JUDGE ROBERTS LIKES THE CONSTITUTION....
By Ted Baiamonte Comments: bje1000@aol.com (09/22/05)
and the Democrats do not. Judge Roberts is a patriotic American and the Democrats are not. When Ronald Reagan famously said, "why do the Democrats always blame America first," he might have provided the obvious answer, i. e., they blame America first because they don't like America, or the Constitution on which it is based, and they act accordingly.
When Democrats take their oath to be on the Supreme Court they must pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. But how can they honestly do this when they don't like the Constitution? Simple: they can't; so they treasonously lie like Greeks bearing a Trojan horse. What they really mean when they take the oath is: "we will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution but only after we change it into something we like." This is the political version of, " I love you; now change"
In an absurd effort at polite dialogue the mass media tacitly covers up this egregious dichotomy in American political dialogue by referring to Republicans as "strict constructionists" and Democrats as "judicial activists." This is a brilliant stroke by the greedy mass media, who wish not to offend anybody so they can sell to everybody, and cowardly politicians, who wish to calm everybody so everybody will vote for them, in that it soothes the public into thinking the issues are arcane legal and philosophical ones that are too complex to understand, probably not important, and probably better off left to those boring, pugnacious people who speak and even enjoy legalese.
Probably no judicial issue highlights the patriot/traitor dichotomy better than the Interstate Commerce Clause. The Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution was designed to give Congress the power to resolve disputes between states so that commerce would flow freely between states for the express purpose of giving everyone, regardless of the state in which they lived, a higher standard of living. It was not designed to be a communist Trojan horse giving the Federal gov't a blanket power to govern and destroy all American commerce just as Soviet blanket power had destroyed all Soviet commerce. Yet here is how Lawrence Tribe a leading "judicial activist" sees the Commerce Clause: "Marshall indicated that... congressional power to regulate 'commercial intercourse' extended to all commercial activity having any interstate impact -- however, indirect."
And here is what Clarence Thomas, a leading patriot said about the commerce clause, "If Congress can regulate this [two women in California growing small patches of marijuana for medicinal proposes) under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything," including "quilting bees, clothes drives and potluck suppers." Thus, "the federal government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."
The judicial dispute between Democrats and Republicans reflected by the Interstate Commerce clause is not a trivial or arcane one, it is a basic dispute about the very idea of America. Republicans love the freedom from gov't that Jefferson defined for us in the election of 1800 while the Democrats hate freedom in favor of some ill defined Soviet style bureaucracy of ever growing proportions that one day, they hope, will tax enough and be large enough to create utopia on earth. Thankfully, soon to be Chief Justice, John Roberts, prefers freedom and the Constitution.
In a creative but highly disingenuous effort to defend themselves and further subvert the Constitution, Democrats have recently taken to calling Judge Roberts an activist. They reason that he is an activist in the sense that he seems willing to actively strike down liberal decisions made by liberal courts which clearly ignore the Constitution. Their obvious trick is to apply the term "activist" to him for actively defending the meaning of the Constitution when theretofore it had been defined to apply only to those who wanted to actively change the Constitutional.
CNN (often know as the communist news network) had a recent headline: "Toad case reveals Roberts as activist - Aug 4, 2005". The case in question involved a toad that the Congress sought to regulate, with the Interstate Commerce Clause, from possible extinction. Judge Roberts wondered at the absurdity of it by asking about how the Congress could regulate a toad when the toad resided in only one state and seemingly had no direct or indirect connection to Interstate Commerce, whatsoever? To the liberals, the toad mattered and Constitution did not. They wanted to save the toad; so contorting the Constitution to do so was perfectly legitimate. Let us all pray to God that we learn to care for Liberals as little as they care for the Constitution that has become the bedrock of all earthly civilization.
Ted Baiamonte -- comments: bje1000@aol.com
(Printer friendly version) Email: Ted Baiamonte Comments: bje1000@aol.com
