An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Archive for 1 February 2011
We have those who actually want to preserve it, REALLY do care about the future of the children, and their well being, know where rights come from and Who is really in charge. Then, we have those who want to destroy it through ‘social justice’, believe rights come from man, and have such a negative agenda that there would be no hope of our survival.
Which side do you see yourself on in this ‘war’?
Where are the windows?
What? You thought this was going to be about politics, in some form or another? Pfft! Nope. I want to know where the windows went.
Metal buildings are becoming more common. The economy has a lot to do with it, and money could be spend on more important things, like actually spreading the Word. Only see one itty bitty window though.
Now, the reason I bring this up, other than the fact it’s been bugging me for years, it occurs to me that as a church, shouldn’t we be open and welcoming to the world outside? To me, windows do that. Let the outside world hear the joy coming from the members inside. Let everyone hear the songs of praise, voices raised to His Glory. Isn’t joy a lot more welcoming than a building that is closed off?
Now, granted, there are church with windows. BIG stained glassed windows that probably cost more than some people make in a year.
But can ya open them? Can you let in the sound of God’s creations? The songs of birds? The blowing wind? Can you let the sounds of joy out?
There’s also a practical reason to have windows. What if the A/C poops out? Do you really want to bake in a closed up building? If there were windows, they could be opened!
Bring back the windows!
Another Victory on the Road to Repeal
“It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place. If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain for it would be ‘difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power’ and we would have a Constitution in name only.”
Read the whole column here.
The Constitutional Moment
Wall Street Journal
‘If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”
Federal Judge Roger Vinson opens his decision declaring ObamaCare unconstitutional with that citation from Federalist No. 51, written by James Madison in 1788. His exhaustive and erudite opinion is an important moment for American liberty, and yesterday may well stand as the moment the political branches were obliged to return to the government of limited and enumerated powers that the framers envisioned.
As Judge Vinson took pains to emphasize, the case is not really about health care at all, or the wisdom—we would argue the destructiveness—of the newest entitlement. Rather, the Florida case goes to the core of the architecture of the American system, and whether there are any remaining limits on federal control. Judge Vinson’s 78-page ruling in favor of 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business, among others, is by far the best legal vindication to date of Constitutional principles that form the outer boundaries of federal power.
Read the whole column here.
How Far Can Congress Really Go?
In news stories about Obamacare, the usual journalistic formulation is, “This will be,” “That will be,” “Citizens will,” “Companies will,” etc.
The assumption is that you will, or he will, or whoever will, because as duly enacted and signed into law, Obamacare will — that word again — descend on us at a date certain. A more cautious formulation would be “would” — the subjunctive case. Maybe, maybe not, is its meaning.
I have no quarrel with the journalistic predilection for assuming that what Congress enacts will go into effect. From the looks of things, nonetheless, the state of Obamacare is subjunctive with a capital “S” — the latest indication being the U.S. district court decision this week in Florida, which struck down the whole law as unconstitutional and void.
The mandate to buy health insurance exceeds congressional authority under the power to regulate interstate commerce, says Judge Roger Vinson in a case brought by governors or attorneys general of 26 states. Nor does Vinson buy into the argument that the Constitution’s “necessary and proper” clause confers authority on Congress in this instance to set up so vast and far-reaching a scheme. With no language to “sever” an unconstitutional portion of the law from the law as a whole, the scheme as a whole has to go.
Read the whole column here.
A Bridge Too Far
by J. D. Longstreet
Turns out we conservative bloggers are not as far off the beam as our leftist antagonists would have you believe, right?
We have been decrying ObamaCare as unconstitutional from day one. And now a US District Judge agrees with us.
Federal Judge Roger Vinson wrote of his decision: “I must conclude that the individual mandate and the remaining provisions are all inextricably bound together in purpose and must stand or fall as a single unit…. To now hold that Congress may regulate the so-called ‘economic decision’ to not purchase a product or service in anticipation of future consumption is a ‘bridge too far.’ It is without logical limitation and far exceeds the existing legal boundaries established by Supreme Court precedent.” (SOURCE)
Read the entire column here.
At one time, Congress actually followed the U.S. Constitution. Somewhere along the line, the intent got subverted, and we have now something completely different than the Republic, as it was established. ObamaCare is just one symptom of a HUGE problem, albeit, a really serious symptom.
What is the motivation?
1. Government control of persons and property.
2. The receipt of revenue, either by lawful action or extortionate conduct.
3. The protection of the system that provides for points 1 and 2.
4. The protection of persons who facilitate points 1, 2, and 3.