I usually don’t write about particular candidates in Congressional races, but this one really caught my attention, not only for the fact that New Jersey really does not need any new taxes, but also because the state itself could use a third generation small business owner who also happens to be a strict Constitutionalist and a politician who actually understands science enough to see through the obfuscations of global warming alarmists.

David Larsen is a man who recognizes cap-and-trade for what it really is – just another power grab and wealth redistribution scheme. If you want real change, then on Tuesday, June 8th say yes to Republican David Larsen and no to Representative Leonard Lance, who currently occupies the seat. You see Leonard Lance is what we call a RINO – that sort of squishy Beltway Republican who will often surprise you by doing something inane like voting for cap-and-trade. Voting for cap-and-trade is not the act of a fiscally responsible representative, especially given the current climate – pun intended – of the now unestablished science of global warming. When political agendas collide with science it is the people – you and I – who pay the price. And a hefty price it is. The only warming these days is in the anthropogenic global warming science community. It is there you will find a great deal of hot air.

Remember climategate? If not, here is refresher of many posts from American Thinker on the subject. The bottom line is how so-called scientists were exposed as biased hacks when emails were leaked that explicitly described how data was fudged to fit the climate scare narrative.

Today Al Gore, self-appointed leader of the Global Warming scare is being sued by The Weather Channel & 30,000 scientists worldwide. That has not stopped the winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, obviously awarded for the explicit demonstration of incompetence in a given field in which the recipient possesses no expertise, from continuing his crusade for your money. At least he has that invention of the internet thing going for him.

And guys like Leonard Lance are all too happy to join the previous Vice President in absconding with our hard earned cash, all under the guise of discredited science.

So serious is the climategate scandal it has also prompted another lawsuit from Peabody Energy Company (PEC) against the EPA; a suit which may lead to criminal prosecution.

One would think that with such overwhelming evidence the books have been cooked and the lid torn off exposing one of the greatest political tainting of science in its entire history, that politicians would be rushing away from cap-and-trade back into the reality-based world. The fact they are not says one of two things. Either they are completely ignorant of the scientific process and climategate cover-up or they are agenda driven hacks. As both cases would shed a negative light on any candidate, it is clear that anyone who voted for cap-and-trade does not deserve to hold elected office. As New Jersey’s elected representative for the 7th district last year Leonard Lance voted for cap-and-trade legislation in the House. Here is what his vote means to those of you in not just New Jersey but the rest of the country as well.

Visit the website of David Larsen for Congress to find out more about cap-and-trade. The bottom line is that some in your government are prepared to basically burden you with a tax while not calling it a tax, and they will do so under the umbrella of junk science and in the name of power and money. The Heritage Foundation estimates the total cost of living per average household in the U.S. will increase by $3,000 per year or more; in New Jersey the cost of living could increase by as much as $6,000.

Here is a nice little video outlining the issue of cap-and-trade and the position of Representative Leonard Lance who voted to put his hand in your pocket last year because a bunch of agenda-driven scientists provided him the cover to do so:

Of course, our story would not be complete without the gratuitous backpedaling that politicians like Leonard Lance are famous for. If I were Dan Rather – which thank God I am not – I might be tempted after watching the following video to come up with a useful metaphor. Perhaps something along the lines of “Leonard Lance is tap dancing faster than a barefooted Michael Flatley on a hot bed of coals”. Yeah, I think I like that one.

Watch Leonard Lance dance, wiggle, and attempt to spin his way out of his vote for cap-and-trade.

The die has been cast. The question is clear. Who has dibs on your money? You, or a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians using scientists as political fodder to get their grubby hands on more of your money? It’s not a hard choice. On June 8th vote for a man of reason and fiscal sanity. Vote for David Larsen.

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Cross-posted at Wolves of Liberty

I am a non-violent guy. When it comes to restoring constitutional governance to this country, my method of choice is nullification and non-violent passive-aggressive resistance in the vein of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Admittedly, there is probably a point where I would turn my back on these strategies and take a – shall we say – more direct approach, but if that ever happened the egregious attack on our liberties would have reached a point where many Americans would be – quite literally – up in arms.

However, when it comes to my family and protecting them forget about that passive-aggressive, diplomatic BS. Mess with a member of my family and you better hope I am not around, otherwise you’ll be unlucky enough to be on the business end of a Glock 45 or AR15 and, if your stupid enough, the recipient of some of the ammo in said weapon.

I live in Texas, and by now most of use have heard of the violence that is starting in the border towns and making its way north. Even in Oklahoma, where my brother is a Lieutenant in a police department of a major city, they are briefed on gang and drug violence. It is a growing epidemic, so severe that Sheriff Arvin West from Hudspeth County in Texas told ranchers in his county:

You farmers, I’m telling you right now, arm yourselves. As they say, the old story is it’s better to be tried by twelve than carried by six, and I don’t want to see six people carrying you.

Conceal and carry time for the wife – maybe a P245. A little heavy, but the woman can handle it and I prefer the 45 caliber over a 9mm any day. Just ask a coroner or ER doc and they will tell your a lot more people survive hits from .38’s and 9’s than .45’s or .357 magnums.

