What Constitutional Limits Are Left?
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." --Thomas Jefferson
"[A]t the risk of being a broken record [on ObamaCare], we remain focused on the wrong issue because conservatives and Republicans do not want any part of the right issue. Congress would not be able to tax anyone a penny if the subject matter on which lawmakers sought to spend the money raised was not within Congress's constitutional authority to address. Health care and health insurance are precisely such issues. So why does Congress get to raise taxes for and spend money on them? Because the country -- very much including Republican leaders and many conservatives -- has bought on to the wayward progressive premise that the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution empowers Congress to spend on anything it wants to spend on as long as there is some fig-leaf that ties the spending to the betterment of society. That, and not an inflated understanding of the Commerce Clause, has always been the problem. Republicans are afraid to touch this because, if you follow the logic, you'd have to conclude that Congress has no constitutional authority to set up a social security system, a Medicare or Medicaid program, or most of the innumerable Big Government enterprises that Republicans support while, of course, decrying Big Government. Republicans occasionally want to limit what government spends, but they don't want to acknowledge any constitutional limits on what government could spend -- that's what has gotten us to this point." --columnist and former DoJ attorney Andrew McCarthy
"In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision upholding the constitutionality of Obamacare, the principal choice now facing Americans on November 6 will be whether to keep Obamacare or to repeal it. The question is a binary one, and the answer -- expressed almost entirely through their presidential vote -- will go a long way toward determining the future course of this great nation. Yes, the economy is extremely important; and, yes, Obamacare is hurting the economy. But the reason why this election is the most important since the Civil War is not because Mitt Romney would make a far better steward of the economy than President Obama (though he would). Rather, it's because we are about to decide whether to put what will soon be one-fifth of our economy under the control of the federal government; whether to funnel previously unthinkable amounts of power and money to Washington; and whether this nation conceived in liberty will continue to prioritize liberty. It is understandable why President Obama has no interest in framing this election as a referendum on Obamacare. His party already suffered perhaps its worst defeat since the 19th century thanks to his centerpiece legislation. With the Supreme Court's ruling now behind him, he will have even less incentive to remind voters about Obamacare going forward. As far as he's concerned, the less the American people think about it, the better." --columnist Jeffrey H. Anderson
"Twenty new or higher taxes across-the-board [in ObamaCare] are bad for economic growth, bad for job hiring, bad for investors, and bad for families. A tax is a tax is a tax, according to Judge Roberts. But he forgot to say that if you tax something more, you get less of it. Presumably Mitt Romney will make this case in a major way. Hopefully he won't forget that Obamacare is not just a huge tax hike. It's also a major new spending entitlement that's already pegged at $2.5 trillion and will increase the federal debt burden much faster than the GDP expands. In other words, tax, spend, regulate, borrow. The Obama mantra. Romney must go after it -- time and time and time again. Bankrupting the economy is not exactly a job-creator." --economist Larry Kudlow
Opinion in Brief
"[Chief Justice John] Roberts' concern was that the court do everything it could to avoid being seen, rightly or wrongly, as high-handedly overturning sweeping legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president. How to reconcile the two imperatives -- one philosophical and the other institutional? Assign yourself the task of writing the majority opinion. Find the ultimate finesse that manages to uphold the law, but only on the most narrow of grounds -- interpreting the individual mandate as merely a tax, something generally within the power of Congress. Result? The law stands, thus obviating any charge that a partisan court overturned duly passed legislation. And yet at the same time the Commerce Clause is reined in. By denying that it could justify the imposition of an individual mandate, Roberts draws the line against the inexorable decades-old expansion of congressional power under the Commerce Clause fig leaf. Law upheld, Supreme Court's reputation for neutrality maintained. Commerce Clause contained, constitutional principle of enumerated powers reaffirmed. That's not how I would have ruled. I think the 'mandate is merely a tax' argument is a dodge, and a flimsy one at that. ... Perhaps that's not how Roberts would have ruled had he been just an associate justice, and not the chief. But that's how he did rule. Obamacare is now essentially upheld. There's only one way it can be overturned. The same way it was passed -- elect a new president and a new Congress." --columnist Charles Krauthammer
Let Your Voice Be Heard
Now that the Supreme Court has validated Barack Obama's unconstitutional power grab, it's time for Patriots around our great nation to rise up and make our voices heard. We at The Patriot Post need your help on the front lines, because the battle will continue.
