Constitutional Entitlements?

[Flanders]

Justice Scalia made a truthful statement and Rep. Clyburn flipped it like a burger:

During last week’s hearings Scalia said that the 1965 legislation created a “racial entitlement” that is very difficult to get out through “the normal political process.”

XXXXX​

The third highest ranking Democratic in Congress flipped Scalia’s comments around by praising the Voting Rights Act and calling the US Constitution “an entitlement for everybody.”

There’s the crux of black racism in this country. Guys like Clyburn use a physical act like voting as a foundation for funding welfare state entitlements. In effect, Clyburn’s constitutional entitlements magically morph into privileges and incomes for the parasite class.

Everything black racists say is rooted in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Every “Human Right” in that foul document is an entitlement that must be funded, while not one Right in the original Bill of Rights requires a penny in funding. Indeed, our federal government so hates the original Bill of Rights they world replace every God-given Right with an entitlement. Once that is accomplished the government, and only the government, will decide which entitlements deserve funding. More importantly, the government will decide who gets the bill.

One final observation on Clyburn: When a black racist cites the very Constitution his party is determined to abolish the rest of us, whites and non-whites, better start looking into his motives.

Here’s the link to the brief article I quoted:

Rep. Jim Clyburn Hammers Justice Scalia As ‘White And Proud’
by Garrett Quinn | 11:04 am, March 2nd, 2013

http://www.mediaite .com/online/jim-clyburn-hammers-justice-scalia-as-white-and-proud/

 

[Flanders]

From the OP
. . . our federal government so hates the original Bill of Rights. . .

Proof:

"Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787."

XXXXX​

The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)

That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on "unreasonable searches and seizures," and no right to a jury trial.​

"Bad optics" as they say in the political business. Not that it matters. Even if Brennan had taken an oath on the Constitution with the Bill of Rights included, does anyone think that would stop him from making a mockery of the document if the president ordered him to?

March 9, 2013
Rick Moran

Blog: CIA Chief Brennan takes oath on draft Constitution -- with no Bill of Rights