With Friends Like Biden and Schumer...

With Friends Like Biden and Schumer…
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
March 13, 2024

With so-called friends like Joe Biden, current occupant of the White House, and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Israel certainly needs no more enemies. From both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, Israel, the closest ally of the United States in the Middle East, is receiving terrible advice and veiled threats, which undoubtedly will be tossed into the circular file by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

During his State of the Campaign shout fest, Thursday March 7, Biden stated so grandiosely that Israel has the right to defend itself, exactly five months to the day of the heinous Hamas invasion of Israel slaughtering more than 1,200 innocent Israeli children, women, and men. Without missing a beat, Biden all but called for a ceasefire and demanded Israel provide MORE humanitarian aid to Gaza. Lest Biden forget, and there’s a pretty damn good chance of that, a ceasefire existed on October 6, 2023. That ceasefire ended when Hamas invaded Israel, raping women and little girls - it only took a United Nations committee five months to begrudgingly come to that same obvious conclusion.

Hamas also murdered men, women, and children in such horrific fashion as decapitating babies while forcing parents to bear witness before executing the parents. Burning babies alive. And taking more than 200 people hostage from more than a dozen countries, including the United States, of which more than 100 are still in captivity, including five from the United States. Yet Biden, and much more often, Kamala Harris, continues demanding a ceasefire from Israel.

Hamas is also the elected body of Gaza. Hamas controls what comes in and goes out of Gaza - including humanitarian aid. Hamas has commandeered more of these supplies than most people could imagine, depriving those few Gazans not helping Hamas. That said, for Biden to say Israel must step up and provide more humanitarian aid, simply proves his lack of understanding of the situation there, as well as his lack of understanding of war. Did the US provide humanitarian aid to Nazi Germany during World War II? There’s always that double standard concerning Israel. Israel is expected to go above and beyond, but to be fair, Israel historically makes every bona fide attempt to limit civilian casualties. Succeeding is harder than the uninitiated would realize because Hamas infamously hides its terrorists within civilian homes and sites, uses those very civilians as human shields, as well as putting their weaponry amongst civilians in places such as hospitals, kindergartens, the underground tunnels, and even mosques.

And Hamas is not alone in its assault on Israel. Israel is under constant attack by Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa Martyrs, the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement, and the Houthis from Yemen. These terrorist organizations are funded and sponsored by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Under Biden, billions of dollars have been released to Iran, that heretofore were never surrendered by the Donald Trump administration. 

Both Biden and Schumer foolishly continue calling for a two-state solution, which anyone who pays attention, understands how untenable such a suggestion is, and how much at risk it puts Israel. There is no two-state solution to be had when Hamas and the Palestinians will not even recognize Israel and its right to exist. There is no two-state solution to be had when Hamas and Hezbollah have written in their charters the call to eviscerate Israel and slaughter the Jewish people, as they have continued doing since October 7. Netanyahu referenced a 99-9 vote in the Knesset. “That’s over 90 percent supported my policy of opposing a Palestinian state being rammed down Israel’s throat.”

The most obvious first step toward any kind of peace must begin with the release of all the hostages by Hamas. Has Biden suggested such a plan? Harris? Schumer? NO; and no one should hold their breath. But while Biden is merely a puppet, a stooge, doing the bidding of the radical, progressive, leftists, in desperate need of the Muslim votes from Michigan and Minnesota, Schumer should know better. 

Instead Schumer continues playing politics. Speaking from the Senate chamber on Thursday, March 14, Schumer had the audacity to call anyone opposing a Palestinian state “bigots.” Schumer said new elections in Israel are necessary to bring about a two-state solution and because so many Israelis have lost confidence in their government. But that’s simply not true. Having spoken with numerous friends who live in Israel, to a person, as much as some of them absolutely do not like Netanyahu, they all support the decisions made by his government in its necessary quest to completely eliminate Hamas. They have said that it is vital the nation of Israel stand unified and strong in this common goal and put partisan politics aside - at least for now.

