This is one OF Hollywood's True American,
May God Bless Chuck Norris & Charlie Daniels.
Crabby Old Man
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36156
Riders on the Storm
by Chuck Norris
03/23/2010
I have so few words to express the depth of my disgust with the unconstitutional path and passing of Obamacare and the corruption in Congress. So let me just tell you about the storm coming to Washington.
The majority of Americans have voiced ad nauseam their grave concerns with and rejection of Washington's health care bills. Like a host of other commentators, I have written at least a dozen syndicated articles this past year addressing sound objections. And like you, I've joined rallies, signed petitions and passed along a plethora of reasonable nonpartisan negative critiques of Obamacare. But at every turn, Washington has ignored us and demonized our opposition.
Obamacare violates commerce laws by forcing Americans to purchase a product and annihilates the federal government's 10th Amendment restrictions over U.S. states and citizens, which is why a whopping two-thirds of states across the nation already are legally battling over whether federal law can trump state laws via Obamacare.
Why can't Washington see that the main problem with Obamacare is not its costs, coverage or faulty projected savings, but that the federal government should not be involved in the health care business at all?! According to the Constitution, such a matter should be left to the free market, citizens, local communities and states.
But that's history now. One-sixth of our economy will be controlled by the federal government, and we're supposed to blindly accept that's not a socialistic tendency. The fact is that despite the Congressional Budget Office's projected savings, Obamacare will morph and inflate (along with its costs) in the years to come. Has any government program not done so? As President Barack Obama admitted to Fox's Bret Baier last week, "Yes, it's one-sixth of the economy, but we're not transforming one-sixth of the economy all in one fell swoop." There are the key words: "all in one fell swoop."
Mark my words: The terms in this health care bill eventually will be so far-reaching that it will become a major foundation for a fundamentally different America, from which will sprout many tentacles that will choke out other freedoms. This is not just a health care bill; it's a metastasizing tool and weapon for all forms of federal intrusion and takeover. In areas that the feds can't cover or control presently, absence and subtlety in the bill's language will provide the springboard for their future rule.
But the time for commentary and dialogue is over. The final hour has come. Our Constitution is on life support, and the federal government is pulling the plug.
As there is before an impending death or brewing storm, there's a hush at the moment, but most of us sense that there's something very, very wrong on the horizon.
It reminds me of a few years ago, when Dr. James Foster from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center tackled the question of whether there really is a period of calm before a storm. His answer: There definitely is.
Foster noted, "It was recognized long ago that before a severe storm, the air is still and the birds stop singing and go to shelter."
What's true with weather is also true with Washington. Many patriots have stopped singing. Some have gone into hiding. Others are gathering wood as we trudge through this Valley Forge. But all will reawaken and fight for the republic our Founders laid down for us.
The gray and black clouds are not governmental control, but masses of American citizens and patriots who will continue to swarm tyranny (Democrat and Republican) until it is squeezed out of our nation, just as it was during the American Revolution.
For now, all Washington bureaucrats need to know is this: The forecast for the U.S. Capitol in the upcoming weeks and months is definitely thunderstorms. If you encouraged, affirmed, endorsed or voted for Obamacare in any form, expect a dark cloud to precede your exit as we vote you out of office. We will remember in November. That's not only a threat; it's a guarantee.
We the people have come to understand the profound wisdom of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote to Abigail Adams in 1787, "I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere."
Washington: Pack your bags. Run for shelter. The storm is coming.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Being Texan
U just have to live in this great place to understand .
N.E. Tx is my little piece of heaven on earth.
Crabby
From Bum Philips: Being Texan
Dear Friends,
Last year, I wrote a small piece about what it means to me to be a Texan. My friends know it means about damned near everything. Anyway, this fella asked me to reprint what I'd wrote and I didn't have it. So I set out to think about rewriting something. I considered writing about all the great things I love about Texas. There are way too many things to list. I can't even begin to do it justice. Lemme let you in on my short list.
