Category Archives: Uncategorized

The U.S. Constitution is Merely Toilet Paper

Believe it or not,  since the very beginning of this great republic there have been those who have desired to transfer as much power as possible from the states and individuals to federal politicians and judges. Starting all the way back to Hamilton’s unconstitutional bank where he made the argument to Washington that the new federal government had the authority to regulate the economy, making the bank constitutional, when in fact no such authority existed. Washington then consulted Jefferson about the bank idea.  Jefferson  stated that the bank was not an enumerated power, nor was it necessary and proper to carry out any of the enumerated powers, so therefore was unconstitutional.  Jefferson’s understanding of the constitution was spot on, while  Hamilton’s was wrought with amnesia for he had completely forgotten all about that war of independence thing a few years earlier and the reasons for it.

It’s very, very disturbing to me to hear so-called constitutional thinkers talk about the constitution in such haphazard and even reckless ways. They, just like those before them have turned the constitution into a mishmash of mangled words where up means down and left means right. They have reduced the constitution to a handful of meaningless phrases that completely distort the meaning of various parts of the constitution. Phrases such as the “general welfare ” clause, which is not a clause about general welfare, but instead a clause about taxation, how they are raised and what they can be spent on. Another distortion is the term  “necessary and proper” also known as the “elastic” clause. which many seem to think  this clause is there as some kind of catch-all. This clause, however only allows congress to do those things that are necessary and proper to carry into action powers that are listed in the constitution such as purchasing battle ships for the navy. The navy is a listed power, but buying battleships is not. Another famous distortion is the “supremecy clause” and the notion that all federal laws are supreme…….this could not be further from the truth. Two very important words that are never mentioned in the abbreviated version are “pursuant to”. In order for any federal law to be the supreme law of the land, it must be made pursuant to the constitution, which means it must be constitutional.

Another “Supreme” distortion is the doctrine of incorporation by which it has been contrived that the Bill of Rights applies not only to the federal government, but state and local governments, public schools and anything else the courts wish to apply them to. The United States Constitution applies only as described therein, and the state constitutions apply to the state governments and the other government entities such as counties, cities, and towns.

The United States Constitution does not require a law degree to understand, although it does require several readings and some research. The only correct reading of the Constitution is a literal reading for it actually requires very little “interpretation.” A literal reading of it, however, presents one major problem to those with devious motives toward it. It will give them few, to no avenues for such efforts.

God save the United States Constitution!!!!


Will Obama Move To The Right?

The question of whether or not Obama will make a move to the right if republicans take one or both houses of congress I think has an obvious answer, and that would be an emphatic…..No! He has shown no propensity to compromise or any willingness to work with the opposition in any measure. He is an ideologue who sees his role as president to fundamentally change America. In other words, to change the basics of America.

He will try to sound as though he is moving toward the center and is willing to be more cooperative with republicans, but this will only be for show. Sort of like when the stimulus bill was being debated and most everybody was up in arms, he would come out and talk about how we must cut spending. It’s as though he thinks we are still in the 19th century when a politician could go to one town and say one thing and then go to a town twenty miles away and say the polar opposite. Somebody should tell him that we are in the 21st century, and every word he says is broadcast around the United States as he speaks. He can’t say and act in one way in even a state and go to another state and present himself in the opposite without everyone in the country knowing about.

I get the sense that this being president stuff for Obama is getting old real fast. I really don’t think he is as concerned about being re-elected as he is about changing the country to his liking. He is a worshiper of big government, and he will do all he can to force his religion upon us. We have the First Amendment that prevents congress from forcing religious views upon us, but unfortunately we have no such protections from government worshipers…..wouldn’t it be nice if we did. Republicans should put their names on their office doors with velcro, because they won’t be there long if they forget why they were given back some power if they do in fact get back some power.

The Federal Government Is To Blame

Knee jerk reaction has placed the blame on a lot of villains for the current financial and economic mess we find ourselves in. Greedy Wall Streeters have been blamed, greedy bankers, greedy this, greedy that, derivatives, credit default swaps, mortgage backed securities, and any other convenient scapegoats. These, however were not the problem. Even the real estate bubble itself was not the problem. All of these were symptoms of the problem.

What exactly was the problem? The problem was the meddling in the economy by omnipotent moral busy bodies in the federal government. These perps include, but are not limited to; Presidents, Congress, HUD, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA, and even the Justice Department. The collective efforts of these cohorts created the housing bubble. A bubble that caused housing prices to increase anywhere from 30 to 120 percent in a handful of years, and like all bubbles, this one was doomed to burst from the very beginning.

Let’s isolate some of the reckless activities. First, the Federal Reserve kept interest rates unreasonably low in order to spur economic activity. It is a fact that this tactic will have that effect, but the problem is that the Fed can’t control how the borrowed money is spent, and low interest rates draw individuals into the market who shouldn’t be involved.

Legislatively it started with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. This act was fairly benign at its inception, but it set the stage for much deeper involvement by the federal government later on. Using their bully pulpits, Presidents Clinton and Bush actively pushed for home ownership while claiming that home ownership was the American dream. Clinton’s Justice Department even threatened some lending institutions with criminal prosecution for discrimination when no such claims were made by rejected borrowers.

The main agency culprits were Fannie and Freddie. These so-called government sponsored private entities that hold special privileges and immunities because of that sponsorship were the main players in creating the housing bubble. They purchased loans from loan originators who would then take the proceeds from that purchase and make more loans for Fannie and Freddie to purchase. This process was repeated over and over and over. Fannie and Freddie also reduced the lending requirement of loans they would purchase which brought individuals into the market who otherwise would not have participated. At the time of the housing crash, Fannie and Freddie held half of all mortgages and were buying three-fourths of all new mortgages. Fannie and Freddie weren’t the only purchaser of mortgages, but they were without a doubt the driving force and set the industry atmosphere.

As housing prices climbed, the need for special financing such as interest only, adjustable rate and no down payment loans became the rage. The combined activities of the Federal Reserve, Fannie and Freddie caused a huge increase in the demand for housing. This increased demand as in all cases, caused higher prices. The higher prices coupled with the eventual interest rate increases by the Federal Reserve put downward pressure on demand which caused prices to fall. When prices fell to the point that the owners owed more than their homes were worth, they bailed.

I know that many of you have noticed that I have placed no blame on the usual scapegoats, because the bubble and the bursting of that bubble should be the focus of our attention, and none of these scapegoats caused the bubble or the eventual bursting of it. Those who purchased homes didn’t look at the usual scapegoats and say, “I want to go buy a home.” They looked at the low interest rates and lazy lending policies pushed by Fannie, Freddie, FHA, and federal politicians. Were it not for the bubble and the bursting of it, the problems that occurred in the financial sector would have never happened. Those who hate the free market like to say the free market failed. The free market didn’t fail, federal government intervention failed—as usual.

Who Is An Enemy Of The State

With the recent terrorists killings by Major Hasan at Fort Hood begs the question—who is an enemy of the state? Terrorist Hasan had showed many signs that he was a radical Islamist who showed that he was a muslim first, and an American second. It seems very obvious at this point that Americans died, were brutally murdered because of political correctness. This murderous beast should have been singled out and kicked out of the military on his back side, especially after all of the red flags he waved prior to his terrorist act.

Patriotic Americans who practice the Islamic faith should not be singled out for critique based solely on their faith, but they should be singled out based on their behavior, I repeat, their behavior. An American muslim who conducts himself as any other patriotic member of the military deserves no special attention, but an American muslim who conducts himself and espouses the beliefs that Major Hasan espoused is a danger to others in the military and has no right to serve in the military. If that hurts the feelings of muslims, they need to be a lot more proactive in expunging their religion of these murderers, instead of sitting on their hands while tacitly condoning these acts.

What Do Republicans Need To Do?

