Posted on 12/05/2013 11:14:19 AM PST by DanMiller
The Bill of Rights has been around for a long time. Some complain that it gets in the way of the Government, but that's its purpose.
With an ever expanding Federal Government, can the Bill of Rights still get in its way? Or is the Government more effective in getting in the way of the Bill of Rights?
Here's a link to an article at PJ Tatler about some of the consequences of our ever expanding Government:
REP. BOB GOODLATTE (R-VA): Professor Turley, the constitution, the system of separated powers is not simply about stopping one branch of government from usurping another. It’s about protecting the liberty of Americans from the dangers of concentrated government power. How does the president’s unilateral modification of act of Congress affect both the balance of power between the political branches and the liberty interests of the American people?JONATHAN TURLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power in every single branch. [Emphasis added.]
This Newtonian orbit that the three branches exist in is a delicate one but it is designed to prevent this type of concentration. There is two trends going on which should be of equal concern to all members of Congress. One is that we have had the radical expansion of presidential powers under both President Bush and President Obama. We have what many once called an imperial presidency model of largely unchecked authority. And with that trend we also have the continued rise of this fourth branch. We have agencies that are quite large that issue regulations. The Supreme Court said recently that agencies could actually define their own or interpret their own jurisdiction. [Emphasis added.]
Here are two short videos on the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks4O_7wjE7A&w=640&h=360]
"Weaponizing" the IRS? Yep, and it seems to be proceeding apace.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOEW7ykhM80&w=640&h=360]
Some State and local governments have also become excessively audacious in a Fourth Amendment context. According to an article posted today at Jonathan Turley's blog,
If a recent story is to be believed, it appears that there are many things that you can demand to see in the “show me state” but a warrant is not one of them. A Kansas City man is accusing the police department of shocking conduct after he declined a demand that he allow police officers to search his house without a warrant. Eric Crinnian, a lawyer, said that an officer threatened that, if he insisted on his getting a warrant, he would come back in force, bust down his door, and shoot any dogs in the house.. . . .
What makes this alleged threat even more egregious is that we have been a disturbing trend of officers shooting family dogs under questionable circumstances here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here andhere and here and here). It is chilling that, according to Crinnian, the first thing that this officer thought of was to threaten to shoot the family’s pets as if it were just one more minor act like kicking in a door. [I apologize for the way in which the list of links is formatted, but after reviewing the HTML code there seems to be nothing I can do about it.]
Here, here, here and here are just a few links to additional allegations of police abuse. I have "bookmarked" many more, but those linked seem particularly relevant here. Remember when the police were actually civil servants?
Conclusions Questions
The rot is metastasizing, but why and where did the tumor begin? Did it grow and spread before enough of us noticed it? If so, why? Is it already too late to excise it? If not, how?
I remember reading where this kid (forgot age) went door to door in his neighborhood and would read some of the BoR. In just about every instance the responders said it sounded like Communist doctrine.
The progressive (statist/socialist) movement. Started over a century ago, went on steroids in 1913 or thereabouts and has steadily expanded ever since. We have just about lost our constitutional republic and will short of the people finally getting fed up enough to take action.
Rights ??
How about:
Abortion
Same sex marriage
Government dictated health care
Minimum wage
(free) Birth control
Amnesty
??
Dogs have become the new way to protect yourself in the minority neighborhoods. You see all sorts of people walking with a huge pit bull.
We have just about lost our constitutional republic and will short of the people finally getting fed up enough to take action.
I agree. The only hopeful sign at the moment seems to be the increasing disenchantment of youth (probably limited to those who can read English) with President Obama's redistributionist policies as embedded in ObamaCare. Will that irritation be soothed away before November of 2014? 2016? I hope not, but mere hope is insufficient.
” why and where did the tumor begin?
It began with Marx who the “enlightened” believed to be able to take them beyond capitalism.
Constitutional government. It’s a subculture now.
Yeah. Given the info below...I must ask...when will the shooting start?
The Supreme Court said recently that agencies could actually define their own or interpret their own jurisdiction.
That's Declaration of Independence describing King George type stuff.
And here in Colorado—I have no reason to suspect Senator Bennet is an anomaly our Senator thinks the First Amendment prohibits the Government from endorsing one religion over any other. Quite the opposite of what Justice Joseph Story published in his seminal Commentaries on the Constitution,1833 about the probable general if not universal sentiment in America when the Constitution and Bill of Rights) were adopted. quite the opposite of what the US supreme Court found in 1892 Church of the Holy Trinity v. the United States. And as Justice David Brewer published in 1905 of that case”The United States a Christian Nation. “Quite unable to reconcile historical fact to our mere progressive politicians—eh?
Since when does any Liberal Democrat politician know anything about the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights? They were elected simply on popularity, not knowledge of anything about US government and how it works.
True —and as I received a letter from Mike Farrell yesterday—I find he affirms that Hollywood Actors (especially those like Mike Farrell are like any Liberal /Progressive Democratic Politician.
A suggestion.
If anyone claiming to be a policeman arrives at your door and demands entry without a warrant, and issues threats if you do not allow entry, call 911 immediately, describe the situation, ask whether there is a policeman with that name and badge number currently on duty.
Since 911 calls are recorded, this immediately changes the situation; and you can get a copy of the call later to support your complaint.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.