Monthly Archives: April 2009

The Underutilized Right to Nullification…

I have one rule when interpreting how the nation was meant to function. Channel Thomas Jefferson and all will be well.

The man credited with writing the majority of the Declaration of Independence, strict Constitutionalist, advocator of federalism and one of two men responsible for the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, was quite simply, the man who best understood the path the nation needed in order to ensure its success.

Madison and Jefferson are two men from our nations past whose lessons carry more profound impact with every passing day.

Throughout the history of our great nation, Congress, Senate, Supreme Court and the White House have repeatedly ignored the very clear intent of the Constitution; a three-branched republic with power slightly tilted to Congress.

Before these transgressions began manifesting themselves in the form of increased taxes, growing bureaucracy, etc., Jefferson and Madison wrote the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions declaring the rights of states, when the federal government overstepped its limits of jurisprudence—aka everything done by the federal government in the 20th century—to nullify federal laws.

Imagine the country we would live in today if the federal government only provided that which the Constitution gives it permission to provide: no drug war, no income tax, no insurmountable deficit, no Patriot Act.

The states have no right to borrow or coin money and have balanced budget requirements. This is by design.

Why do we repeatedly elect people who wipe their feet on the Constitution? It seems we are stuck not between a rock and hard place, but between a manure truck and an organic fertilizer truck.

Liberals believe government is key to a better life, more government = better living. Conservatives meanwhile believe legislating morality is the correct path for the nation.

As a result, we have two groups of incompetent people arguing over which aspects of free people’s lives their government should control. Hello? The answer to that moronic argument is none.

Complete dismissal of all federal laws would allow states to return to their rightful power in the U.S. but that’s not going to happen.

The officials elected by their states to represent them in Washington won’t take a stand against party politics.

This situation screams for an effort by the states, mid-west and mountain regions on their own if need be, to apply nullification.

Consider total nullification of drug laws to start, allowing the states to decriminalize and tax drugs if they see fit. Let’s be honest: if the federal government wiped out drug laws, Utah—and probably several others—would definitely maintain those laws.

The states constitutionally have the right to choose their own paths.

The U.S. is not intended to have centralized power.

Ask a Political Science professor if we are following the Constitution, if the answer is no, be careful. He or she is either going to say it’s obsolete, or are conservative and should be reported immediately to “the guild.”

If you read the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers and all of the supporting documentation from Jefferson and Madison’s time, you will come to the obvious conclusion these men designed as perfect a political system as one can find in any country on Earth.

Washington’s purpose is very clear: provide a sound military, provide and maintain infrastructure, coin money, (not to today’s extremes) manage foreign relations.

These are the functions to which they are supposed to LIMIT their actions. There are several other functions at which they totally fail; sound immigration policy comes to mind.

Everything else they’ve legislated has violated the Constitution. Everything. The New Deal, TARP, the Great Society, the Patriot Act, the drug war, annually increasing budgets to support these idiotic and wasteful programs, are all violations that can and should be countered through nullification.

What would Jefferson and Madison do?

I for one believe they would demand nullification.



Filed under Uncategorized


10th Amendment – the Constitutional counter to Federal Corruption

Several of my preceding columns received criticisms of my apparently conservative tilt. I’d like to take this opportunity to clear the air.

The only political concept that more nauseates me than half the country believing Democrats are the answer is the other half of the country believing Republicans are the answer.

Neither party understands or represents the fundamental concepts on which our country was founded. Let me be completely straightforward on this: the Republican view of Constitution is equally dimwitted as that of the Dems.

When two parties of incompetency and corruption are fighting for control, no one wins.

President Bush furthered the century-old path to centralizing power in the White House, then covered everything up claiming executive privilege and refused to answer questions. Candidate Obama promised to bring transparency and change. Do you still believe him?

President Obama’s not yet 80 days in office, he’s already claiming executive privilege to cover up some of the financial decisions he and Treasury Secretary Geithner made.

He brought change the way Detroit brought efficient vehicles.

Bush and Rumsfeld authorized the use of military assets during the Beltway Sniper attacks. Despite only needing to ask Congress’ permission to do so, they refused to do so.

We all know the primary goal of nearly every politician serving in D.C. is reelection. Let me be clear, President Roosevelt furthered the Great Depression and manipulated the economy in order to assure his reelection. Obama will do the same. Just as Bush would have and just as Presidents Clinton and Bush Sr. would have.