It starts with The Window at Big Bend, which in and of itself is proof of God. It goes to Lake Sam Rayburn where my Granddad taught me more about life than fishin, and enough about fishin to last a lifetime. I can talk about Tyler, and Longview, and Odessa and Cisco, and Abilene and Poteet and every place in between. Every little part of Texas feels special. Every person who ever flew over the Lone Star thinks of Bandera or Victoria or Manor or wherever they call "home" as the best little part of the best state.
So I got to thinkin about it, and here's what I really want to say. Last year, I talked about all the great places and great heroes who make Texas what it is. I talked about Willie and Waylon and Michael Dell and Michael DeBakey and my Dad and LBJ and Denton Cooley. I talked about everybody that came to mind. It took me sitting here tonight reading this stack of emails and thinkin' about where I've been and what I've done since the last time I wrote on this occasion to remind me what it is about Texas that is really great.
You see, this last month or so I finally went to Europe for the first time. I hadn't ever been, and didn't too much want to. But you know all my damned friends are always talking about "the time they went to Europe." So, I finally went. It was a hell of a trip to be sure. All they did when they saw me was say the same thing, before they'd ever met me. "Hey cowboy, we love Texas." I guess the hat tipped em off. But let me tell you what, they all came up with a smile on their faces. You know why? They knew for damned sure that I was gonna be nice to em. They knew it cause they knew I was from Texas. They knew something that hadn't even hit me. They knew Texans, even though they'd never met one.
That's when it occurred to me. Do you know what is great about Texas? Do you know why when my friend Beverly and I were trekking across country to see 15 baseball games we got sick and had to come home after 8? Do you know why every time I cross the border I say, "Lord, please don't let me die in _____"?
Do you know why children in Japan can look at a picture of the great State and know exactly what it is about the same time they can tell a rhombus from a trapezoid? I can tell you that right quick. You. The same spirit that made 186 men cross that line in the sand in San Antonio damned near 165 years ago is still in you today. Why else would my friend send me William Barrett Travis' plea for help in an email just a week ago, or why would Charles Stenciled ask me to reprint a Texas Independence column from a year ago?
What would make my friend Elizabeth say, "I don't know if I can marry a man who doesn't love Texas like I do?" Why in the hell are 1,000 people coming to my house this weekend to celebrate a holiday for what used to be a nation that is now a state? Because the spirit that made that nation is the spirit that burned in every person who founded this great place we call Texas, and they passed it on through blood or sweat to every one of us.
You see, that spirit that made Texas what it is, is alive in all of us, even if we can't stand next to a cannon to prove it, and it's our responsibility to keep that fire burning. Every person who ever put a "Native Texan" or an "I wasn't born in Texas but I got here as fast a could" sticker on his car understands. Anyone who ever hung a map of Texas on their wall or flew a Lone Star flag on their porch knows what I mean.
My Dad's buddy Bill has an old saying. He says that some people were forged of a hotter fire. Well, that's what it is to be Texan. To be forged of a hotter fire.
To know that part of Colorado was Texas. That part of New Mexico was Texas. That part of Oklahoma was Texas. Yep. Talk all you want. Part of what you got was what we gave you. To look at a picture of Idaho or Istanbul and say, "what the Hell is that?" when you know that anyone in Idaho or Istanbul who sees a picture of Texas knows damned good and well what it is. It isn't the shape, it isn't the state, it's the state of mind. You're what makes Texas.
The fact that you would take 15 minutes out of your day to read this, because that's what Texas means to you, that's what makes Texas what it is. The fact that when you see the guy in front of you litter you honk and think, "Sonofabitch. Littering on MY highway."
When was the last time you went to a person's house in New York and you saw a big map of New York on their wall? That was never. When did you ever drive through Oklahoma and see their flag waving on four businesses in a row? Can you even tell me what the flag in Louisiana looks like? I damned sure can't.
But I bet my ass you can't drive 20 minutes from your house and not see a business that has a big Texas flag as part of its logo. If you haven't done business with someone called All Tex something or Lone Star somebody or other, or Texas such and such, you hadn't lived here for too long.
