827. Wynken, Blynken, and Nod - no, Lauren, Junior, Ted, and Andrew

Last week was a series of misfires for at least four American politicians. Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, R-CO3, and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, featured herself posing in front of a small arsenal of guns, was quoted saying we weren't "meant to rewrite parts of the Constitution" somehow forgetting the Second Amendment is, in fact, an amendment - a rewrite.

Then there's Donald Trump, Jr., who, while trying to defend one Texas politician during the Texas ice storm and energy debacle, misidentified another, implying the governor of Texas, Greg Abbot, is a Democrat. Rest assured, Junior, he isn't and we wouldn't have the incompetent fool on our side. Maybe Junior needs to study up on his list of governors. Presently among America's governors, among the states 23 are Democrats and 27 are Republicans. Among the territories, three are Democrats and one is a Republican. The Puerto Rican governor's party, while not a part of the Democratic Party, is affiliated with it.

The Texas politician Junior was trying to defend was the Canadian Cuban Senator Rafael "Ted" Cruz, who can now add Cancun to the list of descriptors ahead of his name. While Texas was frozen due to the ineptitude of its political system with regard to energy regulation, frozen to the point of people dying, Ted and his family decided to skip town and cross the border (and then some) for some "fiesta y siesta" in sunny Cancun, Mexico. The escapade was quickly brought to the attention of most of America and, with the exception of diehard Trumpers, frowned upon. Cruz has changed the details of his trip twice but is making up for it with a lengthy set of photo ops of him carrying bottles of water and boxes of sandwiches in well-staged events across Texas, coming to the rescue of the people he was elected to serve, long after President Biden had declared an Emergency at the request of Governor Abbott, and long after rescue and support efforts were well underway by his 2018 opponent, Beto O'Rourke, as well as over $4M of support being raised by Congresswoman AOC, of The Bronx, NY, while he was south of the border. Cruz is a very poor excuse of a public servant.

Finally, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has been one of the Democratic darlings of the Covid-19 pandemic, has lost his lustre over allegations concerning both the lack of proper reporting of nursing home deaths during the pandemic and some systemic racism in the vaccine delivery since vaccinations have begun. Both the FBI and the U. S. Attorney's Office are reportedly looking in on Cuomo's actions. People have forgotten that Cuomo, who most assuredly won on his father's name, came under attack in his 2018 Primary from actress and activist Cynthia Nixon as being the "Corporate Candidate." In a 09/10/2018 post on my page, just ahead of the Primary, I mentioned that while I didn't expect Nixon to win, that she was hoping to bring out new voters, voters she had been appealing to from the Left side of the Democratic Party.

Let's hope this week is better for everyone.

© Jeff Noble, Louisville, Kentucky, February 21, 2021.

826. McConnellian.

Linda Blackford, writing in the Lexington Herald-Leader, uses the word McConnellian, writing

"McConnell's vote to acquit, shortly followed by a fiery speech denouncing Trump is McConnellian hypocrisy, coming right after his next best in saying he couldn't convict Trump after his presidency was over when he delayed the trial until his presidency was over.  That's a lot of contorting."

What a great adjective. Until now, there hasn't been a good word to fully describe the betrayal of Mitch McConnell to Kentucky, the memory of Henry Clay, the U. S. Senate, and the United States. Now we have one.  It occurs to me that "McConnellian" sounds remarkably like "Machiavellian." 

© Jeff Noble, Louisville, Kentucky, February 14, 2021.

824. Another "Antifa" Terrorist and Traitor to America caught in Nashville

Another one of those "Antifa" people, Eric Gavelek Munchel, 30, was arrested this afternoon and booked into a Nashville jail about two hours ago. This is the "Antifa" guy with the zip-ties, allegedly carried to tie people up so they could later be taken to the gallows that had been erected on the Capitol's South Lawn to be hung.

Those of you who continually try to dismiss this aggression against our Capitol as an expression of First Amendment Free Speech are ignoring what is clear to nearly every public safety agency not just in America, but around the world. Those who were in the Capitol illegally, however they gained entry, had as a goal, the overthrow of the United States Government and the murders of Vice President Pence and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, among others. The woman who was shot, being celebrated as a martyr by the right, was breaking and entering and had been warned by the police to back away from the door. She disregarded a command from an officer of the law and continued her aggression. She is not a martyr. She died as a criminal and should be posthumously charged.

As I said in a post on Wednesday, and as is becoming very clear, the Trump Campaign assuredly, and possibly several Republican members of Congress, and perhaps the Republican National Committee, coordinated the efforts at the overthrow of America. In a separate post, I suggested that cameras in the Capitol, of which I can tell you there are many, coupled with all the videos posted to Facebook and Instagram, will allow most, if not all, of these terrorists to be caught, arrested, and prosecuted by Federal authorities.

There is much talk about the one single "John Sullivan," an Antifa guy on the inside, who "led the insurrection." Those of you Trump supporters who are pinning your hopes on that single person are going to be greatly and gravely disappointed. He, too, will find his actions captured by the myriad cameras in the hallways of Congress. We'll know what his role was. This was not Antifa. This was the traitor Donald Trump and his family and his campaign attempting to overthrow the government.

Eventually, Trump will be charged with sedition, irrespective of whether he is impeached or removed under the 25th Amendment. Between now and the 20th, all Americans, all across the Republic, need to be fully aware of their surroundings. Trump and his supporters are planning another coup for Inauguration Day. This time the newly re-formed Capitol Police, the District of Columbia Police, the National Guards of the District of Columbia, the States of Maryland and New York, and the Commonwealth of Virginia, all will be prepared to mete justice to any attempts at insurrection and sedition.

© Jeff Noble, Louisville, Kentucky, January 10, 2021.

823. It's going to be a great week in America! Happy 2021.

 

38-3-51

100.305, 321.39, 323.10, 323.12, 323.13

35 Pa. CS 7301 (b).

You might ask, "What are these cites?"

Let me begin by saying starting next week, when the Kentucky General Assembly convenes, the veto-proof Republican-controlled legislature will be taking up 39A.100, which is the equivalent cite in the Kentucky statutes that the above numbers are in the Georgia, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania codes respectively.

They are all cites to state laws approved by their state legislatures granting governors (and in some cases other elected officials) broad (sometimes undefined) extensive authority in times of peril or pandemic. These are the times we are in.

We've been hearing our president (and many of the few supporters he has left) making the argument that the laws under which most of the states conducted their elections, because they were different, amended or altered in their operations by the governors or the officials in charge of elections, somehow nullifies the elections themselves because those laws were not approved by the legislatures themselves.

The stupidity in this argument, and stupid is a word I rarely use but it is most applicable here, is that I am able to cite to Georgia Code 38-3-51; Wisconsin Statutes 100.305, 321.39, 323.10, 323.12, and 323.13; and Chapter 35 of the Pennsylvania Code of Statutes, Section 7301(b), all passed by members elected into the legislatures of the respective states, just as KRS 39A.100 was codified into our Kentucky laws after being passed in last year's General Assembly, all of these granting the authority that the uninformed president and his uninformed supporters say doesn't exist.

Now that the GOP has complete control of the Kentucky General Assembly, and given we have a Democratic governor, they will likely reverse many of the laws they passed in 2020. Republican legislators clearly lack logic.

But lacking even more logic than Republicans in the Kentucky General Assembly is the president and his supporters who make the argument, stupidly, that laws do not exist which allowed the states to conduct last year's elections in the fashion they were conducted.

Fools like Congressman Louie Gohmert, Senator Ted Cruz, and Gov. Ron DeSantis should be tried for sedition, if not treason, against the Republic based on the United States Constitution and cites such as the Georgia Code 38-3-51; Wisconsin Statutes 100.305, 321.39, 323.10, 323.12, and 323.13; and Chapter 35 of the Pennsylvania Code of Statutes, Section 7301(b).

