Comment

Comment by J.R. on March 20, 2011 at 2:46pm

J.L., I've already read your Supremacy Clause post on the on-going blog-thread following Billie's posted article. You presented an excellent analysis and clarification of what the Supremacy Clause actually means and put the power hierarchy  in context, while re-asserting that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land.  It does takes a lot of careful reading, research, and analysis to fully understand a lot of intricacies that appear, at first, to be in conflict, when closer scrutiny shows that is not the case.

It would be great if you would copy and paste that post here, for the benefit of those who are contributing to this blogpost thread. It is definitely related subject matter. I know I have learned a lot from your other informative postings and believe those who visit and post here will as well. 

Comment by JL Gawlik on March 20, 2011 at 2:09pm

Carrying a piece of paper in your pocket is one thing, but understanding what it says is another.

 

Many miss quoted the Constitution so many times in 2008, 2009, 2010, some actually quoting from the Bill of Rights saying it was the Constitution. There were some Congressional members who laughed when asked if the HC bill was Constitutional, by saying if we did that, we would never be able to pass not one bill. We have a lot of arrogant elected representatives in Congress that need to be kicked out of office because of the disrespect and disdain they have against the U.S. Constitution and the American people, like Reid and Pelosi.

 

The conservatives in the House now, have drawn up rules that each bill passed must show where in the Constitution, it is supported. Boehner stated over and over that one of their main goals is to put a end to the unconstitutional actions of Congress in creating new laws and budgets. They are also putting into place a law that the budget must be passed each year and that it must be balanced or debt/deficit free. If you go to http:www.gop.gov  you can see many of their ideas they want to put into place to get our government back to the people. Personally i think they should be tested on their knowledge of all of our documents: Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and our U.S. Constitution. Michelle Bachmann has started  up classes on the Constitution for the new Freshman Congressional members. They moved in to stop the so-called co-opting of new members, which many like Congressman Jason Chaffetz said was a real eye opener his first year where he was offered money, food, trips in exchange for his votes and friendship by lobbyists and other Congressional members. Thankfully he told them that he is here for his constituents, only, he is their voice.

 

I personally question what Obama's real knowledge is, even though he was said to be a Constitutional law professor, i question his knowledge and respect of the Constitution and law, period, especially since he has declared the Marriage Act signed by Clinton unconstitutional, who died and made him king?  He supposed to be the leader of our country and has stated over and over WE ARE A COUNTRY OF LAWS.  How can we be if our elected leader, serving in the peoples' seat, can pick and choose WHAT LAW HE deems Constitutional?

 

I agree with you on his teachings, two very good Constitutional experts are Andrew Napolitano and Robert G. Natelson.

 

 

Comment by J.R. on March 20, 2011 at 1:38pm

Right!  But many of them say they carry a copy of the U.S. Constitution around in their pocket.  Since so many don't follow the Constitution, they must be carrying it around just for show... or to fool their constituents into thinking they actuallly have read it, understand it, follow it, and make laws that are based upon it.  Typical politicians... when what we need are statesmen/stateswomen.  What is needed is a new federal law that requires that each bill that is passed in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, have included in it the exact constitutional basis for it. That way we wouldn't have unconstitutional laws being enforced that would need to be repealed and rarely are.  We should have that requirement on the state level, also. 

You would think all elected officials would carefully study the Constitution and be able to answer questions about it.  Of course, many of them, including Obama, have long since rejected the Constitution as the law of the land.  Obama is as anti-Constitution as they come and treats it as if it's made out of silly putty, to be molded, manipulated and shaped into whatever suits his purpose.  It's creepy that he taught the Constitution while a part-time adjunct professor at the University of Chicago.  What he was actually teaching was probably more like Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals."

Comment by JL Gawlik on March 20, 2011 at 1:16pm

J.R. Go read my post over at: 

http://www.fctpcommunity.org/profiles/blogs/war-declaredthe-trojan-...

 

Explaining Article VI, Clause 2: QUALIFICATIONS ON STATE SOVEREIGNTY: THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE:

The Supremacy Clause imposed the following rule on all state courts:

 

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 Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the Contrary not withstanding.

 

The United Nations has no authority over the United States. The Constitution is our highest source of law and it is the main authority and guide of our federal government even over federal laws.

Comment by J.R. on March 20, 2011 at 12:17pm

Robert Adelhelm, your'e right, "talk is cheap" and we do need to do a better job of lighting a fire under members of Congress who have become complacent and bogged down in their one-best-way mentality of doing things, have not guarded against encroachment and erosion of their constitutional powers, and have forked over their war powers to whomever is serving as President for four or eight years. 