“Ultimately, I’m the Prime Minister of Israel. I’m responsible for the security and future of the Jewish state and I’m supported in my policies - the overwhelming majority of Israelis support my policies - that we have to eradicate Hamas as a terrorist and governing organization, get our hostages back, and we have to make sure Gaza doesn’t form a threat to us anymore,” said Netanyahu. 

“Of course the US cannot dictate the outcome of an election, nor should we try,” said Schumer from the Senate floor. “That is for the Israeli public to decide; a public that I believe understands better than anybody that Israel cannot hope to succeed as a pariah opposed by the rest of the world. As a democracy, Israel has the right to choose its own leaders, and we should let the chips fall where they may. But the important thing is that Israelis are given a choice - there needs to be a fresh debate about the future of Israel after October 7,” said Schumer.

Here is where Schumer didn’t just cross a line, he pole vaulted over it. “In my opinion, that is best accomplished by holding an election. If Prime Minister Netanyahu’s current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down, and continues to pursue dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing US standards for assistance, then the US will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course.”

Sounds like more than a veiled threat. Sounds like Schumer is calling for regime change by hook or by crook. This is not the way one ally treats another ally. Seems Schumer wants to install a puppet or stooge in the Israeli Knesset to take orders the same way Biden does. Seems Biden, Schumer, and the Democrat Party have the same visceral hatred of Netanyahu as they do of Trump. Seems Netanyahu and Trump are in good company.

But what Netanyahu said several days ago should remind Schumer of several immutable truths. “Our battle is your battle, and our victory is your victory…. We’re going to defeat Hamas. We’re going to do whatever is necessary to minimize civilian casualties - something we believe in, but we have to defeat this terrorist Nazi army, otherwise there’s no future for anyone in the Middle East,” said Netanyahu. Notice he referenced the entirety of the Middle East, and not just Israel. Netanyahu is not a megalomaniac. He knows the importance of future treaties and alliances as were accomplished under Trump with the Abraham Accords.

Retired army general Benny Gantz, a Netanyahu opponent but member of the Prime Minister’s war cabinet took exception to Schumer’s Senate chamber remarks just a few hours later. Gantz posted on X, “The US and Israel share common values and interests, and the citizens of Israel and its leadership are very grateful for the US standing by the state of Israel in its difficult and complex moments.
“The leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate Chuck Schumer is a friend of Israel who helps her a lot even these days, but he made a mistake in his statement. Israel is a strong democracy, and only its citizens will determine its leadership and future. Any external intervention in the matter is incorrect and unacceptable,” concluded Gantz’s text.

No wonder Gantz is a diplomat - he offered much kinder, and more tactful words than Schumer deserved. Schumer’s words were offensive, threatening, contrary to appropriate behavior between allies, and a shonda - a disgrace.

Michael Herzog, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, also took issue with Schumer’s incongruous message on X. “Israel is a sovereign democracy. It is unhelpful, all the more so as Israel is at war against the genocidal terror organization Hamas, to comment on the domestic political scene of a democratic ally. It is counterproductive to our common goals,” wrote Herzog.

“There is no substitute for total victory - we’ll achieve it,” said Netanyahu. “It’s either Israel or Hamas, there is no middle way. We have to have that victory we can’t have ¾ of a victory. We can’t have ⅔ of  a victory, because Hamas will reconstitute itself, reconquer the Gaza Strip and do the October 7 massacre over, and over, and over, again. For the people of Israel, that’s the Red Line. We can’t let Hamas survive,” Netanyahu said.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Biden's Angry State of the Campaign Address

Biden’s Angry State of the Campaign Address
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
March 10, 2024

To paraphrase former President Donald Trump, Joe Biden exhibited high energy during his delivery of what G-d willing will be the last State of the Union address of his occupation of the White House. But, much more is needed than a one dimensional shout fest of an inappropriate campaign speech set in the House chamber blaming Republicans for anything and everything, while taking no responsibility for anything himself.

