About Me

In writing the "About Me" portion of this blog I thought about the purpose of the blog - namely, preventing the growth of Socialism & stopping the Death Of Democracy in the American Republic & returning her to the "liberty to abundance" stage of our history. One word descriptions of people's philosophies or purposes are quite often inadequate. I feel that I am "liberal" meaning that I am broad minded, independent, generous, hospitable, & magnanimous. Under these terms "liberal" is a perfectly good word that has been corrupted over the years to mean the person is a left-winger or as Mark Levin more accurately wrote in his book "Liberty & Tyranny" a "statist" - someone looking for government or state control of society. I am certainly not that & have dedicated the blog to fighting this. I believe that I find what I am when I consider whether or not I am a "conservative" & specifically when I ask what is it that I am trying to conserve? It is the libertarian principles that America was founded upon & originally followed. That is the Return To Excellence that this blog is named for & is all about.

Monday, March 26, 2012

Responses - The Future's Real Direction

Thanks to everyone who responded to the subject message that highlighted the ObamaCare case that is currently being heard by the Supreme Court - "I pray the people arguing this case are capable to rebut every sparring word the opponents make.  Am sure they can do better than me. God help them."  This from a long time reader of the blog.
Below is a very thoughtful response received from an unknown (to me) subscriber to ReturnToExcellence.net.  The writer is asking for some answers that I provide in red.  In summary - the country was founded on having an informed citizenry who originally only voted in people who followed their oaths to support the Constitution.  If that was the situation today we not only would not have this Supreme Court case we would not have ObamaCare itself.
I don't entirely understand where you are going with this piece.  Would you be upset if the Supreme Court were to decide that the individual mandate of the AHCA exceeds the scope of the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3)?  Or is your concern outcome determinative? The power of the Supreme Court works both ways. - We have painted ourselves into a corner where the Supreme Court is the best chance we have to declare ObamaCare unconstitutional.  This line of thinking (i.e., mindset) is a double edged sword – the next time something like this comes up the Supreme Court (nine unelected but appointed for life judges) may very likely vote against your preference & in fact may do so re ObamaCare. We should be looking to return to the principles of our founding – not looking for temporary gains in a system destined for destruction.  Changing the mindset to return the courts to their intended constitutional place in our Republic provides an excellent, but just one, example of the citizenry not accepting business as usual in a country where everything is stacked against us just waiting to see how much we can lose. We must recognize the current onslaught by statists to invoke a socialistic system on us.

If there were no Supreme Court to make the call, there would be nothing to potentially put the brakes on the Executive and the Legislative branches, who have already made their call. Should Obama be re-elected, Congress will be unable to repeal the AHCA, and the cement that is abridging this aspect of individual liberty will solidify. – Yes, the Executive & Legislative branches have made their call & following the principles of our founding that call (ObamaCare) should stand until overturned by future Executive & Legislative branches with no interference from the Supreme Court.  The decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the Supreme Court's self-declared claim to judicial review (i.e., the ability & duty to determine whether or not the actions of the other two branches were constitutional) that entrenches the Supreme Court to this day as the lead branch of government. Judicial review by the Supreme Court is itself unconstitutional & is allowed only by the weakness of the other two branches – e.g., the Supreme Court alone will determine whether or not ObamaCare is constitutional. Ever ask yourself if this is right? Did the Founders envision something like nine unelected judges overruling 537 elected officials? Elections have consequences & ObamaCare is just one of the consequences of the last presidential election.

It was unclear, when the the Constitution was first ratified, whether the Supreme Court could rule on the constitutionality of a statute. But the Supreme Court has been exercising that power since Marshall.  The Supreme Court seized this power early on in our Republic & it has haunted us ever since.  The Judicial Branch was originally intended to be the weakest of the so-called three equal branches.

As you aptly pointed out in your letter to the Wall Street Journal, the President also has a remedy. The President can exercise his or her own veto power when the legislation comes to the Presidential Desk, and he or she has constitutional concerns.  From our founding to the time of the Civil War presidents routinely vetoed bills because they thought them unconstitutional – mostly for spending issues.  All of my comments above illustrate the return to excellence of libertarian principles that America was founded upon & originally followed that my writings are named for & are all about. 

1 comment:

  1. I might also say if deemed unconstitutional, BO broke his oath and should be impeached, if the back bone is in congress. Along with all that voted for it. In my eyes they all broke the oath.