As I was reading an AP article written by Lolita Baldor, picked up by the Las Vegas Review Journal, it made me think back to when I was in school. This article is about the Obama administration's push to allow law enforcement agencies easier access to internet spying, or as they call it eavesdropping. The article made me think about the history textbooks with the pictures of the big brother propaganda campaign. Was our own government really spying on its own citizens? That was a question that no one, outside the government could really answer, unfortunately we don't have to ask that question anymore.
The government feels that since communications technology has changed so rapidly, that they need to have access to all American's internet traffic, emails and social network sites. It seems all the encrypted technologies frustrate the government on their ability to spy on people. The rationale is they need to eavesdrop on conversations involving terrorism, crimes or other public safety issues. Now who determines what constitutes a public safety issue? It appears the new regulations would mandate any company that provides any sort of communication services would be required to make unscrambled texts of phone calls, e-mails and computer traffic readily accessible to law enforcement agencies. This includes places such as Twitter, Facebook, My Space, Skype and all other social networks. All of this compliance wouldn't come without cost, the cost to retrofit the software to comply with new regulations; I'm sure the government would be more than happy to spend tax payer money on systems making it easier for them to spy on us. Law enforcement claims it needs the wiretaps to obtain information critical to obtain convictions and supporters of the new regulations say it would not expand law enforcement authority and would only involve legally authorized intercepts.
This is nothing more than a power grab by the federal government and law enforcement agencies to invade the privacy of United States citizens. They hide these intrusions into our privacy behind the banner of safety, they need to spy on citizens to catch terrorists and other criminals. How are they going to know who is a criminal or a terrorist without listening in and reading everyone's private information? These proposed regulations severely infringe on the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The worst part is this is just the tip of the iceberg. The federal government, the courts and law enforcement agencies have been stealing our liberties from us for a long time. It didn't start with this administration and it didn't start with the USA PATRIOT Act from the last administration. It's been happening slowly, so we don't notice and it's been hidden behind the veil of fear and public good.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Friday, September 24, 2010
More politics as usual
The more "change" that comes to Washington, the more it stays the same. The Defense Bill was blocked the other day. The party of "No" came through for us again. I like the moniker of "Party of No". They have stood against the socialization of our health care system, they stood against the cap and trade legislation, they stood against amnesty for illegals. They have said no to some very important legislation that could cripple our country. Beware of the lame duck!
The democrats once again had to attach some very questionable bills to the defense bill in hopes that 1. it will pass with the other bills or 2. they can use it as campaign fuel in the upcoming elections.
If the democrats really wanted to reach across the aisle, why would they try and sneak extremely controversial legislation into a simple bill to fund the military? The democrats aren't really concerned with anything but pushing the progressive agenda. They must hurry, they are about to lose control of Congress, beware of the lame duck!
We need to go back and get involved in local politics and hold those members accountable, from the local level we can advance to the state level. Once at the state level then we can hold the federal government accountable for their actions and work to correct the abuses of the federal government. The states created the federal government, not the other way around.
The democrats once again had to attach some very questionable bills to the defense bill in hopes that 1. it will pass with the other bills or 2. they can use it as campaign fuel in the upcoming elections.
If the democrats really wanted to reach across the aisle, why would they try and sneak extremely controversial legislation into a simple bill to fund the military? The democrats aren't really concerned with anything but pushing the progressive agenda. They must hurry, they are about to lose control of Congress, beware of the lame duck!
We need to go back and get involved in local politics and hold those members accountable, from the local level we can advance to the state level. Once at the state level then we can hold the federal government accountable for their actions and work to correct the abuses of the federal government. The states created the federal government, not the other way around.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Revive the Constitution
There are several things that we can do to bring back the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the land. The first thing we need to do is become an informed citizenry. The American people have become fat, dumb and happy and most people can't tell you which Congressional district they live in, let alone their state and county districts. Most people have stopped paying attention to politics, leaving it to the politicians and that's where we began to stray off course. They figured out we weren't watching what they were doing and took advantage of us. We must become informed about the issues and policies and the politicians who want to represent us. We must follow what they do and hold them accountable for their actions. We need to relearn our history, not the fancy smancy history that those who subvert our Constitution want us to learn, but the actual, not always popular history. We need to learn what the Constitution says and make sure the politicians live up to it. Another thing we can do to help revive the Constitution is focus on a local level. We need to elect Constitutional following candidates on the state and local level. What we must remember is that the states and the people gave the federal government power and we are responsible for keeping them in check.