But the hypocrisy began even before Biden left the White House to make the trip up Pennsylvania Avenue. So concerned about the safety of Biden, a huge fence was erected for the purpose of protecting the so-called leaders, yet those same elected officials can’t seem to construct a wall or fence at the southern border to protect the American citizens living in such a precarious state. A state that would not have existed had Biden not destroyed the Trump border policies and intentionally allowed eight to 10 million illegals from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe to invade this nation.

Some of those illegals and citizens alike were responsible for Biden’s delay in reaching the Capitol as they protested, what they believed to be, his pro-Israel policy. The protesters are pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas, and pro-ceasefire. Reaching the Capitol past 9:10 PM, Biden took several more minutes to reach the Speaker’s podium being mobbed by Congressional well-wishers - much more so than usual State of the Union addresses. (Quite frankly, I think Biden took smaller and shorter steps so as not to fall down, and stopped for the members of the two houses in order to ask for directions getting down the aisle.) The Democrats did not seem so concerned with the state of the Union, but with the state of Joe Biden.

So charged up, Biden began his address as soon as he gave the customary copies of his speech to Kamala Harris and Speaker Mike Johnson, before Johnson even had the opportunity to introduce Biden as is conventional. Biden jumped in with both boots to tell the American people the state of Ukraine, not the state of OUR Union. Seeking to increase spending on Ukraine’s defense, Biden should have opened with seeking to increase spending on defending the United States and the permeable southern border - which he allowed on his so-called watch. The United States needs to suspend funding for Ukraine until Europe makes a more concerted effort to do their fair share. Biden so enjoys demanding Americans pay their fair share, so too should Europe, especially after saying that Europe is at risk.

After Biden demanded more aid for Ukraine he turned his attention to yelling at Americans who don’t love their country. “You can’t love your country only when you win.” I imagine he directed that barb at the Republicans, for what reason I could not fathom. Most Americans love their country and want the best for the nation and its citizenry. That said, Biden’s accusation should have been directed to the left wing, radical, progressive, America last Democrats - the ones who support open borders and a dissolution of the border patrol, freebies for illegals, putting illegals ahead of Americans, granting amnesty and ultimately citizenship and voting rights for illegals, those calling for the defunding of law enforcement. If Biden wants to condemn folks for not loving their country, he must start with every Democrat who voted against condemning anti-Semitism, and for calling for the removal of Trump from ballots, saving democracy, which couldn’t be further from the truth. (https://sanfordspeaksout.blogspot.com/2024/03/scotus-rules-9-0-keeping-trump-on.html)

The gaslighting portion of the Biden “campaign” speech followed the criticizing Americans who don’t love their country section. Biden claimed 15 million new jobs have been created during his term in office, that the economy is strong, that crime is down, and that the GOP is responsible for the crisis at the border. Not once did Biden take responsibility for his many failings. How many of those so-called new jobs happened to be people returning to work following Covid (you know, the China virus)? Biden actually had the audacity to say the US economy is “the envy of the world.” Did Biden even bother to read the crime statistics, especially those in the biggest of American cities, those run by Democrats for decades and decades?

During the gaslighting, as if on a Kool-aid high, the Congressional Democrats began chanting “four more years,” something they did at least three times during the Biden “campaign” speech. Four more years? Four more years of what? An invasion at the southern border thus far having allowed more than eight million illegals into this country to rape, pillage, plunder, murder, attack, and assault at will? Illegals supplanting veterans from certain housing? Illegals supplanting American children from schools? Prices so high people have to hedge between buying groceries, medications, gas for their vehicles, or paying mortgage/rent? An administration telling students they don't have to pay back their college loans and forcing the rest of us to pay them? An administration supporting the bastardization of Title IX - recognizing biological males as so-called women? An administration trying to cut more freedoms from Americans - telling us what kind of car to buy, what kind of crappy working appliance to buy, what kind of food to eat? Four more years of out of control spending making the dollar worth less and less every year? Four more years of rampant Anti Semitism - especially on those college campuses Biden is so quick to force us to pay for that poor excuse of an education? Four more years of a military not making its quotas of new recruits? Four more years of the military worrying more about pronouns than protecting America?

As Biden continued his angry, get off my lawn rant, he turned his attention to the size of a Snickers bar, which seemed more important than the size of the holes at the southern border. Biden also seemed more concerned with snack chips infinitely more than China stealing US computer chip technology.

Soon thereafter, US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) stepped up, practically turning the State of the Union address into a session of the British Parliament. Attired in a Make America Great Again ball cap, a shirt reading “Say Her Name,” in memory of Laken Riley, and two buttons with Riley’s name and photo on her jacket. Riley was the 22-year-old Georgia nursing student beaten to death on February 22 by an illegal alien from Venezuela. Greene began to shout “say her name,” in an attempt to goad Biden into mentioning the victim of his own border policies. It worked.

Biden held up the button Greene gave him earlier that evening upon his arrival in the House chamber. Looking at it, he shouted, “Lincoln. Lincoln Riley, an innocent young woman that was killed by an illegal. That’s right. But how many thousands of people killed by illegals,” BIden asked derisively, meaning, by legals. Or did he say legals in the first place? Hard to tell; Biden didn’t have complete control of his speech and diction as has become his norm. And even holding the button, Biden couldn’t correctly say the name of Laken Riley. (https://sanfordspeaksout.blogspot.com/2024/02/bidens-broken-border-claims-life-of.html)

That Biden called Laken Riley’s murderer an illegal stirred up more consternation within the legacy media than the actual slaughter of that innocent nursing student. For days since the State of the Union “campaign” speech Biden has had to answer for the “sin” of using the word illegal, which is exactly what this waste of space should be called. Biden has been verbally genuflecting over this egregious transgression, in an effort to assuage his base. Donald Trump, on the other hand, met with Laken Riley’s parents, not that the legacy media would report such information. 

Biden sounded equally delusional when discussing Israel, and the war started by Hamas on October 7, 2023. To be fair, Biden did support Israel’s right to defend itself - he’s a real sport, as if Israel, a sovereign nation, needs any other nation’s permission to defend itself. It was all downhill from there, as Biden clamored for a two-state solution, which is completely untenable. There is NO two-state solution to be had when one of those states won't even recognize the existence of the other, when the same group wants to destroy the other, and continues slaughtering its people as it did on October 7.

There also has been an almost constant harangue, mostly from Kamala Harris, demanding a ceasefire in the war Hamas started against Israel. On October 6, 2023 a ceasefire existed. The very next day, on October 7, Israel was attacked. Hamas slaughtered more than 1,400 Israeli men, women, and children. Hamas is also the elected body of Gaza. Hamas controls what comes in and goes out of Gaza - including humanitarian aid. Hamas has commandeered more of these supplies than most people could imagine. That said, for Biden to say Israel must step up and provide more humanitarian aid, simply proves his lack of understanding of the situation there, as well as his lack of understanding of war. Did the US provide humanitarian aid to Nazi Germany during World War II? There’s always that double standard concerning Israel. Israel is expected to go above and beyond, but to be fair, Israel historically makes every bona fide attempt to limit civilian casualties. Succeeding is harder than the uninitiated would realize because Hamas infamously hides its terrorists within civilian homes and sites, uses those very civilians as human shields, as well as putting their weaponry amongst civilians in places such as hospitals, kindergartens, and the underground tunnels.

Biden sounded like a cranky, angry, demented, old man, delivering a partisan, rancorous, campaign speech, ignoring key issues, or not spending nearly enough time on them. He bellowed at the people as an old school marm looking down the nose of her spectacles. He was disrespectful, dithering, doddering, and downright disagreeable, May we the people be Blessed that this be the last State of the Union address he delivers.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield,, IN.

SCOTUS Rules 9-0 Keeping Trump on State's Ballots

SCOTUS Rules 9-0 Keeping Trump on State’s Ballots
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
March 4, 2024

Less than 24 hours before the polls are due to open in 15 states for Super Tuesday primaries, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously on Monday, March 4 that the Colorado Supreme Court decision barring former President Donald Trump from their primary ballot cannot stand.