There has been a lot of discussion lately about what the Republicans need to do to start winning again. Some say that they need to become more inclusive and others says they need to moderate their tone on social issues or even drop them completely. It has also been said that Republicans can’t be successful only as the party of old white men. First—the source of most of these suggestions are liberals, and a few spineless Republicans, which begs the question – do you really think those liberals have the best interests of the Republican Party in mind?—I think not. They, however, would love it if Republicans became more like them as some suggest. I have a few suggestions of my own

First:  The Republicans don’t need to panic as some are doing. Republicans have been out of power before, and it was only  a few years ago that everyone was talking about a permanent Republican majority. Even though there has been a huge swing in control of Congress the last couple of years, the losses the Republicans suffered on a race by race basis in the 06 mid-terms and 08 were close losses, not blowouts. Just a few thousands votes gave the Democrats control of the Senate in 06, and the 08 elections were decided by war weariness and the economy.

Second: The Republicans need to stop letting the Liberals establish the rules of engagement. For example, during the campaign Barack Obama decided that lobbyists were the scourge of the Earth, and that he would have nothing to do with them, and any who did were equally contemptuous, and when Obama hit this ball into the Republican court, the Republicans fumbled it, and kicked it around instead of hitting it right back into his court. It could have been hit right back into his court very simply by pointing out that most lobbyists are Americans – they are known as citizens, constituents, businesses, organizations, bureaucrats, governors, etc, etc, and none of them can pass legislation – all they can do is suggest. If politicians pass bad legislation regardless of the nature of the influence or those who exert it, it is the fault of the politicians not the so-called lobbyists, and if Barack Obama wants to ignore and vilify these people, he is ignoring and vilifying Americans—Americans who have every right to petition their government for redress.

Third:  The Republicans must stop being cowards—I do mean COWARDS, and come to the realization that the Liberals are at war with them, which means that they must go to war with the Liberals. If you are going to defeat your enemy, you must go to where your enemy is. You can’t bomb them from 30,000 feet, and you can’t be nicey nice, or appease them – if they are in the gutter, you must go into the gutter after them. There is a saying in basketball that the teams who apply the full court press don’t like having it applied to them, which means the Republicans must start applying the press to the Liberals in the same way that they have been applying it to Republicans.

Fourth: Republicans must go on the attack. For instance, they should never apologize when called racist—they should instead attack by pointing out how the Democrat Party is and has been the party of racism, and that the Democrat Party has done more than any other in keeping down minorities, and in particular, blacks. When called uncaring by the Liberals, the Republicans should attack by pointing out the fact that Liberal policies have done more to impoverish, and to keep impoverished, a huge segment of the citizens of this country, most of whom are black. The Republicans should attack attack attack – they should never, I repeat, never go on the defensive – for if you are on the defensive in politics—you are losing.

Fifth:  Ignore the party pacifists. Yes there actually are Republicans when it comes to politics who believe in the policy of appeasement and pacifism. This policy weakens the party in the very same way that Democrat policy of appeasement and pacifism weakens America on the world stage. These spineless Republicans can be heard everywhere – they include but are certainly not limited to—Jeb Bush, Michael Medved, Joe Scarborough, Tom Ridge, etc, etc, etc. Republicans such as these are embarrassed by conservatives who are willing to take the fight to the Liberals, and they discourage such efforts.  They do not possess what it takes, if you know what I mean, to attack liberalism, and they will end up taking us to the same place that liberals want to take us, only slower. Republicans must not see Liberal policies as the reason for their success and emulate that, but should instead emulate the fervor and intensify in which Liberals promote their ideas.

Sixth: Republicans must stigmatize Liberals as bad for the country. Liberals, primarily since the 30’s have done a very good job of stigmatizing Republicans as heartless, uncaring, racists, bigots, homophobes, and right now are trying to label Republicans as the party of “no”, and they have actually convinced Americans that they are better on the economy—only incompetent boobs could allow this to happen, because Liberal policies are terrible for the economy. The Liberals accomplished this very simply by repeating the same lies over and over and over, all the while, Republicans made no meaningful or concerted efforts to counteract such propaganda, and the result in the end was that it stuck.

