Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

It’s been a while since Minnesota Senator Al Franken announced he would be resigning from the Senate in the light of multiple allegations of sexual assault. At this point, Cher’s farewell tour might wind up being shorter than Franken’s. Of course, Franken’s supporters are upset to see him leave because they feel he didn’t get a chance to address the allegations against him. In legal and Constitutional terms, this is called due process, and as you might expect, the Left sees it a little differently than the rest of us do.

due process

What the Left thinks it means – the steps necessary to obtain a fair and just ruling

What it really means – the steps necessary to obtain a fair and just ruling regardless of who is being accused

Although the Left and the rest of us see due process similarly, there is a vital difference: the Left demands due process for their side, but not for anyone else. I know this is shocking to think about, but Leftists are hypocrites in this area, among many others.

Remember the University of Virginia date rape case? I’m sure Rolling Stone does, considering they paid out for their bad reporting. But the Left used the case as proof of a rape culture on American campuses well before the first allegations were researched. In that particular situation, the narrative was more important than the facts, and they ran with it.

This came to a head again when Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos changed Title IX regulations to allow for more due process with college date rape investigations. The Left were angrier than Rosie O’Donnell on any day ending in a Y during the Trump Administration. How dare DeVos make it harder for the accused to be disregarded! How dare she try to make the investigation process fair for everyone involved instead of just the victim! Women are to be believed because they simply don’t lie about sexual assault!

Then came Al Franken. All of the sudden, the Left cared about the process and making sure the allegations were valid. Wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact Franken is a proud Leftist in a position of power, would it? Nahhhhhhh!

The thing about the Franken situation is he wasn’t denied due process. He chose not to go to court to address the matter and instead tried to weasel out of it by asking for an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee. (Senate Ethics? Isn’t that a paradox?) The Senate Ethics Committee is not known for dishing out tough punishments for ethics violations. In recent history, there have been a number of violations brought before them, and only one has resulted in any significant form of punishment (that is, if you consider a light slap on the wrist to be significant).

If the Left were truly concerned about due process, they would have demanded Franken face his accusers in court. Very few did. The majority of them decided the Senate Ethics Committee was the end all and be all of due process when it’s not even close to it.

Due process is vital for two reasons. First, it gives both sides equal footing to make their cases. Second, it allows for an appropriate punishment or lack of punishment depending on what is found. As shocking as this may sound, the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn’t act in the same way as a court of law and has completely different standards. As such, it’s more of a diversion or perversion of due process for Franken to accept that route in lieu of having a day in court.

And it certainly doesn’t make it easier for the Left to demand due process be ignored on college campuses.

Look, if you want due process, you have to want it for everyone across the board, not just for the people you agree with. That ensures everyone has a chance to get it.

Think of it this way. What if Ted Cruz accused you of violently beating an elderly nun in a Whole Foods in Austin? Due process gives you the chance to refute those allegations with a jury of your peers. Partisan due process gives Cruz the chance to railroad you to jail without so much as a peep out of you.

Or if you prefer, talk to Rolling Stone about the importance of due process.

 

Don’t Just Do Something! Sit There!

Yesterday, the House of Representatives made news, but not necessarily the kind of news you want to make. After Senate Democrats failed to pass gun control laws that would have made it illegal for people on the FBI terrorist watch list to own weapons, House Democrats decided to do something and…conduct a sit-in on the House floor. Personally, I think House Democrats are missing a letter in “sit-in” to more accurately describe what they’re accomplishing, but that’s neither here nor there.

What House Democrats and their Senate colleagues are attempting to do is use political theater to drive their agenda to pass more gun control laws in the wake of the Orlando shooting. Of course, the kind of laws they’re trying to pass right now go completely against the Fifth Amendment’s concept of due process under the law, but hey, it’s just the Constitutional rights of people we’re dealing with here! Who cares when we can pass more gun control laws that will only affect people who follow the law?

The ACLU, for one.

In the spirit of transparency (real transparency, not the Obama Administration’s definition of transparency), I have to say the ACLU and I don’t necessarily agree on much. In fact, the ACLU has been pretty much anti-gun in the past few decades and have adopted the Left’s interpretation of the Second Amendment. Yet, the ACLU came out and said the Democrats’ proposed gun control bill was unconstitutional.

