Howard Chandler Christy Depicts The Founders Signing The U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787. "Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States" (1940)

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 4

Major Theme: When the Congress Shall Meet

"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day."

-U.S. Constitution

[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]

ANALYSIS
Paragraph two states that the Congress shall meet at least once in a year. What significance are we to glean from this? The Founders did not intend for Congressmen and Senators to spend a lot of time in the capital. Politics was not supposed to be a full-time occupation. It was a public service, no more than that. Think of how much less mischief our Congress could get into today, if they spent less than half the time they usually spend in Washington.

Patriot Thought

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 (Paragraphs 6 and 7)

Major Theme: The Senate's Role In Impeachment Cases

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]

-U.S. Constitution

Sunday, August 11, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 (Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5)

Major Themes: Qualifications to Become a U.S. Senator; Senate Responsibilities of the Vice President of the United States; How Senate Leadership is Chosen

Paragraph 3:

"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."

Paragraph 4:

"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided. "

Paragraph 5:

"The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States."

-U.S. Constitution
[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]

ANALYSIS 

Don't you love the Constitutional qualifications for high political office? Technically, I'm qualified to run for one of the two Georgia U.S. Senate seats just because I'm over thirty, I've always been a citizen, and I live in that state! Easy, right? Wrong. Senate terms (six years) are long. Senators can be elected to unlimited terms. (Think Ted Kennedy, senator from Massachusetts 1962 - 2009). There are only two seats to run for, rarely more than one is up for election at a time. Finally, it takes a lot of friends, money, and advertising just to familiarize your name on the ballot, let alone convince the voters of your state that you are the right candidate for that office. 

Check out paragraph 4, the Senate powers of the vice president of the U.S. The vice president is often overlooked in our political culture. He has almost no decision-making powers. Yet, he presides over the U.S. Senate and casts a tie-breaking vote. Sometimes, the future of a president's favored legislative bill in the Senate hangs on the tie-breaking vote of the vice president. Of course, the vice president is expected to follow the wishes of the president. Still, the opportunity to save a president's endangered agenda in the Senate is a cherished role of the vice presidency.

Patriot Thought 

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 3 (Paragraph 1)

"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote."  
-U.S. Constitution
[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]  [underline added]

ANALYSIS
The Founders designed the U.S. Senate for two main reasons. First, it gave the small states protection against the dictates of the larger states, protection they feared they wouldn't have in the population-based House of Representatives because in the Senate, each state gets exactly two senators. Second, by making the selection of senators the prerogative of state legislatures, the Senate served as a check against the whims of the popularly elected House of Representatives. The Founders did not trust democracy and wanted each state to have its interests represented in the national government. 

This arrangement was entirely undone by passage of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913. Now, U.S. Senators from each state are "elected by the people thereof." Thus, each senator must be all things to all people, just like congressmen, and the states have lost a powerful bargaining tool in protecting its interests in the federal government.


Patriot Thought

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Flight of the Obamacare Bringers: Obamacare Exemptions Create a Ruling Class

In the age of the Soviet Union, socialism was for everyone except the party members. While the masses lived in government-issued projects and drove government-issued cars (for those whose applications could prove such a vehicle was a necessity), members of the central committee and politburo lived in Black Sea dachas, enjoyed caviar, and rode in chauffeur-driven limousines. 

Socialism has always been the spirit behind the creation of America's Affordable Care Act. It was the same for Social Security, Medicare, and all other programs created in the name of helping everybody. You can decide for yourself whether these programs are good or bad, but any program that involves re-distributing wealth and issuing benefits across all segments of society is a brand of socialism. But there is something ominously different about the career of the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. Its bringers are running full-speed away from it!

In 1965, former President Harry Truman enrolled himself in Medicare. If it was good enough for everyone, it was good enough for a president. And yet, since the 2012 re-election of President Obama, two years before the expected full-implementation of Obamacare, those of the very segments of society which made this law a reality are tripping over themselves to get their constituents exempted from it. 

The first grumblings came from Senate Democrats, worried about their re-election chances in 2014. Montana Senator Max Baucus, one of the chief sponsors of Obamacare, began calling the law "a train wreck." Next, it was the turn of the labor unions, most notably Jimmy Hoffa Jr.'s Teamsters, UFCW, and Unite-Here. Together, they issued a damning statement about Obamacare to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Here are its most insightful passages:


"Like millions of other Americans, our members are front-line workers in the American economy. We have been strong supporters of the notion that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. We have also been strong supporters of you. In campaign after campaign we have put boots on the ground, gone door-to-door to get out the vote, run phone banks and raised money to secure this vision. Now this vision has come back to haunt us."


"As you both know first-hand, our persuasive arguments have been disregarded and met with a stone wall by the White House and the pertinent agencies. This is especially stinging because other stakeholders have repeatedly received successful interpretations for their respective grievances. Most disconcerting of course is last week’s huge accommodation for the employer community—extending the statutorily mandated “December 31, 2013” deadline for the employer mandate and penalties."



"Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it." 
The Affordable Care Act will “destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”
This week, in keeping with Obamacare's trend of destroying" the backbone of the middle class", the president just issued an executive order, exempting congressional staffs from receiving the Medicaid-Plus (i.e. Obamacare exchange plan) that was set to replace their existing (and generous) Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) with lower quality coverage. Over the last few weeks, these staffers have groaned that Obamacare will force them to pay thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket expenses.

Hearing their cries, the president issued his executive order exempting congressional staffers from Obamacare, breaking his own law. This is not the first time the president has broken the Obamacare law. A matter of weeks ago, he waved the employer mandate (delaying it, conveniently, until after the 2014 midterm elections). Does it seem far fetched that labor unions will get an exemption too? Not at all. 

The president has already shown us that he has no regard for the rule of law, that he conducts himself as being above the law, and that he will save his privileged, ruling elite, from the very laws he signed to make everyone" pay their fair share." The only segment of American society that will not get an Obamacare exemption is the middle class, in other words, those of us who can not afford to send a lobbyist to Washington on our behalf. The Affordable Care Act (with all its exemptions) is set to create a new American ruling class, unless it is repealed.

Patriot Thought



Sources:

WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324635904578644202946287548.html

Hoffa quotes from:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/16/James-Hoffa-Flips-on-ObamaCare


Daily U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 2 (Paragraph 5)

"The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."  
-U.S. Constitution
[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]

ANALYSIS
Most people today know that the House chooses its own speaker. However, after the last election there were whisperings to consider making New Gingrich speaker of House again, although he is not currently an elected representative. As for the Constitution, the House can simply choose its speaker, according to its own rules.

Patriot Thought

Monday, August 5, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 2 (Paragraphs 2 and 3)

Major Themes: Qualifications of Congressmen, Apportionment of Representatives and Direct Taxes, and How Slaves will be Assessed for Taxation

Article 1, Section 2 begins by addressing how the House of Representatives shall be composed, and that its members shall be elected every two years. The qualifications to become a congressman are as follows:

"No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]
-U.S. Constitution


ANALYSIS
Article 1, Section 2 is the U.S. Constitution's first mention of slavery in the United States. You may notice great care was taken to avoid the use of the word slaves in the document. The founders were enlightened thinkers who understood slavery was an immoral practice, at odds with the ideals of the American Revolution, specifically contradicting the "self evident" truth that "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence. 

Apportionment of congressmen and direct taxes refers to the number of congressional seats a state may have in the House of Representatives and the amount of direct taxes owed by each state to the federal government. Both figures are determined by each state's population. 

Paragraph 3 distinguishes between four categories of people for apportionment of Congressmen and direct taxes. It was more of a snapshot of eighteenth century America, rather than today's America. 

We can all guess who the "free Persons" were. Those "bound to Service for a Term of Years" were otherwise known as indentured servants, slaves for a contracted number of years. This practice was already outdated by the era of the Constitution. Indians living within the borders of the U.S. were not taxed because they were regarded as sovereign nations. 

For the last category of persons, apportionment of Congressmen and direct taxes would be determined by "three-fifths of all other persons" - slaves - to call them what they were. This meant that a state could constitutionally count each slave as three-fifths of a person for purposes of apportionment of that state's number of Congressmen and the amount of direct taxes owed.

This was what our school textbooks refer to as the three-fifths compromise. The northern states (which had few slaves) were envious of the southern states (which had many). The North was not envious because they wanted more slaves. What they were afraid of was the ability of southern states to use their slave populations increase their numbers of congressmen, and to therefore dominate the House of Representatives. The South felt fully justified in counting its slave population for apportionment. Therefore, the three-fifths compromise gave both sides some of what they wanted.

The U.S. Constitution was written in the period 1787-88 and slavery was constitutionally protected in the United States until passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, this amendment would be a "king's cure" for the hitherto constitutionally certified evil of slavery.

Patriot Thought




Sunday, August 4, 2013

The Tea Party: Five Years Later

An Adapting Movement?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/04/five-years-later-evolving-tea-party-movement-wades-into-2014-elections/

Daily U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 1

"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested  in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

-U.S. Constitution
[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document]

ANALYSIS
This means Congress has the power to legislate (or make laws), not the president, the courts, or any other body. 

