Two Roads Diverged...

Several weeks ago Walter Williams remarked while guest-hosting Rush’s show that perhaps it is time to admit that this nation will no longer continue the charade of abiding by the Constitution and simply proclaim that it is null and void. After all, the federal government by its very actions declares that fact every day. Williams pointed out that much, if not most of what the federal government does and spends has no legal basis in any clause of the Constitution. And while the Supreme Court has given the feds the appearance of legal cover on many occasions, no action of the Court has the authority to amend the original text. In short, many of the Courts rulings are simply wrong, either by intention or accident. After all, members of the court are just people, subject to the same personal and political vagaries as the most partisan politician.

What is the Constitution after all? Well, only the document written by the founding states which created the federal government to serve their few collective needs and defined the powers and limits within which it must operate. The states ceded power and authority in those few areas, but retained the final oversight, which is amendment. Power flows from the states to the feds on the states’ terms, not vice versa. That which the states give the states can take back. The drafters never imagined that the federal government would dictate terms to the states and to the people. But just in case they included the 10th Amendment. You know, the one the feds pretend does not exist while it actually does, all the while finding new rights and powers which don’t actually exist but the feds pretend they do via the ‘doctrine’ of penumbras and emanations. A living, evolving document if you will. Poppycock!

Federal officers and officials and judges love to cherry pick the Constitution, abiding by those parts that they like (such as extracting taxes and spending money), while conveniently ignoring the more troublesome parts, like the whole religious freedom thing or the part about the people bearing arms. The trouble with this approach is that the Constitution is like pregnancy. Well, not exactly like it but in one important aspect it is, i.e. a woman can’t be a little bit pregnant. Either she is or she isn’t. Similarly (stay with me), the Constitution is an all or none proposition. It must either be accepted and followed in toto or not at all. To accept anything less is lawlessness which leads to anarchy. In another way it is like the relationship between the Holy Bible, Christianity and Christians. The Bible is God’s written covenant between Himself and His people. For a Christian to ignore or disobey some parts while accepting and following others begs the question of whether that individual is truly a Christian. Can you truly be a Christian if you reject part of God’s Word? Likewise, can this nation truly call itself a lawful constitutional republic if it rejects parts of its foundational law? ‘No’ anyone?
If the nation collectively disagrees with a portion of the Constitution or if times have changed to the point of requiring modification, that is available through amendment. But only through amendment. Unilateral decisions by presidents or Congresses or Supreme Courts cannot and must not be permitted to change the fabric of the document. That is nothing more than rule by fiat, by decree, by the whims of men. And that is disaster. The beauty of our Constitution is its protection of the rights of the minority from the whims of the majority. The ruling majority cannot simply ride roughshod over the lives of those not in power. They cannot trample the God-given birthright of those they disagree with. But, if they are permitted to freely trample the Constitution at will then there is no hedge of protection otherwise available to those standing in their path of destruction. At that point we cease being the United States of (or in, as they used to say) America and have become a Unified State of America, where all power is vested in one federal government which alone dictates the scope of its power and authority. The rights of the citizens are not recognized as deriving from their God, but rather from their government. And what the government gives it can take back. The states have no power, if they even exist in more than name only. The people have no recourse, no ability to petition the government with their grievances for a just redress. Eventually anarchy and tyranny will rule the day. We will have sunk to the basest expression of human depravity. Perhaps, just maybe the drafters knew this about human nature and set about to write a document which took that into account. The document works as long as we all agree to abide by the complete, unaltered manuscript. We must also understand and teach our children that what the Constitution provides for is not pure, unfettered democracy which sounds good to the untrained ear but always leads to tyranny of the majority over the minority; but rather a republic, with democratically elected representatives, and with a Supreme Law that protects the God-given rights of the smallest minority among us. We must elect and appoint and hire people to all levels of government that have a strong sense of morality and ethics and the rule of law, who will respect every dotted-i and crossed-t of the Constitution if there is any hope for the survival of our republic. George Washington understood this when he said that “Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.”