Let that sink in for a moment. A left-leaning organization with a history of being anti-gun is telling their fellow Leftists to slow their roll when attempting to erode the Constitutional rights of people. No, you haven’t gone through a dimensional wormhole. Trust me, I checked. What happened is not just a rare moment where I agree with the ACLU, but is also a red flag that the Left is going way off the reservation with this one. (And, no, that’s not a swipe at Senator Elizabeth Warren.)

This is the point where the curtain gets pulled back and we get to see the Wizard of Oz. If Democrats were serious about passing what they call “sensible gun laws,” they would be willing to draft bipartisan legislation where civil liberties could be protected. Instead, they drive to the left faster than a NASCAR driver at the Daytona 500.

That’s because the Left doesn’t want anything sensible in this debate right now. Doubt me? Keep in mind a handful of Democrats have literally said Republicans want to arm terrorists because they refused to vote for the Democrat bill. (Given the fact the current Administration literally has armed terrorists, the irony is richer than Adnan Khashoggi betting on whether Joe Biden will say something stupid.)

When you resort to gross misstatement to make your point, your point might be weaker than a balsa wood love seat at Michael Moore’s house. Then again, it might have been an attempt to divert attention away from how ridiculous the House Democrat “sit-in” looks. When grown adults are sitting and pouting as their colleagues bring in pillows and blankets, comfort foods like M & Ms, and cater in meals (totally not making that up, by the way), they should be called out as the children they appear to be.

This is where Speaker of the House Paul Ryan fumbled the football a bit by trying to get C-Span to stop broadcasting from the House. If anything, I would have allowed the cameras to keep rolling, but with a bit of a twist. I would encourage House Republicans to hold up signs or visual aids mocking the House Democrats for their antics. As it stands, Ryan miscalculated, and the result was the “sit-in” disrupting actual House business by being vocally disruptive. Yes, they have the First Amendment right to assemble, but for members of a party who has accused Republicans of being obstructionist while they are actually disrupting Congress, we have the First Amendment right to tell them to go pluck themselves.

Or a word that rhymes with “pluck.”

 

Good Idea or Bad Idea?

In the wake of the Orlando shooting, Democrats decided to recycle an idea they introduced last year: banning people on the FBI’s terrorist watch list from getting guns. (At least they believe in recycling something!) On the surface, it makes sense. We don’t want terrorists getting guns, right? Absolutely.

So, why aren’t more people on the Right on board with this idea? A little thing the kids like to call “due process.” It might be just a fad, though, if some people get their way.

Put simply (so Leftists can understand it), due process requires people not be denied their fundamental rights without there being some sort of legal action. Although the FBI is an arm of law enforcement, it is not equal to a trial where little things like evidence and sworn testimony can be used to determine guilt.

Still unclear about this concept, Leftists? Let’s try something closer to your political hearts. Due process prevents cops from throwing members of Black Lives Matter into solitary confinement before the BLM clowns get their case heard in court. After they’re found guilty, then the BLM clowns get thrown into solitary. There are no short-cuts in the process, kids.

Even if you’re not down with due process, there’s another huge (or YUGE if you’re a Trump supporter) problem with the FBI’s watch list. The way you get on the list in the first place is completely arbitrary. You don’t even need to be an actual terrorist to land on it! In fact, you could be an actual terrorist and not land on it. (See the Boston Marathon bombers for a prime example.) And if you’re a mother of three from Minneapolis with the oh-so-Muslim-sounding name of Lena Olson, you could wind up on it by mistake.

Yeah, that’s not exactly a “whoops.”

And it’s not exactly something we can gloss over, either. Since 9/11, we as a society have been willing on some level to let some rights go by the wayside. Democrats and Republicans alike have used the fear of terrorism, both foreign and domestic, to weaken the concept of due process for their own political ends. This continues today, as does the inefficiency and ineptitude of those who keep and maintain the watch list.

That, in and of itself, is not a valid enough reason to apply the watch list to whether someone should be allowed to get a gun. But I do have an idea, and I’m hoping the Left (and some people on the Right) have the intellectual courage to act on it.

If you support the Democrats’ proposal, volunteer to go on the watch list. Even if your name is Lena Olson. Report yourself to the FBI as a suspected terrorist, just to be on the safe side. If it saves just one life…