Which brings me to what happened to my wife. Before continuing, the woman I married is the type of person who is very passive in a car. If someone cuts her off, she does not honk the horn, flip them off, or pull up along side them to scream obscenities. She knows such actions can have consequences. I am a little more aggressive, but have learned to pull back after spending years with my wife in the passenger seat playing the role of Mrs. Bucket from the British comedy Keeping Up Appearances: “Mind the pediatricians dear!”. Guys, you know what I’m talking about (joking honey).

My wife is driving home from her job when she is cut off by a driver in an old foreign maroon colored car – the type of car so old you know it will never pass state inspection. Inside is a young Hispanic male. My wife slams on her brakes, pulls back, and when the driver does not speed up, she accelerates her vehicle to pass and then pulls back into the lane in front of the punk well enough ahead of him to not give the appearance of attempting to cut him off.

Next thing she knows, she of off on a high speed chase. First he pulls up next to her and starts screaming obscenities. He then attempts to cut her off. She pulls a maneuver and ends up back in front of him and turns onto our street. He follows her. She decides that, instead of pulling into our apartment and letting the little punk know where she lives, she would double back to a gas station where she knows there is usually a police vehicle.

When she gets there, no such luck. She pulls into a parking spot and stays in her vehicle. The punk drives up and opens his window, still screaming obscenities and daring her to get out of the car. Customers walking out of the store turn around and walk back in. He begins to flash obvious gang signs and using language typical of a street thug. At this time, my wife pulls out her phone and pretends she is using it to call the police. As we can’t dial 9-11 on our cell phones, she hopes the ruse will work and begins to act like she is providing a description of the vehicle. The SOB keeps cursing at her and daring her to get out of the car. Big tough man picking on a woman. God, I wish I were there. Oh, what fun I missed and what pain this bastard escaped.

My wife, having exhausted all her options, decides to head back towards our apartment as the gangster follows her. At the last second she makes a dangerous right turn at a high rate of speed and enters our apartment complex. The idiot following her is caught off guard and slams on his brakes too late and attempts to reverse his vehicle. As other cars are already heading his direction, he capitulates and drives on.

For the next three hours my wife is left shaking as she comes down off the adrenaline high. She feels helpless and went so far as to ask me if I would take some time off work the next day and allow her to follow me to where she works. I agreed.

I was actually disappointed he was not waiting. I don’t suffer from fear. Having had four heart attacks starting at age 38 (I am now 43) and 25 stents there is very little that scares me, and some little punk or group of punks or gang is not one of them. I was quite prepared to unload into the sorry bastard if he was stupid enough to return. Thankfully for him, he must have went home and did a few bong hits and fell asleep.

So that’s it. My wife is now very interested in getting a conceal and carry. I don’t blame her and support this decision 100%. We live near a range and I’ll take her shooting as often as she wants. I love to fire a good weapon that reminds me that I live in a country where I can protect myself, which leaves me with a final thought. I would also throw out my passive-aggressive non-violent approach to solving problems if anyone ever tried to take away my right to defend myself. If anyone – ANYONE – ever attempted to take away my firearm, one of us is going to bite the dust.

Politically incorrect? Too frigging bad.

In other news and opinion:

Riot Police Called in to Protect Obama from Out of Control Tea Party. Look at these vicious thugs!

Thank god the security forces were heavily armed and well prepared with full body armor or this guy with a bullhorn could have done some serious damage:

Police state: How Mexico treats illegal aliens

Breaking news from Michelle Malkin: I am not white!

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Cross-posted at Wolves of Liberty News.

Michelle Malkin exposes the theatrical collusion that has come to define Washington not only in the political arena, but between politics and big business:

The GOP wants SEC correspondence disclosed. Here’s that story. In related news, Goldman Sachs cheerleader and beneficiary Rahm Emanuel met with NYC business elite about the financial reform plan.

That’s not all:

While President Obama assails the culture of greed and recklessness practiced by the men of Goldman Sachs, his administration is infested with them. The White House can no more disown Government Sachs than Da Boss-in-chief can disown Chicago politics.

Read the whole post.

Most troubling is Greg Gordon article at McClatchy exposing the White House visitor logs:

While Goldman Sachs’ lawyers negotiated with the Securities and Exchange Commission over potentially explosive civil fraud charges, Goldman’s chief executive visited the White House at least four times.

White House logs show that Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein traveled to Washington for at least two events with President Barack Obama, whose 2008 presidential campaign received $994,795 in donations from Goldman’s political action committee, its employees and their relatives. He also met twice with Obama’s top economic adviser, Larry Summers.

…Goldman’s connections to the White House and the Obama administration are raising eyebrows at a time when Washington and Wall Street are dueling over how to overhaul regulation of the financial world.

…According to White House visitor logs, Blankfein was among the business leaders who attended an Obama speech on Feb. 13, 2009, and he also joined more than a dozen bank CEOs in a meeting with Obama on March 27, 2009.

Blankfein also was supposed be among the CEOs who met with Obama in December, but he and two others phoned in from New York, blaming inclement weather.

He and his wife, Laura, were listed on the logs among 438 presidential guests at the Kennedy Center Honors the previous week.

…Several former Goldman executives hold senior positions in the Obama administration, including Gary Gensler, the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Mark Patterson, a former Goldman lobbyist who is chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; and Robert Hormats, the undersecretary of state for economic, energy and agricultural affairs.

