Category Archives: Constitution

It’s Anti-Liberalism Stupid!

Posted on by
1

I love Larry Elder’s piece on the elections this week. It’s entitled: “It’s not ‘anti-incumbency’ stupid: It’s ‘anti-liberalism.’” Titles like that are refreshing and need to be reduplicated often because the MSM wants to paint this anger many have as something it is not: anti incumbency. That’s not why so many are angry. We are angry because the government is taking a road into socialism and liberalism that is un-Constitutional. We do not live in a country that can survive with a socialist government. The Constitution does not give the government those sort of powers and the public is beginning to see that.

It is interesting because I found out one of the men I know here in Jackson is a bona fide Democrat and sees what Obama is doing as the best thing that ever happened to America. What he doesn’t realize is that the Constitution doesn’t give Obama the power to take over the car companies, banks, Wall Street or our health care. That is not in the president’s realm of power and the more he seeks to take control, the less control he will eventually have. You can argue all you want the morality of capitalism vs. socialism, but the reality is that socialism is not something that goes well with the freedoms we have been given by God.

That is another point we need to stress. The Founding Fathers recognized that these freedoms we have, as spelled out in the Constitution, were given to us by God, not the government. Liberals want to say that these freedoms were given to us by the government because they know that if the government gives freedoms, it can remove those freedoms. Don’t give into this lie. The government does not have the right to regulate free speech, freedom of religion, etc. These rights are God ordained, not government ordained.

Of course, we see this reality in Congress’ latest attempt to regulate the blogosphere. Hotair.com has a piece on it this morning. They want to regulate political free speech on the internet. Again, the action of liberals. They cannot allow free speech, unless it means some nutjob covering himself with mayonnaise in the middle of Central Park (It’s always some liberal city. Let’s see some nutjob do that here in Jackson, TN). The reason they cannot allow free speech is because they know they always lose in the arena of ideas. Their ideas are bankrupt to begin with because the liberal always wants to control everything, even the thoughts of those opposed to their position.

What I would like to know is how in the world are they going to possibly regulate free speech in the blogosphere? There are so many blogs that they can’t possibly watch them all. They don’t have enough people. The upside of this? My blog actually might get more attention than it usually does. Just think of all the liberal government observers coming to my blog and reading it for “political” content. They might even read some of the theological pieces and … get saved. That would be fun. Remember, liberals need the gospel just as much as conservatives.

Noble Stand! Officer Refuses Orders Because Commander-in-Chief is Not Eligible

Posted on by
2
This is truly standing up for principle. Lt. Col. Terry Lakin is refusing orders to deploy to Afghanistan because the Commander-in-Chief is ineligible to issue such orders. You have to admire Lakin because he had to swear to uphold the Constitution when he became an officer, and he is seeking to do so by refusing orders which will lead to his own court martial.
He, like many others, feels like Obama should prove that he is a natural-born citizen. That is one of the Constitutional requirements for being the President of the United States. I know a lot of lefties discount this, but this is just as important as the First Amendment. If Obama will not pay attention to the small details of the Constitution, then he won’t pay attention to the big issues either, as we are beginning to find out. 
I hope Lakin is successful in his stand. I do plan on praying for him. It is a noble cause and I hope the Lord protects him. Who knows, perhaps this will be what brings Obama down. I doubt it, but you never know. Read the rest of the story here.

The Constitution Today!

Posted on by
Reply

Again, as I said before, I hope this leads to an overthrow of the Dems in November, or the states pulling away from these socialist Libs. They rule without any regard to the Constitution, and given that they do so, what is going to keep them from holding onto their positions even if they lose in November? OK, there is a lot of fear in that, but alas. It’s 2 a.m., I can’t sleep, and thinking about my country causes me to flee to Christ. His Kingdom is true. His Kingdom will not go against His word. His Kingdom will last. Ours… well, it’s on its way out.

What? Health Care Workers Don’t WANT the H1N1 Vaccine?

Posted on by
Reply
Yup! According to this story out of New York, many of the health care workers who have been told by the state to either take the vaccine, or lose their jobs, are still refusing to do so.
New York is the first state in the country to mandate flu vaccinations for its health care workers. The first doses of swine flu vaccine will be available beginning next week. Much of it is reserved for state health care workers, but there is growing opposition to required innoculations.

Health care workers in Hauppauge screamed “No forced shots!” as they rallied Tuesday against the state regulation requiring them to roll up their sleeves.

“I don’t even tend to the sick. I am in the nutrition field. They are telling me I must get the shot because I work in a health clinic setting,” said Paula Small, a Women, Infants and Children health care worker.

Small said she will refuse, worried the vaccine is untested and unproven, leaving her vulnerable. In 1976, there were some deaths associated with a swine flu vaccination.

Again, this entire H1N1 flu vaccine seems to be a scare tactic and a boon to the pharmaceutical companies. On the level of flues, it seems to be a milder type flu and many may have already had it without even realizing it. Just the fact that health-care workers are refusing to take the vaccine should say something about the vaccine itself.

As for the civil rights issues, I wonder how that will play out. Our government it getting more and more intrusive into our lives. Where in the Constitution does it give the power to government the right to force untested medications on people?

Texas Gets It Right — Declaring That 10th Amendment still holds true. UPDATED

Posted on by
Reply
Texas has begun the fight back against the oppressive U.S. government in a bipartisan move to uphold the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They have taken the first step in declaring that Obama’s government is becoming oppressive, and that Texas will not stand for it!!!!

This first video is actually state Rep. Brandon Creighton… giving the reasons for the resolution.

Here is Gov. Perry:

Here are some of the quotes as best I could write them.

“By in large we think it’s time to draw the line in the sand and tell Washignton no longer are we going to accept their oppressive hand in the state of Texas. That is what this press conference is about… I think it’s time to say enough is enoung and we have reached that point.”

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

UPDATED: Here is what Ben Shapiro had to write about this at Townhall.com.

The US Constitution contemplates constant friction between the states and the federal government. The states had to ratify the creation of the federal government, so it is no wonder that they chose to restrict the power of the federal government and to maintain their own. In 1798, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison joined to write the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, which declared that “the powers of the federal government … (result) from the compact, to which the states are parties … in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”

In simpler terms, the states, according to the framers, were duty-bound to resist action by the federal government superseding its allotted authority under the Constitution. To that end, the states reserved to themselves the chief authority to tax, to raise militias, and to carry out the day-to-day activities required by government.

It was a brilliant structure. The federal government could not redistribute money and resources from taxpayers of one state to taxpayers of another without running up against resistance from the states, seeking to safeguard their own sovereignty. The federal government could not take over the states’ interest in the education, welfare and protection of their own citizens — and so the federal government remained small. The states’ role was simple: they were to be “laboratories of democracy” run by local citizens, in the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.

You know what… that darn Constitution may just get in the way of Obama’s grand plans. I certainly hope so.

Good News!

Posted on by
Reply

One of those guys in Congress actually remembered we have something called the Constitution!

As a reminder of the federal government’s limited powers, 20 representatives want to ensure that every single piece of legislation passing through Congress includes a statement citing specific constitutional authority for enacting it.

Sponsored by Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., H.R. 450, or the Enumerated Powers Act, states, “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. …”

When he introduced the proposal Jan. 9, Shadegg gave a House floor speech reminding his colleagues of limited authority granted in the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

It states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Maybe they will start abiding by it soon. Read the rest here.