When you ask a man from New York what he is, he'll say a stockbroker, or an accountant, or an ad exec. When you ask a woman from California what she is, she'll tell you her last name or her major. Hell either of em might say "I'm a republican," or they might be a democrat. When you ask a Texan what they are, before they say, "I'm a Methodist," or "I'm a lawyer," or "I'm a Smith," they tell you they're a Texan. I got nothin' against all those other places, and Lord knows they've probably got some fine folks, but in your gut you know it just like I do, Texas is just a little different.
So tomorrow when you drive down the road and you see a person broken down on the side of the road, stop and help. When you are in a bar in California, buy a Californian a drink and tell him it's for Texas Independence Day. Remind the person in the cube next to you that he wouldn't be here enjoying this if it weren't for Sam Houston, and if he or she doesn't know the story, tell them.
When William Barrett Travis wrote in 1836 that he would never surrender and he would have Victory or Death, what he was really saying was that he and his men were forged of a hotter fire. They weren't your average every day men.
Well, that is what it means to be a Texan. It meant it then, and that's why it means it today. It means just what all those people North of the Red River accuse us of thinking it means. It means there's no mountain that we can't climb. It means that we can swim the Gulf in the winter. It means that Earl Campbell ran harder and Houston is bigger and Dallas is richer and Alpine is hotter and Stevie Ray was smoother and God vacations in Texas.
It means that come Hell or high water, when the chips are down and the Good Lord is watching, we're Texans by damned, and just like in 1836, that counts for something. So for today at least, when your chance comes around, go out and prove it. It's true because we believe it's true. If you are sitting wondering what the Hell I'm talking about, this ain't for you.
But if the first thing you are going to do when the Good Lord calls your number is find the men who sat in that tiny mission in San Antonio and shake their hands, then you're the reason I wrote this tonight, and this is for you. So until next time you hear from me, God Bless and Happy Texas Independence Day.
May you be poor in misfortune, rich in blessings, slow to make enemies and quick to make friends. But, rich or poor, quick or slow, may you know nothing but happiness from this day forward.
Regards From Texas,
Bum Phillips
N.E. Tx is my little piece of heaven on earth.
Crabby
From Bum Philips: Being Texan
Dear Friends,
Last year, I wrote a small piece about what it means to me to be a Texan. My friends know it means about damned near everything. Anyway, this fella asked me to reprint what I'd wrote and I didn't have it. So I set out to think about rewriting something. I considered writing about all the great things I love about Texas. There are way too many things to list. I can't even begin to do it justice. Lemme let you in on my short list.
It starts with The Window at Big Bend, which in and of itself is proof of God. It goes to Lake Sam Rayburn where my Granddad taught me more about life than fishin, and enough about fishin to last a lifetime. I can talk about Tyler, and Longview, and Odessa and Cisco, and Abilene and Poteet and every place in between. Every little part of Texas feels special. Every person who ever flew over the Lone Star thinks of Bandera or Victoria or Manor or wherever they call "home" as the best little part of the best state.
So I got to thinkin about it, and here's what I really want to say. Last year, I talked about all the great places and great heroes who make Texas what it is. I talked about Willie and Waylon and Michael Dell and Michael DeBakey and my Dad and LBJ and Denton Cooley. I talked about everybody that came to mind. It took me sitting here tonight reading this stack of emails and thinkin' about where I've been and what I've done since the last time I wrote on this occasion to remind me what it is about Texas that is really great.
You see, this last month or so I finally went to Europe for the first time. I hadn't ever been, and didn't too much want to. But you know all my damned friends are always talking about "the time they went to Europe." So, I finally went. It was a hell of a trip to be sure. All they did when they saw me was say the same thing, before they'd ever met me. "Hey cowboy, we love Texas." I guess the hat tipped em off. But let me tell you what, they all came up with a smile on their faces. You know why? They knew for damned sure that I was gonna be nice to em. They knew it cause they knew I was from Texas. They knew something that hadn't even hit me. They knew Texans, even though they'd never met one.
That's when it occurred to me. Do you know what is great about Texas? Do you know why when my friend Beverly and I were trekking across country to see 15 baseball games we got sick and had to come home after 8? Do you know why every time I cross the border I say, "Lord, please don't let me die in _____"?
