October 4, 2014 2:30 pm -

A Facebook post written by Charlotte Lucas, the wife of Lucas Oil founder in Indianapolis, displays disparaging remarks about minorities. Mrs. Lucas is “sick and tired of minorities…”

Lucas claims minorities are “running the country,”  however, her oppressed white husband Forrest has a net worth of $300 million and their company brings in an annual revenue of $150 million, according to Addicting Info.


[su_center_ad]Charlotte has had it, dammit! Won’t you please “fight back” for her gazillions of dollars?

Charlotte and her husband live in a sprawling 25,000 square foot home. To put that in perspective, I live in a 1,300 square foot home which has 3 bedrooms. So, the poor beaten down couple is really living in a modest home which is about 10 times the size of mine. I  live in one of those “minority” neighborhoods which according to her, is full of residents who are “running our country”.

The 33.6 acres where the Lucases reside, include an infinity swimming pool with a cascading waterfall and five buildings. Their estate has been the site of community benefits such as the Young Presidents Organization with guest speaker former President George W. Bush. Their home houses a 60-spot parking lot.

In total, they own five residences so they’re really just scraping by.

Charlotte whitesplained her Facebook post to RTV 6“I was very upset when I wrote that,” she said. “I will not elaborate other than to say that there are certain people who are trying to make the whole world eat what they want to eat and do what they want to do. I don’t think it’s any of their business what I put in my mouth. Thank you.”

Whatever that means.

Watch courtesy of RTV 6:

Please, for the sake of all that is good and decent, quit holding the rich white people down.[su_csky_ad]

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

144 responses to Wealthy ‘Lucas Oil’ Founder’s Facebook Rant: ‘I’m Sick And Tired of Minorities Running Our Country’

  1. mea_mark October 4th, 2014 at 2:33 pm

    I used to use Lucas oil on some equipment, never again.

    • StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 4:36 pm

      Add Lucas oil to the list of products I will never spend my money on.

    • Dwendt44 October 4th, 2014 at 5:23 pm

      Always thought it was overpriced second rate stuff anyway. I never tried any of that crap.

  2. Tammy Minton Haley October 4th, 2014 at 2:37 pm

    gee…i wonder who she was talking about with the “eat what they eat” comment…

    how did Bill Maher put it? oh, yes…
    “If seeing a picture of our beautiful, intelligent First Lady, makes you a rabid, frothing attack dog…maybe it’s YOUR problem.”

  3. NMAXXS October 4th, 2014 at 2:39 pm

    She can eat sh!t…and live.

    • whatthe46 October 4th, 2014 at 4:04 pm

      or die.

  4. Margie Bateman Osgood October 4th, 2014 at 2:40 pm

    And how much taxes did she say they paid each year? ……………Oh wait………….

    • granpa.usthai October 4th, 2014 at 9:00 pm

      no doubt a lot of $$$ on paper, but then when the write offs write off, not so many $ actually being sent to the treasury.

  5. OldLefty October 4th, 2014 at 2:43 pm

    My, minorities she means the top 1%?

    I agree!

  6. rg9rts October 4th, 2014 at 2:44 pm

    What does she have against WASPs ??

  7. Mike Butkus Jr. October 4th, 2014 at 2:52 pm

    I don’t think it’s any of their business what I put in my mouth. Thank you.”
    Oh dear lord…LOL!

    • tiredoftea October 4th, 2014 at 3:52 pm

      I’m guessing it’s not much and not often.

      • Anomaly 100 October 4th, 2014 at 4:05 pm

        Unless it’s her foot in her mouth.

        • tiredoftea October 4th, 2014 at 4:07 pm

          She still has room for Twinkies.

      • Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:38 pm

        ba ha ha ha ha!

      • granpa.usthai October 4th, 2014 at 8:58 pm

        you kidding? -they got ‘men for hire’. Just ask any Republican in DC.

  8. arc99 October 4th, 2014 at 2:54 pm

    Well I am sick and tired of rich white right wingers whining about the fact that in America, everybody is entitled to be treated equally, not just rich white people.

  9. veggiedude October 4th, 2014 at 3:12 pm

    I so pity people who miss how the good old days were, you know, back in the 50’s when segregation ruled and them commie atheists were put in their place with McCarthyism.

  10. Foundryman October 4th, 2014 at 3:25 pm

    Yeah!!!.. Me too..I’m sick and tired of having those minorities and all their money running everything and telling me what to do. Just who does that 1% think they are anyways?

  11. NW10 October 4th, 2014 at 3:50 pm

    This is bringing back memories of the video of those Open Carry loons who protested on the Grassy knoll. One of them said he was tired of “foreigners” dictating things and went on a rant about how we have a “foreigner from Kenya” as the President.

  12. tiredoftea October 4th, 2014 at 3:53 pm

    Yeah, Charlotte, democracy sucks when you’re an oligarch.

    • StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 4:33 pm

      High Five~!

    • Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:37 pm

      Ha Ha Ha, sorry gonna copy StoneyCurtisII and High Five~! *mine was louder*

      • tiredoftea October 4th, 2014 at 5:54 pm

        Loud is good.

  13. grammy97 October 4th, 2014 at 4:15 pm

    Considering what came out of her mouth, I don’t even want to know what she puts in her mouth.

  14. Leftside_Annie October 4th, 2014 at 4:16 pm

    Heh. Evidently the cowardly, racist bitch has removed her Facebook page. (Good riddance.)

  15. StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 4:33 pm

    Rich cry babies make me sick..

  16. StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 4:47 pm

    What she puts in her mouth is of no concern to me.

    • Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:36 pm

      But I am sure she’ll have some Biblical concerns if gay men said the same thing!

  17. StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 4:48 pm


  18. neworleans878 October 4th, 2014 at 5:02 pm

    Poor lady is so oppressed that the family company could barely afford the 121 million it took to put their name on the Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis.

    • Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:36 pm

      I know she almost choked living in her home that has 50 cars parking space!

  19. Mainah October 4th, 2014 at 5:05 pm

    It is estimated that over 17% of the world’s population are atheists. I would say that’s a lot of people. There are billions of Muslims. I would say that was a crap load of people. Then there are Hindu’s, Buddhist, Pagans, Wiccans, Satanist, Agnostics … and I’m sure I’ve missed a group or two. I am surprised she isn’t better educated.
    I really want to know where that rant stemmed from. That’s an odd thing to say. Why does she believe that any one gives a crap what goes in her mouth. shudder.

    • Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:35 pm

      More important fact is, how many of these put on papers they belong to one religion or other because there is no option listed for Atheist and you cannot leave the section blank. I can tell you at least in Sri Lanka, Nepal, India, China, Tibet and few more nations, there is no option to leave the Religion blank and MANY just choose some default religion to avoid the hassle. So, the real percentage of Atheist is very highly likely to be much greater!

    • granpa.usthai October 4th, 2014 at 8:55 pm

      Hell, China’s almost 1.4 billion and counting alone, + another 50 million or so living outside the country. India & associates have almost another billion. Neither of them are big on Americanized Christianity. And, of course, they aren’t near as WHITE as Mitt unless he’s wearing his spray on Latino tan.

  20. PBRMN October 4th, 2014 at 5:06 pm

    1% is a huge minority. I too am sick of the !% minority running/ruining this country

    • neworleans878 October 4th, 2014 at 5:13 pm

      Very off topic, but gotta know…your avatar…’68 Fast back or some other model or year Mustang?

      • Dwendt44 October 4th, 2014 at 5:20 pm

        Looks like ‘Elenore’. The ‘Gone in Sixty Seconds’ remake car.
        I liked the original version more.

      • fancypants October 4th, 2014 at 5:44 pm

        it looks more like a” ford Shelby” new Orleans
        special build and faster then your avg. mustang

  21. Rusty Shackleford October 4th, 2014 at 5:19 pm

    I found a better pic of her.

    • granpa.usthai October 4th, 2014 at 8:45 pm

      always crying for more!

  22. Hawthorne October 4th, 2014 at 5:27 pm

    She has apparently deleted her Facebook account.

  23. Szebastian Onne October 4th, 2014 at 5:33 pm

    Quote – – >> “I don’t think it’s any of their business, what I put in my mouth” – Charlotte Atkins Lucas of Lucas Oil Stadium

    Unquote – – >> So Mrs. Lucas, could you please given in writing that your 2% rich ‘mob’ of US of A, will also not interfere in business of anyone putting anything in their mouth, without them lobbying and including Bible, Court Battles to stop rights and decide for women’s body? Could you please?

  24. eddie1247 October 4th, 2014 at 5:39 pm

    The wealthy seem to have a lot to say as to what goes on in our country and they are in the upper 1% which makes them and you a minority.

  25. fancypants October 4th, 2014 at 5:41 pm

    Lucas oil products are a lot of hype Their gas additive sucks and does little for better mileage. BG has them beat in the automotive industry

  26. raincheck October 4th, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    “I don’t think it’s any of their business, what I put in my mouth”
    I wonder if it’s some kind of reference to Michelle Obama’s campaign to get kids to eat better because of childhood obesity… I heard some lady make some similar remark about that once…. “I’m NOT goin ta let Michelle Obama tell me how to feed MY Kids” Or some kind of nonsense to that effect… she can keep insisting on feeding her kids “crap” for all I care….

  27. secondlook October 4th, 2014 at 6:08 pm

    What does it say about republicans when they have to complain about a first lady trying to promote healthy eating to children during an obesity epidemic? Why is this woman so unhappy? They’re making out like bandits and getting their way about everything pretty much.

