Sheriff Joe Being Sued Over Abortion

Judicial Watch is reporting that Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona, is facing a lawsuit filed by a prisoner seeking an abortion.

In the lawsuit, it has been alleged that by charging inmates a transportation fee Sheriff Joe is restricting a prisoner's "right" to kill her baby. The Eighth Amendment, which protects prisoners from cruel and unusual punishment, has been invoked in the 22-page filing. What about the baby's right to protection under the same amendment? Doesn't that count for anything?

Maricopa County charges inmates a fee between $300 and $600 for transportation and mandatory deputy escorts when going for elective medical procedures such as abortion. Arpaio says that to not charge a fee would force the taxpayers to unfairly absorb the costs. And he's dead on. It's bad enough that the procedure itself is paid for by the taxpayers. Why should the inmate get a completely free ride and not have to shoulder some of the costs incurred?

While the only mention of the group filing the lawsuit on behalf of the prisoner is only described as a "notoriously liberal civil rights group," we can safely narrow it down to one of two groups: The ACLU or The Southern Poverty Law Center. Both are groups of America-hating progressives who wish to make social policy legislation. They say that by "unfairly" delaying abortions to inmates, Sheriff Joe risks the life of the mother as the risks associated with abortion increase with each passing week. What a load of dung!

Here's where the left is talking out both sides of their collective big mouths. On one hand, they're saying that delay increases the risk of complications in what is otherwise a safe procedure while advocating for partial-birth abortion on the other hand. If delaying abortion is so risky to the mother, then one would think that they're against the barbaric act of partial-birth abortion, which is most often performed in the last trimester of pregnancy. But they LOVE defending butchers who kill babies by delivering them breech, leaving the head in the birth canal, and vacuuming out the brain after inserting a pair of surgical scissors into the base of the skull.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio is using common sense in his administration of justice. For far too long, the "rights" of prisoners have been trumped over that of their victims and their families. It's about time we have a law enforcement official in this country who realizes that prison is not supposed to be a frickin' vacation. If you commit a crime, you should not be living better in prison than you may be living in the free world.

Sheriff Joe, keep up the great work. You're one hell of a patriot, and we love you.

The FBI, Eric Holder, and Hate Crimes

What constitutes a "hate crime?" According to the FBI, a subdivision of the Department of Justice, the official definition is a "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Sounds pretty fair, eh? I mean, we'd all agree that crime itself is bad enough, but targeting someone just because of their skin color makes it worse, right?

A House resolution passed this summer as part of a larger defense bill. Here's the title of the resolution:

PROHIBITION ON RECRUITMENT, ENLISTMENT, OR RETENTION OF PERSONS ASSOCIATED OR AFFILIATED WITH GROUPS ASSOCIATED WITH HATE-RELATED VIOLENCE AGAINST GROUPS OR PERSONS OR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

That's right. The U.S. Government has put itself on a par with Matthew Shepard and James Byrd. Commit a crime against a black in the name of white supremacy? Hate crime. Beat a homosexual to a bloody pulp while yelling slurs? Hate crime. Organize a rally against government policy in the name of freedom? Hate crime.

The most disturbing part of the legislative text lies within Section 524. This part of the text must have been written by George Orwell himself. The resolution uses the phrase "...as determined by the Attorney General" multiple times. In short, current Attorney General Eric Holder will determine what constitutes a hate crime. The Founding Fathers would have called this tyranny, and they would have been exactly right.

Subsection 2 of Section 524 reads as follows:

A “Hate Group” is defined both explicitly and as “other groups or organizations that are determined by the attorney general to be of a violent and extremist in nature.”

The "evidence" that a person belongs to what is deemed a "hate group" by the AG is defined very clearly in Subsection 3 of Section 524 of the resolution.

“...a person is associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence...Individuals known to have attended meetings, rallies, conferences, or other activities sponsored by a hate group. Individuals known to be involved in online activities with a hate group, including being engaged in online discussion groups or blog or other postings that support, encourage, or affirm the group’s extremist or violent views and goals. Individuals who are known to have in their possession photographs, written testimonials (including diaries or journals), propaganda, or other materials indicating involvement or affiliation with a hate group. Such materials can include photographs, written materials relating to or referring to extreme hatred that are clearly not of an academic nature, possession of objects that venerate or glorify hate inspired violence, and related materials, as determined by the Attorney General.” [emphasis mine]

Now, let's put the pieces together. Eric Holder has free reins to determine who is and is not a member of a "hate group," a term determined by Holder's personal whims. And let's be real: Holder isn't exactly the paradigm of fairness.

The firm he worked for before ascending to AG has represented enemy combatants housed at Guantanamo Bay, and Holder himself has said:

"In the end, Guantanamo will be closed, and I think that that is an appropriate thing to do, given the fact that it has served and I think continues to serve as a recruiting for those who intend to do this nation harm, and has served as a wedge between us and those nations that are our allies."

So there it is. His rationale for closing Gitmo is because it keeps the radical Muslims plotting against us. FYI, Mr. Holder: They hate us and want us dead whether Gitmo stays open or not.

The determination of a "hate crime" lies in the hands of one man should this come to pass.

"Mr. Orwell....paging Mr. Orwell..."



And now, on to the FBI...

THE FBI CONNECTION TO HATE CRIMES

At the beginning of this post, I gave you the FBI definition of a "hate crime." How does this all tie together with AG Eric Holder? It's a little murky, but stay with me.

As AG, Holder is the last say so for the FBI. The FBI director reports to Holder and Obama. That's it. So let's say, hypothetically, that the FBI receives information that a small group of church members are planning to organize an anti-abortion rally on the steps of the Supreme Court. Not wanting an ugly scene, Holder could then have the FBI investigate said church members. If any literature found within their homes is deemed as evidence of belonging to a "hate group" by Holder, the little old lady who decided to help stop the scourge of abortion by peacefully protesting will be brought up on "hate crime" charges. It's the Gestapo on steroids.

Who would be giving information to the FBI of potential hate crimes? Hang on, folks. This will blow your mind.

From the FBI website under the heading of "Public Outreach":

The FBI has forged partnerships nationally and locally with many civil rights organizations to establish rapport, share information, address concerns, and cooperate in solving problems. These groups include such organizations as the NAACP, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium, and the National Organization for Women.

This is a virtual rogue's gallery of leftist groups. If they feel a "hate crime" has been committed, or let's say that they've just gotten their panties in a twist, they go directly to their partner, the FBI. And who does the FBI report to? If you said "The AG, who will determine what constitutes a 'hate crime'", move to the head of the class.

One group that jumped out at me on the FBI site was the Southern Poverty Law Center. This is one of the most whiny group of progressives and socialists to take up space in this country, and they have an interactive map of what they have dubbed "hate groups" in each state.

In my home state of Pennsylvania, here are some of the groups put into the same category as the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nation.

• Catholic Counterpoint
• Alliance for Catholic Tradition
• Council of Conservative Citizens
• Catholic Apologetics International

While I know nothing about these groups and their methods, I will say, in all fairness, that the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam are also on the SPLC list of "hate groups." But since when is belonging to a group of conservative citizens equated with belonging to the Klan? Maybe since the partnership with Eric Holder's FBI was formed? It is quite the possibility.

I wonder if Eric Holder and the FBI are following this advice:

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. -- Josef Stalin