Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Senate’

Official portrait of United States Senator (R-KY).

Senator Rand Paul’s June 7, 2012 endorsement of Mitt Romney for President in 2012 came as no surprise to me, as I predicted as far back as 2009 that he wouldn’t be a constitutional candidate for the U.S. Senate, and my unpopular prediction was further vindicated with this endorsement, so why are so many others surprised by his decision?

On December 31, 2010, I wrote the article, The U.S. Senate regularly violates the law, about my shocking discovery that U.S. Senators were regularly conducting business and passing legislation without the constitutionally mandated quorum of a majority of Senators in order to conduct business.

In it, I responded with a January 9, 2011 comment about my assessment of Senator Rand Paul:

If Rand doesn’t know about that requirement and his duty regarding it, then he’s already no constitutional candidate in my books.

I stopped regarding him as a constitutional candidate once he came out with this November 2009 press release:

http://www.randpaul2010.com/2009/11/rand-paul-try-convict-and-lock-up-terrorists-in-guantanamo/

“Foreign terrorists do not deserve the protections of our Constitution,” said Dr. Paul. “These thugs should stand before military tribunals and be kept off American soil. I will always fight to keep Kentucky safe and that starts with cracking down on our enemies.”

If you read his words carefully, there is the possibility that it was a clever attempt to fool “law and order” conservatives into voting for him, so long as he has accepted being a one-term Senator in actually standing for the Constitution in this matter.

However, I suspect he meant it the way I first read it, whereby he regards the Constitution and Bill of Rights irrelevant to foreign “terrorists,” despite the Constitution being a contract between the people and their government, which defined the government’s powers and limits, including its dealings with foreigners.

Read Full Post »

Meet the Press

Meet the Press, America’s longest-running television show, isn’t still on the air due to superior research and guests.

On the September 4, 2011 episode, they played a video of one of Texas Governor Rick Perry’s campaign events, in which a nine year old asked him who was his favourite superhero.

At 26:35:

I’m gonna show you my age a little bit, Eric, because I don’t know any of the real current superheroes, but there was one back in my day named Superman, and Superman came to save the United States.

Too bad that Meet the Press researchers and host, David Gregory, failed to point out to their audience that Superman had recently renounced his U.S. citizenship, which I find to be very fitting symbolism for would-be President Rick Perry’s plan for America.

Then, at 30:55, presidential historian and frequent Meet the Press talking head, Doris Kearns Goodwin, declared about Perry:

Some of his stands — saying Social Security is unconstitutional, the income tax is bad, we go back to the Senators being elected by state legislatures. That was great, when we had Mr. Oil and Mr. Gas and you could buy your way into the Senate.

First of all, Social Security IS unconstitutional, since it’s not general welfare, but specific welfare. Even if you consider it to be general welfare, the general welfare clause was intended to be a restrictive clause, in limiting spending to Congress’ enumerated powers.

The income tax IS bad since its purpose was and is to insure an ever-growing and unpayable national debt.

And as for big corporations buying their way into the Senate in the past, as if that doesn’t happen even more now! Before, big corporations had to curry favour with a majority of the elected legislators of each of the several States, whereas now, they are able to buy off senators directly, and they have unlimited campaign contributions with which to do so since the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision.

Read Full Post »

Senate of Canada. Canada Parliament [Ottawa].

Stephen Harper, Canada’s Prime Minister since 2006, with a majority government since May 2011, has introduced so-called Senate reform legislation, calling for new senators to be term-limited to nine years, and to be elected by the people in their respective provinces, all under the guise of modernizing the Senate.

Given that he’s been Canada’s Head of Government since 2006, he really should know better that such a plan is unconstitutional, because he only plans to get the support of the House and Senate in passing it.

Part V, Section 42, Subsections (1)(b) and (c) of the Constitution Acts 1867 and 1982 states:

42. (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made only in accordance with subsection 38(1):
(b) the powers of the Senate and the method of selecting Senators;
(c) the number of members by which a province is entitled to be represented in the Senate and the residence qualifications of Senators;

Subsection 38(1) requires:

(a) resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons; and
(b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of all the provinces.

The argument is that it’s not an amendment to the Constitution. However, the Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of the land, and the institutions created by the Constitution can’t be changed by the institutions themselves, unless specifically authorized by the Constitution. Otherwise the creation is more powerful than the creator, and that’s non-sensical.

Read Full Post »

hatrickpenry

AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA

Recovering Austrians

Supporting recovering Austrian Economics addicts and their families

Real Currencies

Supporting People and the Commonwealth and resisting the Money Power by defeating Usury