Posted on 02/03/2011 10:29:26 PM PST by Citizen X_Area 51
Following a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutionality of the new health care law, Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told CNSNews.com that the Obama administration should continue enforcing the health care law despite federal judge Roger Vinson’s ruling that it is unconstitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
As you well know I’ve been a proponent of this view for quite a long time so you’ll get no argument from me here.
“The Obammunist, “How many divisions does the Supreme Court have? Or the Republicans for that matter?”
According to a 1990s study, 90% of the military officer corps identify themselves as either republican or conservative.
“The doomsday option. Con-Con.”
It’s not a Con-Con we need, but a state’s convention called to answer one question: Shall the federal government be abolished?
The states created the federal government and they can abolish that federal government.
Great tagline.
No. We don’t need the dissolution of the country. That means America’s enemies win.
What we need is for every officer of government, at every level, and in every branch, to begin to adhere to the imperative requirements of their oaths.
"The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.
-- George Washington, Farewell Address
Yes I agree and was badly wording my argument. Not only that, but the Nuremberg trials and others have established that blindly following authority does not make it right.
So I was wrong in that respect.
And yes the USC says nothing about USSC decisions and their effects. It’s just that in the past the US Executive has followed USSC decisions and I feel this is a good thing. Ultimately the Congress is the branch that decides whether the Executive has overstepped their bounds.
Do we really want a country in which USSC decisions are ignored? What was to stop the Pelosi congress from declaring global warming skepticism illegal? It was our tradition of liberty, free speech, and yes the USSC.
I believe it says that the President may be impeached for “high crimes and misdemeanors” and Contempt of Court is exactly that, right?
Not if they're making constitutional rulings.
Otherwise, yes.
Being held in contempt by the court comes under the heading of a high crime and misdemeanor to my way of thinking and especially so if there are multiple counts!
High crimes and misdemeanors are whatever the Congress says they are.
And some court opinions are contemptible, wouldn't you say?
Ok, I think I see your point now. Emotion was clouding my thinking.
We explicitly adopted the English common law system which had a long history of precedent which applies to all civil cases. So, when an appeals court makes a ruling, the ruling is precedent for all subsequent cases coming through courts under the jurisdiction of that court.
It looks like Durbin was careful to say what he did in a hallway interview as he left a committee meeting.
Leni
Some are, yes.
“What we need is for every officer of government, at every level, and in every branch, to begin to adhere to the imperative requirements of their oaths.”
That’s the ideal. There must be consequences and punishment for those who don’t honor their oath. Until there are patriots in office to administer that punishment, traitors will continue to act with dishonor and full impunity.
And my state convention idea to abolish the federal government is my nuclear option to avoid another bloody civil war, or at least get the sides clearly defined.
The only way to get them to adhere in our current culture is to punish them for not doing so.
It used to be that we could rely on a person’s morality and a sense of common, objective standards of behavior, for them to comply.
This concept has broader application than just gov’t officials. This concept extends to every person in the country. I assert that the culture has been intentionally manipulated to the point that people cannot or will not self-govern, and “must” be externally governed by an “elite” that has arrogated the power to do so.
So if, for example, AZ chooses not to accept obamacare because of Vinson's ruling that it's unconstitutional, the Feds will sue us (again) and force AZ to prove in court that a law that was ruled as unconstitutional IS unconstitutional.
Durbin = If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bu!!shit!!!
I agree about upholding the Constitution, I just don’t think that throwing it out is warranted.
Any republic will fail if it’s citizens are deficient, uneducated, and ignorant. In any Republic, if the citizens no longer want a Republic and no longer respect it’s institutions, then it’s kaput no matter what you do.
What the US needs is better citizens, not a better Constitution. How to do that is to start in the classrooms, which are now little more than leftist indoctrination.
"An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others."--James Madison, Federalist No. 48
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.