One way to keep the feds in check would be an Article V convention. Article V of the US Constitution spells out how the Constitution can be amended. The first is by 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress and ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures (38 states). This has been the only method used to date but there is another, 2/3 of the states (33 states) can call an Article V convention to propose amendments to the Constitution, which still must be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures. We need to push our state legislatures to invoke an Article V convention. The Constitution has been subverted and we need to bring it back. The "necessary and proper" clause needs to be clarified, the "commerce" clause needs to be reigned in, it's for interstate commerce, not intrastate or production. "General Welfare" is not a clause, it's a two words in a clause. It's a shame when politicians stand up in front of the media and claim the "good and plenty" clause gives them power, or the "general welfare" clause allows them to steal our liberty. The "commerce" clause has been abused and now Congress uses it to justify just about anything. I was waiting for the libtards to use the "commerce" clause as justification for health care or financial reform, but they didn't. Instead they just laughed off questions about where in the Constitution they were given power to do what they want. Many even said they don't worry about what the Constitution says. Elected officials that have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution not knowing what or caring what it says, this is what we are up against. Career politicians that care only for themselves, ignoring the restraints of law imposed on them by our Constitution.
We need to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, they allowed for the federal government to directly tax it's citizens (which has gotten much more progressive over the years) and allowed for direct election of Senators, ignoring the fact that Senators were designed to be the states voice in the federal gov't and a check against the feds consolidating too much power. With the addition of a couple of words we could clarify the necessary and proper clause, it clearly implies that it refers to the enumerated powers, but some have even subverted it. The commerce clause is clearly defined, we just need politicians and judges that have the spine to stand up for the Constitution. We need to elect officials that believe in term limits and respect the limited power of the federal gov't.
We need to become informed and vote! Communist Russia, with only one candidate on the ballot, had nearly 98% voter turnout and we generally average about half of that on Presidential elections and around 35% for midterm elections. That's just for federal elections, generally local elections draw even less. It just goes to show how little people think about politics. It's a shame that the sheeples in the country don't pay more attention to something that can so drastically effect their lives. They sit on the sidelines and don't realize that the gov't is overstepping its role in our lives, they only notice when they it directly effects their lives and then they complain. We need to stand up at any intrusion against anyone and take our country back. Don't be a sheeple, be a patriot! Stand up for what you believe in and make sure you let your elected officials know what you think. It's never been easier, there are websites that will tell you your state and federal officials, my favorite is congress.org, you can send letters, emails and phone calls, it gives you all the info. There are also websites that will send you emails that let you know how your reps voted and upcoming bills.
"When people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson.
One way to keep the feds in check would be an Article V convention. Article V of the US Constitution spells out how the Constitution can be amended. The first is by 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress and ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures (38 states). This has been the only method used to date but there is another, 2/3 of the states (33 states) can call an Article V convention to propose amendments to the Constitution, which still must be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures. We need to push our state legislatures to invoke an Article V convention. The Constitution has been subverted and we need to bring it back. The "necessary and proper" clause needs to be clarified, the "commerce" clause needs to be reigned in, it's for interstate commerce, not intrastate or production. "General Welfare" is not a clause, it's a two words in a clause. It's a shame when politicians stand up in front of the media and claim the "good and plenty" clause gives them power, or the "general welfare" clause allows them to steal our liberty. The "commerce" clause has been abused and now Congress uses it to justify just about anything. I was waiting for the libtards to use the "commerce" clause as justification for health care or financial reform, but they didn't. Instead they just laughed off questions about where in the Constitution they were given power to do what they want. Many even said they don't worry about what the Constitution says. Elected officials that have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution not knowing what or caring what it says, this is what we are up against. Career politicians that care only for themselves, ignoring the restraints of law imposed on them by our Constitution.
We need to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, they allowed for the federal government to directly tax it's citizens (which has gotten much more progressive over the years) and allowed for direct election of Senators, ignoring the fact that Senators were designed to be the states voice in the federal gov't and a check against the feds consolidating too much power. With the addition of a couple of words we could clarify the necessary and proper clause, it clearly implies that it refers to the enumerated powers, but some have even subverted it. The commerce clause is clearly defined, we just need politicians and judges that have the spine to stand up for the Constitution. We need to elect officials that believe in term limits and respect the limited power of the federal gov't.
We need to become informed and vote! Communist Russia, with only one candidate on the ballot, had nearly 98% voter turnout and we generally average about half of that on Presidential elections and around 35% for midterm elections. That's just for federal elections, generally local elections draw even less. It just goes to show how little people think about politics. It's a shame that the sheeples in the country don't pay more attention to something that can so drastically effect their lives. They sit on the sidelines and don't realize that the gov't is overstepping its role in our lives, they only notice when they it directly effects their lives and then they complain. We need to stand up at any intrusion against anyone and take our country back. Don't be a sheeple, be a patriot! Stand up for what you believe in and make sure you let your elected officials know what you think. It's never been easier, there are websites that will tell you your state and federal officials, my favorite is congress.org, you can send letters, emails and phone calls, it gives you all the info. There are also websites that will send you emails that let you know how your reps voted and upcoming bills.
"When people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Return to the Constitution
The Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. It was carefully constructed to protect individual liberty and had built in checks to keep the government from overstepping it's enumerated jobs. The states had a voice, the people had a voice and when they got out of hand, SCOTUS was there to keep them in line. The checks and balances were not only built into the government, but the citizens had checks as well. The 1st Amendment to the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing any law that limits free speech, freedom of the press, the right to assembly; giving the citizens at large the right to speak up against their government, elected officials and the laws and policies. The states used to have voice, but the progressives took that away. State legislatures used to elect Senators and their job was to protect the states interest on the federal level, since the states created the federal government. The Founders knew that the federal government would never limit their own power, that's why their powers were limited in the Constitution.
