Impeachment won't work. Filing suit
won't work. Only defunding can alter this regime’s reckless course. Ultimately,
of course, the most efficacious and peaceful remedy is for the States to assert
their 10th Amendment power to nullify any and all federal
laws/edicts/regs/rulings which are patently unconstitutional.
If the States refuse to play in the federal sandbox, the feds will have no option but to pound sand.
If the States refuse to play in the federal sandbox, the feds will have no option but to pound sand.
While I wasn't surprised by Obama's
signature timidity, overall I agree with his tack.
That said, it is clear this ISIS catastrophe could have been avoided had Obama, always the rigid and
politically-driven ideologue, adopted the clear-headed advice of our military
leadership to maintain a respectable military force in Iraq. But, we all know
Obama didn't vigorously push for a SOF agreement as he should have. This, of
course, created a power vacuum which ISIS quickly filled. Also, with such a
supportive residual force, the US could have more successfully influenced
Maliki and, more than likely, averted Maliki's stupid, self-destructive military
firings and appointments which crippled Iraq’s well-trained and
well-equipped---but entirely demoralized---army.
Like in Korea and Europe, keeping a
military presence in Iraq was slum dunk obvious.
Kids, ideologues and geeky
alternative universe globalists, academics and Progressives in charge of our
government and foreign policy is akin to the kiss of death.
Bye-bye Iraq, and hello to another
9/11 tragedy, or tragedies.
One bright possibility in this otherwise dreary picture: the stoic Kurds, always a reliable and determined ally of the USA in the Middle East and second only to Israel, will most certainly achieve their sovereignty this time around. They bloody well earned it!
One bright possibility in this otherwise dreary picture: the stoic Kurds, always a reliable and determined ally of the USA in the Middle East and second only to Israel, will most certainly achieve their sovereignty this time around. They bloody well earned it!
It always gets back to cause and effect.
Sadly, the pervasive self-delusion,
apathy and willful ignorance gripping the country are the culprits. Obama and
his Progressive minions are but symptoms of a dumbed-down, hopelessly
unprincipled population. We've met the enemy and it is US.
Has he gone insane? Not any more insane than any other neo-Marxist ideologue.
No, this guy is an extremely competent obfuscator, prevaricator, saboteur--a coldly calculating radical Statist.
In short, he knows precisely what
he's doing even if the results of his ruinous actions imperil America and
violate historical economic and political foundational truths.
Socialists and Communists NEVER learn.
Socialists and Communists NEVER learn.
Let's be clear: Landrieu stands with
Landrieu, NOT coal.
Short of a coup d'etat or outright
revolution, the solution is for the House to withhold funding and for the
States to assert their 10th Amendment authority to nullify any and all
unconstitutional acts by ANY branch of the federal Leviathan.
That said, neither the House nor the
States have the spine or principle to faithfully uphold their oaths to preserve
and protect the Constitution. (My guess is that neither the House nor the
States even understand their authority and duties under the Constitution.)
And, of course, secession,
thoroughly and willfully discredited by clueless statists and revisionists, is an entirely
constitutional remedy to federal tyranny.
Our Founders provided efficacious
remedies, but if we are unwilling to exercise our powers what good are those
remedies? We have met the enemy and it us!
Sen. Mary Landrieu:
‘Getting rid of me would not be good for the country and it’s future’
No shameless self-promotion going on
here, huh? The boorish arrogance of this nitwit. Who the hell does she think
she is?
She's just scared about being in the
unemployment lines which she and her Progressive pals have created for the rest
of us.
Sorry, Mary, aka "Obamacare Queen", but
you're going to have work for a living for a change--and soon.
She and her ilk make me vomit.
Stunning but terribly in character
for this charlatan. This shameless and corrupt political hack is a disgrace.
Like Obama and Pelosi, he'll definitely go DOWN in history.
Alaska Sues U.S. Over Its Rejection of Oil Exploration Plan
The fed's illegal control over
Alaska lands which are not for the specific purpose of maintaining armories,
fortifications and related military uses, is blatantly unconstitutional. It
violates the Enclave Clause, plain and simple. What Alaska (and other States as
well) should do is seize all lands illegally held by the feds. Will they do it?
Nope. Why? Ignorance of the Constitution and a knee-jerk and vacuous belief
that the federal government is supreme; that it trumps the Constitution and the
States. Monstrous idiocy!
Until the States dust off and
actually read the Constitution and assert their authority as sovereign States
in this and myriad other issues, our downward spiral into darkness and
oppression will continue unabated.
Advice to Kremlin: permit a
secession referendum in Crimea. If secession is lawfully approved by popular
vote, THEN Crimea should subsequently call for an additional referendum to confederate/unite
with Russia. This process would be in keeping with international law--and our
own Constitution for that matter--and obliterate the idea that Russia is
forcefully annexing Crimea.
Political optics is everything. But, Russians are notorious blockheads of the first order, and they will opt for more thuggish tactics to acquire not only Crimea, but the Russian-dominated eastern portion of Ukraine as well. AND they will probably get away with it.
As for Paul, on nearly every issue I
completely agree with him--esp. in the area of economics. But, I’m afraid his
foreign policy is puerile,, short-sighted and fanciful.Political optics is everything. But, Russians are notorious blockheads of the first order, and they will opt for more thuggish tactics to acquire not only Crimea, but the Russian-dominated eastern portion of Ukraine as well. AND they will probably get away with it.
Great PR, but insane. Sure, it will draw the folks' attention to the tyranny, but that’s really it.
The remedy to executive overreach is a constitutional one: impeachment. And if enough Senate seats are captured by Republicans in November--which I doubt--then impeach, convict and remove him from office. (Note: to convict and remove a sitting chief executive requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate, a bridge too far for the most optimistic Republicans among us.) If this approach doesn't work out, then an all-out occupation of DC by patriots is needed until this putative president resigns or is forcibly removed.
Merely passing more laws which will again
be ignored or vetoed is meaningless, unless, of course, it paves the way for
effective removal.
Likely Success of Article
Five Convention Efforts
For me, repealing the 17th Amendment
and adopting a balanced budget amendment are justifiable reasons for a
Convention of States.
However, this Art V Convention process
can be uncomfortably lengthy during which time much federal mischief can be
further perpetrated on the States and the People.
Thus, while the Art V process goes
forward, I urge everyone to support States' 10th Amendment authority and duty
to nullify any and all unconstitutional federal acts. The one-two punch of an
Art V process AND the invocation of the 10th Amendment would be
dynamite!
Obviously, if the feds don't honor
our current Constitution and Amendments, can we reasonably expect them to honor
any new Amendments? That said, a concurrent Convention of States AND State
nullification is THE most efficacious constitutional remedy before us.
Supremes shoot down state's fight for gun rights
And the States permit this judicial
mockery of the Constitution!Montana's mistake was to refer the law to the federal courts in the first place.
Constitutionally, Montana may
determine its own gun policy--NOT the feds.
As long as ignorant politicians
defer to Leviathan on matters wholly within the State's scope of constitutional
authority, federal invasiveness will not be stemmed.
JUST SAY NO, Montana! Nullify any
court ruling which violates your State's sovereign rights under the
Constitution. In other words, dust off the Constitution, read it, and follow
it! Geez! This isn't rocket science, guys!
"Illegal immigrant" is an oxymoron.
Per immigration law, one can't be
illegal AND an immigrant. If you entered the country illegally, you are an
illegal alien/undocumented alien/illegal entrant--NOT an illegal immigrant. An
immigrant is, by definition, a legal entrant. Got it, Sonia?
Mixing and matching immigration
terms to merely accommodate one's sensitivities is ignorant and irresponsible.
Oh, and by the way, Sonia, according
to Webster's Dictionary, "illegal" is defined as illicit, unlawful,
criminal. Do you find our dictionaries personally offensive too? Gee, maybe
they should be outlawed, huh?
My God. Political correctness is
stupefying this country. The extent to which some of us will go to obfuscate in
order to advance our inane political agendas is disgusting and depraved. And
Sonia, a jurist, should know better. (Tragically, she DOES know better, but that makes absolutely no difference at all. These days political agendas invariably trump faithfulness to the Rule of Law.)
Art III doesn't give the Supreme
Court the power to violate the 10th Amendment.
The court can opine as to the constitutionality of a particular act, but it has absolutely no constitutional authority to "rule" against or to militate against what, in its view, is an unconstitutional act. The Founders were very clear about this. Unfortunately, our political leaders and jurists have, over the years, hollowed out the Constitution to comport with their ideological game plans. It's up to us to restore constitutional order both at the federal and state levels.
