Ted Cruz: Constitutional Remedies to a Lawless Supreme Court

National Review ^ | June 26, 2015 | Ted Cruz

[INVAR]

The key phrase was “peacefully obtained from the grip of an oligarchy or a tyranny”.

I am pretty sure that the Declaration cost a great expense of blood in violence to maintain.

But who knows? It is possible that most are now taught in History class that white Christians from Europe simply walked on in and took the country from the king of the Mexican Indians by deceiving them to trade the country for beans who were then wiped out by all the global warming that the bigoted racist heterosexual white man brought with him.

[nathanbedford]

I should decline to supply you any examples of reform leading to good government because the question assumes what you now ask, to wit: that a society can reform government without Civil War. I know your question is not ingenuous but is rather a diversion, just part of the bluster designed to divert the reader's mind from your motive. I submit that 1000 examples will not suffice because you are playing games. The question which itself assumes arguendo the possibility of reform producing good government, exposes not just your mindset but might cause the reader to consider the matter from other perspectives. I think a guy named Socrates used this technique a lot.

The question was also posed to compel you, in the unlikely event that you were to accept the theoretical possibility that reform can possibly lead to good government, to tell us at last why you don't want to attempt an Article V reform. This thread, indeed every thread in which you interject an objection to undertaking Article V reform is, after all, a debate to enlist support for the reform of America according to conservative principles and to realign the perverted Constitution with the original instrument. Therefore, it is not merely a debate between you and me but a debate which the reader might consider in deciding whether to lend his support to a reform movement which, however slim or optimistic its chances of success, at least offers a chance to save the Republic.

I submit your diversionary tactics are done to conceal a fear that attention to Article V will delay the Civil War you so earnestly desire. I will withdraw the allegation the minute you tell me whether you would prefer a peaceful reform and explain why you want to prevent such an attempt at reform beyond the old chestnut that "it just won't work." I will accept your word because, by way of acknowledgment of your integrity, I believe you have refrained from telling us the flat truth because you are committed Christian who shrinks from lying about his motive or lying about any subject for that matter but who realizes that few would support a bloodthirsty yearning for war, and Civil War at that. As a Christian of integrity, you are unwilling to lie about your true position on wanting war. But to be worthy of our time this should not be a debate either about your motives or my motives, but about readers judging whether to support Article V.

I offer the following not in submission to your gamesmanship, rather I offer the following list of governments that have been peacefully reformed as a service to the fair-minded reader knowing that I will likely never get an answer to my question because I believe you to be trapped by your moral dilemma:

South Africa at the end of apartheid; the United States at the end of Jim Crow; Austria relieved of Soviet occupation; the German Federated Republic in 1949; the present government of Japan reforming itself after occupation; the present government of South Korea evolving, that is reforming itself into a democracy; the USSR; Poland; Latvia; Lithuania; Hungary; the Czech Republic; Slovakia; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Estonia; Georgia; Kazakhstan; Kyrgyzstan; Moldova; Tajikistan; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; Uzbekistan; Taiwan, reforming itself toward democracy; Nicaragua between leftist regimes; Innumerable British colonies gaining independence through peaceful reform; Ghana; Suriname; Spain reforming itself after Franco; Chile likewise.

I have no doubt that the quality of the reform will not please you in each instance but reforms they were and, by honest standards, they were peaceful. Tyranny is as much in the eye of the beholder as it is an objective reality. Thus, the end of Reconstruction in the American South can be regarded either as a peaceful reform or as a cowardly retreat depending on your eye's perspective. But I suspect that even among 1000 examples there can be no example that answers the "JUST ONE" gauntlet you have thrown down so I offer "JUST ONE" which I believe will be dispositive for the objective reader:

The Confederated states organized under the articles of Confederation reforming into the United States of America in 1787. It is more than a passing interest that this reform was accomplished by invoking the equivalent of Article V

[VideoDoctor]

Anyone that can’t see Ted Cruz as our next President must be blind or living under a rock.

Sorry to report we have an abundance of those types of Americans.

[caww]

Bravo!!! Bravo!!

[caww]

Colonel...I stayed up the whole night Cruz taught the Constitution in relation to our governance and it’s branches when he did the filibuster........he was just that engaging in what he said and how he presented what he wanted to get across to any ears that would ear...and mine were more than tuned!

When he was finished I was stunned in how much I really didn’t know or understand but after that I did...and that should be required for every educational institute in our country..including the instructors...perhaps even moreso....

Ted is a Constitutionlist.....we could not have anybody better running for this office, but more importantly knowing exactly what he must do when his feet hit the ground in WAshington.

Ted knows the people, he knows how deceptive they are, and he knows how to navigate the halls of Congress. We must have someone who does know and who understands fully our Constitution.

[caww]

.....”We need to get behind Cruz early and stay there. It doesn’t matter what promises the others make, Cruz has fought the establishment since he was elected. He’s the only one willing to buck the system ‘no matter the cost’ and he will make an incredible President.”.....