Seventh: Republicans need to make people understand that life on the government dole or under government tyranny is no life whatsoever. Being a Liberal is very simple minded approach to politics—just promise everything and then say “don’t forget me when you vote.” It is, however, a much more difficult proposition to convince people that their first duty is to take care of themselves, to not leach on others, and certainly to not rely on others through the federal government—this is where far too many Republicans fall short. Liberals go into politics planning to give away the farm to get votes, and Republicans go along with it because they don’t want to lose votes.

Is Colin Powell Confused or Just Obtuse?

Let’s start with his statement on Meet the Press where he laid out his rationale for supporting Obama for president over the independent moderate maverick John McCain.  He praised Obama for his inclusiveness, his reaching out, his intellectual curiosity, and let us not forget – his rhetorical skills – we mustn’t forget those rhetorical skills. Powell said that in making his decision that he wanted to know if Obama had the experience to be president, but oddly enough he pointed to no experience that made his decision to support Obama, logical. He then went on to complain about how McCain and the Republican party got nasty in the campaign, and how the Republican party in general was moving further to the right. Powell also expressed how he would “have a problem” with two more conservative supreme court nominees, which is what McCain would probably get. I can’t really accept this Republican nastiness notion, because it could be very thoughtfully argued that Obama and the Democrats were nastier in their campaign tactics, and that the democrats have moved sharply to the left, and the idea that a self-described republican would have a problem with conservative Supreme Court justices is oxymoronic.

It seems to me that Powell has been taken in by Obama’s rhetorical skills in the same way that many in the country have been. I think this shows that even those who we think are the brightest among us, in the end are just as human and possess no more depth of thought and analysis than many others do. Powell also seems to believe that if Obama speaks and acts confidently that that translates into competence and experience. What’s really amazing is that he came to that conclusion over the course of seven weeks as he stated on Meet the Press – wow. I think the most important term to remember about Powell’s endorsement is “sellout”. There was no way on God’s green earth that Colin Powell, Mr First-Black All-Everything was not going to support the first black nominee for president. The pressure on blacks in general to conform is much greater than most of us will ever know, and Powell knew that he would have to pay the piper if he didn’t support Obama.

Now as the Republican messiah, Powell is proselytizing on what the Republicans need to do in order to become worldly and inclusive and how if we do these things we will be delivered salvation. Powell has done a very good job of hiding his positions on most issues which is the reason he has high approval numbers, but he has made his opinions known on a few issues. He says the Republican party needs to reach out. Ok, but what exactly does that mean. Could it mean, as he stated on Face the Nation,  that the Republican party needs to be more willing to spread America’s wealth. In other words, steal the private property of productive citizens and give it to unproductive ones. Or still yet in other words, purchase votes through bribery – I guess that’s reaching out.  One point should be made on the idea of America’s wealth. America the country, has no wealth, because most all of the wealth in America is the property of individual citizens and other private entities. He says Republicans need to be more inclusive. I guess that means we should give those who enter our country illegally a bit sloppy kiss and a bottle of water. He supports affirmative action which means he supports racism – now this is a Democrat tenet but it is not a Republican one. He has said that Americans want to pay taxes. Does he mean they want to pay more taxes, or just that they are willing to pay taxes for reasonable constitutional government functions – I suspect he means the former. I think Americans are certainly willing to pay taxes, they just don’t feel like they should have to ask for a rape kit after doing so.

Now, is Colin Powell confused or obtuse. He says he is a Republican, which he is free to call himself a Republican, but he is certainly a very liberal Republican from what is known about him. I think it is safe to say that he thinks Republicans need to become more like him, which means more to the left, which means that his Republican party would take the country to the same place as the Democrat party, only slower. He will have a difficult time convincing most Republicans that this is the way to go.