So how about it, is it time to throw in the towel and relegate the Constitution to a resting place in the National Archives? Is it too late to be saved? Can we find enough like-minded people to pool our resources and martial our strengths for one last great hurrah?! Time will tell, in very short order.

How about it Mr. Franklin, have we kept the Republic you gave us? Furthermore, can we keep it?

I pray to God that we can and will.

King For A Day, Year, Term, Life?

The liberal progressives love to talk about the Constitution being a 'living,

breathing' document. How is that possible when they have deliberately

killed it? It's dead as a doornail as my mother would say. Proof of that is

that the current federal government does anything and spends anything it

darn well pleases and any of us that raise constitutional objections to their

behavior are laughed out of Washington. A city named for the man who

had the most reverent respect for the Constitution. We used to talk about

being a nation of laws, not men. History clearly shows that when the whim

of men rule without legal restraint, tyranny and horror follow. The same

holds true for a pure democracy. Simple, unfettered majority rule is merely

anarchy by another name. Actually its worse, its oppression and abuse of

the minority by majority mob rule. That's why our Constitution did not

establish a simple democracy with majority rule. We are a constitutional

representative republic with democratically elected public servants. The

majority is constrained by the mutually agreed to provisions and restrictions

of the Constitution. Furthermore, changing any tenet of the Constitution

is a laborious and time-consuming task, requiring far more than a simple

majority vote. As it should.

So today, with our Constitution essentially relegated to tawdry Saturday

Night Live skits for laughs, we are no longer a national of laws. We are

a nation ruled by the whim of the man-of-the-moment. Right now that

man is Barack Hussein Obama. Whatever he says goes, whatever he

wants he gets. Rule by executive order and regulatory fiat, not by

constitutional principles or even legitimate legislation. Take over private

businesses and industry at the drop of a hat. This is fascist tyranny.

Tomorrow the man (or woman) of the moment might be Mitt Romney

or Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. I don't care who it is,

I don't like it. I don't want to be ruled (vs. governed) by anyone under

such tyrannical circumstances, whether right or left, Republican or

Democrat, conservative or liberal, libertarian or progressive. The rule

of any man, if unfettered will lead to disaster; no matter how seemingly

benevolent or altruistic the original intentions.

In my estimation, the survival of our nation rests upon our ability to

restore the Constitution and the rule of law to its rightful preeminence

in a very short period of time. Failing this, I fear all is lost.

Paper Chase

I'm no wild-eyed rabid 'birther' on the question of Barack Obama's eligibility to serve as President, but his recalcitrance on coming clean with his official birth certificate is of passing interest. The Constitution does require that our President be a natural born U.S. citizen. John McCain, born in the Panama Canal Zone has produced his full birth certificate on several occasions and the U.S. Senate has even passed an opinion on his eligibility. So why all of the secrets Mr. Obama? To date he has not produced the official, original long-form birth certificate from Hawaii, his purported birth state. He has only produced a short 'Certificate of Live Birth' which appears to have been created around 2001. He has also spent a lot of lawyer time and money keeping the original document locked up. It is curious that he would make such a fuss over a simple constitutional requirement that could be cleared up within minutes of releasing the birth certificate. Strange. A number of parties have filed various state and federal lawsuits to try and resolve the issue, most met with laugher and dismissal. To date, none have successfully been able to subpoena the necessary document. Which raises an interesting question in my mind; is it incumbent upon the person seeking the office of President to provide verifiable proof that he is constitutionally eligible to serve (as John McCain has voluntarily done), or is it necessary for some party (say one of the States) to challenge a candidate's eligibility? It would seem to me that the logical answer is that the party positively seeking the office must provide proof of compliance with all constitutional requirements. Why would the country be required to simply accept someone's word as proof positive that they are compliant? Who would lie about such a thing? Hmmm, I wonder. But who would obfuscate as well? And why? And if the party seeking office is not required to provide the proof but rather some party must challenge the question of eligibility, then it would seem that the candidate in question would not be legally able to hide the necessary documents to either exonerate them or prove the questioning parties' case. Isn't that what discovery is all about? And since this is a fundamental constitutional requirement, why can't a party who has standing (such as a State) get their case heard? Why are they all dismissed? We have a crucial, fundamental constitutional question that is unresolved and the courts (the place that these questions are supposed to be resolved) will not allow the issue to be adjudicated. Stranger still. Who's pulling the strings here? So what we are left with is merely the President asserting that he is a natural born United States citizen because...he says he is. "Just take my word for it." As Indiana Jones would say, "Trust me." Well, Mr. Obama, frankly we don't trust you because you have given us no reason to trust you. We have an old saying, trust but verify. We are still waiting on the verify part. And waiting. And waiting.

