Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category
Enumerated powers, cont’d.
“The powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written.”
- Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Now consider what Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 33:
“But it will not follow from [the Constitution] that acts of the [federal government] which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the [states], will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.“
Simply put, when the federal government acts outside its constitutional powers, it should be considered an act of usurpation.
Clearly, any branch of government operating outside the bounds of their limited authority is unconstitutional, but the problem appears that nothing has been clearly codified. If our legal system gave the same consideration to high crimes, treason, and usurpations as it did to, say, fraud and murder, our elected and appointed officials would know precisely what they could–and couldn’t–get away with.
More to follow.
In: Politics · Tagged with: Constitution, Enumerated Powers Act
Howard Dean: We don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution!
“I don’t think it’s unconstitutional but I don’t care if it is or not. I think that the courts will make that decision.”
- Howard Dean – Democratic National Committee Chairman and former presidential candidate, in reference to Obamacare
In: Politics, Quotes · Tagged with: Constitution, Howard Dean, Obamacare
Pass the Enumerated Powers Act
For society to function properly, it must live by laws. We citizens have laws we must follow, and our government has laws they must follow as well – the Constitution. Unfortunately, the Constitution has been largely marginalized and ignored by the federal government.
There is solution: the Enumerated Powers Act.
The Enumerated Powers Act (EPA) has been introduced during each session of Congress since 1995, but the bill is sent to committee – never to be considered again. It simply states that Congress must cite the article, section, and clause of our Constitution that grants them the authority to pass any legislation. What senator or representative could be against the Constitution? After all, they each swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution.” During the 111th Congress, Congressman John Shadegg (R – Ariz.) had the support of 70 co-sponsors for the EPA, up from 53 during the 110th. The momentum is on our side, but unfortunately Mr. Shadegg retired in 2010. So ‘We the People’ must contact the representatives we sent to Washington and urge them to pass the EPA in order to ensure constitutional government.
In an age where the federal government passes bills that number in the thousands of pages, I have posted the EPA in full below:
A BILL
To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Enumerated Powers Act’.
SEC. 2. SPECIFICATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR ENACTMENT OF LAW.
(a) Constitutional Authority for This Act- This Act is enacted pursuant to the power granted Congress under article I, section 8, clause 18, of the United States Constitution and the power granted to each House of Congress under article I, section 5, clause 2, of the United States Constitution.
(b) Constitutional Authority Statement Required- Chapter 2 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 102 the following new section:
‘Sec. 102a. Constitutional authority clause
‘Each Act of Congress shall contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act. The failure to comply with this section shall give rise to a point of order in either House of Congress. The availability of this point of order does not affect any other available relief.’
(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 2 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 102 the following new item:
‘102a. Constitutional authority clause.’.
Join the Victory Institute’s Facebook page, Pass the Enumerated Powers Act for more.
In: Politics · Tagged with: Constitution, Enumerated Powers Act
From aircraft carriers to debt carriers
From Mark Steyn’s column “Dependence Day” (emphasis mine):
According to the [Congressional Budget Office]’s 2010 long-term budget outlook, by 2020 the U.S. government will be paying between 15 and 20 percent of its revenues in debt interest—whereas defense spending will be down to between 14 and 16 percent. America will be spending more on debt interest than China, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, India, Italy, South Korea, Brazil, Canada, Australia, Spain, Turkey, and Israel spend on their militaries combined. The superpower will have advanced from a nation of aircraft carriers to a nation of debt carriers.
Now I am not saying that high defense spending is always good – it all depends on how you are spending that money – but that’s another topic entirely. The fact that our debt, which as of this post is over $14 trillion (according to defeatthedebt.com and usdebtclock.org), is this high in my estimation poses a far greater threat to the United States security than al Qaeda and their Islamist allies.
To put it another way, our debt is more than the total economies of China, the United Kingdom, and Australia combined. I find this unacceptable, but does Washington? We shall see just how different this Congress is from the last one.