Do you know why children in Japan can look at a picture of the great State and know exactly what it is about the same time they can tell a rhombus from a trapezoid? I can tell you that right quick. You. The same spirit that made 186 men cross that line in the sand in San Antonio damned near 165 years ago is still in you today. Why else would my friend send me William Barrett Travis' plea for help in an email just a week ago, or why would Charles Stenciled ask me to reprint a Texas Independence column from a year ago?
What would make my friend Elizabeth say, "I don't know if I can marry a man who doesn't love Texas like I do?" Why in the hell are 1,000 people coming to my house this weekend to celebrate a holiday for what used to be a nation that is now a state? Because the spirit that made that nation is the spirit that burned in every person who founded this great place we call Texas, and they passed it on through blood or sweat to every one of us.
You see, that spirit that made Texas what it is, is alive in all of us, even if we can't stand next to a cannon to prove it, and it's our responsibility to keep that fire burning. Every person who ever put a "Native Texan" or an "I wasn't born in Texas but I got here as fast a could" sticker on his car understands. Anyone who ever hung a map of Texas on their wall or flew a Lone Star flag on their porch knows what I mean.
My Dad's buddy Bill has an old saying. He says that some people were forged of a hotter fire. Well, that's what it is to be Texan. To be forged of a hotter fire.
To know that part of Colorado was Texas. That part of New Mexico was Texas. That part of Oklahoma was Texas. Yep. Talk all you want. Part of what you got was what we gave you. To look at a picture of Idaho or Istanbul and say, "what the Hell is that?" when you know that anyone in Idaho or Istanbul who sees a picture of Texas knows damned good and well what it is. It isn't the shape, it isn't the state, it's the state of mind. You're what makes Texas.
The fact that you would take 15 minutes out of your day to read this, because that's what Texas means to you, that's what makes Texas what it is. The fact that when you see the guy in front of you litter you honk and think, "Sonofabitch. Littering on MY highway."
When was the last time you went to a person's house in New York and you saw a big map of New York on their wall? That was never. When did you ever drive through Oklahoma and see their flag waving on four businesses in a row? Can you even tell me what the flag in Louisiana looks like? I damned sure can't.
But I bet my ass you can't drive 20 minutes from your house and not see a business that has a big Texas flag as part of its logo. If you haven't done business with someone called All Tex something or Lone Star somebody or other, or Texas such and such, you hadn't lived here for too long.
When you ask a man from New York what he is, he'll say a stockbroker, or an accountant, or an ad exec. When you ask a woman from California what she is, she'll tell you her last name or her major. Hell either of em might say "I'm a republican," or they might be a democrat. When you ask a Texan what they are, before they say, "I'm a Methodist," or "I'm a lawyer," or "I'm a Smith," they tell you they're a Texan. I got nothin' against all those other places, and Lord knows they've probably got some fine folks, but in your gut you know it just like I do, Texas is just a little different.
So tomorrow when you drive down the road and you see a person broken down on the side of the road, stop and help. When you are in a bar in California, buy a Californian a drink and tell him it's for Texas Independence Day. Remind the person in the cube next to you that he wouldn't be here enjoying this if it weren't for Sam Houston, and if he or she doesn't know the story, tell them.
When William Barrett Travis wrote in 1836 that he would never surrender and he would have Victory or Death, what he was really saying was that he and his men were forged of a hotter fire. They weren't your average every day men.
Well, that is what it means to be a Texan. It meant it then, and that's why it means it today. It means just what all those people North of the Red River accuse us of thinking it means. It means there's no mountain that we can't climb. It means that we can swim the Gulf in the winter. It means that Earl Campbell ran harder and Houston is bigger and Dallas is richer and Alpine is hotter and Stevie Ray was smoother and God vacations in Texas.
It means that come Hell or high water, when the chips are down and the Good Lord is watching, we're Texans by damned, and just like in 1836, that counts for something. So for today at least, when your chance comes around, go out and prove it. It's true because we believe it's true. If you are sitting wondering what the Hell I'm talking about, this ain't for you.
