Yes We Do Need The Constitution

TL In Exile:  

While I harp on the Constitution, I know that most of my blathering is just for those who think there is some legitimate means of resistance. I don't think we need it. We do not need to justify our actions through the Constitution, but others might.

We cannot go back to it, but we can demand that the ideals that spawned it are alive and held within the hearts of those patriots of today, because the Constitution is nothing other than a declaration of the power of the people over their government, not the other way around. If one understands and believes that the individual is supreme, what else needs to be established?

TPTB have twisted ever word, every intent to serve themselves, yet the words remain, plain and in simple terms to anyone who cares to read it. We don't. Forget it, it doesn't matter, because we are determined to have liberty through whatever means secures it, or death. That is the original intent of the Constitution, to provide the legitimacy for those who need it and the rest, like us, we don't need it. We know we are not free and nothing else matters.

Their are 3 things that I believe in with all my heart.One is the Holy Bible,it is the unadulterated,inerrant,and inspired Word of God.Another is the Declaration of Independence,it defines where our liberties come from -our 'Creator'-,the purpose of government,and secures to the people the right' to alter or abolish' any form of government 'that becomes destructive to these ends.'Finally I believe in the Constitution as originally constructed,it creates our Federal government,defining its form,purpose,and limitations,through its original intent our liberties are protected.

My question is when did the Constitution betray you,Mr. Davis?When did the Constitution as originally constructed ever steal your liberty?Yes,they have been those,beginning with Lincoln all they way to our present time,who have subverted it,trampled upon it,and manipulated it,who have stolen our liberty,but the Constitution didn't do it.For those who have ears to hear,the Constitution rebuked them for it,but we didn't heed it.The fault lies with 'We the people',not with the Constitution it self.

If not the Constitution,then what form of government do you suggest?What form of government can you come up with that would best secure our liberties to ourselves and our posterity?Not a better one.

As for me,Mr. Davis,I will trust James Madison and our Founding Fathers over you or any one else where our liberties are concerned.

Politicizing The Legal Process

From Yahoo:

US President Barack Obama on Monday challenged the "unelected" Supreme Court not to take the "extraordinary" and "unprecedented" step of overturning his landmark health reform law.

Though Obama said he was confident the court would uphold the law, the centerpiece of his political legacy, he appeared to be previewing campaign trail arguments should the nine justices strike the legislation down.
In a highly combative salvo, Obama also staunchly defended the anchor of the law -- a requirement that all Americans buy health insurance -- as key to giving millions of people access to treatment for the first time.
"Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Obama said.
Pointed comments from Supreme Court justices last week during three days of compelling hearings have convinced many commentators that the court, expected to rule in June, will declare the law, dubbed ObamaCare, unconstitutional.

What Obama is doing is politicizing the legal process,creating an air of illegitimacy on the Courts potential ruling of Obamacare as unconstitutional,arguing that the Court is thwarting the democratic process.This is disgusting and totally predictable coming from a thug who believes that the Constitution is 'a deeply flawed document.'

The 'Final Death Sentence For The Fourth Amendment'

From WND commentary:

And now for the first time in American history, according to the Government Accountability Project’s Jesselyn Radack, Attorney General Eric Holder has officially and publicly declared “new guidelines that permit the federal counterterrorism investigators to collect, search and store data about Americans who are not suspected of terrorism, or anything …
“According to the Justice Department, law enforcement and other national security agencies can copy entire databases and sift through the data for suspicious patterns to stop potential terrorist threats” (“Govt. Keeping Data on Americans With No Connection to Terrorism,” whistleblower.org, March 23).
Where in the Constitution do “suspicious patterns” – otherwise undefined and outside the jurisdiction of our courts – allow the government to put large and growing numbers of us into databases for future tracking?
Indeed, Radack writes, this gossamer of “information” is being stored “on Americans who are not even thinking about committing a crime.”
As of this writing, Mitt Romney appears very likely to be the Republicans’ choice to thwart President Barack Obama’s desire for a second term. Have you heard any objection from him on this purge of privacy?
And which government agency will lead in this final death sentence for the Fourth Amendment? Emerging from its customary deep secrecy is our nation’s (and probably the world’s) most immense spy center, the National Security Agency.