  28. Dawn Oceanside October 4th, 2014 at 6:25 pm

    Sorry sweetie, over 50% of the country voted for this minority President, TWICE. Only 5 other President’s in OUR country’s history have been able to accomplish this feat.
    As far as eating, 50% of children in THIS country are overweight, 30% obese, because they can’t afford healthy food, because YOU ASSHOLE’s get large tax breaks, and have our military preform FREE SECURITY around the world, such as country’s with O I L.
    BTW, many of OUR military are on food assistance, a rise of over 300% in the last decade. Proud witch?? Poor ol’ white witch bein’ held down ……LMAO@U

    • Dwendt44 October 5th, 2014 at 1:33 pm

      And another 20% of children don’t get enough to eat in the first place.

  29. jonquilofmars October 4th, 2014 at 6:26 pm

    Mrs. Lucas, if you don’t want people to be concerned with what you put in your mouth, maybe you shouldn’t stuff both feet into it on Facebook!

  30. April Thorpe October 4th, 2014 at 7:41 pm

    So I guess she hates the fact that Michelle Obama is taking an active lead in creating a healthy standard for our country and our nation’s children?

    How does that compare to past WHITE Presidents whose First Ladies also took a proactive role in the health and general welfare of this country?

    I don’t remember any complaints then. Oh, but wait…! This is a black woman telling all us uppity whites to stay in our place–rather than go out and oppress other people based on race, sex, creed, skin color, religion, and on and on.

    • Dwendt44 October 5th, 2014 at 1:32 pm

      traditionally, First Lady activities were more ‘hobby’ and a way to keep them out of the way of real important dealings. Michelle O. took a bigger handful of an important issue and keeps it in the spotlight.

  31. Kyara Peacock October 4th, 2014 at 8:03 pm

    Oh, but it’s OK for Charlotte Atkins Lucas and others of her ilk to tell
    people what to do. Last I checked, sweet-cheeks, millionaires and
    billionaires are MINORITIES and they are trying to tell the masses of
    our country what to do so they’re also part of the “riff raff’

  32. M D Reese October 4th, 2014 at 8:09 pm

    Well she is right about one thing–it IS the 1% who are running this country. My heart bleeds for this poor put-upon idiot.

  33. StoneyCurtisll October 4th, 2014 at 8:36 pm

    No ones business what I put in my mouth.

  34. Kthom October 4th, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    Both her and her husband haven’t always been wealthy. He used to be a truck driver and she worked in a beauty salon at least according to local Indianapolis media. You think that coming from a modest background she might have a little compassion for the other 99 percent. What a twit.

    • neworleans878 October 4th, 2014 at 8:51 pm

      Usually it’s the next generation or the generation after that are the ones who develop such contempt in such families.

      Can’t imagine what her children must be like.

  35. granpa.usthai October 4th, 2014 at 8:43 pm

    missing that Iraqi War kickback money in their offshore bank accounts, no doubt.

  36. tracey marie October 4th, 2014 at 9:33 pm

    Basically she is a racist pos blaming Mrs. Obama for her inbred racist rant. Poor dear, you outed yourself, we see you.

  37. RK Johnston October 4th, 2014 at 9:42 pm

    I am listening to a song by Lily Allen that I hereby dedicate to this twerpess:
    (If you are up on your phonetic alphabet, you’ll know the title!)

  38. searambler October 4th, 2014 at 10:05 pm

    “I don’t think it’s any of their business what I put in my mouth.”

    I know something you can put in your mouth…..

  39. firsthand white October 4th, 2014 at 10:17 pm

    Sounds like what you put in your rotten mouth is too small! a real man would
    fill it up and keep it shut stinky bitch!!

  40. Obewon October 4th, 2014 at 10:22 pm

    You can’t ever make these loons happy. She hates equal rights constitutionality upheld by her own conservative SCOTUS. Is she ranting about her conservative Saudi oil masters cutting WTI oil prices below $90/brl?

  41. bobrobertson October 4th, 2014 at 11:08 pm

    Is that a SPOT on my windows? Where’s Consuela? And when was the last time Jorge mowed our lawn” These lazy f’n Mexicans, why do we hire them??
    Oh that’s right, because we’re Republican CHEAPSKATES.

  42. Tammy Minton Haley October 4th, 2014 at 11:12 pm

    this “Lucas Oil” company is world-wide, with offices in Australia, the UK, and Europe…it produces hundreds of different lubricants, from “Fishing Reel Oil”, to drag car stuff…her FB page is gone (!), but the company has one, and a website, with a “Contact” link…

    • Tammy Minton Haley October 4th, 2014 at 11:14 pm

      i wrote a little note to the “Lucas Oil Heirs”, explaining that today was the day when their ancestor destroyed the family business because of her racism and bigotry….

  43. Doge of Yettis October 5th, 2014 at 12:16 am

    Wut?…”Eat what they eat and do what they do”!?!…she must be watching Fox ‘news’, too much…IMA half Mexican Atheist, and i could care less about what she eats or does…No one i know, does either.

  44. Glen Davis October 5th, 2014 at 12:24 am

    And I don’t want any of what comes OUT of her mouth…

    • neworleans878 October 5th, 2014 at 12:26 am

      Every once in a while they give themselves away…like tonight.

