Andrew Napolitano

Glenn Beck In Fantasy Land: President Rand Paul Would Nominate Andrew Napolitano To The Supreme Court

For the last several months, Glenn Beck's network has been regularly running a presidential poll in which Beck's audience ranks various possible GOP presidential candidates, giving them each a grade ranging from A to F.

Today, Beck and his co-hosts spent the first hour of their radio program going over the results of this month's poll, which found — surprise, surprise — that their audience tends to like the same candidates that they like and dislike the same candidates that they dislike, so that Jeb Bush got an "F" while Ted Cruz got an "A" and everyone else fell somewhere in between.

Since the poll already features a host of people who most likely are not going to actually run for president, Beck suggested today that they should add Judge Andrew Napolitano to the list for next month just because there is a "Draft Napolitano" effort underway online and Beck thinks it would be interesting to see what sort of support the judge could garner from Beck's audience.

The idea then prompted Beck to begin to fantasize that if Rand Paul becomes president, he would probably nominate Napolitano to a seat on the Supreme Court.

"Can you imagine if Rand Paul got in?" he said. "Judge Napolitano would probably be a candidate for Supreme Court. Can you imagine that? That would be great!"

Fox Host: Vaccine Mandates Will Destroy The Constitution, Declaration Of Independence

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano defended Sen. Rand Paul’s recent remarks on vaccinations in his WorldNetDaily column today, writing that proponents of vaccination mandates want the government to “own our bodies” and create a society much “like Big Brother in George Orwell’s novel ‘1984.’”

“[I]f the government owns our bodies, then the presumption of individual liberty guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution has been surreptitiously discarded, and there will be no limit to what the government can compel us to do or to what it can extract from us – in the name of science or any other of its modern-day gods,” he said, warning against giving power to “Big Government politicians” who seek to intervene in all realms of society.

The science is overwhelming that vaccinations work for most children most of the time. Paul, who is a physician, said, however, he knew of instances in which poorly timed vaccinations had led to mental disorders. Yet, he was wise enough to make the pro-freedom case, and he made it stronger than Christie did.

To Paul, the issue is not science. That’s because in a free society, we are free to reject scientific orthodoxy and seek unorthodox scientific cures. Of course, we do that at our peril if our rejection of truth and selection of alternatives results in harm to others.

The issue, according to Paul, is: WHO OWNS YOUR BODY? This is a question the government does not want to answer truthfully, because if it does, it will sound like Big Brother in George Orwell’s novel “1984.” That’s because the government believes it owns your body.



What do the states have to do with this? Under our Constitution, the states, and not the federal government, are the guardians of public health. That is an area of governance not delegated by the states to the feds. Of course, you’d never know this to listen to the debate today in which Big Government politicians, confident in the science, want a one-size-fits-all regimen.

No less a champion of government in your face than Hillary Clinton jumped into this debate with a whacky Tweet that argued that because the Earth is round and the sky is blue and science is right, all kids should be vaccinated. What she was really saying is that in her progressive worldview, the coercive power of the federal government can be used to enforce a scientific orthodoxy upon those states and individuals who intellectually reject it.



Paul’s poignant question about who owns your body – and he would be the first to tell you that this is not a federal issue – cannot be ignored by Christie or Clinton or any other presidential candidate. If Paul is right, if we do own our bodies and if we are the custodians of our children’s bodies until they reach maturity, then we have the right to make health-care choices free from government interference, even if our choices are grounded in philosophy or religion or emotion or alternative science.

But if Paul is wrong, if the government owns our bodies, then the presumption of individual liberty guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution has been surreptitiously discarded, and there will be no limit to what the government can compel us to do or to what it can extract from us – in the name of science or any other of its modern-day gods.

Paranoia-Rama: Obama's Ebola Plot And The Gay-ISIS Recruitment Strategies

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.

Now that a Liberian man who flew to Dallas this week has become the first person to develop Ebola symptoms in the U.S., the right-wing media is doing what it does best: freak out and blame everything on President Obama. Or maybe Ebola is just a distraction from Obama’s plot to seize everyone’s guns while gay people and ISIS attempt to “recruit” American children.

5. Ebolagate

It seems conservative pundits are trying to one-up each other to come up with the most insane ways to connect Obama to the case of a person in Dallas being diagnosed with Ebola after traveling from Liberia.

Laura Ingraham suggested that Obama is threatening the health of Americans due to his “core ties to the African continent,” saying Obama’s “familial connection to Africa” is the reason why flights from West Africa are still entering the U.S., while Michael Savage said Obama “wants to infect the nation with Ebola” by sending U.S. troops to West Africa who will then contract Ebola and spread it when they are back in the U.S.

It was only a matter of time before a Republican congressman embraced the latest conspiracy theory emerging from right-wing talk radio, and of course, this honor once again belongs to Rep. Louie Gohmert, who told Fox Business that Obama wants to “send 3,000 military into where they can get Ebola that they can bring back,” even though, as the Texas Republican astutely noted, “the military’s not trained to go catch Ebola and die.”

4. The Gays Are Coming

There’s only one thing worse than Ebola, and that’s “a gay” who is trying to “recruit” your son, or so explained “doctors” Paul Cameron and Gordon Klingenschmitt this week on Klingenschmitt’s acclaimed show “Pray In Jesus Name.”