At some point we all have to admit that the 'war on terror' has grown to be a bigger threat to our liberties and our way of life than Al-Qaeda ever has been.

'Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria'

Hat tip to Free North Carolina.

The problem here is not that the Obama administration openly violates the Constitution on an almost a daily bases.No!The real problem here lays with Congress.With all of Sen. Sessions outrage,he and the Republicans in Congress WILL DO NOTHING to force the Obama administration to conform to the Constitution.Thats why the Constitution provides for checks and balances,sir,to stop such violations.The Constitution does not operate upon the honor system,you must enforce it for it to work.

On another note,why should we get involved in Syria at all?How does Syrians killing Syrians threaten our national security or interests in the region?The cold hard truth is that a long drawn out civil war in Syria is a benefit to us and Israel.It weakens Syria,no matter who the victor would be,and they wouldn't be a threat in the time being or for awhile afterwards to their neighbors,especially to Israel.

How Ron Paul Would Effectively End Abortion In America

Ron Paul:

"To summarize my views--I believe the federal government has a role to play," said Paul. "I believe Roe v. Wade should be repealed. I believe federal law should declare that life begins at conception. And I believe states should regulate the enforcement of this law, as they do other laws against violence."
"I don't see the value in setting up a federal police force on this issue any more than I do on other issues," Paul said. "The Fourteenth Amendment was never intended to cancel out the Tenth Amendment. This means that I can’t agree that the Fourteenth Amendment has a role to play here, or otherwise we would end up with a 'Federal Department of Abortion.' Does anyone believe that will help life? We should allow our republican system of government to function as our Founders designed it to: protect rights at the federal level, enforce laws against violence at the state level.
"As President, I will sign and aggressively advocate for a law that removes abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts," said Paul. "This approach, done by simple majority vote and stroke of my Presidential Pen, would effectively overturn Roe v. Wade and allow states to pass strong pro-life legislation immediately. Millions of lives would be saved by this approach while we fight to make every state a right to life state."

While most Pro-Life Republicans talk a good game,they rarely do anything to actually stop abortions.Ron Paul is not only Pro-Life,but he has a plan,that is not only capable of ending this scourge in our country,it is also Constitutional.Tell me who is the most Pro-Life candidate?

The New Republican Virtue Of Cowardice

Michael Barone:

Many Republican House members, and the bloggers and tea partiers who cheered their victory in gaining a majority in November 2010, seem to be seething with discontent and eager for confrontation.

They believe, reasonably, that their victory represented a repudiation of the vast expansion of government by the Obama Democrats. They want to see those policies reversed, and pronto. And if the dilatory Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the all-campaign-no-governance President Obama want a confrontation, so much the better.
Such impatience is unbecoming in those who call themselves “constitutional conservatives.” It is James Madison’s Constitution that prevents the winners of one election from directing the course of public policy as unilaterally as, to take one example, the British Labor party marched Britain into a socialist welfare state on the basis of one election victory in 1945.

This is utter hog-wash!We who want less government and to reduce its power over our lives DO NOT expect a return to Constitutional government over night.In fact most of us know it won't happen in our lifetimes.

We know we will have to have both the House and a filibuster proof Senate,with the Presidency just to begin to restore our nation to its Constitutional roots.We also know that the battle will not just be in Washington,but in the streets all across America.The Left -the Union-thugs and Occupy Wall Street- will rage with violence at the end of government programs that they have been conditioned to be dependent upon;being encouraged to do so by the crony capitalist who have enriched themselves at the expense of the state.It will be a very long and enduring fight.

The problem that I and others have with the Republicans in Congress,is not in their prudence in picking the right fight,but in their refusal to stand up and fight at all.Their strategy seems to be to avoid confrontation with Obama and the Democrats at all cost,caving in at every opportunity.They may not be able to roll back the welfare state,but they DO NOT have to be a party to its expansion.

Patience is a virtue,but cowardice is not.This exactly what John Boehner and the GOP leadership in the House has exhibited,cowardice.I will not be lectured to,by Michael Barone or any other Washington insider on being impatient,when we are led in Washington by a bunch of cowards.