  45. Anthony DeLaTorre October 5th, 2014 at 12:58 am

    Dumb Liberals taking this out of context, She meant Minority meaning a small group of people(special interest groups) and the Majority of people meaning a shit ton of people( you and me) dummies

    • Viv Arney October 5th, 2014 at 3:39 am

      Ah the poor downtrodden rich POS. You just keep eating her splat, bagger. She’d squash you like a bug in a heartbeat.

    • RON Allen October 5th, 2014 at 6:02 am

      SO if we’re taking this out of context, then fill in the blanks! What Atheist, what Muslim, what other minority, OR special intrest group is telling anyone, especially her, a rich white person what she can or can’t do? What the hell restrictions does she have?! I don’t have $300 million & I own own house, employed, come & go as I please, tavel, have health insurance, own a couple of cars, kids in college & I’m a gun owner. And NO, I don’ believe anyone is comming to take my guns! I have no restritions on me other than the laws eveyone needs to abide by & MONEY, I don’t have 300 milion, so I can’t afford everything I’d like! And then to get peronal, what minority or special interest is stopping YOU from living your life?

      • Dwendt44 October 5th, 2014 at 1:25 pm

        Maybe she got in a long line at the checkout at Wal-mart.

        • RON Allen October 5th, 2014 at 5:40 pm

          Good one!

    • jasperjava October 5th, 2014 at 6:07 am

      She specifically mentioned atheists and Muslims as minority groups who are supposedly running the country. Since we’re not dumb conservatives, we can read the context quite well.

      The only minority who is running the country and imposing its will are the millionaires and billionaires who are trying to buy our democracy. Only 400 individuals control as much wealth as half the population combined. THAT’S a powerful “special interest group” that conservatives never seem to have any concern about.

    • Anomaly 100 October 5th, 2014 at 6:36 am

      Charlotte, is that you?

    • fahvel October 5th, 2014 at 11:48 am

      tony, you are a blank page and that’s good ’cause if you actually tried to use your brain, your head would explode.

    • Nicholas Russell Harris October 6th, 2014 at 11:19 am

      Aparently you are too damned stupid to read what she said. Go back under your bridge now troll. . .you have done enough here.

  46. Stacy Turner October 5th, 2014 at 1:20 am

    I heard Atheists run this country so I am here. What am I in charge of? Oh, wait…this thread is a conservafeel and no fact thread. I am out.

  47. R J October 5th, 2014 at 2:14 am

    I read this story and I think of this song

    Jeannie C. Riley – Harper Valley P.T.A.:

  48. labman57 October 5th, 2014 at 8:48 am

    This is essentially the mantra of today’s Republican Party.

  49. Angusomy October 5th, 2014 at 10:02 am

    Her husband supports grass roots racing across America. End of story.

  50. Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler October 5th, 2014 at 10:05 am

    Yeah, how dare people take away the Lucas family white rich privilege.

  51. Denise October 5th, 2014 at 10:32 am

    did I miss something while asleep? when did minorities start running the country?

    • Hogandda October 5th, 2014 at 2:00 pm

      Maybe she is really talking about a black man in the White House running things.

      • Yenta October 5th, 2014 at 2:47 pm

        Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

  52. fifthdentist October 5th, 2014 at 10:45 am

    She should try living for a month on minimum wage — in a fancy government housing unit — and see just how much she “can and cannot do.” She also would find the choices of what she can stick in her (greedy) mouth would be somewhat limited.

  53. lordboaz October 5th, 2014 at 12:04 pm

    What a dumb bitch

  54. Nzo Nelson October 5th, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    any words from a disconnected bitch, an ignoramus, cant be takin seriously… the minority quotient of millionaires and such is so small that I wouldnt let them suck my socks or eat my chittlins… pleas ask her to go frack herself….

  55. burqa October 5th, 2014 at 6:13 pm

    So you’re sick of minorities, Mrs. Lucas?
    Here are my thoughts regarding you, courtesy of the Mightey Pop:

  56. Pundit456 October 5th, 2014 at 7:16 pm

    Alan the fact that you can only rebuke her because of her wealth and not refute the truth or her statements is testament to the fact that even you must concede her points are valid.
    Some states are recognizing sharia law; the judiciary and lgbt are riding roughshod over our Constitution; our schools are absurdities suspending children for saying grace, sharing food or having normal beliefs and then making everyone else responsible for one or two children’s personal dietary restrictions.
    She is absolutely right that the country is being dictated to by sub cultural groups which she correctly refers to as minorities because minority is a numeric designation not a racial or religious one.

    • OldLefty October 5th, 2014 at 7:37 pm

      Alan the fact that you can only rebuke


      Unless the minority is the 1%, the burden is on her.

      As for what you said above, most is hooey when looked at more closely.