Jacobs of the University of Minnesota said that the administration now risks “kind of a feeding frenzy.”

“The administration has to be very careful,” he said, “because . . . they’re seen as the ones who bailed out Wall Street. If there are indications that the administration was talking to regulators or to Justice Department people about when and how Goldman or other firms would be investigated, I think that’s going to create almost a mob scene.”

I am reminded of Dr. Larry Hunter’s lessons in political theater:

What do Harlem Globetrotters basketball, professional wrestling and American politics all have in common? They are FAKES.

Oh, the consequences are real enough and can be catastrophic. And, the players are not fakes; some are marvelous performers and others are fine athletes (was there ever a better ball handler than Meadowlark Lemon or a political bone crusher better at the political Hammerlock and the High Crotch Takedown than Nancy Pelosi?); it is the contest that is fake; it is choreographed violence, cliffhanging drama; a blood sport with real blood carefully let that titillates a gullible audience. Although professional wrestlers appear to be bitter foes inside the ring, outside the ropes they are drinking buddies, just like U.S. Senators. Wrestling matches, like congressional debates, are carefully choreographed and the punches, gouges and kicks are pulled or exaggerated for effect. The blood in the ring is real enough—wrestlers frequently use a small razor to ‘blade’ (cut themselves) to draw blood—which completes the illusion and makes the match more exhilarating and dramatic for the fans.

So is this just more theater in the road to over-regulation of the free market? Did the actors already know their assigned parts before the drama began? One wonders.

In other news:

Update on Navy SEALs case

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Obama says Tea Partiers should be thanking him:

On tax day, he show cases the tax cuts in the stimulus plan, other tax break, and refusal to raise taxes on people making less than $250,000 a year.

“So I’ve been amused in recent days by these people having rallies,” he said to laughter. “I think they should be saying thank you.” Big applause, and calls of “Thank you” from the crowd.

The man sure can lie with straight face. Either that, or he believes his own propaganda, along with the worshiping zombie crowds that fill his teleprompter driven drivel.

After much thought, I did find it appropriate to thank Obama for a whole litany of accomplishments and deeds performed by the Self-Anointed One.

• Thank you Obama for an unemployment of 9.7%, and real unemployment (workers who stopped looking, marginally attached workers, and underemployed workers) of 17.5%.
• Thank you Obama for siding with Marxists Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez when Honduras President Manuel Zelaya decided to throw out the Constitution of his country and stay in power past his term before being unceremoniously marched out of the country by the military which fulfilled its oath, stepped back, and allowed the Honduran Congress to appoint a successor. Those inconvenient Constitutions sure can be a bitch to budding Marxists.
• Thank you Obama for your America apology tour.
• And for trillion dollar bailouts, budgets, deficits.
• Let’s not forget heavy government regulation that further stifles our economic recovery. Thanks a million Mr. President.
• And we can’t forget to thank you for supporting tax increases at all income levels.
• Or indicating you have no idea how basic economic theory works.
• And a big shout out for insulting our intelligence. We know if you increase taxes on small business (what you call the wealthy), big business (such as oil), then everyone, including middle class America, end up paying the tax. Which means we should also thank you for:
• Showing us you would be a horrible contestant on Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?
• Thank you Obama for selling out our children’s future and attempting to enslave them to a bloated government.
• For the nationalization of many industries, including automotive and health.
• For undermining the CIA and our military by publishing documents that reveal our interrogation techniques.
• For canceling important weapon systems
• For bowing, and bowing, and bowing ad nauseam to world leaders like an impotent second class citizen unworthy of manhood.
• For weakening this country by providing terrorists the same legal protections as U.S. citizens.
• For omitting “Islamic Terrorism” from security documents while allowing the Department of Homeland Security to publish reports labeling soldiers and conservatives as potential right-wing extremists.
• For stonewalling on the Fort Hood massacre investigation:
• For creating a shadow government of czars who are radical Marxists and crooks.
• And lets not forget to thank you for alienating Israel, our only real ally in the Middle East, while fostering a potentially explosive situation in that region. Bully for you.
• An I am sure that many in Iran would love to join us Americans in thanking you for turning your back on Iranian protesters while they were slaughtered.
• While we are at it, thanks in advance for assisting Iran in creating a nuclear warhead. Awesome!
• And thanks for helping me win that bet. It is possible for a President to be worse than Jimmy Carter.
• But most of all, thank you for pulling this country together in opposition to your policies; for making us stronger and setting the stage for a comeback of epic proportions for fiscal conservatism as happened after we were subject to four years of Jimmy Carter. Of course, you won’t be thanking us for that, not when your explicit goal is weakening and destroying the greatest nation on this planet.

So thank you in advance for failing – something I guarantee will happen.

