Monday, April 25, 2005

Some More Reasons to Hate the ACLU

Recently I have gotten some email from supporters and even members of the ACLU here in Arizona and elsewhere complaining that I only focus on the “unintended” negative impact of the ACLU on the American landscape. When I asked these “people” for examples they could provide none and since they are just mindless socialists following the lead of their “home office” I will not publish their names and/or email addresses at this time. I however in this post will publish just a few examples of the “evil” that the ACLU does. I have collected these over the short span of less then a week so sit back and enjoy the freakshow as they say but take heart true believers the news is not all bad.

The first story I will discuss comes to us from the wonderful city of Flint, Michigan. Seems that the ACLU is once again riding to the rescue of drug users and drug dealers and this time using the Constitution to serve their “evil” purposes. The ACLU feels that the right to assemble extends to those who frequent known drug houses or other places where drugs are illegally used and sold. The Flint Police rightfully raided a nightclub where drugs were openly used and sold. At the end of the raid 17 of the patrons were arrested for suspicion of possession and the remaining people were given misdemeanor tickets for frequenting a known drug house, which is punishable by a $500 fine, 90 days in jail and 2 years probation. The ACLU was promptly called and they proceeded to drop this wisdom on us, "It penalizes the right to free expression with a drug charge that carries a stigma that can affect these people for the rest of their lives," Gibbs said.” He's among 11 attorneys who have agreed to represent suspects for misdemeanor charges in the case. The ACLU is not representing any of the 17 people facing felony drug charges.

Given the ACLU’s policy on drug legalization it’s pretty hypocritical of them not to defend the 17 who actually had drugs on them but then I am getting off point. Take this comment by local law enforcement and weigh it against the statement from the ACLU. “Genesee County Sheriff Robert Pickell, whose drug deputies participated in the raid, said What's Next has a history of tolerance for drug use that makes it a known trafficking area for dealers and users. Unfortunately folks this ploy by the ACLU has worked in the past, they won a similar case in Racine, Wisconsin back in 2002. It is the responsibility of the citizen to not put themselves in a situation where they might be ticketed for this offense; it has nothing to do with the First Amendment right to assemble. I am sure that the Founding Fathers did not mean that we had the right to assemble where criminal activity was being conducted. Can you see the dangerous precedent this could set? Police Departments all over the country use this type of law to keep people out of drug areas and thus help reduce the amount of drugs being sold. Well let’s hope the judge in Michigan has more sense of what the Constitution actually grants us then the judge in the Wisconsin case. Fortunately the prosecutor in Michigan has a good head on her shoulders and the city’s ordinance has already withstood legal challenges.

This next example comes from the Houston Chronicle and directly from the lips of an ACLU operative. The ACLU opposed some very successfully drug raids that were happening in Harris County, Texas because they tended to stick to lower income and minority areas. The rest of the article is gloating and the typical ACLU party line being spewed. I am not a member of law enforcement and I certainly don’t belong to any groups that seek to keep poor minorities down but I do recognize the reality that in most cities in this country, drugs are usually most prevalent in lower income areas which unfortunately are often home to many minorities. You don’t have to be a genius to understand that if we want to catch criminals then you have to go where they live and/or work. It has nothing to do with racial profiling as the ACLU would have you believe. If a WHITE MAN robs jewelry store and the cops start looking for a WHITE MAN in the nearby area because that is who robbed the store. That is not racial profiling, that is taking the information available and doing the job of catching criminals. It is unfortunate that so many of America’s criminals are themselves minorities and live in low income minority areas but damn if that’s where the bad guys are then that is where you go.

Let’s take this a step farther, we were attacked on 9/11 by 19 male Arabs. Since then has the TSA done any special screening of male Arabs entering the country on flights from known terrorist havens, nope, not at all? When the TSA under the watchful eye of Norm Mineta was asked why they were not doing special screenings for male Arabs, the reason given was that they did not want to insult or offend innocent male Arabs. Well you know again I am sorry but if we were attacked by terrorists that happen to be male Arabs then if you want to keep us safe from another attack you better take a look at male Arabs. Apparently in its march to destroy America, the ACLU is firmly in lockstep with the terrorists who wish to do us harm.

And the third story to make of the ACLU trifecta of “evil” is about how the ACLU with absolutely no regard for the financial well being of the University of Wisconsin system is demanding health benefits for unmarried domestic partners. Ok, a couple of things with this one. First I don’t really care who you are or how wronged you may be, if the employer, company, or who ever does not have the money then your not going to get the pay, benefits, or whatever. The facts of this case are that the University of Wisconsin and the State of Wisconsin can hardly extend benefits to unmarried partners of employees since the state is facing a 1.6 billion dollar deficit. It is very ironic that the ACLU has chosen Wisconsin to press the gay rights case, mainly because Wisconsin is very gay friendly and one of the most leftist/socialist states in the country.

Look the law, remember the law, in Wisconsin is very clear, the state will not extend health benefits to unmarried partners of employees. Now since the state currently has no law allowing same-sex marriages the five couples named in the lawsuit are up a creek with no paddle. I really hate how the ACLU takes and twists an issue in to something it is not. This case is being billed as the latest in gay rights but it’s really not. The state has laws in place that have created this unfortunate situation for these folks and the only way it is going to change is if the state passes a law allowing same-sex marriage which does not seem likely since the legislature in Wisconsin is going to send a proposal to the votes to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage as early as next year. I actually don’t have a problem with the University of Wisconsin extending benefits to the partners of unmarried gay employees but the law and the fact that the state is broke says otherwise. As much as the ACLU wants to change the laws of Wisconsin by this lawsuit that is just not how things are done.

Now at the start of this very long post I promised some good news about the ACLU. Well here it is, recently the ACLU lost a case in which a previous precedent that the ACLU had in fact set was successfully used to defend a Christian group. The ACLU in losing this case has now reversed themselves on the very precedent they used to get a school district to grant access to a gay student club. Actually the ACLU has not lost anything rather they have now filed a friend of the court brief in opposition to Equal Access Act. I just love it when the ACLU shows up on both sides of an issue; it just further illustrates what an “evil” organization they are. I guess they are the ones who taught John Kerry that “both sides of the issue” trick. The Alliance Defense Fund used the Equal Access Act in exactly the same manner that the ACLU did in a similar case involving a gay student group that was denied access for after-school activities. The Case, Prince vs. Jacoby was heard by the “hated” Ninth circuit court of Appeals and simply had no choice but to follow the precedent set by the ACLU’s case. I really can’t say it any better then the ADF’s Tim Chandler so I will just quote him, "This goes to show how far the ACLU will manipulate the legal system to further their radical agenda," said Chandler, a litigation specialist who is working on the case. "They are backtracking," Chandler said. "They used these laws to get what they wanted – equal rights for the gay-straight alliance – and now that they've gotten that, they want to retract it so the Bible club doesn't get the same benefits." Predictably the ACLU of Washington state could not be reached for comment on their friend of the court filing. It warms my heart to see this groups legal tricks turned against them.

Well folks that is all for today. I know that many out their in the vast space of the BlogSphere still believe that the ACLU does good and sticks up for the little man, woman, gay, or illegal immigrate, well to you ignorant people I have just one little statement, get a clue or at least buy one. The ACLU is a leftist/socialist group that is dedicated to the destruction of the values that America was founded upon. Simply put, there are on a level with the Islamofascists when it comes to the danger that they pose to this country. If I have sparked your interest, please head over to the Stop the ACLU blog and the Stop the ACLU website to find out more. Have a great day everyone.

No comments: