“The Constitution…is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” –Thomas Jefferson
Once again, I am amazed at how prescient our Founding Fathers were, with regard to the present state of government in these United States.
Tag: liberty
How is it that some people can see the Constitution as a “living, breathing” document, that it must be adapted and interpreted in the light of our changing culture, and that we are able to find new rights and laws in the emenations of the penumbra of the aureola. And yet these very same people would have an absolute conniption if you suggested using the same approach on Roe v. Wade?
[Via Blogs4God, with the above title shamelessly ripped off from one of Roy’s commenters.]
Today President Bush posthumous awarded the Medal of Honor to Sergeant Paul Ray Smith of the U.S. Army. Sergeant Smith, in April of 2003, led a counter attack against members of Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard who had ambushed Army troops at the Baghdad Airport. His actions saved more than 100 men. Only three Medals of Honor have been awarded since the Vietnam War.
We are grateful for people like Sergeant Smith, and our hearts and prayers go out to his family, especially his children. Were that more of our countrymen of Sergeant Smith’s mind.
The Divine Tribunal — excuse me, I mean the Supreme Court of the United States, as it’s officially known — has decided, by a 5-to-4 vote, that executing criminals under the age of 18 is unconstitutional.
Where, you may ask, does the U.S. Constitution say that? Well, nowhere, actually. But the Tribunal doesn’t decide what’s constitutional by consulting the Constitution. That would cramp itsstyle.
[…]
Conservatives often accuse liberal justices of “legislating from the bench.” The charge is too kind. The problem isn’t that they legislate; it’s that they lie.
As seen on the Laura Ingraham web site this morning:
“At this point I would rather have a right-wing Christian decide my fate than an ACLU member.”
— Eleanor Smith, a disabled, self-described liberal agnostic lesbian
Two Republican Florida Senators could have saved Terry Schiavo’s life by voting ‘yes’ to a law. ‘The death penalty is an authorized punishment for capital crimes designated by the legislature’ (Article I, Basic Rights, SECTION 17, Florida Constitution), not the order of a county judge. The Florida House could have impeached Judge Greer (Article III, SECTION 17) for committing the felony (Florida Statute Chapter 825) of denying nutrition to a disabled person and multiple violations of guardianship (Florida Statute 744).
[…]Instead, George Greer, a black-robed priest-king, ordered that a deputy sheriff stand guard in Terry’s room and prevent her parents from giving her a cup of water. When Gov. Bush had an executive agency exercise their authority under Florida law, George Greer ordered — took executive authority — over all Florida authorities.
[…] The Roman Republic ended when Roman Law was contested by men who said, ‘the law is what I say it is.’ Civil wars begat dictators, more civil wars and dictators until the civilization was a shell to be broken by invading barbarians. American Civilization is at her Rubicon.
People seem to have forgotten that our constitutional republic’s system of checks and balances applies to all three branches of government. The judicial branch is not the final word on what the legislative and executive branches decide to do. The judiciary’s job is to ensure that what the legislative and executive branches are doing are within the boundaries of the respective constitution (federal or state). This is a job in which the judiciary has continually failed, nearly from the inception of our nation.
Likewise, the judiciary is not to engage in making up law from the bench, which has repeatedly done since the 1960s, up to and including the granting of constitutional rights never before voted upon and passed. Law is the purview of the legislature, not the judiciary bench. Rights are granted by God, not the government. The judiciary has no enforcement powers of its own; it has to rely on the executive branch to enforce any decisions it may make.
This is why I don’t see why the deputy sheriff in the Schiavo case mentioned above could not have been removed by a state trooper on orders from Governor Bush, should the governor had chosen to do so. That deputy does not answer to Judge Greer. He answers to the Sheriff, who answers either to the constituents who elected him, or to the elected county government which appointed him. The latter, in turn, is answerable to the people who put them in to office. Unless that deputy committed a crime, or is acting as a baliff in the judge’s courtroom, Judge Greer has no executive authority over him.
Judges are not the final arbiters of what the law is. They are the insurers that the law is followed, and that law does not trample upon stated constitutional rights. It is not their job to “interpet” the law; a good law should need no interpretation. I am continually amazed at how the words “Congress shall make no law…” has been applied to state and local governing bodies. Likewise, “…shall not be infringed” has become “…shall be infringed when deemed necessary.” No, it means shall not. Not then, not now, not ever. Not by a little or a lot. It means not at all. Yet we see it happen all the time, and by and large, as a populace, we do nothing about it.
If a law is unclear, then the judiciary should send it back to the legislature for a do-over. Other than that, they should keep out of the law-making business. The Constitution of the United States is plenty clear-cut on many matters. We have simply allowed what was once clear to our forebears to be muddied in our eyes.
[All emphasis throughout is added. –R]
If you’re not subscribing to MDJ or MWJ, you’re missing out on what is the very best and most comprehensive coverage of the ongoing Apple trade secret lawsuits. Matt Deatherage has worked to the point of failing health to deliver a knock-out of an issue this past Sunday that features the most intensive news of the cases I’ve seen. Matt & Co. deliver brilliant point after brilliant point, with so many good ones, I’d have to reprint the entire article to get them all in.