Patriot Thought

Saturday, August 3, 2013

Dick Morris' History Video: Relief But No Recovery

Dick Morris' latest history video untangles the myth of Roosevelt's New Deal. In doing so, his argument offers striking parallels to the failure of big government to bring us economic recovery in the last five years.

http://www.dickmorris.com/the-new-deal-part-i-relief-but-no-recovery-dick-morris-tv-history-video/

Patriot Thought

Thought of the Day: Obama Unveils Plan to Prevent Future Benghazis

Let's guess what the plan is? Return the armed security stripped of the embassies after President Obama came into office? No, guess again. Go after the people who attacked Benghazi in the first place? No, not that. Give up? Here it is, the plan is to shut down more than twenty embassies and consulates across the entire Middle East when we receive a localized threat in the Arabian peninsula. Okay, maybe this saves the lives of the personnel for another day. But what message does this send around the world to those who want to harm us?

Friday, August 2, 2013

Daily U.S. Constitution: The Preamble

"WE THE PEOPLE of the Unites States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." 

[spelling and capitalization are reproduced from the document] -U.S. Constitution

ANALYSIS
There we have it friends, the rationale for establishing our American government. Do you notice the source of sovereign power? It lies not with the federal government or with any of the state governments. We the people are sovereign in America, even if we've forgotten it.

Patriot Thought

Thought of the Day: I'll Have More Flexibility After I'm Re-Elected

Let's see, Mr. Snowden flies to Moscow, pleading for asylum. Mr. Obama asks Mr. Putin to return Mr. Snowden to his homeland to face criminal charges. Mr. Putin says no. Months go by. Mr. Snowden is granted asylum in Russia for one year. Is this the flexibility Mr. Obama referred to last year, when he assured the Russian foreign minister all he needed to do was get re-elected before proceeding with U.S. and Russian relations? Hmm... It seems Mr. Obama was the only one who promised flexibility.

Patriot Thought

Thursday, August 1, 2013

Thought of the Day: Phony Scandals

What can we the people do about a re-elected president who calls illegal spying on journalists' communications, IRS persecution of citizens who disagree with him, and four dead protection-denied American embassy workers, phony scandals

Patriot Thought

Visitor Comments

The dated links and statements below show interaction between the readers and makers of this blog to further the marketplace of ideas that enrich the education of patriots. Certain opinions made to posts are excerpted and re-posted here to highlight interesting discussions by fellow patriots.

Chris CJuly 28, 2013 at 12:31 PM [writing in response to Thursday, July 25, 2013: Moral Reflections on the Zimmerman Trial and on the Right to Self Defense]

I think it is absurd to draw a moral equivalence between innocent until proven guilty and guilty until proven innocent. It should be clear that one is far more protective and respectful of individual rights than the other. It's ironic that you attack the American system here, when it obviously takes more into account that someone could be falsely accused. Hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution rather than the defense.

DonaldJuly 28, 2013 at 8:27 AM[writing in response to Thursday, July 25, 2013: Moral Reflections on the Zimmerman Trial and on the Right to Self Defense]

It is interesting because the American Justice system goes from a innocent until proven guilty point of view. It definitely is no better in China where it is from a guilty until proven innocent point of view. Both are flawed because both lend themselves to being tainted with corruption as well as the norms of society.

Living the JourneyJuly 26, 2013 at 10:11 AM [writing in response to Thursday, July 25, 2013: Moral Reflections on the Zimmerman Trial and on the Right to Self Defense]

I found it interesting that Donald's perception of how America out to be was originally influenced by American fiction. This reminds me of when I arrived in China the first time expecting to see sword toting warriors running on the roofs of ancient temple like buildings. I was definitely surprised by reality.

Donald
July 26, 2013 at 9:09 AM [writing in response to Thursday, July 25, 2013: Moral Reflections on the Zimmerman Trial and on the Right to Self Defense]

Long before Zimmerman was pronounced innocent, people in my country were laughing at the thought of a white man (yes he is white Hispanic really) being found guilty of killing a black teenager. That will never happen they say. When things like that happen, it is the stuff of legend and stories and hollywood scripts. Look at some of the greatest literature found out there (to kill a mocking bird for example). It is the stand of the downtrodden black defendant who triumphs over the hard and brutal white man. This in itself is a tragedy as well because of the stereotypical vision people then have of the US as in the case of many of my country people as well as others from other countries in their view of America.

Anonymous
December 28, 2012 12:13 PM [writing in response to Friday, December 28, 2012: Beyond Gun Control: The Real Reason For Sandy Hook (A Moral Analysis)]

I do believe in evil but I also believe that Adam Lanza had mental issues that weren't being addressed. Also, he had been abandoned by his father whom he hadn't seen in over 2 years and who had a second family which Adam was not a part of. Adam had been assigned a school psychologist but somewhere along the line he dropped through the cracks and didn't get the care he needed that could possibly have prevented this tragedy. We'll never know...