The Fine Art Of Conflation and Emotionalism

In many discussions about politics, we hear how the government should do this, or the government shouldn’t do that, the government, the government, the government. Have you ever wondered exactly which government is being discussed – if you haven’t, you need to start. I was listening to a debate recently between a conservative and a liberal about national health care, and as you can guess the conservative was against it and the liberal was for it. At one point in the debate when the liberal realized that he couldn’t convince the conservative of the nobility of national health care he used “liberal slight-of-hand”, and asked the conservative if he liked his local fire and police service. Now – they were talking about “NATIONAL” health care and then it suddenly changed to “LOCAL” fire and police service. Do you see what is going on here? The liberal is trying to justify unconstitutional federal spending on health care by conflating it with constitutional state and local spending, and he is also trying to draw on emotion at some level.

This conflation/emotion tactic has been used quite effectively far and wide by liberals for decades, and they will even conflate federal and individual spending in order to make their agenda seem logical and necessary. Have you noticed that in discussions about national health care that the liberals will say how much money “WE” will save if we do national health care. When liberals say “we”, they mean each of us and the federal government and whatever mouse they have in their pocket. This is just another example of the deep rooted belief of collectivism, and the god-like reverence of the federal government that liberals hold so dearly. Another example of this, is the discussion that followed when Barack Obama made the statement that America is not a Christian nation. When many said that America is in fact a Christian nation, because of its overwhelming Christian majority and was founded on Christian principles – liberals took that as an attack against the government, as evidenced by their response. Just how did they respond, they responded by saying that we are a secular nation because of our secular government. Even here, they can’t separate the secular nature of the federal government from the religious make-up of America. They are just too emotionally invested in the federal government to understand that difference.

What I am about say is extremely important, so pay very close attention. We have basically three levels of government spending in the United States – federal, state, and local, and we must add individual spending in there also, because of the liberal proclivity to conflate federal and individual spending. We have the United States Constitution that enumerates limited and specific powers to the federal government, and we also have the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights that grants all other powers to the States or the People. Let Me Be Clear (sound familiar) – this means that if the constitutional authority doesn’t exist for the federal government, that it is the responsibility of someone else other than the federal government – either the states or the people.

In closing, it is so so important that with all of the discussions about “the government”, that we understand in a perfectly clear way which level of government is being discussed. We can’t be dragged into discussions about the merits of government control or spending, without first determining if the authority for such a venture exists. I would estimate, without looking at it closely, that seventy percent of the federal budget is unconstitutional as laid out in the Constitution as originally written. Just because some boneheads in black robes who pulled their rulings out of the darkness, say it is constitutional, doesn’t make it so – but it does give shelter to those who want to abuse the Constitution. Liberals believe that the Constitution should be flexible and malleable to fit the times, because the founders couldn’t possibly foresee the circumstances unique to our times, but that just isn’t true. The founders did foresee the need to make the Constitution adaptable to future issues by including an amendment process. This is the way it should be changed – not by judges creating authorities out of thin air.

That Pesky Pendulum

It swings back and forth, back and forth. A few years ago pundits were talking about a permanent Republican majority at which point the Republicans promptly stuck their collective heads into the dark side and became more concerned about staying in power by becoming Democrat-lite. Right after the last elections the pundits wondered if the Republicans could ever re-gain power.

Now, the Democrats have taken the elections as a referendum for their policies instead of a referendum against the Republicans. They now have stuck their collective heads into the dark side in trying to force through their far left policies in a center-right country. Liberals actually believe that they are in the mainstream of American thinking, and the result will be the pendulum swinging back toward the Republicans. It seems that re-gaining power has less to do with what the party out of power is doing, and more to do with what the party in power is doing.

Liberal Tyranny

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience”…C.S. Lewis.

The answer is—NO!. Mankind got along just fine for thousands of years without liberals providing a breast on which to feed, a clean diaper, and a night night don’t let the bed bugs bite. It’s too bad that so many Americans now want these things.