A Solution for Airport Scanners

Writes Dorothea: Here’s a simple solution to the controversy over full-body scanners at airports. Develop an enclosed booth that passengers step into but , instead of X-raying them, when the door closes, it will detonate any explosive device they have hidden on or in their body. The explosion will be contained within the sealed booth.…

Details

Targeting Earmarks

the anti-earmarks issue is a fraud. It’s a neocon trick, pushed by the Club for Growth and similar groups. It’s a way for the neocons to seem to be against spending while not actually being against it, and it’s a way to strengthen the presidential dictatorship against the legislature. Once again, earmarks are not spending; they allocate spending, to local pork rather than presidential pork. Ron Paul, of course, does it right. He is willing, as a representative, to request earmarks in appropriations for his constituents’ local projects, but votes against the spending itself.

Details

New Jersey Legislators Take on TSA

Introduced in the New Jersey State House and Senate are resolutions calling on the state’s congressional delegation to do something about constitutional violations by the TSA at our nation’s airports. Watch it: Good base positions on the problems – but the solution? It does not lie in asking the federal government “pretty please stop.” It…

Details

How Banning Sports Betting Undermines The Constitution

Though legal sports betting is prohibited in the US by Federal law, there has been in recent years a re-examination of its logic on a variety of levels. Part of this is a desire for new revenue sources, while part is simply a growing acceptance of gambling in all forms. Ultimately, the true injustice of banning sports betting lies in its contempt for the Constitution.

Unfortunately, the Congress of the United States has shown very little respect for the Constitution in recent years. Were it to abide strictly by the role outlined for it by the founding fathers, the Legislative Branch of our government would have to relinquish any number of its powers in a variety of areas. The primary problem with our Congress is that it has increasingly become a collection of career politicians rather than a body representative of its constituency. As a result, the overriding concern of the average Senator or Congressman is increasing the power that he is able to wield, and as a result the power that his body is able to bring to bear. Most problematic for you and I, every increase in power at the Federal level must be brought about by a usurpation of state and local sovereignty and, more alarmingly, personal liberty.

Details

Abolish the TSA

Writes Art Carden in Forbes: The Republicans control the House of Representatives and are bracing for a long battle over the President’s health care proposal. In the spirit of bipartisanship and sanity, I propose that the first thing on the chopping block should be an ineffective organization that wastes money, violates our rights, and encourages…

Details

Hillary Supports States’ Rights?

Speaking on a broad range of issues before an audience of young Australians, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton fielded a question on marriage equality by saying that while she has not supported marriage equality in the past, she does support civil unions and American states “taking actions that they believe reflects the evolution of attitudes…

Details

The Commerce Clause super precedent

Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney-General for the State of Virginia, makes a cogent point in his interview with CNSNews.com regarding the Commerce Clause of our federal constitution: Would the newly freed citizens of the 13 States have given the federal Congress and president more power to regulate their commercial activity in the Constitution of 1787 than the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain exercised over them when they were colonists? The answer of course is No. To quote Cuccinelli, ‘Otherwise, why rebel?’

Details

How We Can Reverse ObamaCare

With the establishment of judicial review in 1803 by Marberry vs. Madison, the Supreme Court became the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. Constitutional matters, such as whether the Second Amendment affirms the right to possess firearms to the individual or to some militia, ultimately wind their way to the Supreme Court where the meaning of the Constitution’s provisions is voted on and decided. This can take years.

The Court, however, is not infallible. Sometimes the Court reverses itself. The recent Kelo decision, for instance, begs for reversal. And some Court decisions are stains on American history, such as Plessy vs. Ferguson and the Dred Scot decision. So the Supremes are quite capable of error. Also, the Court can be intimidated, as happened under FDR with his attempts to pack the Court.

Despite their human frailties, justices are appointed for life. Only one Supreme Court justice has been impeached, Samuel Chase in 1804. The Senate acquitted Chase in 1805. Federal judges also rule on questions of constitutionality, and they, too, are appointed for life. Since 1789, the Senate has tried 14 impeached federal judges and removed six. This includes former federal judge Alcee Hastings, who was found guilty of corruption and perjury, and removed from office in 1989. (Since 1993, Mr. Hastings has served as the U.S. Representative from Florida’s 23rd district.) 

Details

Everything Has Its Place

You know, everything has its place.

They set up the giant Christmas tree in my city’s downtown this weekend.

That wasn’t the first premature dose of holiday spirit I’ve endured over the last couple of weeks. Last Thursday, one of our local radio stations began its 24/7 rotation of Christmas music. A nearby mall  hung up decorations in the parking lot almost two weeks ago, preparing for a pre-Black Friday sale. And a couple of neighbors lit up their houses over the weekend.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a Grinch and my friends don’t call me Ebeneezer. In fact, I love Christmas. It’s my favorite holiday.

Details