In other news and opinion

Obama mocks, we remember

Dems fall into their own Pay-Go trap

Obama mocks tea partiers: You should thank me for cutting taxes

Obama Claims to Be “Amused” by Tea Party Rallies; Thinks Protesters Should “Thank” Him

Joe Klein: Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are guilty of borderline sedition

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Brion McClanahan writes on the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution:

When Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter signed HO391 into law on 17 March 2010, the “national” news media circled the wagons and began another assault on State sovereignty. The bill required the Idaho attorney general to sue the federal government over insurance mandates in the event national healthcare legislation passed. The lead AP reporter on the story, John Miller, quoted constitutional “scholar” David Freeman Engstrom of Stanford Law School as stating that the Idaho law would be irrelevant because of the “supremacy clause” of the United States Constitution.

In his words, “That language is clear that federal law is supreme over state law, so it really doesn’t matter what a state legislature says on this.” Now that Barack Obama has signed healthcare legislation into law, almost a dozen States have filed suit against the federal government, with Idaho in the lead. Battle lines have been drawn. Unfortunately, the question of State sovereignty and the true meaning of the “supremacy clause” may be swallowed up in the ensuing debate.

As more states are joining in, it is worth noting that so-called constitutional scholars do not really exist. The constitution is not a very difficult document to understand. The real meaning of the phrase “constitutional scholar” should be replaced by “constitutional case law scholar”. However, a close look at what such a scholar actually knows about the origins of the constitution and what the founders intended it to mean makes it abundantly clear that many so-called scholars are not, in fact, scholars in the sense of understanding both the foundations and subsequent evolution of the document’s impact on this country, nor modern deviation from the original intent of the founders. One by-product of the modern study of constitutional law, is that for many in the field case law and precedents are primary while the foundations and history of the document are glossed over or entirely ignored. What does that tell us? It tells us that, since the foundations have been mired and replaced by 200 years of nationalist judges, many current scholars in in the field are actually completely clueless. Ask them about the Marshall Court around 1810 and onward and you will get a list of cases along with commentary, but mention that it was Marshall who took the sound defeat of nationalists at the Philadelphia Convention and turned it into a victory and you will be met by a blank stare or a nationalist talking point that exposes the naivety of the speaker. You also will not hear any mention of why America in 2010 looks a lot like America in 1776 in reference to the many being lorded over by the few. Brion McClanahan continues (emphasis mine):

Engstrom’s opinion is held by a majority of constitutional law “scholars,” but he is far from correct…

…The so-called “supremacy clause” of the Constitution, found in Article 6, states, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding [emphasis added].”

The key, of course, is the italicized phrase. All laws made in pursuance of the Constitution, or those clearly enumerated in the document, were supreme, State laws notwithstanding. In other words, the federal government was supreme in all items clearly listed in the document.

As stated earlier, the constitution is not a difficult document. So grab your nearest copy and look for the words “national healthcare” or any synonymous phrase. The fact you will not find such working indicates national healthcare is not one of the enumerated powers of the federal government. How embarrassing for Engstrom. Of course, that does not stop him from continuing to display a complete ignorance of the constitution. Read the whole article. Here I wish to point out a few other pertinent items (emphasis mine):

By the time the Constitution was debated in the several State ratifying conventions in 1787 and 1788, the “supremacy clause” galvanized opponents of the document. The Constitution, they said, would destroy the States and render them impotent in their internal affairs. The response from proponents of ratification illuminates the true intent of the clause. William Davie, a delegate to the Constitutional Convention from North Carolina and proponent of the Constitution, responded to attacks levied on the “supremacy clause” by stating that:

This Constitution, as to the powers therein granted, is constantly to be the supreme law of the land. Every power ceded by it must be executed without being counteracted by the laws or constitutions of the individual states. Gentlemen should distinguish that it is not the supreme law in the exercise of power not granted. It can be supreme only in cases consistent with the powers specially granted, and not in usurpations [emphasis added].

Davie wasn’t alone in this opinion. Future Supreme Court justice James Iredell of North Carolina argued that, “This clause [the supremacy clause] is supposed to give too much power, when, in fact, it only provides for the execution of those powers which are already given in the foregoing articles….If Congress, under pretence of executing one power, should, in fact, usurp another, they will violate the Constitution [emphasis added].”…

…Ultimately, the three most powerful States in the Union, New York, Massachusetts, and Virginia, demanded that a bill of rights be immediately added to the Constitution; near the top of those recommended amendments on every list, a State sovereignty resolution. These ultimately became the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Clearly the intent of this amendment was to mitigate any design the federal government had on enlarging its powers through the “supremacy clause.” If the power was not enumerated in the Constitution and the States were not prohibited by the Constitution from exercising said power, then that power was reserved to the States.

The crux of the article that will shape the debate as ObamaCare lawsuits wind their way to the Supreme Court is well articulated (emphasis mine):

Several other constitutional “scholars” have weighed in on the debate in the last week, and each has invoked the “supremacy clause” to defend their opposition to State action against healthcare. Duke Law Professor Neil Siegel went so far as to suggest that the States are not reading the Tenth Amendment correctly. In perhaps the most outlandish statement of the debate, he also said, “Any talk of nullification bothers me because it’s talk of lawlessness.”

I guess Mr. Siegel has failed to consider that Idaho bill HO391 was passed by a legitimate legislative body elected by the people of the State. That would make it lawful.

Brion McClanahan recalls a very telling quote by a great patriot:

Of course, this debate ultimately boils down to loose interpretation verses strict construction. Thomas Jefferson had the best line on this issue.

