Tag Archives: Federal government

Jul 26 2014

The Reason Americans Will Not Fight Back Against the Corruption and Criminality


Its never to late as long as the change as not been completed!

Jul 24 2014

Obama: ‘It’s Pretty Hard To Find An Economic Measure Where We’re Not Significantly Better Off’


Barack aka POTUS, aka the bear (cub) aka Barry aka Pinocchio aka the tin man ,,, etc.

Jul 24 2014

President Obama To Press: Drop Dead


With Barry the bear its simple he is dyslexic and always say the opposite of what he means or intends to do! transparent means opaque, folks means slaves laser focus means I’ll get to it sometime … etc

Pundit Planet's avatarpundit from another planet

obama-pressObama has attended three super PAC events in the past week. | AP Photo

The most transparent administration in history…

SAN FRANCISCO —For POLITICO.com, Dward-Isaac Dovere and Josh Gerstein report: President Barack Obama went to the West Coast to meet donors from two top Democratic super PACs, but the press wasn’t invited.

“We think these fundraisers ought to be open to at least some scrutiny, because the president’s participation in them is fundamentally public in nature.”

— Christi Parsons, the new president of the White House Correspondents’ Association

Tuesday, the reporters and photographers traveling with the president on Air Force One and in his motorcade were left on the gravel path not even within sight of former Costco CEO Jim Sinegal’s house in the Seattle suburbs where Obama sat for a Senate Majority PAC fundraiser with a $25,000 entrance fee.

“Denying access to him in that setting undermines the public’s…

View original post 356 more words

Jul 24 2014

Feds Urge Paramedics, Firefighters to Help Find “Extremists”


There is no end to the governments wish to control every second of our lives — we must take back the country starting in November and finish the work two years later. The tea party rules!

Jul 24 2014

The 10th Amendment


This is mostly a re post from the Tenth Amendment Center.

Most of us know about the 10th Amendment to the constitution but to put it in context as St. George Tucker does in this post shows exactly what the framers intended in the separation of powers between the federal government and the several states.  The politicians have clearly over stepped the bounds that were established. It took them a long time but what he have now is clearly something very different than what we had up until only a few decades ago.

EDITOR’S NOTE: St. George Tucker was one of the most influential legal scholars of the early American republic. His View of the Constitution of the United States was the first extended, systematic commentary on the Constitution after it had been ratified by the people of the several states and amended by the Bill of Rights. And his Blackstone’s Commentaries, from which the following excerpt originates, was the major treatise on American law in the early 19th century. Lawyers arguing before the Supreme Court of the United States would frequently cite to Tucker’s Blackstone – more often than any other commentator until 1827.

10082013_10th

 
The twelfth article of the amendments to the constitution of the United States, declares, that the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. This became the 10th amendment as after two amendments were not approved.

The powers absolutely prohibited to the states by the constitution, are, shortly, contained in article 1. section 10. viz.

1. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation.

2. Nor grant letters of marque and reprisal.

3. Nor coin money.

4. Nor emit bills of credit.

5. Nor make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.

6. Nor pass any bill of attainder.

7. Nor any expost facto law.

8. Nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts.

9. Nor grant any title of nobility. . . . Concerning all which, we shall make some few observations hereafter.

All other powers of government whatsoever, except these, and such as fall properly under the first or third heads above-mentioned, consistent with the fundamental laws, nature, and principle of a democratic state, are therefore reserved to the state governments.

From this view of the powers delegated to the federal government, it will clearly appear, that those exclusively granted to it have no relation to the domestic economy of the state. The right of property, with all it’s train of incidents, except in the case of authors, and inventors, seems to have been left exclusively to the state regulations; and the rights of persons appear to be no further subject to the control of the federal government, than may be necessary to support the dignity and faith of the nation in it’s federal or foreign engagements, and obligations; or it’s existence and unity as the depositary and administrator of the political councils and measures of the united republics. . . . Crimes and misdemeanors, if they affect not the existence of the federal government; or those objects to which it’s jurisdiction expressly extends, however heinous in a moral light, are not cognizable by the federal courts; unless committed within certain fixed and determinate territorial limits, to which the exclusive legislative power granted to congress, expressly extends. Their punishment, in all other cases, exclusively, belongs to the state jurisprudence.