    • Tammy Minton Haley October 5th, 2014 at 8:47 pm

      what a bunch of racist-apologist bullshit…for the life of me, i cannot understand why you haven’t been banned–especially for some of your gay-bashing rhetoric…you’re a nasty, sour man…i don’t like you…

    • Anomaly 100 October 5th, 2014 at 9:32 pm

      Do I look like Alan? Is it the hair, or the smile?

      I wrote the post. She is a racist of the highest order and you are her apologist.

      Best regards,
      That Anomaly woman

    • Carolyn Hardy-Asfour October 6th, 2014 at 12:50 am

      If Christians who believe their belief system should be followed by all, would open their eyes, every time they scream this is a Christian land and religious law should be followed, they need to understand THEY are opening the door to Sharia law. And even tho this is a country of freedom of and from religion, the Constitution is a secular document, god is not mentioned, there is a reason for that and the proof is Sharia law.
      If you want to pray, fine do it, but follow what your bible teaches you about praying, that it should be in private.
      Gays and Lesbians are not riding roughshod over the Constitution, they are fighting for their equal rights which they are entitled to just like you or I. Your comments show you are bigoted and confused over what the Constitution truly says.
      Who are you to decide what a “Normal” belief is, if someone is Muslim, Catholic, Buddhist, etc. do you not consider them “Normal”. You do not choose where you are born, or even which religion you chose, these have been selected for you by your surrounding culture. if you were from another back ground and religion, how would you feel about the statements you have made?
      It’s ignorance that breeds hate, is this really something you want to teach your children, of which perhaps just might be gay.
      Read, learn, understand what the constitution says and means before you fall any further in to the rabbit hole.
      Although I am all about sharing food, the school did need to consider, if the child had say a peanut allergy, could have been fatal. I can see their point, which makes me wonder even more why people support Republicans, they are the ones cutting these free lunch programs/food stamps/housing for these children, so if you want to be mad at some one for a good reason, why don’t you start with your Congressman.
      Thank you for reading,
      From a very happy Atheist

      • 2tall4u2 October 7th, 2014 at 12:59 pm

        Bravo!!! from an equally proud and happy Atheist. 🙂

      • Pundit456 October 10th, 2014 at 6:12 pm

        You do not sound very happy.
        It is normal to believe that which is supported by physical evidence. It is normal to disregard beliefs which are unequivocally contradicted by all physical evidence. For example, it is not normal for a person to believe themselves to be one gender despite chromosome and DNA evidence to the contrary. This is not my judgement; it is simply a fact with which I take no exception.
        I made sure that my children knew that people choose whether or not to live a deviant lifestyle. They know that if they ever choose to live such a lifestyle they are expected to respect the family and keep that portion of their lives outside the family home. Fortunately my children are quite comfortable with their respective genders so that the issue is moot.
        It is ridiculous for a school to prohibit food sharing because is the school deems one child old enough to be culpable for sharing then the child with whom the food was shared is old enough to be aware of his/her dietary restrictions and bears responsibility for compliance. He/she can simply refuse the offer.
        Not only have I read the entire Constitution (not just the 1st, 5th and 14th amendments) I have also read the notes and minutes from the convention to draft the Constitution which contain records of discussions and debates which lead to the inclusion or exclusion of certain elements as well as the intentions of the convention. Should you decide to do likewise I suppose we could have an informed and intellectually stimulating discussion.
        Thank you for your thoughts.

        • flopdog October 10th, 2014 at 6:31 pm

          You’ve read the entire constitution? Wow. I had to do that in middle school.

          Now, have you read the 250,000 pages of the entire SCOTUS Reporter dating back to West v Barnes 2 U.S. 401 (1791.) Do you know the case law in Gibbons? Johnson v M’Intosh? Runkel? Plessy? Kepner? Kellogg? Griswold? Jones? Lopez? Raich?Have you Shepardized each one to see if more recent law has mooted each case? I have, and continue to do so every day.

          “Reading the constitution” is pointless without knowing the law derived from it.

          I suspect you actually know very, very little about Constitutional law as of 2014.

          • Pundit456 October 12th, 2014 at 11:17 am

            Was not necessary because there is nothing in the US Constitution that accords the force of law to any judicial ruling because all legislative power is vested in congress. The court has no constitutional authority to legislate; its rulings inform and bind lower courts; not the country.
            Try rereading the Constitution. It’s short and unequivocal.
            If you do, and you find anywhere in the Constitution or the Judiciary Act that court rulings constitute legislation, I would definitely be interested.

          • OldLefty October 12th, 2014 at 11:32 am

            The court has no constitutional authority to legislate


            This is correct.
            You need to tell that to the 4 conservative justices who think they are super-legislators.

          • flopdog October 12th, 2014 at 8:42 pm

            Indeed. Citizens United isn’t de facto legislation?

          • OldLefty October 12th, 2014 at 9:12 pm

            I always refer to Citizens United as the new campaign finance laws that the Supreme Court passed in 2010.