When asked to read between the lines to “find” implied powers, Jefferson responded that he had done that, and he “found only blank space.”

Herein lies the crux of the matter – the blank space. The blank space that has been filled in for 200 years by those who would create an ecosystem ripe for the growth of tyrannical rule and contempt fo the unwashed masses. How else does one explain the lucre and arrogance of Congress and the President force-feeding ObamaCare to an unwilling public? The burning question is, will the Supreme Court side with the other two branches?

For two centuries the judicial branch acted the enabler to the Congressional addiction to power. Two centuries to grant Congress virtually unlimited powers. Two centuries for a judiciary promising to uphold the constitution while crossing two fingers together behind their collective backs. Each finger represents the usurpation of powers that belong to you and me. One finger is the Supremacy Clause and one is the Commerce Clause. It will be very telling as ObamaCare lawsuits make their way through the maze of the court system to see if the judiciary will finally imply it understands its own role in shredding the constitution or whether they will continue to conspire with the executive and legislative branch in a triumvirate of tyranny.

This battle will prove once and for all whether tyranny rules our land. I doubt it will resolve the issue of state’s rights vs. nationalism. An entire compendium of cases since 1810 would need to be undone and power wrested from the federal government either by the people along with their states, or by the people under their own power through non-violent passive-aggressive massive civil disobedience. My money is on that later requirement.

Highly recommended article: What Would Jefferson Do? Nullify Now!

More news and opinion:

Dean: Of course ObamaCare is wealth redistribution!

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center provides a peek at how just how ObamaCare can be stopped. Before continuing, keep this quote from Gandhi in mind:

40,000 British troops cannot force 300 million Indians to do what they will not do.

Power in numbers. If Americans don’t want ObamaCare, we don’t have to accept it. We have been conditioned that we must accept it, or that we must rely on the Supreme Court or Congress to save us, but what if the problem is the Supreme Court and Congress? What then? Micheal Boldin provides the answer:

Now that Heath Care legislation has passed, the obvious question for opponents is this: Now What? My answer is best summed up with just one word:

Marijuana.

No, I don’t mean that you should go out and smoke away your anger and frustration. Instead, you should feel empowered. The best way to explain this is by telling the story of a disabled mother from Northern California.

ANGEL’S STORY

Angel Raich has been permanently disabled since 1995. She has an inoperable brain tumor, a seizure disorder and other serious medical conditions. In 1997, her doctor felt that marijuana would be an effective medication.

Angel used homegrown marijuana, and she and her physician claim that it’s helped significantly. You may not agree with Angel’s choice, but it’s one made in accordance with California state law, which allows for such use. The federal government, however, has not shown much respect for state laws in recent decades, and chose to take action. After DEA agents seized and destroyed all six of her marijuana plants, she sued to stop them from doing so again.

The suit went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in Gonzales v Raich, Angel lost. The 2005 ruling made clear that the federal government did not recognize state laws authorizing the use of marijuana – in any situation.

The culprit here is the Commerce Clause, first defined in loose terms by Chief Justice John Marshall in the 1824 case of Gibbons v. Ogden. Justice Marshall is famous for his legislating from the bench and turning the defeat at the Philadelphia Convention of the nationalists, who believed in a strong central government with powers over the states, into a victory. Future Supreme Courts would take even more license with the Commerce Clause to grant Congress virtually unlimited powers – even under so-called conservative Chief Justices and conservative courts.

Mr. Boldin continues:

THE COMMERCE CLAUSE

The court ruled that control over a plant grown and consumed on one’s own property was authorized under the “Interstate Commerce Clause” of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution empowers Congress to “regulate…commerce among the several states.” It has never been amended.

Like any legal document, if the words of the Constitution mean today what they meant at the moment it was signed, we must understand just what those words meant at the time of its ratification…

…With this in mind, the Supreme Court, which is not a set of nine infallible gods, ruled incorrectly. But rule, they did. Thus, all three federal branches agreed that State-level laws allowing marijuana were a no-go. In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas gave a stark warning:

“If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption…then Congress’ Article I powers…have no meaningful limits. Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns, or any number of other items, it may continue to appropria[te] state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce.”

If this is starting to make a bit of sense, it should. The Supreme Court ruling should have ended the matter, right? Even with the incorrect assumption held by most Americans that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the constitution it did not. More than half a million people are registered users of medical marijuana, with millions more unregistered. So who is the final arbiter of the constitution? The states are, as our founders clearly wished it to be. Remember the nationalists were thumped at the Philadelphia Convention, it was only Marshall’s legislating from the bench that began to form the illusion the Supreme Court was all-powerful. Mr. Boldin continues:

RESIST DC

Even though she lost the case, Angel indicated she’d continue to use marijuana. At the time of the ruling, there were 10 states that had such laws. Not one of them has been repealed. Since then, another 4 states have passed similar laws, and many others are considering them, including South Dakota, Kansas, and New Hampshire…

…What’s been the result? The federal government will occasionally arrest some high-profile users, but taken in the perspective of the multitudes consuming the plant, the threat is quite low.

And, in mid-2009, recognizing a need for “efficient and rational use of its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources,” the Justice Department announced that it would back off the prosecution of medical marijuana patients even further.