Too often the States lack the
constitutional principle and spine to defend their sovereign rights under the
Constitution. Why? Sadly, they've been bought off by the giveaways from the federal Leviathan.The court can opine as to the constitutionality of a particular act, but it has absolutely no constitutional authority to "rule" against or to militate against what, in its view, is an unconstitutional act. The Founders were very clear about this. Unfortunately, our political leaders and jurists have, over the years, hollowed out the Constitution to comport with their ideological game plans. It's up to us to restore constitutional order both at the federal and state levels.
Actually, there is a "Supremacy
Clause" in the Constitution. To wit, Art. VI, para 2: " This
Constitution, and the Laws of the United States, WHICH SHALL BE MADE IN
PURSUANCE THEREOF, and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the
Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or
Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
In short, the CONSTITUTION--not the
Supreme Court or any other federal branch of government, or of the individual
States--is supreme. This clause renders federal power supreme only insofar as
the power exercised is within its clearly defined enumerated powers (Art 1 Sec
8).
Nationalists, Statists conveniently
and deliberately misinterpret this clause in order to advance their authoritarian
agendas. They always omit the words " which shall be made in pursuance
thereof".
It's well past time we all became
better acquainted with our Constitution and put these social engineers and
radical authoritarians in their place.
Finally, Art 1 Sec 8 enumerated federal
powers are, by design, very limited. Over the years, the feds--especially with
Progressive encouragement--have expanded their powers well beyond
constitutional limitations. As the 10th Amendment clearly provides, ANY power
not specifically delegated by the States to the federal government, i.e. Art 1
Sec 8 powers, are reserved to the States and/or We the People. In short, the
Feds have NO authority to regulate commerce WITHIN a State. And that includes
marijuana production and sale of same with the confines of a State. Fed
authority applies only to interstate commerce, this for the express purpose of
rendering free and unencumbered trade between the States.
Mark Levin vs. the Tenth
Amendment
We must remember that, this
according to the Founders, the FINAL ARBITER of what is and what is not
constitutional is We the People--not a gaggle of unelected, black-robed,
divinely-inspired judicial oligarchs in DC.
We have strayed so very far from the
Constitution it may require an upheavel to restore constitutional order,
economic sanity and the rule of law. For any thinking American to believe we
now live in a Republic is delusional.
Obfuscators and historical
revisionists are hell bent to equate nullification (and secession) with
slavery, this to delegitimize the inherent reserved rights of the States to
nullify. These purveyors of propaganda and revisionist history conveniently
forget the "Hartford Convention" which brought New England a hair's
breath from seceding from the union. And, of course, the revisionists
conveniently, deliberately and mendaciously characterize nullification as a
"southern thing" when there were actually more acts of northern
nullification than southern nullification. I hope folks get a chance to read
"A Patriot's Call to Action" which debunks this revisionism and
mythology with historical and legal facts.
Look to the 9th and 10th Amendments,
and let our Founders be our guide--not the historical revisionists who would
have us adopt authoritarianism as our form of government.
And while we’re at it, this: by definition,
we've never had a "civil war". In 1861, we had the "War of
Southern Independence" which some have dubbed the "War of Northern
Aggression". Only if the Southern States were vying for political control
of the central government in DC could that 4-yr slaughter be correctly
described a "civil war". The Confederate States of America fought to
be left alone in peace, independence and freedom--NOT to achieve ruling
authority over the union.
Finally, and despite Levin’s errant
assertion to the contrary, Madison did not debunk nullification. In fact, all
Founders asserted that any unconstitutional acts emanating from the central
government are null and void and unenforceable. Madison took exception not to
nullification, but to South Carolina's assertion that a State's nullifying a
particular federal act/law should be applicable in all States unless 3/4 of
those States voted against that nullifying act. And, of course, that is in
error.
I like Levin, but on the subject of
nullification he is d-e-a-d wrong.
Well, that would most certainly be THE solution to the Obamacare menace and a whole host of other outrageous federal violations of trust and of the Constitution, but I'll believe that when I see it, LTC West.
Being a clear-eyed, patriotic
realist, I no longer trust government at ANY level any more.
It's well past time for We the
People to assert our sovereign authority before we're so far down the rat hole
we none of us can dig ourselves out!
Lead the fight, Sir! Then just maybe
it will happen. But I won't hold my breath.