Next week is going to be a great week in America. The Republican Party is going to be seen as the anti-American, anti-Constitution, anti-Rule of Law, anti-Voter, and anti-Election fanatic cult it truly is.

© Jeff Noble, Louisville, Kentucky, January 2, 2021.

822. The First Sunday of Advent, 2020 - the waiting begins, in church and in America

The liturgical season of Advent, a part of the church calendar in many (but not all) denominations, begins todays.  It is a period of waiting.  Waiting, being watchful, and preparing for the birth of Christ on Christmas Day.

As this Advent season begins, America is in its own period of waiting.  Waiting on this interlude between effective presidencies, the current thus far unwilling to concede a clear loss, the clearly successful challenger moving on, preparing for his oath-taking on January 20. 

As to this American advent, the arrival of "Christmas," in this case Inauguration Day, cannot come soon enough, as the current office holder continues day-after-day to issue useless, meaningless, but in some cases harmful statements, knowing the media (on both sides) as well as his followers and those who oppose him are hanging on his every word.  He thrives on the attention.

I've decided we need to stop responding to his every dictum (which, admittedly, is very hard for me to do).  He is the lamest of lame ducks, having lost the popular vote twice (the only president to ever do so) and will be losing the vote of the Electoral College in two weeks.

In a little over seven weeks (and maybe sooner), he'll be a former president and America will move on from him and all of his criminal sycophants and misguided supporters, saving those serving in the Congress.  

Over the next four years, the best thing that could happen for the Democratic Party, whether the party moves left, center, or right, is for Donald Trump to remain the centerpiece and clear leader of the GOP.  He is not just another arrow in the quiver for the Democrats, but the best and most poisonous they possess.

© Jeff Noble, Louisville, Kentucky, November 29, 2020.

816. In response to the president refusing to cooperate with the House Impeachment Committees . . . .

Who cares?

The appropriate response to the White House is "Who Cares?" The House doesn't need the White House's permission to proceed, to consider, to investigate, or to vote. Apparently the president has never read the part of the Constitution related to impeachment and its highly likely that Rudy Giuliani hasn't either. Article I, Section II, Clause 5 is very clear on that point. Very clear.

But all this push back makes you wonder. If the call to Ukraine was so "perfect," then what's the problem? If the (12 minute) transcript of the (30 minute) call is all there is then what's the problem? How many of you, being innocent of an accused crime, wouldn't work like hell to get your story out in the news while under oath to clear your name?

Eventually it will all come out, all of his dealings with Putin and the Russian and Ukrainian mob long before he got into politics, long before he decided he needed money to bail out his failed New Jersey casinos, and long before he built not one but two Trump Towers - beautiful towers, no doubt - in Turkey, the leaders of which are no doubt wonderful people with whom to do business, even in times of war.

815. Mayday, mayday! It's a National Emergency!

Jeff Noble

 

I'm enjoying the glee with which my "conservative" friends are celebrating the president's declaration of a National Emergency to spend billions of dollars that he first promised Mexico would pay for and then couldn't get the Congress, including members of his own party, to buy into. So he's declaring a National Emergency to build his wall, something I told my friend Paul Schmidt I fully expected him to do when he didn't get his way with Mexico or the Congress. This will be the fourth National Emergency he's declared. We're presently living under 28 others besides his three, 12 of Obama's, 13 of W's, and some dating back as far as the Carter presidency. 

Under such an "Emergency," there are some 123 statutory powers the president can use to address the "Emergency." The one distinguishing difference between all 31 of the current "Emergencies" and this new one the president is proposing is none of them spend any money which hasn't already been appropriated by the Congress, something required by the United States Constitution - see Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of America's Bible on that matter. The president's plan is to expand Executive powers and usurp the fiduciary authority of the Congress by spending money which hasn't been duly appropriated. Hell, we don't even have it.

Under the current "conservative" president, tax revenues are flat, spending is up 9.6%, the deficit has risen 41%, and the National Debt has grown by $2,000,000,000,000.00. That has to be a "conservative" record. So while my "conservative" friends are celebrating this "conservative" victory, the smart thing for the Democrats to do is back off and let him do it.