          • flopdog October 12th, 2014 at 9:37 pm

            I agree. I put Citizens United and MCCutcheon in the same crap law bucket as Plessy and Dred Scott. Wildly unconstitutional law specifically designed to buy elections.

            “The Court’s conservative majority believes that the First Amendment gives wealthy donors and powerful corporations the carte blanche right to buy an election but that the Fifteenth Amendment does not give Americans the right to vote free of racial discrimination.”

            Instead of sending (and “losing”) $20 billion+ in shrink wrapped pallets of $100 bills to Iraq, we could have given every citizen a verified ID w/ RFID free of charge. Then passed legislation that every single US citizen over 18 MUST vote, and that polls stay open for 48 uninterrupted hours, including one weekend day. Make it a national holiday. And if banks have kept ATM systems on essentially 100% uptime for decades, I think we can figure out secure electronic voting, hm?

            I suspect Congress would look very, very different if all Americans participated in the voting process instead of the pitiful turnouts our paleolithic elections draw.

          • flopdog October 12th, 2014 at 8:23 pm

            Ah, so Mapp does not regulate evidence obtained in searches? Roe does not regulate abortion? Terry does not regulate traffic stops? Lopez does not regulate federal power to declare gun-free zones? Raich does not give Congress power to regulate anything they want? Do you understand how Shepardizing works in litigation?

            You don’t think Plessy was de facto legislation?

            Do you understand the difference between regulation and legislation? Do you understand stare decisis and its effect on litigation? Ever read a brief? How are they argued? They argue precedent and case law. Your entire argument was concerning a single court case, not legislation.

            You think “it is not necessary” to read and understand case law in order to litigate? As I suggested, I suspect you actually know very, very little about Constitutional law as of 2014.

            Where, pray tell, did I imply that SCOTUS legislates?

          • Pundit456 October 12th, 2014 at 11:13 pm

            “…de facto legislation…” hmmm; I missed that provision in the Constitution; do you have a citation?
            Stare decisis is an internal scotus policy that is not even binding on the court as Kennedy demonstrated in Lawrence v Texas when he used a convoluted rationale to overturn Bowers v Hardwick.

            This is why the Constitution vests all legislative power in congress and outlines the procedure for enacting and repealing laws as well as amending the Constitution. It is not a quick or easy process because the law is not intended to be variable nor made on the whim of a few unelected individuals.

            As to your question, what exactly do you think de facto legislation means?

          • flopdog October 13th, 2014 at 12:43 am

            I really need to explain de facto law to you? Abortion is de facto legal due to SCOTUS case law. Shelby gutted and mooted the Voting Rights Act, because Roberts simply substituted the court’s judgment for Congress’s in deciding which states should be covered under Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which required voting rules in states with a history of discrimination to be pre-cleared by the Justice Department. Actual Congressional legislation is no longer enforced because SCOTUS decided it shouldn’t WITHOUT reconsideration by Congress. You really want me to continue?

            There is no section of US Code which prevents or permits unlimited, anonymous campaign contributions to political parties or candidates. Yet two major recent cases have made such law. There is no mention of such funding in the Constitution, there is no Congressional legislation about such funding: it is legal only because SCOTUS says it is. So if I donate $200 million to the next Republican Presidential Candidate, and request total anonymity, what law permits me to do this and not be prosecuted? Only a SCOTUS ruling: therefore de facto law.

            And as for that mumbo jumbo about stare decisis being an “internal SCOTUS policy;” you are of course, incorrect. Stare decisis is simply precedent; established and accepted case law throughout all US courts.

            You are talking philosophy and a world of fantasy that doesn’t exist. I could fill volumes with law that has nothing to do with Congress. I am talking about the law as it is enforced and litigated today. IOW, the real world. YMMV.

          • Pundit456 October 13th, 2014 at 7:28 am

            If you actually read the voting rights act you would know that it includes a provision for the court to take the action it took.
            Apparently you subscribe to the misconception that unconstitutional means unfair.
            Unconstitutional means a direct conflict with the US constitution.
            The FIRST article of the US Constitution says all legislative power is vested in congress. Therefore “de facto legislation” is a violation of the Constitution.
            There is no constitutional provision that accords the power of law to precedent; precedent is not law and “case law” is not legislation.
            Schoolhouse Rock produced a video on how a bill becomes a law. It may help you to understand the legislative process.

          • OldLefty October 13th, 2014 at 7:52 am

            provision for the court to take the action it took


            Can you cite that ‘provision’?

            Many believe that the majority of the Robert’s court ruling constitute “de facto legislation”.

          • flopdog October 13th, 2014 at 2:53 pm

            Unconstitutional means unconstitutional. Don’t be foolish, and don’t assume you know what I think.

            Voting Rights Act? You are incorrect. Change requires approval of the AG or DC Circuit. The Petitioners did an end run around the law by having that coverage struck down in Shelby. New law. Next.

            What law permits me to give huge sums of money anonymously to political figures and organizations? Got the US Code cite?

