CNN Newsman Would Have Enforced Dred Scott, Plessy

Cuomo_Moore_marriageSometimes the arrogance, not to mention the hypocrisy and the stupidity, of Leftwing “journalists” is truly breathtaking.  Take, for example, a recent interview by CNN’s Chris Cuomo of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore concerning the illegal edicts of the court concerning counterfeit marriage in Alabama.

Like a typical Leftist propaganda artist, Cuomo attempted to make Judge Moore out to be some kind of immoral lawbreaker. But Judge Moore isn’t your typical conservative pushover (shame on you conservatives, for being so gutless!).  Moore came back at the propaganda artist and ended up revealing Cuomo for the hypocritical idiot he is.

As highlighted by RedState, Moore turned the table on Cuomo and demanded to know if Cuomo would have blindly obeyed the immoral edicts of people in authority who should have known better, e.g. the Dred Scott decision which said black Americans could be considered property and Plessy v. Ferguson which said “separate but equal” segregation was good enough.

Ted Cruz 2016


Cuomo tried to dodge the question, but in the end, indirectly confirmed that yes, he would have conformed to the edict that black Americans are property and that segregation is okay.

“You follow the law of the land. You follow the law of the land. That’s what our nation is based on.”

This is a very interesting answer, in light of both recent history and the history that founded this nation.

As Judge Moore already brought out so masterfully, this Leftist would ignore what is right and carry out the edict of an oligarchy as if it were the same thing as law or Constitution.  He’s already demonstrated what a complete ass he is right here.

Woodrow Wilcox


But consider also the facts surrounding the birth of this nation. Did the founders of this nation “follow the law of the land” in declaring independence from Great Britain?  It depends on how you define “following the law of the land.”

If the “law of the land” was “whatever the king said,” then no, they didn’t. The founders of the United States refused to obey the edicts of King George. Why?  Because they were illegal and immoral.

As the founders outlined in the Declaration of Independence, many of the edicts and actions of the British government violated the rights of the colonists as British citizens (that’s what they were) and violated Natural Law.

So would Cuomo have expected the founders to “follow the law of the land” (i.e. the illegal edicts of the British government)?  Knowing the liberal affinity for tyranny, probably so. But I think most Americans would disagree with him.

And don’t forget that President Barack Obama absolutely refuses to follow the law of the land, not only allowing illegal aliens to continue living in this country, but working hard to devise plans to keep them in this country after having violated our borders and our laws, and seeks to reward these lawbreakers at the taxpayer’s expense.

How’s THAT for “follow[ing] the law of the land”?

This isn’t the only thing about which Cuomo is embarrassingly wrong.  During his exchange with Judge Moore, Judge Moore pointed out what every school kid in America should know: that our rights come from our Creator.  However, Cuomo felt overwhelmingly compelled to broadcast his stupidity yet again:

Our rights do not come from God, your honor, and you know that. They come from man… That’s your faith, that’s my faith, but that’s not our country. Our laws come from collective agreement and compromise.

Really? The men who founded and created this nation would strongly disagree with you, newsman:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Ever heard that before, “news”man?  The founders didn’t just understand that our rights come from our Creator, they considered it to be “self evident.”  In today’s vernacular, they considered it to be a “no brainer.”

If Cuomo would prefer to live in a country where the claim is that rights come from man, he’s more than welcome to do that. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own immorality, so he can’t go there, but he could still try Cuba or North Korea. Marxist countries believe men in power have the right to dispense and take away rights as they see fit, so Cuomo should feel real at home in North Korea or Cuba.

Me?  I’ll stick with America, where the founders of that nation knew and recognized that our rights come from our Creator, and they cannot legitimately be taken away by any man or group of men.

But back to the real issue here, which is law in Alabama.  That, too, goes back to following the actual law of the land, doesn’t it?  For what is the law of the land?  Well, Judge Moore is obeying it, where many others are in direct violation of it.

The rule of law in Alabama (and almost of the states) says marriage can only be formed by a man and a woman. The vast majority of the states constitutionally passed laws making this clear,  and most of the states even elevated this common-sense law into their state constitutions.  The federal government also did this back in the late 1990s, and contrary to the opinion of a few black-robed tyrants, the federal DOMA has never been repealed.

This means the rule of law says marriage is a relationship of a man and a woman.

Not only is actual state law on the side of marriage, there is no authority for federal judges to mandate anything concerning marriage. The U.S. Constitution is completely silent on marriage.

Why?  For starters, the founders would never have imagined a culture so insane as to decide that two men sodomizing each other might be called “marriage.” Also, regulating marriage isn’t among the enumerated powers of the federal government in Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.  Whats more, the Tenth Amendment removes any doubt that the federal government might have the authority to change the definition of marriage because any powers not delegated to the federal government are retained by the states and the people (who have made it overwhelmingly clear that they agree that marriage can only be formed by a man and a woman).  “Father of the Constitution” James Madison made it clear in Federalist No. 45 that the federal government doesn’t have unlimited power to do whatever it wants:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

We have a constitutional republic, and our constitution makes clear that the legislative branch has the authority to create law, with proposed law signed into actual law by the head of the executive branch.  The judicial branch, as Alexander Hamilton pointed out in Federalist No. 78, is not an equal branch of government: “the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power.” The layout of the Constitutions in its articles shows that the legislative branch has ten sections outlining its powers, the executive four, and the judiciary three.  Making law is not among the judiciary’s powers. It can only adjudicate according to what the Constitution says, and what established law that has been constitutionally passed says. The judiciary cannot create law. It cannot make up law. It cannot impose its will as if it were law. We are not an oligarchy; we are a constitutional republic where the legislative branch makes law.

So again, who is following the law of the land, here? Judge Roy Moore.

Who is displaying complete contempt for the law of the land?  Others, including federal judges, up to and including several on the U.S. Supreme Court.

And good people have no obligation whatsoever to obey immoral and illegal edicts of people who are more interested in forcing their opinion on people than in doing what is right.

Just ask Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr.

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Bob Ellis has been the owner of media company Dakota Voice, LLC since 2005. He is a 10-year U.S. Air Force veteran, a political reporter and commentator for the past decade, and has been involved in numerous election and public policy campaigns for over 20 years. He was a founding member and board member of the Tea Party groups Citizens for Liberty and the South Dakota Tea Party Alliance. He lives in Rapid City, South Dakota with his wife and two children.
Bob Ellis
View all articles by Bob Ellis
Leave a comment with your Facebook login
Print Friendly


  • AC700

    Very interesting, thanks for this Bob, gives me both hope in humanity (Moore) and none (Cuomo)