Now it’s time to segway into the health-care arena. What, pray-tell, does the above have to do with ObamaCare? It’s the lesson, actually that, as Mr. Boldin states:

When enough states pass laws defying federal laws, and enough people actively defy them too, D.C. simply doesn’t have the manpower to arrest and prosecute all of us.

Many of us are relying on a political solution from Washington to solve our problems. Or perhaps we are putting our hope the Supreme Court will come to the rescue and not interpret the Commerce Clause in some novel way that will increase the power of Congress to control our lives to stunning new heights. For those who place their hopes in such entities I only have to say, good luck. Past experience dictates that such hopes are sure to be dashed, and even if a battle is won, the war will be lost until the people take action and not rely on the power of others to do the work they need to do. Never in history have people been rescued from tyranny by the very enablers of that tyranny, and the march to big government will always continue under both parties. It is only a matter of degree. As Dr. Larry Hunter points out in Who Lost Healthcare? (emphasis mine):

What do Harlem Globetrotters basketball, professional wrestling and American politics all have in common? They are FAKES…

…The sad thing is, most conservatives actually think American politics is a real contest between different visions and alternative practical courses for America. Au contraire. Politics in America today is between two Establishment political parties that need each other as foils—gotta’ have that “bad guy”—egged on by the mouth-radio carnies. The dirty little secret is most of the participants fundamentally agree on the need or the practical necessity of perpetuating and growing the welfare/warfare state. They differ only in degree, not kind.

The proof of this assertion is unambiguously clear: Government in the United States continues relentlessly to get bigger, more intrusive and oppressive no matter which political party is in control, no matter for how long. Yes, each party proceeds at a different pace and by different routes but they all herd us to the same destination nonetheless, confirming Thomas Jefferson’s observation that, “The natural tendency of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield.”…

…The joke is on those Americans who actually believe a restoration of limited government, individual freedom and personal liberty are the objectives of either political party. The poor saps have spent their entire lives paying the full price of admission to cheer on the Washington Generals. How pathetic is that? Pitiful.

So, when the history of the government takeover of healthcare is written and the question asked, “Who lost healthcare?” the answer will be unambiguous: “Republicans, who failed to take a political risk and refused to employ every parliamentary device at their disposal to stop ObamaCare from being enacted into law.”

Conservatives, irate at the Democrats, will make heroes of Republicans for fighting the good fight rhetorically and overlook their unwillingness to act. They will flock to the polls and throw lots of Democrats out of office. Republicans will claim a mandate—but a mandate to do what, slow the boil?

So where do we go from here? Back to Michael Boldin and nullification:

This kind of activism – while it clearly carries personal risk – should be a real blueprint for people that have been consistently unable to find constitutional relief in Congress, the Executive, or the Courts.

Marijuana users: Love ‘em or hate ‘em, but show some respect for them, as many have suffered greatly for doing what they believe is right. People who believe strongly about other issues, like health care mandates, would do well to learn from them.

What should be done about federal control over health care? The same thing that should be done for every unconstitutional federal law, regulation, or mandate – Nullify Now!

If the politicians in Washington fail us (and there is already plenty of backtracking on promises of repeal) and the Supreme Court rules against the people, what then? By ignoring a perfectly good approach to taking back power from a tyrannical few in DC, we have only ourselves to blame. By putting our eggs in the federal basket and failing to pressure our state leaders to pass laws nullifying ObamaCare and coordinating with other states to do the same, we miss a real opportunity. An opportunity to send a message to Washington that, even if the Supreme Court sides with you and even when you back down from pledges to protect the people, we can still win. There are millions of us and only a few of you. We refuse to accept your tyranny and we do so without firing a single shot. All we have to do is ignore you, just like you ignored us.

Be sure to check out other posts at the Tenth Amendment Center that describe how legislation is shaping up, what local Sheriffs should do, how a state can react when Congress threatens to remove federal funds, and other items. Also, check out Nullification – Our Constitutional Option.

Remember, sometimes if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Relying on politicians and judges to save us is a perfect example of why this little pearl of wisdom is still good advice.

In other news:

Andrew Breitbart Offers $10,000 to United Negro College Fund

Some Republicans Still Don’t Get It

AP: Say, guess what we just found in ObamaCare!

Keep the Hopenchange: Personal incomes drop

ObamaCare: What the GOP could (but probably won’t) do now

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

Evil is not an abstract concept. It is not some ephemeral quality difficult to define or subject to the whims of relativism. It is not just an act, but the intent behind the act.

It is evil to steal the fruits of labor derived from the sweat of the body or the effort of the mind and give it to another. This is not liberty; it is not freedom; it is not American. I choose to give to those less fortunate. In doing so, I exercise my right to decide the distribution of my efforts. I reject the very idea of a few who would lord over me, full of such contempt and drunk on power their twisted logic excuses and rationalizes their actions. Only a sick mind belongs in such a pit of malfeasance.

Should I ever be held in contempt of such vultures, I proudly would stand up and identify with a shout the charge to be fact, for indeed I have nothing but contempt for the leeches. They do not own me, though they will try. They do not honor my rights, though they claim to. They are, to their very core, evil.

