Do not forget. Judges are LAWYERS. And they are appointed by the politicians. Whom do they serve?
Yes, but my point is in line with Horowitz’s Art of Political War. The points of Unconstitutionality will soon be made and the Democrats willfulness must be characterized for what it is - an assault against the average person. We must attach them and keep attaching them.
as an attorney i can sympathize with your view. the issues surrounding the commerce clause are a classic touch-off point for discussing deeper issues in this country. Madison and Hamilton knew that, at the end of the day, virtue would stand as the ultimate tie-breaker and no words, paper or eloquent speeches would ever succeed it.
but fundamental law (a constitution) can act on the better hand to nurture virtue and purge all else. no system is perfect, and Madison’s dream of an ideal republic was handicapped by a Constitution insufficient to prejudicially eradicate everything not virtuous. i think we can see today that Hamilton’s version was the better choice, but we’re talking about what are, on paper, tiny differences that amount to a lot after 250 years of abuse by politicians. this will need fixing after the dust settles.
politicians and lawyers are by their nature selfish and nothing will suffice to control them than a culture of virtue that opposes them. they must be opposed with all vigilance and herded like the cattle they are. they are creatures of self. in that dusty and dirty crowd we once in a while find virtue and only in a state of crisis can the two meet and make things happen.
the united states is passing the rubicon and a crisis of impotence is emerging: the federal government is quickly reaching a point where it can no longer issue or enforce real public policy. all it can do now is transfer money from you, to the treasury and then back out to special interests. that is its raison d etat today. all else is fraud and corruption.
if virtue prevailed in washington as it did long, long ago, we would have no such debate about the commerce clause. everyone would understand exactly what it meant without having to call yale and poll the law professors. it means what it means. the second amendment means what it means.
before discarding all lawyers as a part of that cabal, i would only ask that people consider the possibility that virtue can be found there, that they are quietly observing the situation, and that you will know them by their obvious, public sacrifice where upon victory they hand the sword of power back to those that commissioned them, turn and quietly walk away entrusting their futures and the future of millions to rule of law. we will see this again soon, so help me God.
you and i may disagree greatly on matters of public policy. we’re supposed to. but in this war any who stand for virtue stand with us and again, you will know us by our faithful execution of rule of law. Law always should say what it says and should not be a tea-leaved, 10,000 dollar service just to understand one sentence. the commerce clause was obviously purely directed toward limited matters of interstate commerce. but all of his who care about virtue know that.
in these dangerous times those of our oldest traditions in politics are the last ones to hold on to any appreciation of virtue in rule of law. hopefully, those last holders of the crown will, upon the right confluence of events, act and act with purpose.
watch Sarah Palin, i’d suggest. she is going to make real history that puts her in that rare camp of those making history above and beyond the designs of public relations.
apparently the time in which everyone else will also know this is coming on, and its coming on strongly.