3. Obama Taking Your Guns, Again

Naturally, Fox News commentators believe that a bill to expand background checks on firearm purchasers and a proposed treaty to codify practices in the transnational arms trade are actually attempts to ban guns for everybody. In fact, Fox News’ Steve Doocy and Andrew Napolitano believe that, thanks to Obama’s fictional gun-grab, Americans everywhere are in constant risk of getting decapitated.

“The problem is the President of the United States who is doing everything he can, administratively as the chief executive officer of the federal government, and attempting to now get us to enact a treaty to make it very, very difficult to carry guns,” Napolitano fumed following the beheading of a woman in Oklahoma City by a former coworker, adding that Obama wants “to intimidate people out of getting guns because the president believes that he and the government — and all logic defies this — can keep us safer that we can keep our self.”

Doocy then hit Napolitano with a hardball question: “So if Barack Obama could, he would ban guns in the hands of everybody except the police?”

“He has made that patently clear, his problem is the Second Amendment,” Napolitano responded.

2. Ben Carson Is Worried

Ben Carson is worried about a lot of things. For starters, he is very, very concerned that the Democrats may introduce so much anarchy to America that the 2016 elections won’t even take place.

Now, the likely GOP presidential candidate has a greater fear: the Advanced Placement U.S. History curriculum.

As we’ve noted, there is a new crusade in conservative circles to incite opposition to the course, with one Colorado school district attempting to replace the allegedly anti-American curriculum with one that is more “patriotic.”

Carson, a self-proclaimed historian, said this week that he is “shocked” by the advanced placement course’s emphasis on the “evils” of slavery and massacres of Native Americans, suggesting that the curriculum is a recruiting tool for terrorists: “I mean, I think most people when they finish that course, they’d be ready to go sign up for ISIS. This is what we’re doing to the young people in our nation and we have got to stop this silliness, we have got to stop crucifying ourselves.”

Carson is not alone, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has also connected ISIS to the curriculum.

1. We’re Doomed

Pundit and prophet Glenn Beck has been predicting America’s demise for a while now, and the case of a man in Dallas diagnosed with Ebola after traveling from Liberia is proof enough that the U.S. is about to experience a “massive humbling.”

GOP's Base Clamors To Impeach Obama

Nearly two years into President Obama’s second term, a do-nothing Republican Congress is focusing on its next project: the 2014 midterm elections. But that effort might be complicated by increasing pressure from the party’s base to turn Congress’ energy to impeaching President Obama. The impeachment call, which has existed on the right-wing fringe since the start of Obama’s presidency, has picked up steam in recent weeks as it has been endorsed by right-wing media figures, activists and elected officials.

This has put Republican congressional leaders in a tricky spot as they attempt to placate their base without alienating moderate voters. When House Majority Whip Steve Scalise appeared on Fox News Sunday this week, he continually dodged the question. Ted Cruz similarly batted away a question about impeachment, calling it politically unfeasible. Right-wing leaders including Pat Buchanan and Tom DeLay have urged caution in the impeachment campaign, although DeLay said he would personally “love to impeach him.” Likewise, Karl Rove has warned that when it comes to impeachment, “the politics of it are all wrong.”

Even Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas, who last year distributed to every office on Capitol Hill a book on why the president should be impeached and removed from office and hired an attorney to look into impeachment, is now backtracking and warning that impeachment proceedings could benefit Democrats in the midterm elections.

Now, House Speaker John Boehner is claiming that talk of impeachment is a Democratic “scam” to win voters…an odd claim since it’s members of his own party who have been beating the drum about impeachment.

But it might be too late for Republicans to backtrack on a steady buildup of rhetoric questioning the president’s legitimacy, love of country, and authority to govern, which has led to increasing calls for impeachment from right-wing lawmakers, activists and media personalities... although nobody can quite agree on what the impeachment should be for.

  • In a radio interview last week, Rep. Michele Bachmann said that she believed the president has "committed impeachable offenses” but that first “the American people have to agree with and be behind and call for the president’s impeachment.”
  • This month, Rep. Lou Barletta of Pennsylvania said that there are “probably” the votes in the House to impeach the president for “absolutely ignoring the Constitution, and ignoring the laws, and ignoring the checks and balances.”
  • Also last year, Rep. Kerry Bentivolio of Michigan said that impeaching the president would be “a dream come true.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 3/25/14

Napolitano: Syria's Use Of Chemical Weapons Is Just Like President Clinton's Murder Of The Branch Davidians

Judge Andrew Napolitano was the guest on Glenn Beck's television program last night where Beck introduced him as "the man who actually can save our nation" before the two men sat down for a discussion about the possibility of military action against Syria for its use of chemical weapons against civilians.

Napolitano said any such action by the United States would be illegal because the US has not been attacked, is not in danger of imminent attack, nor has an ally been attacked. 

Furthermore, he said, Syria's use of chemical weapons was no different than what the Clinton administration did to the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas back in 1993.

"Who's used chemical weapon on their own people," Napolitano asked. "How far are we from Waco, Texas where federal agents used chemical weapons to murder 76 Americans in 1993 in the Clinton Administration? Can you imagine if China or Russia wanted to bomb us to punish us for what we did at the time? Come on! Where are we going with this?"

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious