Ageless Wisdom Of The Founders
The pending retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens gives President Barack Obama an opportunity to shape court decisions for many years to come. Let’s hope he makes a wise decision.
Unfortunately, his radical leftist views that the United States Constitution is a “charter of negative liberties” and his prior choice of Sonya Sotamayor—who as an appellate judge ruled that the New Haven fire department’s promotion test was discriminatory because no minorities scored well enough for promotion—to the Supreme Court don’t augur well for liberty.
Read this article to learn how the Founding Fathers thought we should interpret the Constitution.
The double standard that is liberalism apparently knows no bounds, for now liberal pundits are effectively calling prominent conservatives criminals because of their disagreement with the policies of the Barack Obama administration.
On NBC’s The Chris Matthews Show on April 18, Time columnist Joe Klein all but accused former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Fox News’ Glenn Beck of sedition.
“I did a little bit of research just before this show—it’s on the napkin here. I looked up the definition of sedition which is conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state. And a lot of these statements, especially the ones coming from people like Glenn Beck and to a certain extent Sarah Palin, rub right up close to being seditious.”
Read this article to learn Thomas Jefferson’s position on differences of opinion.
Still trying to sell his Obamacare plan in Charlotte, N.C., last week, President Obama responded to a simple question with a not-so-simple answer.
Is it, a woman named Doris wanted to know, a “wise decision to add more taxes to us with the healthcare” package? “We are over-taxed as it is,” she said.
More than 17 minutes and 2,500 words later, Obama still hadn’t addressed her question. Read this article to see what one of our founders thought of this type of answer…
If not for the passage of the 17th Amendment in 1913, Obamacare would probably never have passed. That’s because the Senate would have been more attuned to the will of the public that disapproved of Obamacare by a large margin.
As Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States says: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
During the Constitutional ratifying convention, John Jay, co-author of The Federalist Papers, said “The Senate is to be composed of men appointed by the state legislatures… I presume they will also instruct them, that there will be a constant correspondence between the senators and the state executives.”
The United States Supreme Court is weighing the constitutionality of a 1982 ban on handgun ownership in the city of Chicago. It is one of the most stringent bans in the country.
The suit was filed by Otis McDonald, a resident of a Chicago neighborhood who says he is awakened at all hours of the night by all kinds of noises from outside his home. He wants to be able to protect himself from the thugs who roam the streets of his community.
Obviously the gun ban hasn’t worked. In 2008 there were 412 firearm homicides in Chicago, and in 402 of them a handgun was used.
Buoyed by a victory in District of Columbia v. Heller a year and a half ago, gun rights advocates are confident the Supreme Court will rightly rule the Chicago gun ban unconstitutional.
Today is the day set for the televised bipartisan healthcare summit in which President Barack Obama and Republican legislators are supposed to discuss a healthcare overhaul.
In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, Republicans called on the president and Senate and House Democrats to scrap the unpopular Obamacare reform bills being discussed in conference. The House version passed by a slim majority with only one Republican vote and the Senate version passed with no Republican support and only after ridiculous multi-million dollar payoffs to a few of Democrats ensured a filibuster-proof majority.
It’s amazing the lengths to which some will go in an effort to remove God from public discourse.
Activist liberal judges have tied themselves into knots in order to remove Christianity from public schools and nativity scenes from public property. Individuals have sued government to have the words, “In God We Trust” removed from coinage and to ban prayer, the 10 Commandments, Christmas parties and religious demonstrations from public schools.
And many of the comment strings that follow articles posted on Personal Liberty Digest seem to eventually devolve, at some point, into commenters debating religion and government—even when the original article is on another subject entirely. Inevitably one or more of the posters makes the false claim that the Founding Fathers were primarily somewhere between agnostic (the existence of God is unknown or unknowable) or practiced deism (denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe).
Some of the elected class are expressing dismay at the recent United States Supreme Court ruling that overturned much of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform law that was passed in 2002. That law limited soft money in campaign financing, issue ads and controversial campaign practices.
Democrat National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine went so far as to call the ruling a decision that “must not be allowed to stand.” He also warned the Obama administration is preparing a forceful response. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) declared himself disappointed in the ruling.
Remember this: If the elected class opposes it then the ruling must be good for the American people. And this one is.
The House and Senate have each written healthcare reform bills that are approximately 2,000 pages long. Now they are trying to combine both monstrosities into one Obamacare bill that will pass Democrat muster in both houses of Congress.
The sheer volume of the two bills makes reading them—and therefore understanding them—a daunting task. Combine that with the way they are written, with this section referring to another section that removes a sentence from another section, and reading them becomes almost impossible.
No wonder so many of the elected class in Congress scoff when asked by a few responsible journalists if they have read the bill. They haven’t because they can’t.
I’m not exactly sure when it happened, but at some point—150 years ago or more—the American public went to sleep.
While we (I use this as a collective, all-encompassing ‘we’) slept robbers, thieves and liars invaded our House—that is the White House and Congress. They’ve been there ever since.
They stole our money. They stole many of our freedoms. They lied about their motives. They lied about their goals. And still we slept.
If we happened to awaken for a short time and notice the robbers, thieves and liars, we’d squeak and squawk. We’d throw a hissy fit. Occasionally we’d even vote a few of them out of office.