What do you think?
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
President's socialist takeover must be stopped
President Obama has engaged in numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr. Obama should be impeached.
He is slowly - piece by painful piece - erecting a socialist dictatorship. We are not there - yet. But he is putting America on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law; presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars of traditional capitalism. Like Venezuela's leftist strongman, Hugo Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above - one that is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr. Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are Balkanizing the country. It's time for him to go.
He has abused his office and violated his oath to uphold the Constitution. His health care overhaul was rammed through Congress. It was - and remains - opposed by a majority of the people. It could only be passed through bribery and political intimidation. The Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the $5 billion Medicaid set-aside for Florida Sen. Bill Nelson - taxpayer money was used as a virtual slush fund to buy swing votes. Moreover, the law is blatantly unconstitutional: The federal government does not have the right to coerce every citizen to purchase a good or service. This is not in the Constitution, and it represents an unprecedented expansion of power.
Read the rest of the article here:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/22/the-case-for-impeachment-142967590/?page=1
Monday, July 26, 2010
Peter Corrigan Proves Tough Test For Kucinich
Seven-term incumbent Congressman Dennis Kucinich faces the toughest challenge of his Congressional career in 2010 against Peter Corrigan. Corrigan, the Republican candidate for Ohio's 10th Congressional District has been on the move and experts in Ohio and the national stage have begun to take notice. A conservative Republican, Corrigan is running against ultra-liberal Dennis Kucinich in a seat that was previously thought of as "un-poachable" by mainstream political pundits. However the Weekly Standard recently published an article suggesting that if Dennis Kucinich can be defeated, Corrigan is the candidate to do it. To review the article please click on the following link http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/can-dennis-kucinich-be-defeated
Monday, July 19, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Activist Supreme Court Nominees
Are you worried about the latest choices for the Supreme Court? Do you think they will undermine or eliminate the Constitution? Jefferson and Adams had a solution for that. It's in the new book called Nullification by Thomas Woods.
NULLIFICATION
Nullification begins with the point that a federal law that violates the Constitution is no law at all. It is void and of no effect. If a law is unconstitutional and therefore void and of no effect, it is up to the states, the parties to the federal compact, to declare it so and thus refuse to enforce it. It would be foolish and vain to wait for the federal government or a branch thereof to condemn its own law!
Nullification provides a shield between the people of a state and an unconstitutional law from the federal government.
The main point behind nullification is that the federal government cannot be permitted to hold a monopoly on constitutional interpretation. If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, it will continue to grow regardless of elections, the separation of powers and other limits on government power. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson both warned of this.
The Constitution is only a piece of paper and cannot enforce itself. The checks and balances of the three branches of government cannot guarantee a limited government, since these three branches can simply unite against the independence of the states and the reserved rights of the people. This is especially true if one party controls all three branches of government.
The real check on federal power is the ability of the states to interpose to prevent the enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
We cannot believe a bad law is settled because a nine politically well connected lawyers who are treated with awe have informed us that all is well. There is history for the general principle that an unconstitutional law is void. In Federalist Paper #78, Alexander Hamilton said “there is no position which depends on clearer principles, then that every act of a delegated authority contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men, acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
How and by whom should an unconstitutional law be declared void? The federal courts are a branch of the federal government. How can they be expected to be impartial judges? The Supreme Court itself is a branch of the federal government. In a dispute between the states and the federal government (take the Arizona Immigration law), does the resolution come from the federal government? Jefferson refused to accept that answer.
It was impossible for Jefferson to believe that the states would have agreed to a system that assured their unjust subordination! Spencer Roane, a Virginia Judge at that time said that if the federal judiciary were to arbitrate such a dispute between itself and the states, it would be presiding over its own case which is a clear absurdity!
NULLIFICATION
Nullification begins with the point that a federal law that violates the Constitution is no law at all. It is void and of no effect. If a law is unconstitutional and therefore void and of no effect, it is up to the states, the parties to the federal compact, to declare it so and thus refuse to enforce it. It would be foolish and vain to wait for the federal government or a branch thereof to condemn its own law!
Nullification provides a shield between the people of a state and an unconstitutional law from the federal government.
The main point behind nullification is that the federal government cannot be permitted to hold a monopoly on constitutional interpretation. If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, it will continue to grow regardless of elections, the separation of powers and other limits on government power. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson both warned of this.
The Constitution is only a piece of paper and cannot enforce itself. The checks and balances of the three branches of government cannot guarantee a limited government, since these three branches can simply unite against the independence of the states and the reserved rights of the people. This is especially true if one party controls all three branches of government.