Who Says 'A' Must Say 'B' --WFB, Jr.

William F. Buckley, Jr. often admonished people that who says ‘A’ must say ‘B.’ The gist being that ideas and thoughts have logical natural consequences. Sometimes these consequences are not what the person had in mind when postulating ‘A.’ Many conservatives today make the argument (and quite correctly I might add) that the health care reform bills winding their way through Congress are patently unconstitutional. I believe that this position is correct within the scope of Article 1, Section 8 and the 10^th Amendment. The federal government simply lacks the authority and power to engage in these activities and to compel citizens to do or not do certain things relative to health care. The states, on the other hand would be free to pursue universal health care plans within the confines of their borders and according to their state constitutional dictates. Having posited all of this, now who says ‘A’ must say ‘B.’ Under these same U.S. constitutional proscriptions I believe that Medicare and Social Security must also be viewed in the same light; unconstitutional. They simply are not specific enumerated powers of the federal government under Article 1, Section 8. And please don’t bring up the preamble, the general welfare clause, the necessary and proper clause or the interstate commerce clause. These attempts to subvert the clear language and intent of Article 1, Section 8 have been debated to death and handily dispatched. In addition, I realize that various Supreme Courts have ruled several times in the past to uphold the constitutionality of these programs. This merely speaks to the fallibility of the court. The court is composed of mere mortals and numerous courts have been reversed and nullified. I maintain that the court is every bit as political as the executive and legislative branches. Justices are appointed by Presidents to further the administration’s agenda. And over time I believe that justices embark upon crusades for their own personal agendas. To believe that the court is painfully objective and unbiased in its decisions and rigorously faithful to the actual text and original intent of the Constitution is at best laughable and at worst dangerous. Thus, I call upon my fellow conservative revolutionaries to carry our crusade against a federal health care takeover to the next logical step of disbanding Medicare and Social Security (hopelessly bankrupt as they are) and giving the states the opportunity of taking over these types of programs if they see fit.

U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 4

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Paging Senators Nelson, Landrieu...

