Thursday, October 22, 2009


By Jim Beers

The US Attorney General has just announced that Federal laws regarding marijuana will no longer be enforced where States allow marijuana use. Like the administrative decisions by other Presidential appointees to not enforce Federal Immigration laws or even to not enforce The Federal Right and Constitutional wording regarding "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" in cities like Washington, DC or New York City or Chicago or states like Illinois, Wisconsin, New Jersey and Massachusetts: one can only be dumbfounded by the impunity and callous disregard for Constitutional jurisprudence exhibited by "elected officials" and their minions. All of this makes a shambles of Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution that states, "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Yet, when it comes to signing a UN Gun Treaty or a "Climate Change" Treaty, or when it comes to enforcing a prohibition against ANY abortion restrictions (parental notification, permission, school encouragement, etc.): these same "elected politicians" and their minions suddenly become Constitutional "extremists". In the case of Gun Rights and in the case of all the "Climate Change" implications in the proposed Treaties we will all be reminded about how a Treaty "shall become the Supreme Law of the Land" per Article VI of the Constitution as they develop a book of regulations that remake the USA into a copy of 1935 Germany or present day Venezuela. In the case of unlimited abortion, mere words constructed out of thin air (a "right to privacy") when uttered by a Supreme Court Justice are treated as etchings on stone tablets being carried about by Moses.
So what is going on? If a law is unenforceable or if a President and his minions choose not to enforce it (on what legal basis?) it should be repealed. As the current Administration decrees what laws will not be enforced it simultaneously is colluding with the Congress to politicize and control American society in ways that are Constitutionally illegal. For instance:
· Controlling the bonuses and pay levels of selected and growing segments of the economy.
· Threatening banks through government regulatory agencies like the FDIC to provide loans to unqualified minority applicants or to contribute significant amounts to minority organizations that helped elect the President in spite of collecting government funds that specifically prohibited any partisan political activity by such groups.
· Awarding Billions of dollars to select banks, investment firms and insurance conglomerates based on secret (political?) criteria with no public accounting on the disposition, use, and results of such public monies.
· Establishing precedents that destroy the Constitutional mandate of Article I, Section 9 that "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time" by additionally proposing to make said favored firms pay back certain funds and then for the Administration to merely reuse such funds ad infinitum.
· Buying auto companies and then operating them in partnership with workers' organizations.
· Eliminating certain businesses like car dealerships that either supported opposition candidates for office or did not contribute to the recently elected politicians.
· Proposing to take control of all health care, doctors, health workers, and hospitals to not only extend its unconstitutional extension of power over the economy and people but to reinforce its anti-life and anti-religious programs of abortion, family numbers control, withholding of care to the elderly and disabled as well as more Draconian policies such as have been in evidence in recent dictatorships and more Socialist western nations regarding euthanasia for the elderly, the sick, and the disabled.
· Proposing a "Cap & Trade" Treaty that will give the central government unprecedented control over every sector of the economy, all human activities, and unlimited taxing power to both collect massive revenues and favor political supporters like same-sex couples and childless couples that leave lower "carbon footprints".
· Targeting private citizens, media outlets, business entities, and academics for marginalizing and destruction because they oppose Administration policies. For instance, re-instituting the "Fairness Doctrine" to destroy Talk Radio and White House encouragement for supportive media to ignore media reports from opponents considered unfavorable to the Administration.
All of these unconstitutional expansions of Federal powers are identical to the actions taken by Communist dictatorships, Nazi tyrants, and current dictatorships like Chavez in Venezuela, Castro in Cuba, and Morales in Bolivia as they assumed all powers over everyone and everything and simultaneously assured their own unopposed lifetime position as ruler.
Politicians and supporters favored by the ruler will be quietly relieved of the burdens placed on the ruled. For instance:
· Does anyone think that rich regime supporters like Ted Kennedy would have been placed on a six-month "waiting list" or have been told he was too old or too sick to receive end-of-life medical care under the proposed Government Health Care takeover?
· Does anyone believe that powerful politicians would have to give up their New York City Gun Permits while they work to disarm the rest of us like Senator Schumer?
· Would any common man; be he middle class, white, or property owner; be un-prosecuted for carrying a loaded gun in no-gun cities like Washington, Chicago, and Boston like many minorities are or as US Senator Webb was when he carried a loaded gun across Washington, DC and into US Senate offices?
· Consider the "poor" Chancellor at the University of Illinois that recently "Resigned Under Pressure" for favoring "politically-connected" applicants over better qualified common-folk applicants. Why aren't he and other such "perps" prosecuted? Aren't the "politically-connected" in Illinois and Chicago the fruit of this system that the President and all his old chums from Ayres and Wright to Daley and Blagoyevich inherited and milked and are now introducing into national politics? Like Claude Rains in the 1942 movie Casablanca being "Shocked" by the gambling at "Ricks", we can all assume that these Illinois politicians are similarly taken aback by such nefarious activities at The State University.
Last night Lannie Davis, a mouthpiece for the Administration, was arguing for the worthiness of many of the travesties mentioned above. As others dismantled his arguments he was forced into a corner wherein he said "well elections have consequences". The clear implication was that an elected President can do whatever he wants, however he wants to do it. That is exactly what Communist dictators, Nazi Tyrants, and despots like Chavez and Mugabe maintain.
Communist dictators like Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Ho Chi Min obtained their "positions" at the point of a gun. Hitler, Mugabe, and Chavez obtained their "positions" in elections during times of economic crisis with the "assistance" of thugs and intimidation.
The current Administration was similarly elected in a time of "crises" as the President's Chief of Staff noted as "opportunities too valuable to waste". The Administration employed thugs and crooks ("ACORN" and associated "community organizers") that were specifically forbidden from such activity by virtue of the public funding paying for their activities yet were never prosecuted.
What is going on is very dangerous. Based strictly on historic and recent precedents, we are clearly heading into dictatorship and single party rulers not only like 1930's Germany and present-day Venezuela but also like Boston, New Jersey, Chicago, Milwaukee, and Detroit. All the foregoing are hard examples of where this Administration and Congress intend to take us.
The ONLY purpose of government is to protect society. Individuals and families can best control government when it is kept at the lowest possible level (a principle called Subsidiarity). Federal responsibilities ought to be limited to national defense and interstate commerce, while State governments and particularly local governments should be concerned with day-to-day things necessary to the common and local good.
Government will inevitably control individuals and families when power is allowed to migrate to the highest possible level. Power concentration will always attract amoral individuals that will scheme and connive to possess that power in perpetuity for their own benefit. Government growth and the concentration of power at the highest level must always be resisted and avoided for the result is always tyranny and dictatorship because by definition there are then no longer any enforceable limits on government.
Jim Beers 21 October 2009

No comments: