Baldwin has a plan to renew the Constitution (barf alert)

Barack Obama and John McCain may have disagreed on many issues during the long 2008 presidential campaign, but they were aligned on two things:

1. Both the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees were agreed that the man they sought to replace, George W. Bush, had mangled, mismanaged and abused his position.

2. Both Obama and McCain asserted, in a bipartisan repetition that grew surreal in its similarity, that there was a need to "change" Washington.

Or, to be more precise, how do we restore the system of checks and balances that was thrown out of whack by a president whose familiarity with the Constitution might generously be described as rudimentary and a vice president who was openly at odds with the document and its defenders?

But how do we change Washington?:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

"To wit, Baldwin wants Congress to call on the next president to immediately and publicly reaffirm the commitment of the United States to the rule of law."

Hear! Hear!

Time to enforce the U. S. Costitution as written.

Let's begin with Article Two:

Demand that Obama prove he is a natural-born citizen of the United States legally qualified to serve as President.

"The list of abuses of executive branch power is long, as are the administration's attempts to impede congressional oversight. Indeed, Congress has presented President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other Bush/Cheney administration officials with ample opportunities to reverse these abusive actions and restore our democracy. At each step, they have, instead, chosen to show contempt for the Congress and the American public. We must look to the next administration -- and the next president -- to show leadership in restoring executive branch accountability."

There they go again. Or maybe it's just me?

I've once again looked at 'my copy' of the U.S. Constitution and I'll be darned if I can find anywhere in Article I, that says the Legislative Branch has "oversight" over the Executive branch? I checked all Ten Sections and their clauses too and found.. nada, nothing, zip, zero zilch on "congressional oversight"?
And to doubly make sure I wasn't going crazy, senile, or blind, I checked Article II, all Four of its sections and clauses and again -- I can't find anything that says the Executive Branch has to be subservient, "accountable", or be subject to "congressional oversight"?

Democrats and the MSM keep talking about "Congressional Oversight" of the Executive Branch yet there isn't one word about that in the U.S. Constitution. Not to mention that our government is based on three "Coequal Branches". So how can one branch have "oversight" on another if they are equal? This is a troubling paradox.

Then we have Ms Baldwin (and Democrats in general) calling the USA a "Democracy"? That's odd because we aren't. We are a "Republic".

How can all this be?

Okay, Sarcasm and Mocking of Baldwin -- OFF!

This dimwit doesn't, won't or can't remember that VP Cheney said back in 2001 that one goal of the Bush Administration was to restore the Constitutional Powers of the Executive Branch that 'Jimmah' ceded to Congress. Just because the dimwit did it, and no other POTUS tried to get them back, doesn't make it Constitutional.

~~~ rant off ~~~

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.