While the justices took various and in some cases circuitous routes to arrive at “yes,” their unanimity delivers a definitive and solid message that courts or singular individuals will not decide elections. More importantly, it is the will of the people - the legal, voting age, registered voting citizens of the United States who undertake the enormous responsibility of ensuring the preservation of the Constitution and all its protections.

When asked about the impact of the Supreme Court’s nine-nothing vote on the remaining states that have either decided to remove Trump from their ballots or are suing to do so, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley responded, “I think they’re all dead as Dillinger.” Turley is certainly not known as a conservative, but a level-headed, fair thinker, capable of being objective.

“Colorado, Maine, most recently Illinois - those are the outliers. Many of those other people that rejected them were Democrats who did the right thing, like the three liberal justices on the court. They stood with their colleagues, spoke with one voice and said, enough; that we are not going to introduce what Justice Jackson referred to as ‘an undemocratic interpretation of the 14th Amendment.’ We should take some solace and encouragement from that. I think the court is showing this divided country that there are still things that bind us to each other - a certain covenant of faith that we can find in the Constitution,” said Turley.

According to Lawfare, the Supreme Court ruling reversed the ballot disqualifications of Trump in California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Of that group of 10 states, half of them - California, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Virginia go to the polls on Super Tuesday.

Part of the Supreme Court ruling indicated it is up to Congress, not the states, to make such decisions impacting federal elections; that Section Three of the 14th Amendment is supported by Section Five of that same amendment. In the case of Donald J. Trump, Petitioner v. Norma Anderson, et al, (Anderson being one of six Colorado residents to officially call for Trump’s dismissal from that state’s ballot.) the Supreme Court reversed the decision issued by the Colorado state supreme court in December 2023. The Colorado state supreme court decided against Trump in a four to three vote by seven Democrat justices - a margin slim enough to understand the gravity of such a decision, that by a margin of one vote, one justice, one person decided for an entire state for whom the citizenry should have the opportunity to vote. That’s dangerous.

As Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has oft-said, he wants Trump on the ballot because he wants the opportunity to vote against the man for the third time (2016 and 2020).

Section Three of the 14th Amendment reads, in its entirety:
                “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice         President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who,            having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or         as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support         the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the            same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of         each House, remove such disability.” 

Nowhere does this section mention the office of the President of the United States. “We granted former President Trump’s petition for certiorari, which raised a single question: “Did the Colorado Supreme Court err in ordering President Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot?” See 601 U. S. ___ (2024).  Concluding that it did, we now reverse,” wrote the Supreme Court on pages three and four in its ruling per curium. (Per curium indicates the court’s ruling was written and issued by the court as a unit and not by any specific judge or justice.)

Section Five of the 14th Amendment, in support of Section Three, reads in its entirety: “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” 

Page six of the March 4 Supreme Court ruling states definitively, “This case raises the question whether the States, in addition to Congress, may also enforce Section 3.  We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office.  But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.”

US Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) said the Supreme Court decision is “monumental.” 

Trump himself called the ruling, “very well crafted. …I think it will go a long way to bringing the country together. The voters can take the person out of the race very quickly. …A great day for liberty.”

“I think this was the right decision,” said former US Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN). “I think it was important for the Court to speak declaratively with one voice. I agree, this will settle this issue, and leave it to the voters,” said Ford, a panelist on the Fox News program, “The Five.”

Lest anyone think this decision is about Trump, yes, he is the current beneficiary of the nine-nothing Supreme Court vote, make no mistake who the real victors are here: the American people, our Democratic-Republic, and quite frankly the world. The United States is the beacon of freedom - after all, why are millions upon millions of people trying to enter the United States by whatever means necessary (another issue for another column). Quite frankly, the words from the liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elana Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, in their concurring opinion of March 4, speak volumes regarding the importance of not upholding Colorado’s decision. “Allowing Colorado to do so, would, we agree, create a chaotic state-by-state patchwork, at odds with our Nation’s federalism principles. That is enough to resolve this case.”