The Chief Executive (President) holds a temporary position and, as we have all learned from observation and experience, some Presidents are not up to the job.  Yet we're stuck with them for a defined period of time unless they are impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives and removed from office by the U.S. Senate. They can do a lot of damage in a short period of time... as Barack Obama has proven in just a little over two years. One congressman has already called for impeachment of Obama and I get frequent e-mails containing petitions to be signed calling for his impeachment.  I have signed them and forwarded them to others.

But, bottom line, members of the U.S. Congress need to hear from all of us now.  They need to be told, repeatedly, to follow the U.S. Constitution to the letter and uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States as they swore in their Oath of Office to do.  They also must vigorously guard against usurpation of any of their constitutional powers by other branches of government and take back the responsibility for and power over those they have already ceded to the Executive, particularly the power to authorize and declare war. Just as important, they need to be told to listen to the American people who sent them there to do the peoples' business.  When they are elected to either chamber of the U.S. Congress by the people of the sovereign states, it doesn't stop there. When they're in office, they are obgligated to serve the best interests of all of the American people.  And, if they can't or won't do that, they need to resign and get out of Washington... or be thrown out of office at the ballot box.  We know they rarely throw one of their own out, because that becomes a political hot potato.  If they threw all the ones out that need to be thrown out, they probably couldn't attain a quorum to vote on anything. 

Tea Party Patriots, we have a mammoth job to do, both in supporting those who are serving as we sent them to Washington to serve us and in making sure those who are not are defeated in November, 2012.

Comment by Armando Delgado on March 20, 2011 at 10:41am

You state that " Please understand that treaty (according to the Constitution is an illegal treaty." Please, explain why.

Comment by J.R. on March 20, 2011 at 9:57am

You're right, Roma and Tom.  "When called" is past tense and definitely means after having been called by the U.S. Congress to do so, the President may then send our troops into war.  A war action IS war. The founders wisely left the decision of whether or not to enter into and prosecute a war to "We the People," through our 535 elected Representatives and Senators in the U.S. Congress. That is too much power to place in the hands of one person.  If that much power is handed to one person, then, if taken to the extreme, that person (the President) would have the power to war against the people of this country, throw out our constitutional protections and freedoms, and establish a dictatorship. 

The three branches of our federal government were created as a check and balance against each other to assure that there would always be a balance among the three.  Over the past 50 years, that power has become skewed, with both the Judicial and Legislative branches gradually losing more and more power to the Executive Branch.  The outcome is a judiciary that has become peopled with progressive judicial activists who legislate from the bench (usurping Congress' powers), and presidents with disproportionate power to further skew power in favor of the Executive Branch by appointing more judicial activists to the federal court bench, prosecuting lawsuits against states to erode their sovereignty, legislating through regulatory power when legislating is solely the job of the U.S. Congress, and so on. 

With such disproportionate power able to be wielded by the current Executive Branch that makes new power grabs almost daily, we are likely to see our weakened democratic republic become more and more watered-down.  This is a recipe for tyranny.

Comment by Robert Adelhelm on March 20, 2011 at 9:24am

Agree with all, but I always find it interesting that after all the talk there never is any action to stop it.  Talk is cheap without having the moral courage to back it up with action.  If members of congress feel strongly about this DO SOMETHING!  Lead, follow or get out of the way... politicians also need to stop using the word "we" when referring to putting the military in harms way...those that usually say "we" are the one's that have never been nor would ever go...Those that have been understand exactly what I mean.

 

Comment by J.R. on March 19, 2011 at 5:46pm

"RON PAUL: WHY OBAMA IS WRONG ON LIBYA"

"U. S. Congressman Ron Paul, a member of the House Foreign Relations Committee and honorary chairman of Campaign for Liberty, criticized President Obama’s decision to impose a no-fly zone over Libya in a video shot earlier today. In the video, Congressman Paul argues that:

1. The action is an act of War.

2. The no-fly zone is unconstitutional because Congress has not authorized it, a point Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Richard Lugar agrees with.

3. President Obama has illegally ceded U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations.

4. The United States cannot afford the financial burden of more military action in the Middle East."

To watch Congressman Paul's video, click on this link to get to his webpage: 

 

http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-03-18/ron-paul-why-obama-is-wrong-on-li...

(The below links on the topic of interfering in the affairs of foreign nations are also found at the  link provided above) just in case these don't work. Ron Paul: Leave Libya Alone!

Ron Paul: Libya Is Not the American People’s Fight

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page