'POLICE STATE - Man Gets Arrested For Not Giving Cops His Cell Phone'

'The Church Of Obama'

Mark Steyn:

The president of the United States has decided to go Henry VIII on the Church’s medieval ass. Whatever religious institutions might profess to believe in the matter of “women’s health,” their pre-eminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, and immunities are now subordinate to a one-and-only supreme head on earth determined to repress, redress, restrain, and amend their heresies. One wouldn’t wish to overextend the analogy: For one thing, the Catholic Church in America has been pathetically accommodating of Beltway bigwigs’ ravenous appetite for marital annulments in a way that Pope Clement VII was disinclined to be vis-à-vis the English king and Catherine of Aragon. But where’d all the pandering get them? In essence President Obama has embarked on the same usurpation of church authority as Henry VIII: As his Friday morning faux-compromise confirms, the continued existence of a “faith-based institution” depends on submission to the doctrinal supremacy of the state.
“We will soon learn,” wrote Albert Mohler of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, “just how much faith is left in faith-based institutions.” Kathleen Sebelius, Obama’s vicar on earth, has sportingly offered to maintain religious liberty for those institutions engaged in explicit religious instruction to a largely believing clientele. So we’re not talking about mandatory condom dispensers next to the pulpit at St. Pat’s — not yet. But that is not what it means to be a Christian: The mission of a Catholic hospital is to minister to the sick. When a guy shows up in Emergency bleeding all over the floor, the nurse does not first establish whether he is Episcopalian or Muslim; when an indigent is in line at the soup kitchen the volunteer does not pause the ladle until she has determined whether he is a card-carrying papist. The government has redefined religion as equivalent to your Sunday best: You can take it out for an hour to go to church, but you gotta mothball it in the closet the rest of the week. So Catholic institutions cannot comply with Commissar Sebelius and still be in any meaningful sense Catholic.
If you’re an atheist or one of America’s ever more lapsed Catholics, you’re probably shrugging: What’s the big deal? But the new Act of Supremacy doesn’t stop with religious institutions. As Anthony Picarello, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, put it: “If I quit this job and opened a Taco Bell, I’d be covered by this mandate.” And so would any of his burrito boys who object to being forced to make “health care” arrangements at odds with their conscience.

The natural right of conscience is our most sacred of rights.In times of war we do not force those who legitimately oppose war from participating and violating their own conscience,giving them conscientious objector status.At no time does our Constitution require anyone to choose between the state and God.

But now under Obamacare,the state has been elevated above God and reigns supreme,with Barack Obama on the throne deciding what is Holy and unholy.All things belong unto Ceasar now.

Big Brother Seeking To Get A Birds Eye View Of You

From The Washington Times:

Look! Up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It’s … a drone, and it’s watching you. That’s what privacy advocates fear from a bill Congress passed this week to make it easier for the government to fly unmanned spy planes in U.S. airspace.
The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015.

This is another step to place us under total surveillance by a Big Brother police state.

'Teen Arrested For Asking Cop About Unwarranted Raids'

TSA 'Detains' Sen. Rand Paul And Violates The Constitution

From ABC NEWS:

Paul’s office confirmed he set off  an airport security full-body scanner “on a glitch,” according to a spokesman.
The Paul staffer said TSA agents would not let Paul walk back through the body scanner and were demanding a full body pat-down.
The Paul spokesman said his office called TSA administrator John Pistole about the incident this morning.
The U.S. Constitution actually protects federal lawmakers from detention while they’re on the way to the Capital.
“The Senators and Representatives…shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same….” according to Article I, Section 6.
The Senate is back in session today at 2 p.m., with votes scheduled at 4:30 p.m. It is not clear if Paul will make it to Washington by 4:30 p.m. on his new flight.

This is yet another example of the absurdity of the whole airport screening process.Instead of looking for terrorist.our government is more interested in harassing people and exerting its own power,whether it violates the Constitution or not.

Politics And Race Baiting At Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday Celebration

I love how the left will get up and screech and howl,when anyone passes out a conservative voter guide in the church parking lot,citing the "separation of church and state."But when they get up in the pulpit of all places and openly use it to push a political agenda,its just called having a "political conscience."

