I Am NOT the Property of the State

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Today’s Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision regarding the so-called Affordable Health Care Act is why this nation’s founders firmly declared that our rights come from our Creator and are not subject to the oft ill-conceived whim of any individual or group of people. Those groups include the SCOTUS.

If the government can require Americans to purchase things, then there is no limit to its control of our personal private property. We have seen, time and again, that the federal government – particularly this administration and its elected supporters -  will use any available method to coerce the American people. This would effectively end personal property.

The end of personal property is the beginning of slavery. This ruling means that individuals can be taxed into submission to the state.

That the SCOTUS was willing to consider the mandate as a tax to make it fit within the now-grossly-distorted confines of the United States Constitution, is outrageous. That this abomination of liberty-killing legislation ever passed is solely on the heads of Democrats in Congress. They are my sworn enemy and I will not forget.

I am NOT the property of the state and November is coming. I will make the Statists pay and ballots will flow like blood on November 6^th. It is ON!

Why 2012 Is Even More Important Than You Think

The Supreme Court of the United States
Image via Wikipedia

- Courting the Future of Our Nation: The US Supreme Court in Obama's Hands -

You think you're taking the 2012 elections seriously. You're already paying attention. You're months ahead of your neighbors and friends. This makes you, my friend, an opinion leader. So you need to grow into your burdensome responsibilities.

Four more years of a Presidednt Barack Obama and a US Congress that, regardless of majority, hungers for re-election at the expense of good policy may cause repercussions for decades.

What if the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) approves Obamacare? Four years to implement this resounding death knell for American business and it will be too late to make the needed corrections without a chain reaction of tumultuous results. Are you counting on the SCOTUS to save our bacon? Look, I don't care what your local Constitutional expert says, there have been enough questionable decisions in the past few years that I am dubious, e.g. Kelo vs City of New London, Connecticut.

And speaking of the SCOTUS, how many appointments will be made in the next four years? Are you ready to see an Eric Holder court? Four of the nine justices are septuagenarians. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg will be 79 in March just a few days after Justice Antonin Scalia turns 76 and just four months before Justice Anthony Kennedy's 76th birthday.

Elena Who and Obama's Sleight-of-Hand

Elena who? If you’re wondering that then you’re with the rest of us. Elena Kagan’s biggest plus for President Obama may be her lack of experience and, as importantly, her lack of a paper trail. Is she the best possible nominee? No, she’s not, and honest liberals would have to agree.

The other positive she offers to liberals is that she just turned 50 years old. Fifty is very young for a member of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Figure on seeing Elena Kagan for at least three decades.

The down and dirty on Kagan is that she has never been a sitting judge. TV’s Harry Anderson character from “Night Court” has more experience on the bench than Elena Kagan. As far as can be determined, she’s never even been a judge in traffic court.

I’ll let other conservatives discuss her ties with Goldman-Sachs and the blatant hypocrisy of liberals. I’ll also let them point out that she had not argued a case before the SCOTUS until she became Obama’s Solicitor General just 17 months ago. Her hostility to the military is on record, not just in her words but in her deeds, so I won’t go there either. So where am I going? Hang in with me a little longer.

Anyone who would justify approving Kagan based on her comparison to the others on Obama’s short list is short-sighted. There may be a group of Republican US Senators who would justify their vote for Kagan based on a comparison to those Obama has waiting in the wings. This would be a mistake. Are you listening Lindsey Graham and John McCain? How about you Maine senators?

I will never forget the Hell that Clarence Thomas was forced to suffer for his nomination and eventual confirmation. I don’t think the GOP has the stomach for that kind of attack on Kagan and it would prove fruitless. The soulless Democrats have always been better at lying and making personal attacks than Republicans. I don’t think I want us to go there anyway.

Elena Kagan is technically qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. Technically. She has a reputation for brilliance and as Dean of the Harvard Law School even hired some conservative law professors. She is more acceptable, at least on paper, than the others on Obama’s short list of nominees. So, is she the best we can do under Obama? Maybe, and perhaps that’s the problem.

The GOP cannot prevent Kagan from becoming a US Supreme Court Justice. Republicans do not have the numbers in the US Senate. Her alleged lesbianism will not be an issue in this day and time, but her lack of experience and the fact that her political views are outside the mainstream must be addressed.

Kagan is important because she lowers the bar and because she makes “the unacceptable” more acceptable to the public. She will be to the left of Justice Stevens and if the GOP swallows her without complaint then the shifting of the court to the left will begin to take a sharp left turn. Count on it.

Obama and his fellow Democrats do not anticipate losing their majority in the US Senate. They will count on gutless Republicans to accept whomever Obama nominates and Democrats will not hesitate to point to Kagan as the prime example of what Republicans find acceptable. Know this: failure to oppose Kagan ensures an even more liberal nominee in the future.

Republicans must fight and vote against Kagan to maintain the viability of an argument against any future nominations by Obama or future Democrat presidents. There are many arguments against Kagan that are legitimate and should be used to expose the fact that Obama’s ideological bent takes precedence over what is best for this country. To do this, Senate Republicans must be both brave and honest and they just can’t seem to do both at the same time. It is time they learned.

The question for the GOP members of the US Senate is this: Which do you love more: your country or the vapid, temporal praise of a liberal press? Before you answer, do allow Bob Bennett’s fate influence you. May it influence you down to your marrow and know that Utah will not be an exception if you fail in your duty. A filibuster will not work; but this is a case in which the “loyal opposition” needs to be loyal to its country and be in opposition to a nominee that would cause it harm.