But if the first thing you are going to do when the Good Lord calls your number is find the men who sat in that tiny mission in San Antonio and shake their hands, then you're the reason I wrote this tonight, and this is for you. So until next time you hear from me, God Bless and Happy Texas Independence Day.
May you be poor in misfortune, rich in blessings, slow to make enemies and quick to make friends. But, rich or poor, quick or slow, may you know nothing but happiness from this day forward.
Regards From Texas,
Bum Phillips
Monday, March 22, 2010
A TRAGIC DAY FOR AMERICA
THIS WAS A TRAGIC DAY FOR AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL AS WE ONCE KNEW IT
CRABBY
The Foundation
"Human beings will generally exercise power when they can get it, and they will exercise it most undoubtedly in popular governments under pretense of public safety." --Daniel Webster
Toward the Nationalization of Health Care
The Pied PiperWith Senate and House passage of Barack Hussein Obama's so-called "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," liberals have now sealed the deal to nationalize the American health care system -- almost 17 percent of the U.S. economy. Passage of this measure completes the "triple crown" of the Left's Socialist agenda: Social Security, Medicare and now health care. One may conclude that nationalized health care, like Social Security and Medicare before it, will soon be bankrupt. (See how your Senator and Representative voted.)
There is no provision in the United States Constitution giving the central government the authority to nationalize health care, but liberals have never let the Constitution stand in the way of their incremental efforts to socialize the U.S. economy.
Remarks by the leaders of both House Republicans and Democrats demonstrate that neither Party's leadership has sufficient regard for First Principles, for Constitutional Rule of Law.
Most Republicans give it scant lip service, while virtually all Democrats reject Rule of Law outright.
In his remarks about the legislation, Republican Leader John Boehner did mention the Constitution, but repeated the same worn refrains about what the American people want.
"Today, this body, this institution, enshrined in the first article of the Constitution by our Founding Fathers as a sign of the importance they placed on this House, should be looking with pride on this legislation and our work. But it is not so. ... When we came here, we each swore an oath to uphold and abide by the Constitution as representatives of the people. But the process here is broken. The institution is broken. And as a result, this bill is not what the American people need, nor what our constituents want. ... We have failed to listen to America. And we have failed to reflect the will of our constituents."
No, Mr. Boehner. You did not take an oath to support and defend the "will of our constituents."
In her remarks about the legislation, Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not, of course, mention the Constitution, but she did offer this adulterated view of First Principles, an outright prevarication: "In [passing this legislation], we will honor the vows of our Founders, who in the Declaration of Independence said that we are 'endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' This legislation will lead to healthier lives, more liberty to pursue hopes and dreams and happiness for the American people."
This assertion is an affront to everything our Founders embodied in our national documents of incorporation, and Pelosi, et al., know that.
Pelosi added, "You will be joining those who established Medicare and Social Security... This is an American proposal that honors the tradition of our country."
Nails in the coffin!
For his part, Obama remarked, "At a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics. We proved that this government, a government of the people and by the people, still works for the people. ... This isn't radical reform, but it is major reform. This is what change looks like. ... This represents another stone firmly laid at the foundation of the American Dream."
That would be a tombstone, a grave marker for American liberty.
Friday, March 19, 2010
The Constitution be damned.
MAKES ME WANT TO CRY.
CRABBY
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate. What I can tell you is that the vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I don't think we should pretend otherwise. And if they don't, if they vote against it, then they're going to be voting against health care reform, and they're going to be voting in favor of the status quo. So Washington gets very concerned with these procedures in Congress, whether Republicans are in charge or Democrats are in charge. ... By the time the vote has taken place, not only I will know what's in it, you'll know what's in it because it's going to be posted and everybody's going to be able to evaluate it on the merits." --Barack Obama
Translation: The Constitution be damned.