There is one example on why these cases are important for businesses, and why this is not about the political right to free speech as set forth in the First Amendment.
How many people would have looked twice at the original iMac if its Bondi Blue design had leaked out two months in advance, and competitors had already released similar-looking PCs? Apple actually introduced the machine at an event that everyone thought was for some of O’Grady’s long-rumored PowerBooks, and it was – plus “one more thing.” It’s said that only about 30 people within Apple knew what the machine looked like or that it would be announced that May day in 1998, and the press coverage conveyed the shock at Apple’s bold move.
The iMac’s design influenced everything from rival PCs to peripherals to pencil sharpeners, but because Apple kept its work secret until it was ready, all those products were rightly seen as iMac copycats. If Think Secret had leaked the iMac like it did the Mac Mini, would the world have seen those products are iMac knock-offs – or seen the iMac, the original idea that was stolen and released prematurely, as “just part of a trend?”
That sums it up. If the latter had happened, would Apple have recovered as quickly from its doldrums as it did? Would it have recovered at all? One could make the argument that the success of the iMac fueled the development of iTunes, the iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. Without the runaway success of the iMac, Apple as we know it today might not exist at all. That success could have been placed in serious jeopardy with rumors of the new machine leaking out.
If you could spend your money on only one Macintosh publication, I would recommend MDJ or MWJ. (I have no affiliation with these publications, or their parent company, GCSF, Inc., other than as a satisfied subsriber.)
“Congress doesn’t act unless there is a crisis,” one member of Congress once told me. That axiom is growing more apparent every day. Since many in Congress want to deny that we face crises in our economic infrastructure, the public must act now to remind them. We must demand urgent action to save our economic infrastructure. We must holler until they start to follow.
Instead of reading poll numbers, Congress must start reading thousands of e-mail messages from angry voters in their districts and states. Instead of listening to their political advisers, Congress must start listening to thousands of phone calls from people who are fed up with the income tax code, the dysfunctional Social Security structure, and runaway deficit spending. Instead of focusing on partisan politics and the next election, we must force Congress to focus on not leaving this mess for the next generation.
Let’s start with a few real simple and specific messages. Congress, replace the income tax code with a national sales tax modeled on the FairTax. Congress, pass legislation that includes optional personal retirement accounts for workers younger than 45 years of age using 4 percentage points of their payroll taxes. Congress, let’s enact a balanced budget amendment, since you have demonstrated that you cannot control your spending addiction.
Imagine what would happen if every member of Congress received this simple message every week from thousands of voters in their districts and states. Maybe then they will begin to see the same crises that we the people face every day.
One FAL member’s monologue follows: “Hello, my name is Mary Man-Hating-Is-Fun. I am 23 years old, and I am what a feminist looks like. Ever since I learned to embrace my feminist nature, I found great joy in threatening men’s lives, flicking off frat brothers and plotting the patriarchy’s death. I hate men because they are men, because I see them for what they are: misogynistic, sexist, oppressive and absurdly pathetic beings who only serve to pollute and contaminate this world with war, abuse, oppression and rape.”
Other members of the FAL wore scissors around their necks and sang a song about castration.
David Huffman, a writer for the UNH conservative paper “Common Sense” was outraged by the, shall we say, mr-ogyny of the event. Huffman was asked to leave the public university event during the open microphone session. Despite the fact that he wasn’t singing songs about castration, FAL members said he was making women feel uncomfortable. Perhaps it was because he wasn’t singing about castration that these women felt uncomfortable.
Huffman pointed out that nowhere did the posters advertising the event say “Women Only.” He was simply excluded from an event at a public university based upon his gender.
The evening of man-hating was simply an example of an extremist group promoting stereotypes and encouraging violence towards another group. This is the kind of thing that is tolerated in the name of campus diversity, simply because the targets are the “right” group (Read: Not blacks, women, or gays).
After hearing poems that talked about castrating men, read by women with scissors tied around their necks, Hoffman asked “How is this any different than hating African-Americans or Jews?” The answer is simple: It is no different in principle. But, of course, the FAL is not based upon principle. The organization is based upon blind hatred.
[Emphasis added on unlawful items. –R]
Terri Schiavo may well die. No good will come of it. Those who are half in love with death will only become more red-fanged and ravenous.
And those who are still learning–our children–oh, what terrible lessons they’re learning. What terrible stories are shaping them. They’re witnessing the Schiavo drama on television and hearing it on radio. They are seeing a society–their society, their people–on the verge of famously accepting, even embracing, the idea that a damaged life is a throwaway life.
Our children have been reared in the age of abortion, and are coming of age in a time when seemingly respectable people are enthusiastic for euthanasia. It cannot be good for our children, and the world they will make, that they are given this new lesson that human life is not precious, not touched by the divine, not of infinite value.
Once you “know” that–that human life is not so special after all–then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.