Just as the Founders had anticipated, Congress repeatedly tried to over step their bounds and the Supreme Court was there to keep them in line. Congress usually relied mainly on 3 clauses to justify their overstepping of granted powers. The first is the "General Welfare" clause, which is not a power granted by the Constitution. General Welfare being mentioned in the preamble does not give it force of law. Article 1 Section 8 does mention general welfare, but it is mentioned with the power to tax, provide FOR common defense and general welfare of the United States. That doesn't mean providing defense and general welfare, only the means, through it's limited powers. The second clause is the "Necessary and Proper" clause. This clause allows the Congress to pass laws that are necessary to carry out it's limited, enumerated powers. Congress has taken this as an elastic clause, stretching the meaning to imply anything that has a justifiable end. The last and often most abused is the "Commerce" clause. Congress is allowed to regulate trade between foreign countries, Indian tribes and between the states. Congress has abused this by claiming that anything that can effect commerce falls under this clause.
For the most part, SCOTUS rejected these unconstitutional power grabs by Congress. It was after FDR threatened to "pack" the courts with new appointments, including "assigning" junior justices when any justice of the Supreme Court reached 70, potentially raising the number of Supreme Court justices and creating and appointing federal judges at all levels below. I haven't figured out why the court rolled over, but they did and allowed Congress and the socialist President to greatly expand it's power. FDR appointed more Supreme Court justices than any President except for Washington, so I guess in a sense he did get to "pack" the court. It took nearly 60 years for SCOTUS to find it's spine.
The Constitution is written in plain English and is available for all to read. I get irritated by those that say it's a living document, in a sense it is, it allows for itself to be amended. The liberal sense, they mean it's living so they can reinterpret the meaning to fit what they want it to mean. "the admin" claims it is a document of negative liberties (in a sense he's right) because it tells what the federal government can't do to you, "the admin" feels it needs to say what the government must do for you. In America, we do for ourselves, or at least we used to. The other irritating item is those that claim the Constitution is a racist document, they often cite the 3/5 compromise. They claim the Founders were racist because they listed slaves as 3/5 of a person in census counting for determining Representatives to Congress. Actually, the northern states argued that slaves should not be counted, southern states wanted slaves counted. The result was the 3/5 compromise. Anyone that thinks the Constitution is a racist document needs to read up on Fredrick Douglass.
What can we do? Can we do anything?
Just as the Founders had anticipated, Congress repeatedly tried to over step their bounds and the Supreme Court was there to keep them in line. Congress usually relied mainly on 3 clauses to justify their overstepping of granted powers. The first is the "General Welfare" clause, which is not a power granted by the Constitution. General Welfare being mentioned in the preamble does not give it force of law. Article 1 Section 8 does mention general welfare, but it is mentioned with the power to tax, provide FOR common defense and general welfare of the United States. That doesn't mean providing defense and general welfare, only the means, through it's limited powers. The second clause is the "Necessary and Proper" clause. This clause allows the Congress to pass laws that are necessary to carry out it's limited, enumerated powers. Congress has taken this as an elastic clause, stretching the meaning to imply anything that has a justifiable end. The last and often most abused is the "Commerce" clause. Congress is allowed to regulate trade between foreign countries, Indian tribes and between the states. Congress has abused this by claiming that anything that can effect commerce falls under this clause.
For the most part, SCOTUS rejected these unconstitutional power grabs by Congress. It was after FDR threatened to "pack" the courts with new appointments, including "assigning" junior justices when any justice of the Supreme Court reached 70, potentially raising the number of Supreme Court justices and creating and appointing federal judges at all levels below. I haven't figured out why the court rolled over, but they did and allowed Congress and the socialist President to greatly expand it's power. FDR appointed more Supreme Court justices than any President except for Washington, so I guess in a sense he did get to "pack" the court. It took nearly 60 years for SCOTUS to find it's spine.
The Constitution is written in plain English and is available for all to read. I get irritated by those that say it's a living document, in a sense it is, it allows for itself to be amended. The liberal sense, they mean it's living so they can reinterpret the meaning to fit what they want it to mean. "the admin" claims it is a document of negative liberties (in a sense he's right) because it tells what the federal government can't do to you, "the admin" feels it needs to say what the government must do for you. In America, we do for ourselves, or at least we used to. The other irritating item is those that claim the Constitution is a racist document, they often cite the 3/5 compromise. They claim the Founders were racist because they listed slaves as 3/5 of a person in census counting for determining Representatives to Congress. Actually, the northern states argued that slaves should not be counted, southern states wanted slaves counted. The result was the 3/5 compromise. Anyone that thinks the Constitution is a racist document needs to read up on Fredrick Douglass.
What can we do? Can we do anything?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)