There will come a day that a National Emergency will arise over climate change or gun violence or our crumbling infrastructure or the opioid crisis, the latter two something the president has promised to address but hasn't, and as long as there is a Democrat in the White House it won't matter if Mitch is still the Majority Leader. We'll have President Trump's precedent of expanding Executive Powers and usurping the fiduciary authority of Congress as established by this current "National Emergency." We should let him do exactly what he wants to do which, to be honest, is one more brick in the wall of destroying both the United States Constitution and the Republic in general.

And the "conservatives" rejoice at this destruction.

811. Betrayal.

July 16, 2018 will be recorded in the history books of future decades as the day an American president betrayed the 61,000,000 people who voted for him and the 74,000,000 who didn't, and every other American, by telling the president of Russia that he favors and believes him, a tyrant and dictator, over our own American intelligence and military agencies. It's an incredible day; the day the music died.

791. The occasional restatement of my political belief

As a kid (I'm now 54) I was probably something of a Southern Democrat. As a college student I started moving to the Left. I messed around with a leftist anti-war style of Libertarianism popular in the 1980s but abandoned it to an even more Leftist belief. Finally, once in my 30s and 40s, I came to realize that the America I knew was a fairly successful country and a fairly successful socialist country. Admittedly, it was so because of high taxes, taxes assessed on and paid mostly by the rich and the corporate. Since June 6, 1978 (or thereabouts), we have been systematically lowering taxes across the board, and especially as a percentage among the rich and corporate, and replacing them with fees and surcharges. a more pay-as-you-play system. I find this antithetical to the idea of "We the people" united in our effort to be more like our Constitution, where, in the Preamble, are the adjectives "domestic," "common," "general," and "our," and the plural pronoun "ourselves," all implying some connectivity to each other and our prosperity. I know I am in the minority among your readers but I still strongly believe our Constitution is complicit in our socialism.

789. Gowdy, briefly, a coward.

I think the best part of the 114th Congress so far was watching Trey Gowdy's star fall so fast once he announced that he would have voted for Boehner for Speaker, something his Tea Party/Benghazi zealots simply cannot abide. Of course the BMOC Gowdy didn't even show up for the vote claiming the weather precluded his arrival in Washington DC. Excuses, excuses.

786. A brief thought on Obama

One of the things the Right doesn't understand is that the Left, of which I am a part, is nearly as upset with the president as they are. We feel he has compromised on almost every major issue. We feel he has coddled up with K Street lawyers and lobbyists and Wall Street bankers and con-men. We feel that he is far too centrist, just like most of the men (so far) which we have nominated going all the way back to at least Adlai Stevenson in 1952. But we are also confident that a bad centrist better is for the people of America than the men (so far) who have been offered as standard bearers of the GOP since Reagan. The Right has systematically lowered taxes over the last 35 years, making government less and less responsive to ourselves and our global neighbors. The lessening of civility is a direct result of Americans being less involved with their government than ever, both in the taxes they pay and in the rate they vote. There is a reason for this. Beginning with Reagan, we've been taught that government (which is America) is the problem and that rugged individualism is the solution. In that same time period of lessening taxes, the rich of our nation have gotten exponentially richer while the middle class and the poor have done the opposite. America is not the great country it once was. We lead in murders, we lack in education, and we argue over the pettiest of issues. Why? Because we have forgotten that we, America, are the "We the people" famously found in the Constitution. It isn't you and me and that one over there, but all of us collectively. I do not know if Reagan and his followers - Norquist, Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Romney, and others - have destroyed the Republic beyond repair. I personally believe they have although there are others in my party and on my side of the aisle who differ with me. Unfortunately I do not see too many people in either party doing much about it. I'll add, to close, two points. The scrolling at the end of the video is something that we each agree on. Finally, the last good liberal in the White House was Richard Nixon.

