Ron Paul discussing "Super Congress"

Judge Napolitano: Supreme Court may save us from Obamacare...someday

Originally posted at The Desk of Brian, www.deskofbrian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/untitledpost-2

Newsmax released Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's interview with Ashley Martella

"The Constitution does not authorize the Congress to regulate the state governments. Nevertheless, in this piece of legislation, the Congress has told the state governments that they must modify their regulation of certain areas of healthcare, they must surrender their regulation of other areas of healthcare, and they must spend state taxpayer-generated dollars in a way that the Congress wants it done.

"That's called commandeering the legislature. That's the Congress taking away the discretion of the legislature with respect to regulation, and spending taxpayer dollars. That's prohibited in a couple of Supreme Court cases. So on that argument, the attorneys general have a pretty strong case and I think they will prevail.”

Napolitano on the longstanding precedent of state regulation of the healthcare industry makes the new federal regulations that much more problematic:

"The Supreme Court has ruled that in areas of human behavior that are not delegated to the Congress in the Constitution, and that have been traditionally regulated by the states, the Congress can't simply move in there and the states for 230 years have had near exclusive regulation over the delivery of healthcare. The states license hospitals. The states license medications. The states license healthcare providers whether they're doctors, nurses, or pharmacists. The feds have had nothing to do with it.

"The Congress can't simply wake up one day and decide that it wants to regulate this. I predict that the Supreme Court will invalidate major portions of what the president just signed into law…"

The judge also says he would rate President Obama as one of the worst presidents in terms of obedience to constitutional limitations.

"I believe we have a one party system in this country, called the big-government party. There is a Republican branch that likes war and deficits and assaulting civil liberties. There is a Democratic branch that likes welfare and taxes and assaulting commercial liberties.

"President Obama obviously is squarely within the Democratic branch. The president who had the least fidelity to the Constitution was Abraham Lincoln, who waged war on half the country, even though there's obviously no authority for that, a war that killed nearly 700,000 people. President Obama is close to that end of lacking fidelity to the Constitution. He wants to outdo his hero FDR."

For those who oppose healthcare, the Fox legal expert says, the bad news is that many of the legal challenges to healthcare reform will have to wait until 2014, when the changes become fully operational.

Until then, there would be no legal case that individuals had been actually harmed by the law. Moreover, Napolitano says it takes an average of four years for a case to work its way through the various federal courts the final hearing that's expected to come before the Supreme Court.

"You're talking about 2018, which is eight years from now, before it is likely the Supreme Court will hear this," he says.

Other issues that Napolitano addressed during the wide-ranging interview:

• He believes American is in danger of becoming "a fascist country," which he defines as "private ownership, but government control." He adds, "The government doesn't have the money to own anything. But it has the force and the threat of violence to control just about anything it wants. That will rapidly expand under President Obama, unless and until the midterm elections give us a midterm correction – which everyone seems to think, and I'm in that group, is about to come our way.
• Napolitano believes the federal government lacks the legal authority to order citizens to purchase healthcare insurance. The Congress [is] ordering human beings to purchase something that they might not want, might not need, might not be able to afford, and might not want -- that's never happened in our history before," Napolitano says. "My gut tells me that too is unconstitutional, because the Congress doesn't have that kind of power under the Constitution."
• The sweetheart deals in the healthcare reform bill used that persuaded Democrats to vote for it – the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback, Gatorade Exception and others – create "a very unique and tricky constitutional problem" for Democrats, because they treat citizens differently based on which state they live in, running afoul of the Constitution's equal protection clause according to Napolitano. "So these bennies or bribes, whatever you want, or horse trading as it used to be called, clearly violate equal protection by forcing people in the other states to pay the bills of the states that don't have to pay what the rest of us do," Napolitano says.
• Exempting union members from the so-called "Cadillac tax" on expensive health insurance policies, while imposing that tax on other citizens, is outright discrimination according to Napolitano. "The government cannot draw a bright line, with fidelity to the Constitution and the law, on the one side of which everybody pays, and the other side of which some people pay. It can't say, 'Here's a tax, but we're only going to apply it to nonunion people. Here's a tax, and we're only going to apply it to graduates of Ivy League institutions.' The Constitution does not permit that type of discrimination."
• Politicians from both parties routinely disregard the Constitutional limits imposed on them by the nation's founding document, Napolitano says. "The problem with the Constitution is not any structural problem," says Napolitano. "The problem with the constitution is that those who take an oath to uphold it don't take their oath seriously. For example, just a month ago in interviewing Congressman Jim Clyburn, who's the No. 3 ranking Democrat in the House, I said to him, Congressman Clyburn, can you tell me where in the Constitution the Congress is authorized to regulate healthcare? He said, 'Judge, most of what we do down here,' referring to Washington, 'is not authorized by the Constitution. Can you tell me where in the Constitution we're prohibited from regulating healthcare.' Napolitano says that reflects a misunderstanding of what the Constitution actually is. "He's turning the Constitution on its head, because Congress is not a general legislature," he says. "It was not created in order to right every wrong. It exists only to legislate in the 17 specific, discrete, unique areas where the Constitution has given it power. All other areas of human area are reserved for the states."
• Napolitano says that members of Congress infringe on Constitutional rights because they fail to recognize its basis. "They reject Jefferson's argument, in the Declaration of Independence, that our rights come from our Creator, therefore they're natural rights, therefore they can't be legislated away," Napolitano says. "They think they can legislate on any activity, regulate any behavior, tax any person or thing, as long as the politics will let them survive. They're wrong, and with this healthcare legislation, they may be proven wrong, in a very direct and in-your-face way."

http://newsmax.com/Headline/Andrew-Napolitano-barack-obama/2010/03/26/id/354008?s=al&promo_code=9A73-1

Famous Quotes by James Madison

Notable Quotes Page at Desk of Brian: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/notable-quotes
James Madison Page

James Madison was our 4th President, a close friend to Thomas Jefferson, helped push through, amongst other things, religious freedom statues.

Madison's draft of the "Virginia Plan" and his revolutionary idea of three branches of federal government were the basis of the Constitution.

To promote ratification of the Constitution Madison wrote the Federalist papers with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. (Source and Pic Wikipedia & et al.)

A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people.

Our country abounds in the necessaries, the arts and the comforts of life - March 13, 1813

Conscience is the most sacred of all property. - Essay on Property, March 29, 1792

Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. - Federalist No. 10, November 23, 1787

Equal laws protecting equal rights — the best guarantee of loyalty and love of country. - letter to Jacob de la Motta, August 1820

A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the
government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of
auxiliary precautions. - Federalist No. 51, February 8, 1788

I acknowledge, in the ordinary course of government, that the
exposition of the laws and Constitution devolves upon the judicial. But
I beg to know upon what principle it can be contended that any one
department draws from the Constitution greater powers than another in
marking out the limits of the powers of the several departments. - speech in the Congress of the United States, June 17, 1789

I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which
the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense
alone it is the legitimate Constitution. And if that is not the guide
in expounding it, there may be no security. - letter to Henry Lee, June 25, 1824

(Pic to right: Portrait by Gilbert Stuart)

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money,
and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a
limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one,
subject to particular exceptions. - letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792

I own myself the friend to a very free system of commerce, and hold it
as a truth, that commercial shackles are generally unjust, oppressive
and impolitic — it is also a truth, that if industry and labour are
left to take their own course, they will generally be directed to those
objects which are the most productive, and this in a more certain and
direct manner than the wisdom of the most enlightened legislature could
point out. - speech to the Congress, April 9, 1789

Every man who loves peace, every man who loves his country, every man
who loves liberty ought to have it ever before his eyes that he may
cherish in his heart a due attachment to the Union of America and be
able to set a due value on the means of preserving it. - Federalist No. 41, January 1788

Happily for America, happily, we trust, for the whole human race, they
pursued a new and more noble course. They accomplished a revolution
which has no parallel in the annals of human society. - Federalist No. 14, November 20, 1787

He was certainly one of the most learned men of the age. It may be said
of him as has been said of others that he was a "walking Library," and
what can be said of but few such prodigies, that the Genius of
Philosophy ever walked hand in hand with him. - on Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Samuel Harrison Smith, November 4, 1826

A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under
which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another
species. - Essay on Property, March 29, 1792



A local spirit will infallibly prevail much more in the members of
Congress than a national spirit will prevail in the legislatures of the
particular States.
- Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788



A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of
acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps
both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to
be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which
knowledge gives.
- letter to W.T. Barry, August 4, 1822



A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of
representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the
cure for which we are seeking.
- letter to William Hunter, March 11, 1790



A universal peace, it is to be feared, is in the catalogue of events,
which will never exist but in the imaginations of visionary
philosophers, or in the breasts of benevolent enthusiasts.
- essay in the National Gazette, February 2, 1792



All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.
- speech at the Constitutional Convention, July 11, 1787



Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man
must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may
be a reflection on human nature that such devices should be necessary
to control the abuses of government. What is government itself but the
greatest of all reflections on human nature?
- Federalist No. 51, February 8, 1788



America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier,
exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America
disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat.
- Federalist No. 14, November 30, 1787



