Words I long to hear at a Presidential Inauguration

Self...JEFFHEAD.COM (this PM) ^ | February 7, 2007 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

Well...like I said, it is what I would like to hear.

Regarding the unconsitutional part, the Supreme Court is supposed to rule on Act of Congress as to their compliance with the Constitution, not create new law, or new "rights". If they step outside their bounds, then the President and the Congressa, as co-equal constitutional powers are, at least IMHO, due to their oath of office, responsible and duty bound to uphold and defend the constitution against anyone, includiong another branch of government. Yes, it could very well turn into a constitutional crisis... but with Roe v. Wade, that is exaclty what happened in my estimation and I believe both the President and the Congress had a duty that they avoided...that does not mean that a new preisdent should avoid it as well.

Anyhow, like I have said, these are my own opinions...but I believe if enough Americans shared tham and put the apporpriate people in office, the decisions and orders would stand and that the particular offending rulings and acts would be overturned.

[Jeff Head]

The intent is that trading with regimes that represent the anti-thesis of an open and free economic system...ie. the free market...is not free trade at all, and until they make strident and obvious moves toward that end, our trade policy should penalizes such regimes by not opening the free market to them. Otherwise they gain from it at our expense and the potnetial threat to all of our liberty...which IMHO, is exactly what is happening with China right now.

[RockinRight]

I'd make that speech!

I'd add something about fiscal responsibility in there too while I were at it.

If anyone, Newt, or Duncan Hunter, at least has those IDEAS as far as any possible '08 candidates.

[presidio9]

It will be the policy of this administration to treat any totalitarian regime that does not make verifiable and substantive progress and efforts towards instituting republican principles that recognize unalienable citizen rights, as Ronald Reagan treated the Soviet Union, and to forumlat and implement economic, defense, and political strategies accordingly.

Please explain how this constitutes a free trade policy? It looks like you might be suggesting that we stop trading with China (incidently, we did not stop trading with the Soviet Union under Reagan). Are you of the opinion that despite our record unemployment, we need to get back into the phoney novelty vomit production business?

[Jeff Head]

Answer is in post 42. Our trade with the Soviet Union during the Cold War was very restricited...and under Reagan when he challenged them to match us in defense spending, those two elements coupled together bankrupted them.

The Chinese have realized that the failed Stalinist and Maoist economic policies were drving them towards ruin. They have adopted what I would classify as a much more fascist policy (as opposed to communistic) that can work if they infuse it with enough capital to sustain it. I believe that to help a country become cash rich whose ideology it the antithesis of your own is a very dangerous policy and that it doesn't have to be that way. But that is my opinion, nothing more or less.

[B4Ranch]

Can I make some additions to your dream list, since this only be a dream.

All public meetings and all daily school classrooms would begin with the recital of "The Pledge of Allegiance by all in attendance." Businesses would be encouraged to do the same.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

and:
all public office holders would have to annually recite to a local audience of more than 100 persons, "American's Creed".

"I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people, whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies."

Written by William Tyler Page, clerk of the United States House of Representatives, 1917; accepted by that House on behalf of the American People, April 3, 1918

and:
All persons running for public office must first pass a test confirming their knowledge of The Constitution of the United States, Declaration of Independence and The Bill of Rights before being permitted to run for such office.

and:
All public office holders, elected officials and Federal Employees would come under the Social Security Act of 1935 thereby ending the Federal Employees' Retirement System.

and:
All public offices would have Term Limits of no more than 2 terms totaling ten years.

and:
The United States would immediately withdraw from the United Nations and demand that they leave our soil in 90 days. The United States will cease all aid and financial contributions to the UN immediately.

and:
All persons in jail or prison and/or receiving Public Assistance would lose their right to vote in local, State and federal elections.

and:
All immigrants to the United States must be self supporting thereby not eligible for Public Assistance for a term of ten years.

and:
All adult immigrants to the United States must be able to read, write and speak English.

and:
Congress would immediately abolish the Internal Revenue Service or provide the American people with clearly defined laws regarding the payment of Federal taxes.

and:
The American monetary system would return to a gold standard within 20 years.

and:
All government budgets must be in balance every two years.

and:
Congress must examine the cause of armed combat involving American troops and the Speaker of the House shall explain to the American taxpayers the reasons for continuing. Then Congress shall vote to declare war within 30 days or funding shall be halted and all troops withdrawn. An annual review shall be voted on to continue the fighting or funding for combat troops would be automatically halted and our troops withdrawn within 90 days.

and:
All foreign aid cash or assistance plans must be voted on by the people of the United States every five years.

and:
Presidential Executive Orders shall cease immediately. With the ease of communication available today, all such ideas shall be presented to Congress for a vote.

and:
All government papers designated SECRET must be presented to the public after 25 years. Destruction of such papers to prevent public review by anyone shall result in a minimum 15 year term in federal prison.

