It looks like the general terms of the political debate between Left and Right are framed for the foreseeable future. We on the Right will argue the current administration’s policies are reckless on several counts; fiscal irresponsibility chief among them. The Left will slander us as racists, homophobes, xenophobes, misogynists, Islamaphobes, and whatever else they can pull out of their Politically Correct handbook of imagined horrors.
As one small example of what to expect, take the comment left on my March 26 posting by someone named Richard. At first I couldn’t figure out where he saw ‘bitterness’ and ‘anger’ in my writing style. ‘Sarcasm’ maybe - but ‘bitterness’ and ‘anger’? I have determined to be entertaining in this project (at least for those of you who share my sarcastic sense of humor). ‘Bitterness’ and ‘anger’ would never serve that goal. Then I started drafting this post, and ... I got it – I understood Richard. Poor, poor, Richard. His reasoning seems to be: LibertyAtStake opposes the policies of a president who happens to be black (well, half black, to be precise); therefore LibertyAtStake is a hate filled racist. The pathetically fallacious reasoning identifies Richard as a person in desperate need of public assistance designed for low IQ individuals.
I couldn’t explore this topic any better than Mark Davis does in this Dallas Morning News opinion piece - The dubious logic linking Tea Parties to racism.
The truth, of course, is the Left has launched this coordinated mass slander campaign because they are panicked by fear of the growing power of the T.E.A. Party message. And slander is the only card they have left, because they know they will lose on the merits of the arguments the T.E.A. Party patriots bring up – e.g. fiscal irresponsibility, government overreach, respect (or lack thereof) for the Constitution. The fun part is the T.E.A. Party Express is even now bearing down on them; and their panic should only mount as the climactic day of April 15 nears.
So, with apologies to renowned hippie and accomplished songwriter Neil Young, and also The Daily Caller’s Anchorman, I have adapted and modified certain famous song lyrics to stoke the fear now already growing in Progressive hearts.
“Ms. Palin and pitchforks coming,
We’re finally on the march.
This summer I hear the drumming,
No-vemb-er TEA Par-ty.”
The really good thing about the Left pursuing its unhinged slanderous narrative is the Left will be self-disqualifying itself from participation in the substantive public debate. IOW – the only discussion that matters now is between the right and the center. This discussion is coalescing around a realistic action plan that has two prongs:
1. Win back the House of Representatives in November 2010.
2. Use the power of the Appropriations Committee (“power of the purse”) to deny funding to newly created ObamaCare bureaucracies, or any of the many other abuses perpetrated by the Progressives in this session. (My personal favorite: The ‘If It Says Czar in the Job Title, It Is an Unpaid Volunteer Position’ Act of 2011.)
3. In November 2012 elect a president who respects the limits of the Constitution and/or a veto proof 2/3 congressional majority that also respects the limits of the Constitution.
4. Completely repeal ObamaCare in 2013. Begin governing the country within the limited government framework established by the Constitution, in 2013.
1. Challenge the constitutionality of the ObamaCare individual mandate in federal court. This Washington Times article provides a balanced report of the current status.
2. Dust off the 10th Amendment, and pass ‘Nullification’ laws in individual state legislatures. The Tenth Amendment Center is leading the charge.
There has also been some lively, patriotically motivated, discussion of possible Constitutional amendments. Since there are now 27 Amendments, the proposals are usually framed as the “28th Amendment.” Search the Internet for “28th Amendment” and you can perform your own comprehensive review. Some of the proposals include prohibiting individual purchase mandates (surprise, surprise); and old chestnuts like term limits, and balanced budget dictates.
What surprises me is the lack of serious talk about calling a Constitutional Convention. This seems to me to be an egregious lack of imagination. Really – let’s think outside the box for a minute, people. The Founding Fathers, in their infinitely amazing brilliance, gave us a methodical and organized process for periodically refreshing the relevance of the Constitution. It’s called Article V:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
“…or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States…”
If I’m reading the public mood accurately, getting 34 state legislatures on board to convene a meeting on the subject of Constitutional amendments is not so far-fetched. I could see it being pulled together in a year’s time, or less. Maybe some enterprising state-level professional politician could start a Facebook page, or something.
I’m thinking about making my next post a careful examination of amendment proposals that could be introduced and debated in such a convention.
Hot Pick Of The Late Night
39 minutes ago