            What law forbids me from building a school for whites only? Cite please?

            What law interned Japanese Americans in WW2? Cite?

            Everson created the wall of separation between church and state. Griswold created the right of privacy. In fact, have a lesson:

            · Mapp v. Ohio (1961) – held that evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment shall be excluded from evidence at trial. The “exclusionary rule,” originally devised by the Court in Weeks v. United States (1914), is now the primary way that the Fourth Amendment is enforced. It is not mentioned at all in the text of the Fourth Amendment.

            · New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) – the Court required that public officials suing others for defamation must prove actual malice – a requirement that was not previously in the defamation torts. This radically altered the defamation torts of libel and slander which had existed for centuries.

            · Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) – the Court struck down a law restricting contraceptives as violating the constitutional “right to privacy.” The right to privacy was not explicitly mentioned in the text of the Constitution, but the Court held that it could be inferred by reading several of the rights in the Bill of Rights in combination.

            · Miranda v. Arizona (1966) – the Court held that the Fifth Amendment requires that a defendant be informed of his rights before being subjected to custodial interrogation. The Fifth Amendment does not explicitly say this; the Court held that the clause prohibiting being forced to incriminate oneself required that defendants be warned about waiving their rights before being questioned.

            · Katz v. United States (1967) – the Court held that the Fourth Amendment protected against electronic eavesdropping even though it was carried out without a physical trespass into the home, dramatically reversing Olmstead v. United States (1928), a case decided nearly 40 years before.

            So, in your opinion ALL that law is unconstitutional. Guess what. SCOTUS disagrees.

            You seem to have the weird misconception that all law comes directly from Congress, and “corrections” must go through Congress. Wrong. In Marbury the Court appropriated the right of the Supreme Court to void legislation passed by Congress if the Court determined it to be at variance with the Constitution. If that isn’t legislating from the bench I don’t know what it.

            Your problem is that you assume what the constitution says is how things are done, and you seem to be unaware of the details of exactly how law is made and rejected in the real world. That’s your choice, but it’s not how the country is actually run.

    • deckbose October 6th, 2014 at 10:45 am

      Do you have even one single link to corroborate your claims?

    • mammasgirl October 6th, 2014 at 10:59 am

      What states are recognizing sharia law? Tell me please.

    • RoughAcres October 6th, 2014 at 5:55 pm

      You sound like that “housewife in Florida” whose YouTube video is making the rounds. She talks about “articles” she’s read which prove all of this paranoid stuff – you must be reading and hearing the same information.

      • 2tall4u2 October 7th, 2014 at 12:57 pm

        which one?

    • Larry Schmitt October 6th, 2014 at 8:28 pm

      LGBT managing to obtain the rights they’re entitled to is running roughshod over the constitution? Please explain, we have all night.

    • Superhamster Superhamster October 9th, 2014 at 12:56 pm

      Stop watching Fox News. Those Fox anchors sure are hot, though, even if they probably aren’t human.

      • Jahmaykah October 11th, 2014 at 1:38 pm

        I dislike everything about fox news the word fox says it all those racist pigs on it chose to broadcast things that favors them alone I wouldn’t watch a show on fox if it’s the only station that exists

  57. nadiasindi October 5th, 2014 at 9:25 pm

    Ms. Lucas how about criminal official who are committing fraud, forgery and big time crimes, by stealing our homes, etc..etc..etc..???!!!

    Oregon’s former A.G.Frohnmayer is preventing me getting employed, made me homeless! Put a lien fully paid Condo and sold it!

    He is charging $550.00 an hour and his law firm Harrang is the D.A. of Lane County, City Attorney and the U of Oregon too!!

    Frohnmayer’s committed more fraudulent crimes,forgery than any elected/nonelected official! And noone is holding him accountable!,3369919

    Frohnmayer against Smith “Peyote Persecution Shows Societal Racism!

    Please sign both petitions.

    And this one with Causes too. Thanks!

  58. rat618 October 5th, 2014 at 10:23 pm

    Like she built Lucas Oil…hey I’m tired of rich white folks who inherit their money and then act like they actually did something to gain that wealth.

  59. Carmen Jones October 6th, 2014 at 11:05 am

    Lmao…she’s a dummy…doesn’t she know white people are the minority now..

  60. Nicholas Russell Harris October 6th, 2014 at 11:16 am

    She just almmed into a brick wall on that one!

  61. Darrell West October 6th, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    It is minorities who build this country the first place.It is her who have been having a silver spoon in her mouth have not done nothing to help this country at all.

    • Massif1 October 12th, 2014 at 5:46 pm

      wuuuuut? LOL

  62. Tory Gates October 6th, 2014 at 5:30 pm

    Very sad when someone who has lived her whole life in privilege (or if not, has forgotten where she came from) says things that are so patently false and just plain stupid…here’s the .0001%, folks…

  63. Corri October 7th, 2014 at 12:24 am

    uh-oh… I guess she likes to put her foot in her mouth. In that case, she really is in the minority, not a lot of people are contortionists and can do that.

