: Both at the Federal Level and at the State Level—North Dakota as an Example

If elected to Congress, I will not, under any circumstances, vote for present Speaker of the House John Boehner to be Speaker of the House. I call on every Republican primary candidate running in Texas Congressional District 19 to publicly (in writing) make the same pledge. It would not be a bad idea for every Republican candidate running for the House of Representatives to give the same pledge. See my post at on December 16, 2013 entitled “Speaker of the House John Boehner Attacks the Tea Party Again for Being Fiscally Responsible!”  

I like this political commercial!

Free e-book about the MURDER of the unborn

Competition is good for the economy and competition is good for the Republican Party!!! Competition keeps Congressmen committed to we the people!!! Primary Republicans who do not support the Constitution as written.


“North Dakota Government Tells Court: ‘There is No Right to Abortion’
by Steven Ertelt | Bismarck, ND | | 12/18/13

Every so often the government gets it right on abortion.

While the federal government and most states are fully prepared to push unlimited abortion on demand paid for at taxpayer expenses without any limits whatsoever, some governments still understand that human rights begin when human life begins—at conception, before birth. Such is the case with the state government of North Dakota.

The North Dakota Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday over a 2011 abortion law that was ruled unconstitutional by a district court judge earlier this year (That is, a State district court judge. This case, unlike so many others, is being argued in State court under State law. Or at least, they should be using State law!my addition).

Here’s how the rest played out:

Lawyers for the state, arguing in favor of the law which banned one of two drugs used in nonsurgical abortions, said the case must be interpreted by the intent of those who drafted the North Dakota Constitution. There was no right to an abortion in the state prior to the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision, said the state solicitor general.

The law’s opponents argued that it would illegally restrict abortion rights (There is no legal, constitutionalrightto MURDER an unborn child!my addition). They countered that the state constitution is an evolving, not static, document (Is that written into the State Constitution or is that parroting the nonsense put out by Leftists in relation to the federal Constitution?my addition) and that the U.S. Constitution overrides the attempt at restricting the practice (Sorry! The U.S. Constitution does not give anyone the rightto MURDER an unborn baby or anyone else!my addition).

House Bill 1297 required abortion-inducing drugs to only be provided by a licensed physician in their presence. Under the law a physician providing the drugs also would have to enter into a contract with another physician who would respond to any medical emergency stemming from use of the drugs.

East Central District Judge Wickham Corwin signaled his intent in April to rule against the state and in favor of the state’s lone abortion clinic following a trial in Fargo. In July Corwin released his decision striking down the law.

Solicitor General Doug Bahr, arguing for the state, told the justices the abortion debate clearly has been ongoing in the public for decades.

“We are in a court of law,” Bahr said. ‘The district court completely ignored (the law) (Unfortunately, there is nothing new about thatboth at the State level and the federal level!my addition).’

Bahr said in North Dakota abortion restrictions date back to territorial days in the 1870s and the law must be interpreted based on the intent of those who drafted the constitution in 1889.

‘There is no constitutional right to an abortion (in North Dakota),’ Bahr said.

He said this held true until the federal Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized the practice in the United States.

Justice Carol Kapsner asked Bahr whether or not the court is to ignore Article I, Section 23 of the state constitution. It says the state is a permanent part of the Union and the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land (And the U.S. Constitution is the Supreme law of the land! However, Supreme Court decisions ARE NOT the supreme law of the land! All one has to do is read and understand the U.S. Constitution to know this basic FACT! There are three lawsthat are listed as being supreme! NONE of the three includes decisions by the Supreme Court or any other court! Read and know the Constitution! It does wonders for your knowledge! If the writers of the Constitution wanted court decisions included as supreme law of the land, why was it not included with the other three?my addition).


Bahr reiterated the issue of intent. He also argued while the Supremacy Clause of the federal Constitution says a state can’t apply its laws to deny a person federal rights a state court doesn’t have to interpret its state constitution to protect the same rights in the federal Constitution (True! And there is no federal right to MURDER your unborn baby! If there is, please show it to me. Ive written a book on the Constitution and I have NOT seen such a provision! Enlighten me! Show me the provision!—my addition).

Bahr also said opponents’ complaint cited only state constitutional law, not federal law (Because there is no federal law!my addition). He said they had failed to prove that the state had ever provided the right to an abortion (Should be an easy decision by the North Dakota Supreme Court! What do you think?my addition).’”

City by city, county by county, State by State through the federal government, we need to end, once and for all, the barbaric evil practice of MURDERING our own unborn children!

It is time to replace every member of Congress who in anyway supported Obamacare and replace them with 100% pro-life conservatives who will boldly fight this evil Administration and the usurping federal court judges who are pro-murder in their decisions!

If not now, when? If not us, who?

E-book available: Why Uphold Marriage?

We need to keep supporting and working for PRO-LIFE, PRO-TRADITIONAL FAMILY candidates and representatives at all levels of government.

Never get complacent!

Never give-up!


You will know them by their words and deeds!

Matthew 12: 35-37 (NIV)

“A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Matthew 11: 19b (NIV)

“But wisdom is proved right by her deeds.”

This question was at the side of an article I posted on

“Debating Abortion: Should You Use Pro-Choice or Pro-Abortion?”

My answer: Neither! We should name it by what it is! PRO-MURDER!

Texas Senator John Cornyn is already running ads for his reelection in 2014! We will not be fooled! John Cornyn voted for cloture to FUND Obamacare! John Cornyn owns Obamacare!

John Cornyn owns Obamacare! REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!

John Cornyn owns Obamacare! REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!

John Cornyn owns Obamacare! REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!




1) Obamacare is immoral!

2) Obamacare is illegal!

3) Obamacare is unconstitutional!

4) the American people do NOT want Obamacare implemented!

5) If you vote for Obamacare funding, YOU OWN Obamacare!

6) Obamacare is a vote for, vote against issue in 2014!

7) He/she represents US not the Party and not the President!

Watch this video on Great Britain hospitals!