The federal government then, appears to be the organ through which the united republics communicate with foreign nations, and with each other. Their submission to it’s operation is voluntary: it’s councils, it’s engagements, it’s authority are theirs, modified, and united. It’s sovereignty is an emanation from theirs, not a flame by which they have been consumed, nor a vortex in which they are swallowed up. Each is still a perfect state, still sovereign, still independent, and still capable, should the occasion require, to resume the exercise of it’s functions, as such, in the most unlimited extent.

Jun 26 2014

As the Southern Border Burns, the Democrats Fiddle


More of the destruction of America

Posted Power Line June 26, 2014 author John Hinderaker

Immigration

It is hard to overstate the disaster that is taking place across our Southern border. Tens of thousands of Central American migrants, at a minimum, have made their way illegally across the Mexican border, lured by promises of amnesty, and no one thinks that they–the overwhelming majority–are ever going to leave. We have no more border, we have no more sovereignty, and this is exactly how liberals want it.

Washington’s leading voice on this issue has long been Senator Jeff Sessions. Vilified by the Democratic Party on one side and the Chamber of Commerce and Silicon Valley billionaires on the other, his lonely crusade on behalf of America’s workers continues. Today, he asked unanimous consent to pass two immigration enforcement bills. The first would make the E-verify program mandatory for all employers, clarify that federal contractors and agencies must use it, and allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to require “critical employers” to use it. This legislation would also have increased penalties for employers who do not use the system when mandated, or continue to hire illegal workers.

The second bill would have made it harder for illegals to defraud the federal government by requiring applicants for the additional child tax credit to provide a Social Security number. This reform would save the federal government billions of dollars as well as ending the current, absurd situation where the government subsidizes the violation of our laws.

But the Democrats blocked both measures. They like illegal immigration, and want to see more of it. Amazingly enough, Democratic Senate Whip Dick Durbin, once nominated by us as the dumbest man in Washington, spoke up in favor of defrauding the federal government:

If you have a minor child, you pay less taxes in America. What the Senator from Alabama and this bill try to do is to restrict the availability of this child tax credit to some workers in America. I think they’ve gone too far. I want to make sure that working families with small children have the helping hand of our tax code.

The “helping hand” consists of writing checks to people who are here illegally and who may or may not have minor children. They must think we are crazy, and I can’t say that they are wrong.

Feb 10 2014

Universal Suffrage


Good or Bad?

Suffrage is the term given for the right to cast a vote.  In a pure Democracy everyone of the established voting age or any other qualifier can cast a ballot.  Then all it takes is for one side to have one vote more then the other side in order to win, which is majority rule.  In addition in a pure democracy all the citizens with the right to vote would vote on all issues directly.  Rousseau wrote about that kind of Democracy in his The Social Contract since he was very familiar with this kind of government from Geneva where he grew up.  Obviously this system only applies to a small area or town.

That direct voting by the citizens on everything has always been considered to be both bad and impossible especially at the Federal level and so when the Constitution was written only men (predominately white) with property were allowed to vote. But that restrictive view was not universal and so a few years later under President Jackson, who believed that voting rights should be extended, they were. Therefore by 1840 universal white male suffrage (and some blacks) was the norm, and nearly all requirements to own property had been dropped.

This expansion of the voting franchise continued unabated until 1971 when by that time all Citizens over 18 male or female and of any race could vote.  Whether that was good or not it was the law of the land through the amendment process to the Constitution (14th, 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th and 26th Amendments plus various legislative acts).  The United States was the first major country to have full suffrage for women starting with a few states as early as 1869 and completed when the 19th amendment was ratified in 1920.

The problem with this expansion of the franchise was not with any of the various groups that were added but with an ever increasing lack of understanding by the voters on whom or what they were voting for. There were two parts to this:

The first problem was the education system which stopped teaching the principles of government.  This was by far the worst problem for if the Citizens no longer understood their system of government then they could be manipulated by those seeking power.

The second problem was the formation of political parties that took advantage of this and created block voting where it didn’t matter who was running or what the issue was — it was a vote cast only for the party.

With the very lose voter registration process and vote manipulation (this maters a lot when the vote is close) going on today we have created a system where the winner is chosen more by popularity and money then anything that really counts. Who has the best “spin” and/or the most money gets to win today with the TV, radio and the web (social media) as powerful means of communication. An interesting tidbit about the entertainment industry, Plato in his Republic understood that the Arts could influence elections and that therefore they must be strictly controlled so as not to corrupt the Citizens, he would be appalled at what comes out of Hollywood today..