All those shortsighted people yelling that Trump is a Nazi and a threat to democracy and must be removed from all ballots far and wide are the true, genuine threats to democracy. Their visceral hatred of Trump, which clearly overshadows their respect and support of the Constitution, while legal, is dangerous. These are the people who believe one person - a state secretary of state - should decide for hundreds of thousands to millions of citizens for whom they should be allowed to vote. If they got their way on March 4 and the Supreme Court fostered an alternative ruling, imagine the chaos that would ensue as Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson suggest would invariably occur. 

Suppose Trump is removed from ballots in Colorado, Maine, Illinois, and perhaps the entirety of the left coast and New England. Perhaps Biden is removed from ballots for cause - say faulty cognition, from the Deep South, the Plains region, and Big Sky country. Consider the Balkanization of the voting process or that the election could be decided by 50 individuals before Election Day itself. Does that sound like a Democratic-Republic?

No, that’s the slippery slope to becoming communist Russia. If Russia, under the despotic regime of Vladimir Putin, can’t ban opponents from the “ballot,” those opponents mysteriously fall prey to some malady a la the Soviet leaders who disappeared for days, then weeks before anyone learns he has a “cold.” A “cold” that ultimately claims his life. This is not a tale of fiction to be found in Chekov, Dostoyevsky, Pushkin, or Tolstoy. The February 16, 2024 questionable death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, 47, is being widely attributed to Putin in global circles. Navalny, born June 4, 1976 in the village of Butyn, in the Moscow region, attempted to challenge Putin, but summarily found himself barred from running in 2018 - deemed ineligible due to a prior conviction. This past August, already serving an 11.5 year sentence, a Russian court added an additional 19 more years, on what Navalny called trumped up charges - no pun intended. He died in a Russian penal colony two months after Putin’s announcement he would stand for reelection in 2024.

That is not how political opponents are “handled” in the United States. Or is it? How many opponents of the Biden administration are anonymously sitting in prisons because of alleged crimes committed on January 6, 2021? That is also not the American way. The First Amendment of the Constitution is designed to protect people’s right of free speech, as well as their right to assemble peaceably. 

Even Eugene V. Debs, (1855-1926), born in Terre Haute, IN, where he served as city clerk and later as a member of the state legislature, ran for president - from jail. The perennial candidate for the Socialist Party of America, of which he was a co-founder, Debs ran for president five times in every election from 1900 through 1920, save for 1916. The advocate for organized labor and unionism grew in popularity with each campaign earning 94,768 votes in 1900 and by 1920 Debs garnered 917,799 votes from prison. Debs served time for criticizing the US government’s policy of prosecuting people accused of violating the Espionage Act of 1917.

If the likes of a Eugene V. Debs could run for president from a jail cell, certainly a candidate not having been charged with any crime, let alone convicted of one, should remain on the ballots across the nation. Those who continue to object, have the right to vote against that candidate, as Dershowitz looks forward to doing.

Trump’s lone remaining GOP rival, former South Carolina Governor and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, while speaking in Spring, TX , said “the Supreme Court ruled today that Donald Trump can stay on the ballot.” Followed by a light chorus of boos, Haley continued, “No, I think that was important. We don’t ever want some elected official in a state, or anybody else saying who can and can’t be on a ballot. This is America. This is America. Look, I’ll defeat Donald Trump fair and square, but I want him on that ballot.”

The White House should have the good sense to realize the bullet the nation, and the free world, dodged, and applaud the Supreme Court for their perspicacious ruling. The optics of the White House seeking the de-balloting of Biden’s future opponent would shout Putin.

In her concurring opinion of March 4, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote, “In my judgment this is not the time to amplify disagreement with stridency. The Court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election. Particularly in this circumstance, writings on the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up.  For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity: All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case. That is the message Americans should take home.”

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.