BTW,the whole idea behind the "separation of church and state" -a phrase that does not appear in the U.S. Constitution but it does appear in the constitution of the U.S.S.R.- is a means by progressives to control to religious speech and to remove the Word of God from our daily lives and establish their religion of secularism in all facets of our lives instead.

Also,on a day that is supposed to promote unity and peace,its interesting exactly who is promoting division among us.

Hat tip to The Weekly Standard.

How To Steal Power

Herman Cain Is Pro-Choice/Pro-Life Or Something Like That

Herman Cain tells Piers Morgan that he is Pro-life/Pro-Choice or something like that:

And yet, interestingly, here’s what Cain said to Morgan concerning abortion for people who are not his family members:

No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.

Morgan then said that Cain cannot hide behind the “mask of the pizza guy,” and that, as a person who may potentially become president, his views on issues like abortion become “a directive to the nation.” Cain’s response?

No, they don’t. I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.

So, there you have it: Herman Cain is against abortion, personally, but is firmly pro-choice, as he believes the government should not intervene in social decisions. And that extends to same-sex marriage, by the way. As you may recall, Cain said recently, during an appearance on Meet The Press, that “I wouldn’t seek a constitutional ban for same-sex marriage, but I am pro-traditional marriage.”

Herman Cain is very wishy-washy when it comes to matters involving the Constitution.He is Pro-Life but doesn't want government to protect unborn innocent life.He is pro traditional marriage,but doesn't want a Constitutional amendment to protect it from the left,who want to destroy the traditional family.Let us not forget this,Herman Cain said,he believed in 2nd Amendment rights,but then said,the states had a right to restrict those same rights.

Being wish-washy makes Herman Cain a good T.V. personality,but it makes him unfit to be POTUS.

Hat tip to Pundit & Pundette.

Tell Me Exactly Who Is In Rebellion,Junior?

Jesse Jackson Jr. wants,Obama to declare Congress in rebellion,and operate outside the bounds of the Constitution:

Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. told The Daily Caller on Wednesday that congressional opposition to the American Jobs Act is akin to the Confederate “states in rebellion.”
Jackson called for full government employment of the 15 million unemployed and said that Obama should “declare a national emergency” and take “extra-constitutional” action “administratively” — without the approval of Congress — to tackle unemployment.
“I hope the president continues to exercise extraordinary constitutional means, based on the history of Congresses that have been in rebellion in the past,” Jackson said. “He’s looking administratively for ways to advance the causes of the American people, because this Congress is completely dysfunctional.”

No,Congressman Jackson,"congressional opposition to the American Jobs Act" is not "akin to the Confederate states in rebellion."

First of all,the Confederate States were not in rebllion,they left the Union of their own free will,as it was their right to do so.It was Lincoln,who operated outside the bounds of the Constitution,subjagated the Southern states by force of arms.It was Lincoln who was in rebellion,rebellion to the Constitution.

If Obama takes "extra-constitutional" measures,like Lincoln 150 years ago,he would be in rebellion to the Constitution.Then every state -not 13 as 150 years ago,but all 50 states- should secede from the Union immediately,and reform our government under the Constitution.

What should be done now with Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.,Sister Tolijah has the answer:

Glenn Reynolds thinks Jackson should resign over this. Resign, hell. “Representative” Jesse Jackson, Jr., should be brought before the House and expelled for violating his oath.

It will never happen,but it should.

'Underscoring The Wisdom Of The Founding Fathers'

From The Other McCain:

Now, the Founding Fathers gave us a Constitution that at least affords us the chance for something better. They knew, having just crawled out from under an authoritarian thumb, that a similar leader could arise in these United States.

Couple of points:

Don’t make it personal, no matter how personal the Bad Man gets. BHO is symptomatic, but he is not the disease. Merely voting him out does less good than you’d think.


Keep in mind: the problems are economic.US energy policy sucks, the monetary policy sucks even more, and the entitlement mentality has sapped the American zest for liberty to an alarming degree. You’ve had a Presidential candidate tell the truth about Social Security in a very big way, and now he’s being thrown under the bus. Can Americans handle the truth?