But there is more as we have a representative system of government as the Citizens with the right to vote do not vote directly they vote for Representatives. In the Federal system as originally setup the Citizens voted for someone to represent them in the House of Representatives known as the Peoples house, for obvious reasons.   The House with the Constitutional mandate to prepare an operating budget for the Federal government was given this task so that the Citizens could control the spending since it was their representatives that were responsible for the budget.

This was a much debated system with concerns that the Citizens would find ways to have the federal government find ways to spend money on them, the citizens.  So to counter this tendency the Senate was established (for other reasons as well) and they had to concur with the House on spending bills.

Now the Senate was originally set up to be filled with appointed Senators two from each state.  The logic being that the several states would appoint seasoned and experienced Citizens to these positions.  It was probably assumed back then that these would be wealthy land owners and they would represent the upper class of the country while the House was for the common man.  A check and balance system again.

So with this system both ends of the Citizens were represented the common man and the wealthy man. And they had to work together to get anything done.

But over the last couple of elections cycles this system has been subverted by the Democratic Progressives and the current occupant of the White House Barak Husain Obama the first president that actually instructs the Senate to refuse to bring up House passed Budgets. So instead of doing their job they demand that their spending ideas be taken and no debate is allowed.  The president approves of this process since he does nothing to stop it and instead demands that the House Republicans give him what he wants. This is probably unconstitutional but since the Public education system has produced several generations of students with no real understanding of the process and so the media can blame the House for not giving Obama what he wants. Which is absurd since the House is the peoples House and it is their main responsibility not the Senate nor the Presidents to produce a Federal Budget.

James Madison, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

Feb 9 2014

Is a Change in our form of Government Coming?


The Real Reasons for Health Care & Immigration Reform

There are many serious debates going on in the country today, especially as we have an election coming up in November 2014 that could have major implications for the future of the country.  In this off year election, as it’s called, every member of the House of Representatives is up for reelection and 1/3 of the Senate.  The outcome has the potential to change the course of the country for the good or the bad.  There are three possible outcomes: the first is that the House remains under Republican control and the Republicans pick up enough seats that they gain control of the Senate; the second is that there is no major change in the makeup and the House remains under Republican control and the Senate remains under Democratic control; the third is that the Democrats gain control of the House and that they maintain their control of the Senate.

The core issue to be decided is the Obama administration going to be allowed to complete the “Transformation” of the country that he stated after he won the 2008 election and took office. Obama will probably be known, in history, as the least “qualified” person elected to this office out of the 43 that proceeded him, having only the barest minimum specified by the constitution. His reelection in 2012 was more by the incompetent management of the Republican Party than the support for his policies although it must be said that his message of more “free” stuff (Redistribution of Wealth) was very powerful to the underclass which he significantly added to, by the way, during his first four years. The question that begs an answer now is, have the American citizens woken up and are no longer mesmerized by the sweet talking progressive salesperson?

The debate over the unequal end result of life which occurs for many reasons such as heredity, station, motivation and luck has been going on for all of recorded history, some 5,000 years.  The American experience of less than 250 years represents only 5% of that body of political experience.  Many empires and kingdoms have lasted for thousands of years however none of them had a free citizenry.  Only in America had the common man been allowed to do his own bidding not that of some master.  The result was amassing as in less than 200 years we became the preeminent power on the Globe which simultaneously creating a way of life that was the envy of all.  Keep in mind that even considering the programs started in the mid to late ‘30s the Federal government was still restrained by the Constitution and the Bill-of-Rights; so the Federal government cannot claim that all the growth that occurred before that had anything to do with Federal policies.

Not until the late 60’s did foreigners’ began coming here “primarily” for the “benefits” not the “opportunity” that existed here. The massive influx of people from Europe that occurred from after the civil war until the beginning of the Vietnam war came here for the opportunity not the benefits (free stuff) as the benefits did not exist until after President Johnson (LBJ) created them in the form they now are. Unlike previous waves of immigrants today’s immigrants are given special treatment and benefits such as “welfare,” “The anchor baby” and “The dream act” policies that actually give illegal’s more benefits than citizens. Since nothing can ever be totally “free” the existing citizens are paying for this out of their earning (taxes); such that if you can sneak across the border and get here the rest of us will pay you to live here, get health care and get education at no cost to the illegal.  It’s a very good deal for them but not for us.