There are just 2 days left to raise the remaining $152,000 for The Patriot Post's 2012 Independence Day Campaign. As of today, we are about 32 percent behind where we need to be to make budget. Please make a secure online donation today. If you prefer to support us by mail, please send your check with our printable donor form.
"One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it. ... [L]et's also look from the other side. The freedom the doctor uses. ... First you decide the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government, but then the doctors are equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him he can't live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go some place else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go. This is a freedom I wonder if any of us has a right to take from any human being. ... All of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man's working place and his working methods -- determine his employment." --Ronald Reagan
Re: The Left
"[Thursday], the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for his failure to provide subpoenaed documents to the Congressional Committee investigating the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal. ... In an interview with the New York Times last December, the Attorney General claimed the 'more extreme segment' of his numerous critics were really after the president and that he served as a viable substitute. 'This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,' he said, 'both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we're both African-American.' ... It is worth remembering that less than one month after he began serving as Attorney General Holder also called American 'a nation of cowards' regarding racial matters. All of this calculated odiousness regarding race is designed to obscure reality. ... Every effort to get at the truth has been stonewalled, first by the Attorney General, and now by president Obama himself, who issued an executive order to keep a lid on the worst government scandal since Watergate. Racism? Tell that to the parents of slain border agent Brian Terry. ... Is it racist to want to know who is ultimately responsible for their son's death? How about the Mexican civilians? Since most of them are non-white, why isn't the effort to suppress information regarding their murders -- numbering in the hundreds -- considered racist? ... Quite simply, these are American leftists who prefer protecting the careers of one or more high-level government officials, over bringing some kind of closure -- as in justice -- to hundreds of families whose lives have been shattered by bureaucratic malfeasance at best, and outright criminality at worst. And they're willing to play the race card to do it. Shame on every one of them." --columnist Arnold Ahlert
"In his essay, 'The Price of Liberty', Mark Alexander notes that his son has just entered the US Air Force Academy. Who in their right mind would join the military these days?"
Mark Alexander Replies: "Who"? Young Patriots devoted to Liberty who know that it is in 'the times which try men's souls' (T. Paine) that our country needs its right-thinking Patriots -- civilian and military -- the most. My son is neither a 'sunshine patriot' nor a 'summer soldier.' His motivation to serve is not for reward or accolade but for love of Liberty and our great country. He is a genuine Patriot who has made the difficult decision to answer the call to duty, and will honor his oath -- which our CinC and his socialist cadres violate daily. Frankly sir, those who retreat now, be damned! Pro Deo et Constitutione -- Libertas aut Mors!"
"Upon hearing the SCOTUS decision Thursday on health care, I decided to donate $100 to the cause. This is my first step in standing TALL for Freedom! I will not lose faith in God or Country! Keep up the good fight, and keep your powder dry!" --Dan
"I am one of the folks that is retired and have a limited income -- I guess you could call me one of the bottom 1 percenters. I fear that without the publications like The Patriot Post we will lose a very important voice. A voice that shows facts not rhetoric a voice that reminds us of what this country was built on, a voice of reason and common sense. I just donated what I could to help keep this publication going. Good Luck and keep 'em coming." --Charles
"You, like every organization of this kind needs donated money to survive. Each time I question it I come back to one thing. Your message is clear. The ethics and professionalism used in the pursuit of your mission are intelligent and sound. Frankly, its one of the few articulate, researched, and complete pushes for sound government I have seen. I don't have a lot of money to spare and I don't give to just anyone. But if I don't give then I'm a user. If I don't give then I am merely supporting a middle ground that is nothing but indecisive. Drive on. Your message is on track with my heart and mind and if a $100 is all that it costs me to put this sane message out, it's worth every penny." --Andrew
The Last Word
"Deep down, Obama supposes that if he says something entirely opposite from what he once said, or something so preposterous that it cannot possibly be true, or calls the Falkland Islands the Maldives, no journalist would dare to press him on the disconnect -- given the possible harm to the liberal agenda of our first African-American president. But after nearly four years, the game is about up. If the president lectures the Europeans with another 'make no mistake about it,' they will assume there are lots of mistakes about it. If he says 'in point of fact' to Vladimir Putin, then Putin can be sure there are no facts at all. If Obama addresses the American people with 'let me be perfectly clear,' then they assume he most certainly will be anything but transparent and concise. And if Obama compares a current event to one in his own past, then we can be sure that the earlier event never took place. ... What Barack Obama wants to be true, he says to be true; and we lesser folk can sweat the details when it is usually not." --historian Victor Davis Hanson
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team