The real check on federal power is the ability of the states to interpose to prevent the enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
We cannot believe a bad law is settled because a nine politically well connected lawyers who are treated with awe have informed us that all is well. There is history for the general principle that an unconstitutional law is void. In Federalist Paper #78, Alexander Hamilton said “there is no position which depends on clearer principles, then that every act of a delegated authority contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men, acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
How and by whom should an unconstitutional law be declared void? The federal courts are a branch of the federal government. How can they be expected to be impartial judges? The Supreme Court itself is a branch of the federal government. In a dispute between the states and the federal government (take the Arizona Immigration law), does the resolution come from the federal government? Jefferson refused to accept that answer.
It was impossible for Jefferson to believe that the states would have agreed to a system that assured their unjust subordination! Spencer Roane, a Virginia Judge at that time said that if the federal judiciary were to arbitrate such a dispute between itself and the states, it would be presiding over its own case which is a clear absurdity!
DON'T BE DECEIVED
Election day is coming very soon and many of the candidates are starting to say what we want to hear. They know that 912ers and Tea Party members want small, limited government, lower taxes and freedom!
How many candidates have campaign platforms and speeches that say they are for limited government, lower taxes and reduced spending?
Don't be deceived! They have been saying that for 25 years or longer. It's a great campaign slogan, but what do they mean? I always thought limited government and reduced spending meant ELIMINATING or REPEALING something. Ask a candidate to tell you what is he or she going specifically reduce. What is the plan?
Will they commit to voting to eliminate the Federal Department of Education or the Department of Energy? If the Federal Budget for education was 100 Billion, what if we eliminated it and sent one billion dollars to each of the 50 state department's of education. We know better what to do with that money and besides we will have local control of our schools. The other benefit is we save 50 billion dollars.
I am sure you all know how many redundant agencies and laws we have. Why not have one full session of congress to repeal all the unneccessary "stuff". Each day, a congressperson can bring up one bill that should be repealed. Then the House could vote up or down. I'll bet they could spend a complete session of congress repealing unconstitutional bills and have plenty left for another session!
Ask the necessary question. Don't accept generalities. Pin them down to details and specifics!
How many candidates have campaign platforms and speeches that say they are for limited government, lower taxes and reduced spending?
Don't be deceived! They have been saying that for 25 years or longer. It's a great campaign slogan, but what do they mean? I always thought limited government and reduced spending meant ELIMINATING or REPEALING something. Ask a candidate to tell you what is he or she going specifically reduce. What is the plan?
Will they commit to voting to eliminate the Federal Department of Education or the Department of Energy? If the Federal Budget for education was 100 Billion, what if we eliminated it and sent one billion dollars to each of the 50 state department's of education. We know better what to do with that money and besides we will have local control of our schools. The other benefit is we save 50 billion dollars.
I am sure you all know how many redundant agencies and laws we have. Why not have one full session of congress to repeal all the unneccessary "stuff". Each day, a congressperson can bring up one bill that should be repealed. Then the House could vote up or down. I'll bet they could spend a complete session of congress repealing unconstitutional bills and have plenty left for another session!
Ask the necessary question. Don't accept generalities. Pin them down to details and specifics!
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Rolling Thunder 2010 - A Marine's Vigil
3000 vets on motorcycles from across the USA paraded in D.C. the Sunday before Memorial Day, while a solitary, saluting Marine greeted them out on Constitution A venue... the Marine stood at salute for 3 straight hours, while the parade of roaring bikes kept on coming.... it is held in remembrance of those who've fallen in the military.... the event (or the group) is called Rolling Thunder.
President George Bush used to meet these bikers before they paraded. The camera is on the Marine a lot... watch his struggles with his emotions, and his struggles with holding that salute... the way he salutes is very touching... his head lowered, his eyes down, in reverence for the fallen...
Turn up your sound and click on this link to see the video.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Chinese Officials Conduct Forced Sterilization Program
Officials in China's Puning county, in Guangdong Province, conducted a 20-day forced sterilization campaign in April, aiming to sterilize 9,559 people who had more children than allowed, the London Times reported.
Relatives of the rule violators were imprisoned in order to force compliance with the sterilization efforts. Huang Ruifeng, who has three daughters, said that officials threatened his father. "Several days ago a village official called me and asked me or my wife to return for the surgery," Huang said, according to the London Times. "Otherwise they would take away my father."
About 100 relatives were being held in cramped conditions April 10, the Southern Countryside Daily reported. "There were some mats on the floor but the room was too small for all people to lie down and sleep, so the young ones had to stand or squat. Owing to the lack of quilts, many cuddled up to fight the cold," according to the newspaper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