CRABBY
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate. What I can tell you is that the vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I don't think we should pretend otherwise. And if they don't, if they vote against it, then they're going to be voting against health care reform, and they're going to be voting in favor of the status quo. So Washington gets very concerned with these procedures in Congress, whether Republicans are in charge or Democrats are in charge. ... By the time the vote has taken place, not only I will know what's in it, you'll know what's in it because it's going to be posted and everybody's going to be able to evaluate it on the merits." --Barack Obama
Translation: The Constitution be damned.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Now I Understand
I became confused when I heard the word "Service" used with these agencies:
Internal Revenue 'Service'
U.S.Postal 'Service'
Telephone 'Service'
Cable TV 'Service'
Civil 'Service'
State, City, County & Public 'Service'
Customer 'Service'
This is not what I thought 'Service' meant.
But today, I overheard two farmers talking, and one of them said he had hired a
bull to 'Service' a few cows.
BAM!!! It all came into focus. Now I understand what all those agencies are doing to us.
You are now as enlightened as I am.
Internal Revenue 'Service'
U.S.Postal 'Service'
Telephone 'Service'
Cable TV 'Service'
Civil 'Service'
State, City, County & Public 'Service'
Customer 'Service'
This is not what I thought 'Service' meant.
But today, I overheard two farmers talking, and one of them said he had hired a
bull to 'Service' a few cows.
BAM!!! It all came into focus. Now I understand what all those agencies are doing to us.
You are now as enlightened as I am.
Monday, March 8, 2010
spirt of love
The words of Henry Drummond "You will find as you look back upon your life, that the moments when you have really lived are the moments when you have done things in the spirit of Love."
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Essay – March 4, 2010
Second Amendment -- Still 'The Palladium of Liberties'
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition." --James Madison
James Madison's words regarding the "ultimate authority" for defending liberty (Federalist No. 46) ring as true today as in 1787, when he penned them.
Likewise, so do the words of his appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Joseph Story, who wrote in his 1833 "Commentaries on the Constitution," "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
In recent decades, the "enterprises of ambition" and "usurpation and arbitrary power" among Leftist politicians and their corrupt judicial lap dogs have become malignant, eating away at our Essential Liberty and our constitutional Rule of Law. This has never been more so than since the charlatan Barack Hussein Obama duped 67 million Americans into seating him in the executive branch.
Now more than ever, armed Patriots must stand ready, in the words of Patrick Henry, to "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel."
In June 2008, the Supreme Court, by a narrow 5-4 vote (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy), reaffirmed, in District of Columbia v. Heller, that the people's inherent right to keep and bear arms is plainly enumerated in our Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right, that DC could not ban handguns, and that operable guns may be maintained in the homes of law-abiding DC residents.
This was an important decision affirming the plain language of our Second Amendment and its proscription against government infringement on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."
However, Heller pertained to a federal district, and while our Bill of Rights has primacy over state and municipal firearm restrictions, a Supreme Court case to give judicial precedent to that primacy has yet to be decided.
In his dissenting opinion in Heller, 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens expressed concern that the case "may well be just the first of an unknown number of dominoes to be knocked off the table," should "the reality that the need to defend oneself may suddenly arise in a host of locations outside the home."
One might only hope!
This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments in McDonald v. Chicago, the next test case for the Second Amendment, which will determine if Chicago's onerous gun restrictions are in violation of the Constitution's plain language prohibition of such regulations by states and municipalities.
Otis McDonald, the 76-year-old plaintiff in this case, is challenging Chicago regulations that make it unlawful for him to keep a handgun in his home for self-defense.
My colleague Dave Hardy, a scholar of constitutional law, particularly the Second Amendment, summarized the arguments as follows: "McDonald v. Chicago illustrated the dichotomy between a government of laws and a government of men. One wing of the Court (perhaps the majority) looked to the essential enumeration of the right to arms; the other seemed to argue that since they, as powerful individuals, did not care for the right, or thought it was one of the Framers' bad ideas, they could disregard it."
That is an apt summary of how all cases are handled by the federal judiciary.
Typical of Leftmedia summations, The New York Times opined, "At least five justices appeared poised to expand the scope of the Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms."
Expand?
Only the most uninformed opinion would suggest that asserting the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in Chicago is an expansion of the Second Amendment's scope. But considering the source...
Mr. McDonald's lawyers insist that the 14th Amendment's "privileges or immunities" clause ("no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States") is grounds for overturning Chicago's gun restrictions, and those of other states and municipalities across the our great nation.