Two Paths Diverged in a Wood

I am seeing more and more articles in papers, letters to the editor and writings in blogs comparing the current state of our nation to the times of the Revolutionary or Civil Wars. While I don’t think we have reached that degree of disagreement yet, there are some valid points and comparisons. And I am certainly not calling for a violent revolt or overthrow of our federal government. However, I do disagree with those who posit that such an eventuality could never happen here again. Or, that some States might choose separation in lieu of remaining in a socialist or fascist nation. In my estimation, human nature, emotions and passions have not changed in thousands of years. The same ideas and fears that launched those conflicts are still very real and very much alive today. As the writers of the Declaration of Independence related, we Americans are very tolerant and disposed to suffer rather than take hasty action. There is a point, though; at which something must be done. The United States has been slipping free from its constitutional moorings for decades due to the natural tendency of governments to amass more power and the refusal of the States to squash such efforts. We have suffered higher taxes, bloated deficit spending and ridiculous government regulation and intervention in business and the marketplace for far too many years. The current Obama administration has taken this effort to new heights with ferocious speed. We now have trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, government takeovers of banks and automobile companies, pay czars, diversity czars, insane Cap & Trade bills, an attempted takeover and socialization of our health care industry; in short nationalization of the private business and lives all American citizens. This is blatant fascism! I firmly believe that the current administration does not like the way the United States of America is constituted and seeks to completely remake American in its perverted image. This administration regards the Constitution as a bad joke perpetrated upon the American people. Seeing the States unwillingness to hold its feet to the constitutional fire, this administration essentially ignores the Constitution and its restrictions, laughs it off as an old, irrelevant, living, evolving, pliable document (written by white male slave owners) and ridicules anyone who actually still holds to its tenets. The philosophy in D.C. is that the federal government can do anything it wants to do and no one and nothing can stop it. If the Constitution gets in the way, trample and ignore it. After all, what are the consequences? Well, up to this point, none. If the Supreme Court (a bunch of political appointees with personal agendas) or the States won’t enforce the supreme rule of law upon the Congress and the President, what are the mere People to do? Thus, the stage is set for fascism, tyranny and ultimately, anarchy. Yes, the People elected this President and Congress; but with the expectation that they would act within their legally defined authority under the constraints of the Constitution. Now that we are beyond that point, we very quickly are becoming a nation of men, not laws. Don’t forget, we are a Constitutional Republic with democratically elected representatives, whose power and authority is bound by the limits of the Constitution. We are not a pure democracy; which always leads to the tyranny of the majority over the minority. When the highest elected officials of the land will not obey the most sacred and fundamental laws of our nation, why would they expect the People to act any differently (or better)? The question of 2010 is whether the ballot box will be able to stop and reverse this dangerous slide we have begun into fascism and tyranny. If a major reversal occurs in that election, followed by another in 2012, we may avert a constitutional disaster. That would require the undoing of decades of creeping lawless socialism in our federal government, regulations and statutes. This would amount to a bloodless coup to overthrow the Obama/Pelosi/Reid troika. If this juggernaut is not stopped at the ballot box, however; the path to secession movements or other action may fall into place. I fervently pray this does not happen.

“"The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men." -Samuel Adams”

Whoa!

With a clear understanding of the history of the writing of the U.S. Constitution, I as a legitimate party to that covenant and upon close inspection finding no mention of health care or health insurance; demand that the federal government cease and desist any intrusion into these areas until and unless an amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been duly passed granting such authority to the federal government. And yes, I seriously believe that this stipulation would apply to Medicare, and by extension; to such programs as Social Security and the federal minimum wage.

Breach of Contract

Five political appointees in black robes do not unmake the Constitution. There is no such thing as the Supreme Court, there are only nine justices. People who are imperfect and biased. When the justices function within the boundaries of the Constitution I respect their opinions. When they stray beyond those boundaries, which they have many times I have no respect for their opinions. They then become part of the problem instead of the solution. It is the duty of the President and Congress to reign in the justices when they exceed their assigned authority. There are many horrific rulings which need to be nullified. They do not own the Constitution or have the final, ultimate say about what it means. The Constitution is a contract between the States, which wrote the Constitution and thus created the Federal Government; and the People. The Supreme Court is not a party to that contract. We can all read it and understand what it means. It's time for the People to take back their Constitution and put the Supreme Court, the Congress and the President in their respective places. Which is the back seat, not the driver's seat.

XXVIII Amendment to the United States Constitution

• All laws, programs, rules and regulations enacted by the Federal Government of the United States shall apply to all federal elected officials, all federal appointed officials and all federal employees and contractors equally and without exception. Yes, it's retroactive.
• Members of Congress and the U.S. Senate, appointed federal officials, and federal employees and contractors shall not have the use of any federal government supplied, contracted or run gymnasium, cafeteria, postal service, hair or beauty salon or any other personal convenience service or facility. They shall mingle with the common folk for all of these services.
• No member of Congress or the U.S. Senate, appointed federal official or federal employee or contractor may use any private or private federal government conveyance or transportation. They shall drive their own private automobiles and ride public or commercial buses, subways, trains, boats, ferries or air transportation. They shall not be given any special parking or special treatment or advancement in line for ticket purchase, check-in, baggage check-in or security checks. They created the T.S.A., let them enjoy it. Reimbursement for purchase of transportation for official federal government business shall be granted if approved by the appropriate supervisor and subject to public open records review and if within budget constraints.
• The Interstate Commerce Clause shall mean only that the Federal Government may intervene in a regulatory capacity to prevent a State from imposing unreasonable, prohibitive tariffs, taxes, fees or surcharges on real tangible goods crossing its border(s) to insure free and fair trade between the States. It does not give the Federal Government freedom to regulate any business in any fashion.
• There are no penumbras or emanations from the original text of the Constitution and its approved Amendments. (R.I.P. William F. Buckley, Jr.).