Living the JourneyDecember 31, 2012 7:16 AM[writing in response to Friday, December 28, 2012: Beyond Gun Control: The Real Reason For Sandy Hook (A Moral Analysis)]

How can evil be defined in a pluralistic society? Is morality something decided by vote? And then following that question, how can evil be "treated"? Jason, I think you're trying to open a door that very few want to walk through because if we do, we are forced to make choices about things many would like to leave "relative".

Anonymous
December 31, 2012 7:36 AM[writing in response to Friday, December 28, 2012: Beyond Gun Control: The Real Reason For Sandy Hook (A Moral Analysis)]

I think we should stop offering up drug store psychology and focus on the one common denominator- GUNS. Psychotic people exist in all cultures, nations and religions. Look at the countries in the world with strict gun control laws; such as Japan, Australia, Canada to name a few, and they have far less violence involving guns. Are you blaming secularism? Science? The devil made him do it! Right? Simply, Adam Lanza and other mass murderers are mentally ill. So let's make it impossible for people like him to obtain guns of mass destruction.

Jason Aldous
December 31, 2012 10:56 AM[writing in response to Friday, December 28, 2012: Beyond Gun Control: The Real Reason For Sandy Hook (A Moral Analysis)]

Dear Living the Journey, We will always have tragedies so long as there is evil. Evil as such can not be cured through government policy. On the contrary, its work can only be limited through choices made by individuals.

Dear Anonymous, I do blame secular reasoning for making it difficult for us to address the problem. If you take good and evil out of your worldview, morally you can not say there is anything wrong with what Adam Lanza did. You may be horrified at what he did, but you can not judge it against any standards, if good and evil are removed as avenues of inquiry.

Jason AldousDecember 27, 2012 6:39 PM [writing in response to Wednesday, December 26, 2012: Gun Control Part 3: The Second Amendment (A Legal Analysis)]

Let's see, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Even if the wording implies that the populace must be armed when called up for militia service, it says "the right of the people shall not be infringed." Since the amendment states that bearing arms is a "right" and "not to be infringed" it is an open and shut case for anyone taking an objective reading of it. "Rights" are entitlements. Privileges can be taken away, but not rights. It matters not if this right was given with militia service in mind. Good work, Mr. Emma.


AnonymousDecember 17, 2012 3:46 PM [writing in response to Monday, December 17, 2012, Gun Control Part 2: Would Society Be Better Off If All Guns Were Made Illegal? (A Reasonable Treatment)]

On my part, I think that all guns should definitely be regulated and strictly controlled. Its interesting that almost all Americans point to the 2nd amendment. From my point of view, this 2nd Amendment was written in a time when there was 'trust' among people and their government. Today this trust has been flushed down the drain

AnonymousDecember 17, 2012 5:26 PM [writing in response to Monday, December 17, 2012, Gun Control Part 2: Would Society Be Better Off If All Guns Were Made Illegal? (A Reasonable Treatment)]

In 1959, 60% of the American public favored a ban on handguns. Today, the majority of the American people don't even support a ban on assault rifles. Why? Because since 1959, the argument that tighter gun control would reduce crime has been effectively refuted in the mind of the public. The change in attitude toward gun control is primarily due to fear of crime rather than distrust of government.


GeoDecember 8, 2012 2:11 PM [writing in response to Friday, December 7, 2012, Pearl Harbor: Was It Japan's Fault, or America's? (Conspiracy Theory vs. History)]

FDR campainged on keeping the US out of the war but when he wanted to get into the war he needed an excuse. He may very well have been tempted to withhold information from his top commanders at Pearl Harbor. They certainly suspected he did.

GeoDecember 8, 2012 at 1:28 PM[writing in response to Saturday, December 1, 2012, Voting In A Bad Economy, Recession Myths: De-Constructing Historical Falsification]

Can't argue with your observations, Jason, but even with the limited space no mention of the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs in any discussion of Hoover/Great Depression/FDR is to ignore an elephant in the room.

Chris CDecember 7, 2012 at 4:40 PM[writing in response to Tuesday, November 27, 2012, The Next Great American President: Who We Need To Look For In 2016]

One qualm: I don't think Suez can be regarded as a long-term success for Eisenhower. It bought us no credibility with the developing world and managed to alienate important Allies. As a result, we got no real help from Britain in Vietnam and plenty of hostility from France in the 1960's. France's desire to oppose or sabotage us on key issues has continued to this day.