I think the country is still half-awake. The growing awareness of what is wrong is there. What is lacking is the leadership and guts to take the pain of correcting the mess.


You cannot take a moderate approach to cancer; hence the disquiet with the smooth-talking blue-state RINO possibilities for President. They either give good concession speech to BHO’s second term, or continue to expand the federal government, to the detriment of liberty.


We must restrain this federal government, as the Founders would have it.

Amen!

Where 3 Or More Our Gathered In Jesus Name And Be Fined $300

From CBS Los Angeles:

An Orange County couple has been ordered to stop holding a Bible study in their home on the grounds that the meeting violates a city ordinance as a “church” and not as a private gathering.
Homeowners Chuck and Stephanie Fromm, of San Juan Capistrano, were fined $300 earlier this month for holding what city officials called “a regular gathering of more than three people”.

This is absurd! What right has any government -whether its is federal,state,or local- to tell me or anyone else, how many people we allow in our homes at any time and tell us what we can and can not do inside them? ITS NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS!

Furthermore,what about this couple's 1st Amendment rights? I thought we had the "free exercise" to practice our religion anywhere,most especially in our own homes.Oh,I forgot we are no longer governed by the Constitution,but by a bureaucratic state,my apologizes.

This is just more evidence of how little regard our governments have for constitutional liberty.

"The King James Is An Unparalleled Cultural Triumph"

Last week,Rich Lowery,went an disgraced himself by propagating The Cult Of Lincoln.Now,Rich Lowery,has gone an redeemed himself by correctly surmising the King James version of the Bible's place in our history and our culture;

The availability of the Bible in English, Bobrick notes, fostered commercial printing and a culture of reading. It created space for people — ordinary people, needing no official sanction or filter — to read and think about their faith and life’s profoundest questions. Ultimately, that undermined the authority of, to take another phrase from the King James Version (Romans 13:1), “the powers that be.”
“Free discussions about the authority of Church and state,” Bobrick argues, “fostered concepts of constitutional government in England, which in turn were the indispensable prerequisites for the American colonial revolt. Without the vernacular Bible — and the English Bible in particular, through its impact on the reformation of English politics — there could not have been democracy as we know it.”
The translators of the King James Version stated their “desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood of the very vulgar.” In a cultural triumph difficult to imagine 400 years later, it not only found a wide audience, but elevated it.

If you want to see the cornerstone of Western Civilization,the bedrock of English style democracy,if you want to see the foundations of American constitutional liberty,go find yourself a King James Bible,and there you will find the source of everything that has made us great.

Obama's Covert War On The 2nd Amendment

Via Moonbattery;

The statist agenda has never been achieved until the public has been disarmed, because in the end, anyone worthy of being called human will rebel against socialism. Like other aspects of Obamunism so radical as to provoke open revolt, the campaign to repeal the crucial Second Amendment is going "under the radar" — to quote the Manchurian Moonbat himself:

On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial "large magazines." Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, "to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda," she said.

"I just want you to know that we are working on it," Brady recalled the president telling them. "We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar."

These "processes" will be regulatory, imposed by faceless, unelected apparatchiks and ignored by the complicit media. That's how freedom is killed: quietly, gradually, furtively.

"The Vanishing Constitution"

Bill Costello has written an interesting article at the American Thinker,on the "The Vanishing Constitution";

The federal government has increasingly assumed unlimited powers and acted against the will of the people. When they can't legislate, they regulate.

The attitude is: We know you don't want it, but we are going to force it on you anyway. Who are you to know what is best for you? You are just a pesky voter. We are entitled to discount what you say because you cannot possibly grasp our progressive agenda.

Progressives began the gradual erosion of constitutional principles around the beginning of the 20^th century. The goal? To impose their superior wisdom on the rest of us

Read the full article here.

While I agree with Mr. Costello in that Woodrow Wilson was no friend to the Constitution,but the destruction of our Constitutional government didn't begin with Wilson,but with Abraham Lincoln.It was Lincoln,who not in a"gradual erosion",but in a cataclysmic event,ripped,shredded and burned the Constitution,by imposing his will by military force on,not just the Southern states who had lawfully seceded,but on the Northern states who remained in the Union as well.