In: Politics · Tagged with: Mark Steyn, national debt
Politics of tragedy: Contrasting reactions to Tucson and Ft. Hood shootings
[Originally published at The US Report]
On Nov. 5, 2009, a US Army officer opened fire in a Fort Hood (Texas) medical facility, killing 13 and wounding 30. On Jan. 8, 2010, a man opened fire at a townhall-style event at a Tucson, Ariz. grocery store, killing 6 and wounding 20. Both events appear similar, but media reaction and impact are drastically different.
The sole suspect in the Fort Hood shooting is Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist. Eyewitness reports state that Hassan shouted “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is great) before opening fire on soldiers preparing to depart for Afghanistan.
The sole suspect in the Tucson shooting is Jared Lee Loughner, a 22-year-old who lived at home with his parents after being suspended from college. Loughner opened fire on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and constituents at a townhall-style event at a grocery store.
Both shooters used automatic pistols with high capacity (20- or 30-round) magazines. Loughner used a common 9mm Glock pistol, and Hasan used a 5.7mm FN Five-Seven, which fires bullets that can penetrate the body armor used by law enforcement. While the Tucson shooting has resulted in a surge forward on the gun control issue, there was virtually no push after the Fort Hood shooting, despite Hasan’s use of the so-called “cop killer” gun.
Americans were advised “not to jump to conclusions” on Hasan and his motivations. But in the immediate wake of the Loughner shooting, media parroted shameless politicians and activists who said that the shooter may have been a member of the U.S. military, or that the “anti-government” Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and other conservative radio hosts provided the motivation for the Loughner killings.
Meanwhile, the media made virtually no effort at all to bring attention to the Ft. Hood shooter who was a Muslim. Politicians repeatedly assured us that Hasan was a “lone wolf” terrorist, and to date have still not mentioned the well-documented Islamic motivations behind the massacre. The media did make the leap to suggest that Hasan suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder – despite the fact that he never went to war.
The Loughner shooting isn’t the first time public figures made quantum leaps to conclusions – New York City’s mayor Michael Bloomberg raced to the microphones to pin the 2010 Times Square bombing attempt on an opponent of health care legislation. Even terrorism is an opportunity to score cheap political points.
It appears that Loughner’s alleged right-wing motivations have been discredited by the facts (how many conservatives burn American flags and list The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf among their favorite books?), and that conservative media isn’t to blame (we have since learned that he didn’t listen to radio or watch television). Perhaps he wasn’t right or left, but just a nut with a gun. But the New York Times is still shamelessly pushing the issue, suggesting that Republican governor Jan Brewer and opposition to immigration and the health care bill created an environment conducive for politically-motivated mass murder.
As the facts begin to undermine the disinformation campaign being waged on the American people, it seems that “heated political rhetoric” is now the last remaining instrument of blame for those exploiting the tragedy.
If we want real examples of heated rhetoric (also known as constitutionally-protected free speech), we should look no further than those who have publicly wished for the deaths of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and many other Republicans or conservatives. Our president is guilty of this rhetoric himself, and his supporter Bill Ayers has gone so far as to bomb government buildings. But it appears that the so-called left and their allies in the media are about the only ones trying to take advantage of tragedies for political gain.
We can only speculate as to the media’s motivations behind covering for Hasan. Most likely, they would have used the Fort Hood shooting to push for gun control as well, but the Islamic factor likely carried far more baggage than would be acceptable, so this case was simply swept under the prayer rug.
However, we can clearly see that media and some politicians have taken full advantage of the Tucson murders – regardless of the facts – to push their political agenda: marginalizing and ultimately silencing their opponents in addition to stripping gun rights.
Apparently those in media and government will stoop to any level in order to accomplish their objectives.
Sources:
Hasan Ft. Hood shooting: ‘Secondary trauma’ to blame?
Time Magazine
Ft. Hood Jihadist consulted cleric about whether killing US soldiers was permitted under Islamic law
Jihad Watch
Governor strives to restore Arizona’s reputation
The New York Times
Obama: ‘If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun’
The Wall Street Journal
In: Politics · Tagged with: Fort Hood tragedy, Nidal Malik Hasan
Steyn on big government
“The trouble with the social-democratic state is that, when government does too much, nobody else does much of anything.”