An argument has been made that we need the workers: but at the same time we are told that the workers we need are technicians, engineers and other professionals that can do the hi-tech jobs of the future. On face there is a very large disconnect here for the majority of those we allow to come here by our policies are uneducated for sure no technical skills and speak no English. In other words there are millions of illegal’s that have no chance of being productive members of our hi-tech society.  Whether their children will be so qualified or not is not the point they are not and for the most part will never be. So on face the propositions before us in Immigration reform are preposterous.

Since we have the Federal Government, which is now controlled by the progressive wing of the Old Democratic Party, telling us that two mutually exclusive ideas must be followed something is amiss.  The need for hi-tech workers does just not jive with bringing in illiterate non-English speaking immigrants. Therefore we can only assume that there are other reasons than those being started. The most likely being that if the existing crop of illegal’s were given any form of amnesty (meaning they could stay here) then it would be a very easy step for a future congress to grant them citizenship.  Since these are predominately uneducated people (no fault of theirs) they will be dependent on the federal Government and vote Democratic in overwhelming numbers.  Even if it would be 60/40 to the Democrats favor it would mean the end of the Republican Party. It would more likely be 75/25 or worse and than the Republican Party would be extinct.

Free health care from the Affordable Health Care act known as Obama Care is now going to add to the draw of third world people to come here one way or another.  No political or economic system can sustain these kinds of policies for long without bringing economic destruction.  By the end of this year the Federal Government will have added $10.0 trillion to the national financial obligations (T-bills are only one form) in only 6 years. Since foreign investors presently pick up 50% of the U.S. debt in the form of T-bills the continuation of this uncontrolled spending trend along with anemic jobs growth will soon make any U.S. investment problematical and some change in our form of government will be required.

When one studies Political Philosophy, especially the classic Greeks i.e. Socrates, Aristotle and Plato one finds that there are only a very few forms of government that are possible. Further there are patterns to transitions between them since no single from lasts for very long.  These “basic” forms are:

A. The people are ruled by one person which can take two forms …

A-1 MONARCHY
One ruler, restrained by law  who tries to serve all the citizens of a state.
Example: Queen Elizabeth the First.

A-2 TYRANNY
One ruler who uses his power for himself or for some special group.
Example: Adolph Hitler or Joseph Stalin.

B. The people are ruled by a few people which can also take two forms …

B-1 ARISTOCRACY 
The rule by a small elite of the state’s best people chosen by ability or achievement.
Example: America after the revolution for about 30 years. 

B-2 OLIGARCHY
Self-interested rule by a group chosen for their wealth or social caste.
Example: Post revolutionary France.

C. The people are ruled by themselves which can also take two forms …

C-1 POLITY
The rule by the majority of the citizens but controlled by constitutional law to protect the rights of the minority.
Example: Great Britain or The United States 

C-2 DEMOCRACY
Rule by majority. It uses its power to oppress the minority. Small groups manipulate the masses to get what they want.
Example: Ancient Athens

You can see that the only difference between C-1 and C-2 is a “strong” Constitution” which the founding fathers knew and that was their stated purpose when they created it. Over the past several decades those that desire power but were frustrated by the Constitutional limits decided to get rid of those limits by first instituted a re-education system in the American schools. The tools they used were multiculturalism, political correctness and sustainable energy.  That is now completed and the final transformation is now being instituted with all the talk of the old and obsolete Constitution and according to our current president the need for a “Bill of Positive Rights” meaning what the government can do for you.  The current talk of by-passing Congress with a pen and a phone are also part of this change. The completion of this change in beliefs will move us from C-1 to C-2 which is the opposite of what most would think.

Once this happens, and it is very close right now, according to the Classical Philosophers we move from the “C” class to the “A” class of government. The normal transition would be from C-1 to C-2 to A-2, the transition will be quick and unless the Republican Party will wake up and embrace the “Tea” party the transition to A-2 will be completed by 2020. The reason it will be quick is that it is generally believed that the from C-2 is the most unstable.

There is only one way to stop this transformation and that is for “all” conservatives to band together and keep the House and take the Senate. The goal should be to create a coalition of conservatives in the Senate comprising 60 members. If that could be accomplished than the President could be removed from office by the Impeachment process. Although that would put Joe Biden in office it would be for a very short time and in 2016 a new president could be elected that was not interested in changing our form of government.

However, even if the 60 number could not be reached in the Senate, if the Republicans got the majority, anything over 50, than Obama would have his hands tied to the point that we could at least put changes on hold till 2016 and prevent more damage from being done.