How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited,
unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and
establishments of every hostile nation? 
- Federalist No. 41, January 1788



Among the features peculiar to the political system of the United
States, is the perfect equality of rights which it secures to every
religious sect. - letter to Jacob de la Motta, August 1820



Among the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union,
none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to
break and control the violence of faction.
- Federalist No. 10, November 23, 1787



If individuals be not influenced by moral principles; it is in vain to
look for public virtue; it is, therefore, the duty of legislators to
enforce, both by precept and example, the utility, as well as the
necessity of a strict adherence to the rules of distributive justice.
- in response to George Washington's first Inaugural address, May 18, 1789

An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one
in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced
among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend
their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by
the others. - Federalist No. 58, 1788

An ELECTIVE DESPOTISM was not the government we fought for; but one
which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the
powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several
bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal
limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.- Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788

As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally
said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power
prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his
opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. - National Gazette Essay, March 27, 1792

As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty
to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the
connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions
and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other. - Federalist No. 10, November 23, 1787

Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over
the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate
governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia
officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of
ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any
form can admit of. - Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788

But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority
of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single
State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general
alarm... But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal
government to such an extremity. - Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

But the mild voice of reason, pleading the cause of an enlarged and
permanent interest, is but too often drowned, before public bodies as
well as individuals, by the clamors of an impatient avidity for
immediate and immoderate gain. - Federalist No. 42, January 22, 1788

Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign
body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own
voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if
established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution. - Federalist No. 39, January 1788

Energy in government is essential to that security against external and
internal danger and to that prompt and salutary execution of the laws
which enter into the very definition of good government. Stability in
government is essential to national character and to the advantages
annexed to it, as well as to that repose and confidence in the minds of
the people, which are among the chief blessings of civil society. - Federalist No. 37, January 11, 1788

As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain
degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in
human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence.
Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a
higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been
drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses
of the human character, the inference would be that there is not
sufficient virtue among men for self-government; and that nothing less
than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and
devouring one another. - Federalist No. 55, February 15, 1788

For the same reason that the members of the State legislatures will be
unlikely to attach themselves sufficiently to national objects, the
members of the federal legislature will be likely to attach themselves
too much to local objects. - Federalist No. 47, February 1, 1788

Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well
that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the
term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that
alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man
whatever is his own. - Essay on Property, March 29, 1792

Had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob. - Federalist No. 55, February 15, 1788

As the cool and deliberate sense of the community ought in all
governments, and actually will in all free governments ultimately
prevail over the views of its rulers; so there are particular moments
in public affairs, when the people stimulated by some irregular
passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful
misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they
themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In
these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some
temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the
misguided career, and to suspend the blow mediated by the people
against themselves, until reason, justice and truth, can regain their
authority over the public mind? - Federalist No. 63, 1788

Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue; or in any manner
affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a
new harvest to those who watch the change and can trace its
consequences; a harvest reared not by themselves but by the toils and
cares of the great body of their fellow citizens. This is a state of
things in which it may be said with some truth that laws are made for
the few not for the many. - Federalist No. 62, 1788

California no longer Golden State: bankruptcy, gay marriage, illegals & free the prisoners

Following the initial publishing of "State of the Nation" by Brandon Jones at Desk of Brian -- original post here: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/californianolongergoldenstatebankruptcygaymarriageillegalsfreetheprisoners

The old phrase "As California goes, so goes the nation" will spell disaster for America. Orange County alone is shackled with the burden an millions and millions illegal aliens and a verdict is pending to possible overturn the voice of the people on Prop 8.



57,000 individuals would disagree with me right from the onset as a federal judge has ordered the State of California, the "Golden State", to release these thousands of prisoners to ease the burden on the budget.



"This order, the latest intrusion by the federal
judiciary into California's prison system, is a blunt instrument that
does not recognize the imperatives of public safety, nor the challenges
of incarcerating criminals, many of whom are deeply disturbed." - Attorney General Jerry Brown

From an article by Guy Adams: "Arnold Schwarzenegger has sent redundancy notices to 20,000 government
employees and shut down California’s last remaining public works
projects yesterday, as state politicians failed to pass a budget that
will prevent his administration from running out of money."



The solution in the California State Senate is raise taxes.







In the middle of the worse recession in modern times and their cure (for the $12 billion deficit this year alone) is more taxes. Income tax revenues are in decline -- translation to Liberals: then there's room to tax them more; translation to a Conservative: more tax yields less activity so lower the taxes.

Meanwhile, across the state, Prop 8, the official amendment blocking recognition of gay marriage, is under siege. Similarly, the judicial system can overturn millions of voters, cost the state billions and ignore the constitution entirely.