Jeff, That's what is on my mind today. Tomorrow I may make further additions.

[Jeff Head]

Bro...you are on a roll. Glad to help get those juices flowing!

[Brad’s Gramma]

He'd get my vote if he uses them.

Careful! You don't want Newt or ANYONE just saying these words. You want our candidate to BELIEVE and LIVE this!!!

[Non-Sequitur]

Regarding the unconsitutional part, the Supreme Court is supposed to rule on Act of Congress as to their compliance with the Constitution, not create new law, or new "rights".

The jurisdiction of the court extends to all cases in law arrising under the Constitution, not just acts of Congress. Regardless of whether you agree with their decisions, their opinions on what is Constitutional and what is not are the only ones that matter.

If they step outside their bounds, then the President and the Congressa, as co-equal constitutional powers are, at least IMHO, due to their oath of office, responsible and duty bound to uphold and defend the constitution against anyone, includiong another branch of government.

It is not your place, or Congresses, to say the court stepped outside their bounds. Neither you or Congress have the power to rule their actions unconstitutional.

Yes, it could very well turn into a constitutional crisis...

Which, Constitutionally, would go to the court for their ruling. What have you gained?

[Jeff Head]

Sorry, we disagree.

I believe that all three branches of government are equal constitutionally and that it is in fact the duty of each branch to keep the others in line constitutionally. They all take the same oath to defend it against all comers. If they honestly feel that another has stepped outside its bounds...then they have the right and the duty to oppose it and force the crisis.

Placing one in effect, absolutely over the other two effectively destroys the seperation of powers and the checks and balances.

I'll go even a step further. The fourth branch, if you will, is the states themselves. They are also empowered in the constitution through constitutinal convention of keeping the federal branches all in line. It's rarely (if ever) contemplated...but it is there.

[Jeff Head]

But...as Andrew Jackson said of the Supreme Court...someone has to enforce it.

[B4Ranch]

I don't think anyone who runs for public office actually believes what they say to the voters. Their whole idea is to get elected then reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected and reelected until they are too feeble to get to the office.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Huh. You're right. Yet again. :)

[KoRn]

Please run for the Republican nomination! We need someone, anyone who is a real CONSERVATIVE!!!!!

I'm afraid our future is very dark on its current course. We need a savior.

[CyberAnt]

Well .. he constantly said, "We will find who committed this crime and we will bring them to justice" - pretty words, zero results!

[LibertarianInExile]

"We have several good choices this time and the National Media is keeping them out of the limelight and pushing us into once again a popularity contest of evils and political compromises with disastrous results. That is something that we as voters can control."

I'll make the pledge right now:

In my state's primary, no matter what primary votes come first, I will vote for the candidate with a proven constitutional conservative record (which leaves out McCain and Giuliani, and Romney-come-lately) who tops the last statewide straw poll prior to Iowa. I don't know which state that is, but I'll find out. And to show that this is a sacrifice, I would prefer it's NOT Gingrich, who I consider a windbag and an unethical slimeball, but I'd even stomach him if it meant every other conservative would vote for him instead of fracturing their vote.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for sharing this!

[mysterio]

The speech I want to hear :

"Our Constitution has been under attack from within for the last 100 years. This administration will work tirelessly to restore its integrity, and I will make that restoration my number one priority."

I can dream, I guess.

[cva66snipe]

In my state's primary, no matter what primary votes come first, I will vote for the candidate with a proven constitutional conservative record (which leaves out McCain and Giuliani, and Romney-come-lately) who tops the last statewide straw poll prior to Iowa. I don't know which state that is, but I'll find out. And to show that this is a sacrifice, I would prefer it's NOT Gingrich, who I consider a windbag and an unethical slimeball, but I'd even stomach him if it meant every other conservative would vote for him instead of fracturing their vote.

Newt could have had it all. He was too smart to do such a stupid thing as he did. He made himself black-mailable in his conduct. It cost him his office and Conservatives control of the GOP. Between Rudy, Romney, McCain, and Newt he would do us the least amount of harm. But I'm skeptical of him still. I believe in repentance but regaining lost trust takes time if it's ever regained at all.

[hosepipe]

You got my vote Jeff.. and anybody else that speaks that..
Even if it were merely rhetoric.. because an almost totally corrupt Congress would not allow it.. And a Supreme Court that legislates and intimidates..