How can you have faith in a man who refuses to cut welfare programs while adding to an insoluble deficit and looks to greatly expand the dysfunctional federal bureaucracy? How can you continue to back politicians who refuse to cut their own pet projects and instead continue to plunder the Social Security Trust fund and further destroy Medicare?

None of you seems angered that the country you will someday control has been delivered bankrupt.

Americans perpetuates the corrupt two-party system when we have better options. Americans apparently believe the Constitution is a joke.

I don’t comprehend this America. Why? You accept the beliefs of statists like John Maynard Keynes, Karl Marx, FDR, Ronald Reagan, John McCain and Barack Obama and believe that somehow government should have control of everything. Quick now, what was the last program the federal government ran efficiently or well?

None of these men even approached greatness. Thomas Jefferson was a great man. He knew revolutions keep government honest and get rid of garbage. We’re due folks.

The 10th Amendment, for the uninformed, says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Think about that for a moment. Essentially this means every act by the government in violation of the original intent of the Constitution, a limit on federal power, is a violation of one-tenth of the Bill of Rights.

Recent news indicates we may have some amount of hope. Our union was created to limit federal government’s influence on the people, with states governing the day-to-day needs of their people.

Reportedly 16 states have introduced legislation to invoke the 10th Amendment in an effort to regain their state’s rights.

Apart from civil rights violations, what possible downside can you come up with for the states to govern their people? The representation is more responsive, budgets must be balanced, and they can’t print money.

The federal government retracts the military troops serving abroad and puts them on the borders, decriminalizes anything involving a personal choice – allowing the individual states the right to maintain those laws – stops printing money to intentionally devalue the dollar, and (here’s a stretch) restricts their actions to Constitutional mandate.

Yes, we can?

How did we get to this point?

Next week: Nullification, what would Madison do?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Obligations and concerns…

It’s bothersome to me that the true numbers of our deficit are not receiving the appropriate amount of coverage. It seems the hostile press Bush deservedly encountered, has embraced Obama with their whole heart. A man who ran on a platform of change and endorsed transparency, is invoking the same executive privileges with which he disagreed. So, our unfunded liabilities for Social Security & Medicare, plus the budget deficits, plus the impossibility to generate enough revenue to cover the budget, leaves us with obligations exceeding the GDP of the ENTIRE WORLD!!

How is this slipping through? That column was written pre-budget. The problem I see is that America seems to be embracing the idiocy of socialism. Why? Because we’ve become a nation of lazy, obese, overpaid, overfat, overlegislated slobs. Rather than work for our fair share, we’d just as soon have those who are willing to work, have their money redistributed. Seems logical, why work if you can get paid to sit around at home and watch the state-provided entertainment that I’m sure will become a basic human right within the decade.

I mourn for the America of 200 years ago. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A New Analogy…

After a brief discussion with a freshman today in American Government and Politics, I had a realization. Her primary thought regarding President Obama was “he’s better than what we’ve had for the last 8 years isn’t he?” There is a part of me that agrees with that concept, but it had occurred to me how epically stupid of an argument that is just a few days ago. Yet, it wasn’t until this conversation that an appropriate analogy popped into my head.

If you spent the last 8 years in a physically abusive relationship, then entered a new relationship, and instead of being physically abusive, instead the new romantic interest is borrowing money in your name, you shouldn’t be okay with that act because “at least he’s not being physically abusive like the last 8 years.” The ONLY question that should be asked, “is our CURRENT president, doing the job that NEEDS to be done for us NOW?” The answer to that question is most definitely “no.”

The larger problem in my mind, beyond the fact that the president wants short term acts, regardless of long term consequences, is that the imbalances created by former President Bush usurping and utterly disregarding Constitutional designs on the restrictions on Executive powers, have not been returned now that the Democratic Party is in charge.

As much as it nauseates me to say it, if Nancy Pelosi really is guiding the nation, power is shifting back to where it was designed to be, Congress.

I see a very large problem with first time voters believing POTUS is supposed to be the center of power in America. It’s NOT. We are supposed to be Congressionally centered, allowing for closer relationships with our elected leadership.

…oh, and the starting QB of the Denver Broncos will have a better statistical season THIS YEAR, than Jay Cutler. He’s a strong-armed athletic QB who makes bad decisions, he’s also a diva.


Filed under National Politics