Californians ignore the constitution, fiscal responsibility and personal responsibility.



There is now increasing cries for a "bailout" for California. A state cannot officially declare "bankruptcy" and President Obama (and Congress) have proved that 49 states can be required to carry the burden of one (see Nebraska's Medicaid clause in the proposed health care bill.)



"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax
revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the
long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur
a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy
which can bring a budget surplus." - John F. Kennedy, 1962



California, we hope you wake up. We don't follow you or have any desire to emulate your politics. I will push, protest, call and write any and every member of Congress: DO NOT BAILOUT CALIFORNIA!



California you have a few objectives that you need to wake up to: first, illegal aliens are just that: here illegally. They are an anchor around the budget and tax liability of the people. Start by sending them back through immigration to gain legal citizenship.



Next, acknowledge and obey the state Constitution. You can vote on measures, be unhappy with the outcome and then try backdoor, backhanded means to achieve the results you want. This is tyrannical and we all hope you can see that at some point. If you want gay marriage, then write another amendment and go do it properly.



Lastly, less government -- California, your state is proof to the rest of us that none of this "microtaxation" on cigarettes, soda, plastic bags, a ridiculous gas tax, etc...is the solution to anything.



I quoted JFK for a reason, maybe you'll see that.












Judge over release of 57,000 prisoners: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5190CB20090210



Stop 8 Pic: http://queertoday.ning.com/

President vs. Supreme Court & Constitution?

Originally posted on The Desk of Brian, www.DeskofBrian.com at

http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/presidentvssupremecourtconstitution

 

"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections."¹

Justice Alito mouthing "Not True" met criticisms from Democrats.

"I can't ever recall a president taking a swipe at the Supreme Court like that," said Lucas A. Powe Jr., a Supreme Court expert at the University of Texas law school.²

What should concern us is the flippant comment about circumventing the Constitution:

"This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."¹

 It's not a question of if, it's already put together as Bloomberg reports. If an executive order gets the President what he wants, then an executive order it shall be.

 The language of the two branches are poignantly opposed to one another.

 President Obama: "With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans... We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision."

"The text and purpose of the First Amendment point in the same direction: Congress may not prohibit political speech, even if the speaker is a corporation or union." - Chief Justice John Roberts

This dispute carries across party lines, blurring the intent of Free Speech under the guise of corruption and evil big business. Likewise, the dissenters pretend that the current landscape shields corporations from funding political parties, candidates or ads, but in fact, these entities muddle the process by creating faux foundations to funnel funds to endorse their political preference.

 The Supreme Court's decision upheld some of our most basic principles, principles about the freedom to engage in political speech that are incorporated into the Constitution, a document that the critics of this decision seem all to willing to ignore when its requirements don’t fit their political objectives.

 Of course, as with Nancy Pelosi, the President seems to think we are "kidding" when we demand our politicians abide by the limits of the Constitution. (see below for Pelosi exchange)

Frankly Mr. President, I'm NOT kidding.

1. Read the entire SOU transcript: Barack Obama - 2010 State of Union address

2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/28/AR2010012802893.html

3. http://www.fresnobee.com/news/national-politics/story/1791007.html?storylink=mirelated

Source of image: http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2009/05/04/why-obamas-supreme-court-selection-will-be-a-disgrace-to-the-constitution/

Pelosi exhange on health care
CNSNews.com: "Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?"


Pelosi: "Are you serious? Are you serious?"


CNSNews.com: "Yes, yes I am."


Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter.

http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/Congress/910231230

Freedom Index: Tally & Scoreboard for Congressional Constitutional Voting

A Constitutional Scorecard presented by the NewAmerican.com evaluates the House and Senate on their votes according to strict Constitutional analysis.

The detailed index lists different votes such as the TARP bill, Stimulus bill, hate crime bill and others.

The Freedom Index describes their scope as "a Congressional Scorecard Based on the
U.S. Constitution” rates congressmen based on their adherence to constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, national sovereignty, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements."

Limited Government? Fiscal Responsibility? Sovereignty?

This is a foreign language in Washington over the last couple of decades (arguably, over the last century) and the results shouldn't surprise anyone.

Perfect scores: John Duncan (R-TN), Jeff Flake(R-AZ), and Ron Paul (R-TX) all in the House and in the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-OK).

For many, the result was "0" - ZERO, nada.

Recently House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was challenged on the Federal Government's Health care intrusion and mandate. Pelosi just dismissed the question: "Are you serious? Are you serious?"

Yes I believe Americans are serious. The Constitution is serious and it's ashame that Washington doesn't hold it in that same regard.


http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-1.pdf