Barry in Wonderland

Eureka! I have figured it out. Barry has no respect for the U.S. Constitution because it was written prior to 1865 and by all white men to boot. In his perverted, twisted fantasy world it simply does not apply to him.

New Sheriff in Town

Now that the Obama administration has officially jettisoned the rule of law in the United States (by virtue of arbitrarily voiding the valid contracts of Chrysler investors) I reserve the new right to ignore any federal law I choose with total impunity. Praise the Lord! Thank you Barry. We can also now quit teaching the U.S. Constitution to our children since it is null and void. Ah, what freedom!

Hey King George Obama...This Declaration's for You

A lot of people have been reading the Constitution lately, and that's a good thing. For a change read the Declaration of Independence. It will sober you up. I can imagine that if its writers were here today they would march up Pennsylvania Avenue and nail the Declaration onto the gate of the White House for King George Obama!
http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm

Unhinged

I have come to the sad realization that I must foreswear any and all fealty, support, trust, faith, allegiance, respect and recognition of the current United States Presidential Administration and United States Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate and the Federal Court System; in short the current alleged United States Federal Government. This decision has not come quickly or without careful consideration. For many years I have firmly believed that the majority of legislation, spending and federal programs have been and remain unconstitutional and illegal under the strict limitations and enumerated powers of the United States Constitution. Repeated elections of new Congresses and Presidential administrations have not remedied the situation and the federal courts have been wholly unwilling to correctly interpret and enforce the supreme laws of the land upon a recalcitrant federal behemoth. What recourse do loyal and patriotic true Americans have? To submit to and recognize such a renegade government merely provides a guise of false legitimacy. I cannot in good conscience be a party to such activity. The election of this current President and Congress has drastically accelerated the dissolution of any illusion of a grounding of the federal government upon the foundation of the Constitution. As witness the move to nationalize private banks, nationalize the automobile manufacturing industry, nationalize the private health care system, nationalize the mortgage industry, nationalize retirement savings accounts in Social Security, abridge First Amendment rights in considering reinstating the so-called Fairness Doctrine, promoting and enabling abortion thus denying constitutional rights to unborn U.S. citizens, attempting to restrict the free exercise of religion in public schools, government institutions and public forums, attempting to restrict Second Amendment gun rights, refusing to defend our borders and sovereignty, refusing to enforce legitimate federal immigration laws and generally usurping the States and People of their retained rights by passing laws, spending money and establishing federal programs for which there is no specific enumerated federal authority or power. Quite simply, the current federal government is illegal and unconstitutional. Not to mention fiscally and morally bankrupt. No doubt, the people who fought to obtain our freedom and established this nation would be horrified to see how subsequent generations of public servants have perverted and bastardized their gift. How shameful and disgraceful. I just pray that we come to our senses and correct the course of our foundering ship of state before we pass the point of no return. Until then, I hold the current federal government in contempt and shall work to reinstate the United States Constitution and a legitimate federal government.

Please Wake Up Paul Revere!

The U.S. Constitution and the American experiment are truly dead.  This unconstitutional, neo-Nazi automaker bailout loan is just another of many nails in the coffin.  Over the last few months we have witnessed the surreal vision of the federal government nationalizing one private industry after another.  It has been fast and easy enough to make Adolph blush.  The American people don’t want it yet our moronic ‘public servants’ are trying to cram it down their throats.  I will not purchase a car made by the new Big-3 and will urge everyone I talk with to do likewise.  Take heed, the federal government is not too big to fail.  Hear the winds of the second American revolution beginning to blow.