Unfortunately, trying to establish a 14th Amendment precedent in and of itself undermines the authority of our Constitution's Bill of Rights.
Recall that there was great debate among our Founders concerning the need for any Bill of Rights. It was argued that such a specific enumeration of rights was redundant and unnecessary to the Constitution and that listed (and unlisted) rights might then be construed as malleable rather than unalienable, as amendable rather than "endowed by our Creator" as noted in the Constitution's supreme guidance, the Declaration of Independence."
To that end, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 84, "I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. ... For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"
Madison prevailed, however, and for clarity he introduced a preamble to the Bill of Rights: "The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution..."
In other words, the Bill of Rights was enumerated to ensure against encroachment on our inherent rights. Read in context, the Bill of Rights is both an affirmation of innate individual rights (as noted by Thomas Jefferson: "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time..."), and a clear delineation of constraints upon the central government.
Note that the Second Amendment is unique in the Bill of Rights in that it expressly asserts the "right to keep and bear arms" is "necessary," more so than just important, to a "free state."
But as feared by those who argued such rights should not be recorded, the "despotic branch," as Jefferson presciently dubbed the judiciary, has endeavored to limit those enumerated rights by way of convoluted and fraudulent precedents.
Likewise, citing the 14th Amendment's "privileges or immunities" clause suggests the Second Amendment was and remains amendable. That, of course, is an egregious affront to Essential Liberty -- but that's the way the game is played today.
Currently, 41 states issue concealed handgun carry permits, or don't require them at all, for law-abiding citizens. Seven other states allow local municipalities to determine gun restrictions; Illinois and Wisconsin do not even allow that option.
Much of the debate about the need to infringe upon the right to bear arms is framed in terms of safety. Gun-control advocates argue that more guns equal more crime. Those advocating for more lenient gun laws argue that more guns equal less crime. Only one of these diametrically opposed views can be true.
While the latter group is factually and demonstrably correct, basing Second Amendment arguments on the issue of safety is as fallacious as attempting to assert the 14th Amendment argument.
In an editorial this week, the conservative Washington Times opined, "The year after the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia's handgun ban and gun-lock requirements, the capital city's murder rate plummeted 25 percent. The high court should keep that in mind..."
No, they should not.
After all, violence is a cultural problem, not a gun problem, and certainly not a Second Amendment problem.
What each member of the Supreme Court must only keep in mind is the plain language of the Constitution, the Second Amendment and the First Principle of his or her oath: "To support and defend our Constitution," as should everyone who has taken that oath.
Accordingly, the High Court should find that the gun restrictions in Chicago, and by extension, those in any other state, are in direct violation of the inherent rights of the people "to keep and bear arms."
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US
Second Amendment -- Still 'The Palladium of Liberties'
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition." --James Madison
James Madison's words regarding the "ultimate authority" for defending liberty (Federalist No. 46) ring as true today as in 1787, when he penned them.
Likewise, so do the words of his appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Joseph Story, who wrote in his 1833 "Commentaries on the Constitution," "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
In recent decades, the "enterprises of ambition" and "usurpation and arbitrary power" among Leftist politicians and their corrupt judicial lap dogs have become malignant, eating away at our Essential Liberty and our constitutional Rule of Law. This has never been more so than since the charlatan Barack Hussein Obama duped 67 million Americans into seating him in the executive branch.
Now more than ever, armed Patriots must stand ready, in the words of Patrick Henry, to "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel."
In June 2008, the Supreme Court, by a narrow 5-4 vote (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy), reaffirmed, in District of Columbia v. Heller, that the people's inherent right to keep and bear arms is plainly enumerated in our Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right, that DC could not ban handguns, and that operable guns may be maintained in the homes of law-abiding DC residents.
This was an important decision affirming the plain language of our Second Amendment and its proscription against government infringement on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."
However, Heller pertained to a federal district, and while our Bill of Rights has primacy over state and municipal firearm restrictions, a Supreme Court case to give judicial precedent to that primacy has yet to be decided.