It is those who practice that act of theft in the pursuit of power, those that enslave the populace to their so-called charity, who need us. We are free. We live in the spirit of liberty. We do not need them. I deem their actions unlawful and abhorrent. Even their might will not frighten me into submission.

Who are these lowly thieves they should defy the wolves of liberty? Do not fear them, for even in their sickness they are aware of our power and are afraid. They can break neither you nor I, and this fact troubles them and defines them by their fear of us. Right is on our side, our spirits bright with the shining light of liberty. Their darkness cannot withstand even the smallest of candles among us. Together, the evil of socialism they represent will perish, and all signs of their foulness swept into the dustbins of history. By will, by conviction, and by moral rightness shall we prevail. They are like leaves and will blow away with the slightest wind – the smallest of breezes. No arms will be required, no martial weaponry, but only the weapons of the mind. Our enemies are feeble. If we recognize and own this fact, their weakness will be no match for our resolve.

I hereby swear to work tirelessly in the effort to vanquish the ideology of thieves, the evil of socialism, and the enemies of liberty; to aspire to bring this nation back to its constitutional foundations where the power lies in the individual. I vow to honor the ideas of empowerment and independence, to make them terms of common use and action, understood in their original context and intent. I vow to buttress such thought through sheer will and determination, and in doing so drive the vultures far away. I vow to set the foundation of such thought so when evil dares to return in any guise, its unsightly countenance will be turned away once again by those who come after me.

Newsworthy:

Obama to sign the Demcare House of Cards

Meet Bart Stupak’s Republican challenger

If you want to go fast – go alone. If you want to go far – go together.

I’m not counting on these bozos to repeal ObamaCare, even with a 2/3 majority. It just is not going to happen and is part of the denial phase of losing our liberties to contemptuous tyrants. It will soon become apparent this approach is a non-starter. Looks good, sounds good, is inspiring to think about it, but it ain’t gonna happen, so let’s look for the real solution. You will find it in the 10th Amendment.

Kill the bill – invoke the tenth, written by the Tenth Amendment Center and fresh off the presses offers the real solution, along with some eye opening insights:

Lenin said:

“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism” and “The goal of socialism is communism.”

Chew on that one for a bit.

The article continues:

Thomas Jefferson said:

“Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force”

That is, unless we wish to give them that power over us. Even a cursory reading of not only the Constitution, but also the context of the times it was written in make this clear. The article continues:

Ignore Washington D.C.

They are ignoring you, return the favor. In his speech on Saturday, Obama referred to you as “astroturf”. In political terminology that insinuates that you were paid for your phone calls and someone picked up your travel expenses and bought your dinner for your troubles. That’s one way they ignore you. Another way they ignore you is to use an unscrupulous process to pass an unconstitutional health care bill that changes the foundation of your country overnight.

If you’re like me, when you call representatives, write letters or attend tea parties, you pick up the tab and sacrifice your own personal time in hopes that someone will listen. I’d much rather spend my time and money with my family, business or hobbies than hoping my actions will result in my federal representatives actually representing. And anyone that could have done anything about the health care bill is in Washington D.C., you can’t meet with them, you don’t know them and you cannot reasonably hold them accountable. How can you really expect them to feel any pressure to represent you? Yes, morally your expectations are valid because they should do the will of the people. Unfortunately, the reality is without the power to exert an opposing force, you will continue to be disregarded as a mere annoyance.

The later could not be more true. We are an annoyance and until we realize that, the politicians in Washington will continue happily along the path of political expediency and play on your emotions for their own political gain. Nowhere in their political calculus does their exist an iota of concern for you, unless expressing it so benefits them. Live it, learn it, and never forget it. If you want to win this, then concentrate on the one area where you actually can make a difference. Learn where the leveraged pressure is. Concentrate on the one area where a long-term solution is readily available to you. No band-aids, no wishful thinking, but hard work, perseverance, convictions, and liberty collide in the perfect storm of freedom.

Brian Roberts continues:

Ghandi had it nailed:

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. “

For the most part, the federal government has ignored any resistance to the health care bill. Tea Parties have been ridiculed as radicals of all varieties such as “tea baggers”, “astroturf”, “racists”, and “domestic terrorists”. But, they have never formally acknowledged the existence of this movement. Once we begin to focus our attention on the state governments, everything changes. The media will be unable to ignore a block of defiant states. Personally, you will be ridiculed as a “tenther” (I think this is pretty cool) but once states exhibit defiance it will not be long before the federal government shifts it’s focus to the states not the individuals. That’s when you will know that you are not being ignored anymore.

At a minimum, your state will be ridiculed as out of touch with reality, as constitutional rogues, racists, and more. The governor of your state and your state representatives will be positioned as little more than common rabble rousers and will be the target of incredible pressure to compromise. But this must be overcome before we can win and we must solidly stand with state representatives. Federal funds will be used to coerce states to comply as has been common practice for some time. This will be specifically painful with health care because defiant state’s federal funds will be used to finance compliant state’s health care. However, this cannot be allowed to stand for any significant amount of time so states must be influenced to pass state legislation that denies the federal government what they covet most, tax revenue.

From here on, resolve will be the key. Not just your resolve, but the resolve of the rest of the citizens in your state. So it’s our responsibility to educate neighbors and make sure the right state representatives are in place.