  64. vladimatt October 7th, 2014 at 12:52 pm

    “there are certain people who are trying to make the whole world eat what they want to eat and do what they want to do”

    She’s so completely self unaware… just like the rest of her White Power Party.

  65. 2tall4u2 October 7th, 2014 at 12:55 pm

    This bitch really loved the taste of her foot. smmfh

  66. Superhamster Superhamster October 9th, 2014 at 12:54 pm

    I would still do her, over and over. Then at the end reveal that my great grandfather was black.

    • Jahmaykah October 11th, 2014 at 1:33 pm

      Super hamster lol hahaha u so crazy.. shi just ignorant. Sad how ppl love to hate I don’t overstand racism at all n never will I hate at one due to their skin tone or their sexual preferences. . Etc or religious belief.. just sad all that money n she still miserable guess money truly can’t buy happiness

  67. Pundit456 October 10th, 2014 at 3:29 pm

    Here is your link on Sharia Law
    This blog contains links to the US Constitution and the Judiciary Act
    I will not bother to link you to the definition of subculture.
    As to your absurd assertion, which is obviously intended to disparage groups who do not subscribe to the lgbt delusion, republican and democrat were once simply disparate ideologies in a political context. Now they and the tea party are ploys to garner political support for the sake of (their) job security. However people are not required to accept an alternate view of reality in order to interact with any non-lgbt member of any political party.
    Conversely, lgbt embraces sexual behavior which is antithetical to normal human sexual behavior; and is disdained by the predominate culture to which lgbt refuses to comport which relegates it to sub cultural status.

    • flopdog October 10th, 2014 at 6:23 pm

      Well considering the Sharia law case you quote took place two years ago, and it is unconstitutional to make a law respecting of any religion, the fed court was correct in striking down the law.

      The blog to which you refer is your own, and has nothing on it but a rehash of your post.

      • Pundit456 October 12th, 2014 at 11:21 am

        First of all I do not believe I addressed you before you replied to me but had you read my comment it was not the blog but the links within the blog that the point.
        The ruling has yet to be overturned.

        • flopdog October 12th, 2014 at 8:49 pm

          “The blog?” It’s your own blog, so you can lose the attempt to present it as a source of anything but your own opinion.. There are three links within. One to the Constitution, one to the Judiciary Act and another link back to your blog. What, exactly, do you think that proves?

          You didn’t address me? So what? Are you new to online political discourse? This isn’t a private discussion between you and anyone, and all are free to reply to any post they choose.

          The Awad District ruling has yet to be overturned because no one has appealed it to the Circuit, nor is it likely. Why? Because the case is TERMINATED. Here is the PACER record:

          and here is the actual ruling:


          You seem very unfamiliar with how the US legal system actually operates, and are way out of your league.

        • flopdog October 13th, 2014 at 3:20 pm

          I notice that when someone debunks one of your claims “the ruling has yet to be overturned” you cut and run.

          In the post below I list the PACER listing for Awad and the actual ruling itself, which neatly smacks your “Sharia is coming to America!” claim. Yet you have nothing to say.

          Any reason for that?

          • Pundit456 October 15th, 2014 at 10:36 am

            As long as you choose to debate irrefutable facts there is no foundation for meaningful discussion.

          • flopdog October 15th, 2014 at 1:00 pm

            Sharia law is coming to America is an “irrefutable fact?”

            I suspect you’re really saying “I have no idea how to use PACER, and don’t feel like reading the actual ruling, which is very clear proof that Sharia law is NOT coming to America.”

            As for your claim “all law comes from Congress,” you don’t seem to understand enough about how the law works in the US today, though you do write well.

            Yes, it is indeed also irrefutable that judges legislate from the bench, and have since John Jay and Marbury. Constitutional or not, it is done, and much of what regulates our daily lives is the product of jurisprudence, not congressional legislation.

            Next time a cop stops you and asks to search your car, try and remember what section of US Code permits you to tell him he may not.

            You have a nice day now.

  68. ConnectedOne October 11th, 2014 at 9:28 am

    Her LinkedIn account is rich, too.

    Executive Vice-President & Co-Owner
    Lucas Oil Products IncJuly 1989 – Present (25 years 4 months)
    Charlotte’s Beauty Salon1972 – 1989 (17 years)
    English Sterling High School
    English, Math, Speech1964 – 1967

  69. Jerry Adams October 11th, 2014 at 9:30 am

    That’s all they know is money. That is there God. MONEY is their God and this is their symbol $.

  70. Jahmaykah October 11th, 2014 at 1:31 pm

    No need to take back they can keep their apology in my book she said it she meant it apologizing now is like slicing someone e one open n putting a band aid on it. She blaming Muslims gays n all minority group for her 300 million dollar net worth we all are running what? Wtf are we running in 2 years when I own my own business n reach such a net worth I will be happy to thank all those who help m get there