In his dissenting opinion in Heller, 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens expressed concern that the case "may well be just the first of an unknown number of dominoes to be knocked off the table," should "the reality that the need to defend oneself may suddenly arise in a host of locations outside the home."
One might only hope!
This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments in McDonald v. Chicago, the next test case for the Second Amendment, which will determine if Chicago's onerous gun restrictions are in violation of the Constitution's plain language prohibition of such regulations by states and municipalities.
Otis McDonald, the 76-year-old plaintiff in this case, is challenging Chicago regulations that make it unlawful for him to keep a handgun in his home for self-defense.
My colleague Dave Hardy, a scholar of constitutional law, particularly the Second Amendment, summarized the arguments as follows: "McDonald v. Chicago illustrated the dichotomy between a government of laws and a government of men. One wing of the Court (perhaps the majority) looked to the essential enumeration of the right to arms; the other seemed to argue that since they, as powerful individuals, did not care for the right, or thought it was one of the Framers' bad ideas, they could disregard it."
That is an apt summary of how all cases are handled by the federal judiciary.
Typical of Leftmedia summations, The New York Times opined, "At least five justices appeared poised to expand the scope of the Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms."
Expand?
Only the most uninformed opinion would suggest that asserting the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in Chicago is an expansion of the Second Amendment's scope. But considering the source...
Mr. McDonald's lawyers insist that the 14th Amendment's "privileges or immunities" clause ("no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States") is grounds for overturning Chicago's gun restrictions, and those of other states and municipalities across the our great nation.
Unfortunately, trying to establish a 14th Amendment precedent in and of itself undermines the authority of our Constitution's Bill of Rights.
Recall that there was great debate among our Founders concerning the need for any Bill of Rights. It was argued that such a specific enumeration of rights was redundant and unnecessary to the Constitution and that listed (and unlisted) rights might then be construed as malleable rather than unalienable, as amendable rather than "endowed by our Creator" as noted in the Constitution's supreme guidance, the Declaration of Independence."
To that end, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 84, "I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. ... For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"
Madison prevailed, however, and for clarity he introduced a preamble to the Bill of Rights: "The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution..."
In other words, the Bill of Rights was enumerated to ensure against encroachment on our inherent rights. Read in context, the Bill of Rights is both an affirmation of innate individual rights (as noted by Thomas Jefferson: "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time..."), and a clear delineation of constraints upon the central government.
Note that the Second Amendment is unique in the Bill of Rights in that it expressly asserts the "right to keep and bear arms" is "necessary," more so than just important, to a "free state."
But as feared by those who argued such rights should not be recorded, the "despotic branch," as Jefferson presciently dubbed the judiciary, has endeavored to limit those enumerated rights by way of convoluted and fraudulent precedents.
Likewise, citing the 14th Amendment's "privileges or immunities" clause suggests the Second Amendment was and remains amendable. That, of course, is an egregious affront to Essential Liberty -- but that's the way the game is played today.
Currently, 41 states issue concealed handgun carry permits, or don't require them at all, for law-abiding citizens. Seven other states allow local municipalities to determine gun restrictions; Illinois and Wisconsin do not even allow that option.
Much of the debate about the need to infringe upon the right to bear arms is framed in terms of safety. Gun-control advocates argue that more guns equal more crime. Those advocating for more lenient gun laws argue that more guns equal less crime. Only one of these diametrically opposed views can be true.
While the latter group is factually and demonstrably correct, basing Second Amendment arguments on the issue of safety is as fallacious as attempting to assert the 14th Amendment argument.
In an editorial this week, the conservative Washington Times opined, "The year after the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia's handgun ban and gun-lock requirements, the capital city's murder rate plummeted 25 percent. The high court should keep that in mind..."
No, they should not.
After all, violence is a cultural problem, not a gun problem, and certainly not a Second Amendment problem.
What each member of the Supreme Court must only keep in mind is the plain language of the Constitution, the Second Amendment and the First Principle of his or her oath: "To support and defend our Constitution," as should everyone who has taken that oath.
Accordingly, the High Court should find that the gun restrictions in Chicago, and by extension, those in any other state, are in direct violation of the inherent rights of the people "to keep and bear arms."
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