Get enough states to do this and we will win. The question remains, do we have the resolve as a people? Are we ready to be revolutionary like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi using non-violent passive-aggressive civil disobedience and constitutional nullification? We have been ignored, stepped on and spit out by Washington. Is it so surprising we would actually do something about it? At what point does one stop taking the insults to ourselves, the assaults to our liberties, and push back? I think the answer it clear. That time is now.

I have worked with these guys in the past and this strategy is the best chance we have of stopping ObamaCare. The exact same type of strategy saved us from ObamaCare last year:

After weeks of refusing to embrace the “obstructionist” label as a virtue, Senate Republicans finally saw the light and late last week began to use the parliamentary tools at their disposal to delay a final vote on health care.

Until then, with the exception of South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, Republican lawmakers had refused to use Senate rules and procedures to obstruct the passage of the health care bill being pushed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and run out the clock on Obamacare. Some prominent Republican senators and members of their staffs had even let it be known they actually believed passage of the Reid health care bill and enactment of Obamacare would benefit GOP candidates in the November midterm elections.

This GOP strategy of expedient complicity enraged the conservative base, roused talk radio show hosts and bloggers and even provoked a backlash from the chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Social Security Institute and the National Tax Limitation Committee joined with…to convey this outrage to the Senate Republican leadership through letters, e-mails and telephone calls from the grass roots to GOP senators’ offices.

Pass this on. The Patient Opt Out team includes Dr. Larry Hunter, former policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan, current CEO of the Social Security Institute, and one of the authors of the Contract With America. The strategy involves an email buy and are quite costly – $10,000 or more for one million email addresses – with the email creative directing the viewer to a page where they can fax all members of Congress.

Last year, this same approach lead to GOP obstruction in the Senate. Without the dedication and work of the groups listed above, the Scott Brown victory last year would have occurred AFTER the passage of ObamaCare.

Help kill ObamaCare now.

Fred Barnes’ eye-opening op-ed in the Washington post is a wake-up call to wavering Democrats and even those leaning yes or committed yes. The Pandora’s Box that is the current health-care reform legislation best be left with the lid on, wrapped up in chains, and chucked into the deepest depths of the ocean:

America will be in a constant health-care war if ObamaCare is enacted. Passage wouldn’t end the health-care debate. Rather, it would perpetuate ObamaCare as the dominant issue for decades to come, reshape politics, create an annual funding crisis in Congress, and generate a spate of angry lawsuits. Yet few in Washington seem aware of what lies ahead.

We only have to look at Great Britain to get a glimpse of the future. The National Health Service—socialized medicine—was created in 1946 and touted as the envy of the world. It’s been a contentious issue ever since. Its cost and coverage are perennial subjects of debate. The press, especially England’s most popular newspaper, The Daily Mail, feasts on reports of long waiting periods, dirty hospitals, botched care and denied access to treatments.

And the people of this country, contrary to what our dear leader continues to spout, are very tied into the process, understand reconciliation and the “Slaughter Solution”, and not liking what they see:

Democratic leaders believe the public doesn’t focus on the process of how legislation is enacted. But in this case they’re wrong. I’ve been amazed at how many people understand “reconciliation”—a process that allows budget and spending bills to pass in the Senate with only 51 votes, instead of 60. Many voters are also now studying the details of the “Slaughter solution,” which would allow the House to “deem” the Senate health-care bill to have passed without actually voting on it and then to vote through changes to the Senate bill. These legislative shortcuts are already infuriating ObamaCare’s opponents.

Also contrary to the Democratic leadership’s position is that ObamaCare will not go away as an issue – not know, not next year and not in 2012. Lawsuits, party platforms and campaigns that run on repealing or de-funding enough aspects of ObamaCare to virtually kill it, will drag this out and make it the issue. Senate comity will be all but destroyed with dire consequences and partisanship in government will reach new unimaginable confrontational heights. This bill is absolute poison to the system, exposes the slimy “inside the Beltway” machinations, and indicates to the American people the fundamental lack of fairness when a small group of people can control the lives of 300 million others, while showing contempt not only for the Constitution, but the people of this country, and the will and best interests of a majority of the electorate.

Power and a complete lack of reason has gripped the Democratic party, heralding their demise and the ultimate demise of ObamaCare. The people will not rest nor sit idly by to be lorded over by a bunch of power-hungry elitists so disconnected to the reality outside their bubble that some actually believe they know what is good for us better than we and are willing to destroy the best healthcare system in the world in the process. Take a look at the NHS. Great Britain has 60 million people. You are about to try an experiment with 300 million people with 1/6 of the U.S. economy. The law of unintended consequences is the real law under consideration of passing. It is also called Murphy’s law.

I’d seriously consider what your doing. The consequences of your actions will not ultimately lead to the enactment of ObamaCare – we will see to that in one way or another – and you will have fallen on your sword for an President and a leader who, in the end, look at you as a pawn they are all too willing to sacrifice. Their contempt for you should anger you, not motivate you to vote yes.

Things are changing, and the old rules are out. Those who make decisions based on the now antiquated habits and culture that is DC politics are in for a shocking surprise. The electorate is awake and watching. We know what’s going on and the rules have changed.

Tread very lightly.