Ted’s been taking a beating by the very ones who still do not understand nor know the man. He’s not in this for his own glory, after all who wants the mess this administration will leave behind, He’s in this for the country because it’s His country....he knows what the Constitution is...and why it must be protected.

[Godebert]

"Ted knows the people, he knows how deceptive they are, and he knows how to navigate the halls of Congress. We must have someone who does know and who understands fully our Constitution."

Without a basic understanding of Natural Law, one can not fully understand the Constitution.

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

[caww]

No No No...not a full out Constitutional Convention...a Convention of States is sufficient enough....we don’t want the Constitution “Changed”...

[caww]

....”our constitution was founded on principles to prevent this governmental tyranny in a revolution against England masters.”.......

We wouldn’t be fighting the British....understand the difference?

[caww]

...”Cruz is a superstar that comes once in a generation, perhaps a lifetime....And we have so many good ones to follow him: Walker, Abbot.....I pray that it’s God’s will that we elect such men for the next 24 years or more; we surely need a break from what’s gone on before. We need a golden age of good leadership.”......

Indeed and Amen!

[Up Yours Marxists]

They certainly don’t abide by the majority of the amendments already there. How would slapping on new ones make them any less brazen???

[PlateOfShrimp]

I am not saying that at all and I have no idea how you got that impression. I am saying that in the past, some SoCons have seemed to base their support on emotional appeal, voting for losers like Santorum or Huckabee.

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves”

Nothing in the Good Book says that we Christians need to leave our brains at the door. We have a responsibility to vote intelligently for the candidate who has the best chance of restoring the country. IMHO, only Cruz has the combination of fortitude and acumen to have a chance. The phrase to “our only hope” meant among those running. Perhaps I should have made this more clear.

Cheers!

[betty boop]

Smartest Guy in the Room, no matter what Room he walks into.

So says his former Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz.

Cruz is especially good in debate — he can see the traps being laid for him by dishonest correspondents. In the end, he manages not only to evade the trap, but to snare his dishonest correspondent in it instead.

To illustrate: a recent exchange with a left progressive news correspondent, who repeatedly tried to get Cruz to answer a question that basically boiled down to "are you an anti-gay bigot?"

Any direct Cruz denial would be spun by the MSM and the Huffington Posts of this world (et al.) as a confession that Cruz doesn't support gay marriage because he hates gays as a class — just by answering "No." But the correspondent already knows that Cruz couldn't answer "Yes."

I know this sort of verbal trap is illogical on its face; but that's how these folks operate. Cruz's denial would be headline news for days, a subversive misdirection of the substance of the issue. Cruz realized that just to answer such a question would be to "dignify" or "validate" it. So he took a pass.

Instead, he turn the question around, and flung it back into his correspondent's face: "Are you an anti-Christian bigot?"

Cruz is simply brilliant. I can't wait to see him on-stage during the GOP primary debates!!!

[Jacquerie]

Cruz is brilliant. He is probably the only candidate I will vote for president.

Still, I'm disappointed with his proposal: Rendering the justices directly accountable to the people would provide such a remedy . . .

The crumbled remains of our republic do not need any more of that which caused our downfall in the first place, which is too much democracy.

As Cruz pointed out, the Senate has become institutionally incapable of fulfilling its duty to convict all but the worst dirtbag federal magistrates, judges, appointees, presidents. Neither will it trim the jurisdiction of federal courts.

The narrow solution is to reform the senate so that it can perform its appropriate, legitimate and constitutional duties.

The broader solution is to super-federalize the government as per Mark Levin's proposed amendments.

[Jacquerie]

By making structural amendments that cannot be ignored or lawyered away.

Start with repeal of the 17th Amendment and federalize from there.

[Hostage]

> “They certainly don’t abide by the majority of the amendments already there. How would slapping on new ones make them any less brazen???”

By designing an amendment under which the States have all control including enforcement.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3304160/posts

[Jacquerie]

I caught about two hours of his filibuster, as Cruz spoke extemporaneously, and completely without notes on The Federalist. I jotted down his references to Federalist # this or that. Everything he said that I back checked was true. Genius.

[caww]

Genius is right.....it was said if anybody wants to know who and what Ted Cruz is about...just read the Constitution. Not only does he know it like the back of his hand...he ‘believes’ what he says when speaking about it.... Remarkable understanding and delivery.

Spending that night listening to him was simply riveting for me....One that goes in my book of extraordinary occasions that did more than make a difference. After that I watched him and soon after began supporting Ted Cruz. ...and will continue to do so throughout this election.

[Hostage]

As a young teenager his father made him memorize verbatim the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Throughout his teens he joined student debate groups in which he honed the skills he displays today. You can bet he has committed to his inner soul all the arguments and expositions of The Federalist Papers.

But for all his study, his knowledge, his practice and brilliance, it would all be fruitless without his deep faith which his father instilled in him.

[Jacquerie]

Quite right.