- Mark Steyn in America Alone
In: Politics, Quotes · Tagged with: Mark Steyn
Why government-run healthcare is a bad idea
If government-run healthcare was such a good idea, then we could look to other countries who have it in place already and see examples of efficiency, innovation, and a more healthy population.
But here is what we see instead, from Mark Steyn’s book America Alone (pgs. 51-52):
In 2004, Debrah Cornthwaite gave birth to twin boys ath the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Edmonton. That’s in Alberta. Mrs. Cornthwaite had begun the big day by going to her local maternity ward at Langley Memorial Hospital. That’s in British Columbia. They told her, yes, your contractions are coming every four minutes, but sorry, we don’t have any beds. And, after they’d checked with the bed-availability helpline, “BC Bedline,” they brought her the further good news that there was not a hospital anywhere in the province in which she could deliver her babies. There followed seven hours of red tape and paperwork. Then, late in the evening, she was driven to the airport and put on a chartered twin-prop to Edmonton. In the course of the flight, the contra ctions increased to every two and a half minutes – and most Lamaze classes don’t teach timing your breathing to turbulence over the Rockies. How many Americans would want to do that on delivery day? You pack your bag and head to your local hospital in Oakland, and they say: Not to worry, we’ve got a bed for you in Denver.
Euro-Canadian socialized health care is, in essence, subsidized by American taxpayers: since the end of World War Two, Washington has assumed the defense costs of its allies, thereby freeing up those countries to spend their revenues on lavish social programs.
The latest Rasmussen poll shows that 55% of Americans surveyed want Obamacare repealed. In fact, every poll the group has conducted since the law passed in March showed a majority of Americans want the law repealed.
26% of those polled thought that Obamacare would lead to the creation of more jobs. Perhaps we should ask the staff at Langley Memorial Hospital how that worked for them. Or anyone in the maternity field in British Columbia for that matter – in a province with over 4 million people, one pregnant mother had to be flown to a hospital 700 miles away.
How is this better for society?
In: Politics · Tagged with: Canada, Mark Steyn, Obamacare, socialized healthcare
Mollifying Muslims
Mark Steyn’s recent piece, “Mollifying Muslims, and Muslifying Mollies” is worth reading in its entirety, but I had to quote this bit:
Too many people in the free world have internalized Islam’s view of them. A couple of years ago, I visited Guantanamo and subsequently wrote that, if I had to summon up Gitmo in a single image, it would be the brand-new copy of the Koran in each cell: To reassure incoming prisoners that the filthy infidels haven’t touched the sacred book with their unclean hands, the Korans are hung from the walls in pristine, sterilized surgical masks. It’s one thing for Muslims to regard infidels as unclean, but it’s hard to see why it’s in the interests of us infidels to string along with it and thereby validate their bigotry. What does that degree of prostration before their prejudices tell them about us? It’s a problem that Muslims think we’re unclean. It’s a far worse problem that we go along with it.
Again, the whole piece is a must-read.
In: Politics, Religion · Tagged with: Islam, Mark Steyn
The ‘stunning decline’ of Obama
A friend sent me a link to an article in the U.K.’s Telegraph about the “stunning decline of Barack Obama.” Nile Gardiner lists ten key reasons why he expects why Obama’s presidency is in “serious trouble.”
- The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people
- Most Americans don’t have confidence in the president’s leadership
- Obama fails to inspire
- The United States is drowning in debt
- Obama’s Big Government message is falling flat
- Obama’s support for socialised health care is a huge political
- Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill has been weak-kneed and indecisive
- US foreign policy is an embarrassing mess under the Obama administration
- President Obama is muddled and confused on national security
- Obama doesn’t believe in American greatness
Gardiner also states that Obama’s extravagant and out-of-touch presidency resembles the Ancien Régime, which was overthrown during the French Revolution.
It is unfortunate that we must turn to foreign sources for truly objective news. I saw that a recent study on news coverage found that the majority of Obama’s news coverage is positive.
In: Politics · Tagged with: Barack Obama
Planned economy or planned destruction?
From the Chicago Tribune, 1934 – and just as applicable today!
In: Politics · Tagged with: socialism