782. Rest In Peace, Mr. Bradlee

An homage, with notably explicit language, to the great Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post, who died today, from "All The President's Men," concerning an event which changed politics, journalism, and the government itself:

"You know the results of the latest Gallup Poll? Half the country never even heard of the word Watergate. Nobody gives a shit. You guys are probably pretty tired, right? Well, you should be. Go on home, get a nice hot bath. Rest up 15 minutes. Then get your asses back in gear. We're under a lot of pressure, you know, and you put us there. Nothing was riding on this except the, uh, First Amendment to the Constitution, Freedom of the Press, and maybe the future of the country. Not that any of that matters, but if you guys fuck up again, I'm going to get mad. Goodnight."

 He was right. RIP, Mr. Bradlee.

767. Day Five of the Republican-created so-called Shutdown

Day Five of the Republican-planned so-called shutdown and a little has changed. In order to understand this post, you have to had previously read my post of October 2nd which begins "So the second day . . . " The gist of that entry is two fold - 1) this isn't a shutdown but a selective slowdown, and 2) unless everyone participates, it really doesn't matter.

Yes, I have friends suffering the financial effects of the shutdown and if I were in their shoes, it'd only take a few paychecks and I'd be in trouble but for some friends and family who might help me one way or another. And those same families may already be like me helping out their own family and friends who are already out of work. I've read today that the House has voted unanimously to pay them. Well, that's good and they need it but it defeats the purpose. It honestly isn't good economics but it is good PR and that is something in short supply in the Federal City. Similarly, there's a bill to open some of the National Parks as if this makes a dint in the $17,000,000,000,000.00 debt. It won't and it is silly. It will allow some Republican members of Congress the opportunity to beat their chests showing their approval while going unanswered will be the systematic cuts those same members have been making to veterans for years. Again, it is really for show. While I am on that topic, I'm trying to imagine some company owner who decides for whatever reason to take a two-week vacation, furloughing their employees, and closing all of their facilities. Imagine their reaction if some overzealous politicians showed up at their plant, rushed the gates, and opened the doors for all the world to see since they made sure a camera was close-by recording their heroic efforts. How would the owner feel? Just a thought. The counter-argument is the parks are public property and I have a place in my property rights-oriented heart for that idea. Still, someone has to clean up after the invasion, emptying the trash, and paying the water, light, and gas bills which were supposed to be at a minimum during the shutdown. But, I digress.

The previous diatribe mostly asked the question "how does the Republican-created so-called shutdown do anything about the $17,000,000,000,000.00 debt?" No one answered that one. Since that time, I've ventured further into the idea that no one on the Republican side of the aisle has answered because they have no answer. Their intention has little to do with Obamacare or the debt or even the deficit, although some of their followers may not realize this or may not acknowledge they are being used. It is all really about a handful of Tea Partiers threatening their caucus and its leader, Speaker Boehner, with primaries in the 2014 cycle, such as the Kentucky kind which elected Senator Rand Paul to office in 2010 and Congressman Tom Massie in 2012. Moderate and even conservatives Republicans are demonstrably concerned about losing their asses in 2014. Wait, I mean losing the congressional seats. Sorry. Or, is that the reason?

Maybe it is simply a desire on the part of the Republican Party to close down the government. I came across an article in the Republican-leaning website Politico from September 10, 2010, a little over three years ago. In the article Congressman Lynn Westmoreland, R-GA3 (SW Atlanta suburbs southwest to Columbus) predicts the current shutdown as part of plan should the Republicans regain the House, as they did in the 2010 elections. The other part of the plan was the recall of Obamacare, something they tried and failed at 42 times (so far). I don't often cite to certain sources in my research, concerned about their political bias. In this case, the site's bias is to the Republicans so I feel a little more at ease in using it. And I feel a little better in calling the so-called shutdown solely a creation of the Republican Party, and not just a creation but part of a plan according to one of its own members.

Here is a link to the story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41980.html

 

766. The so-called federal shutdown

So the second day of the Republican-created so-called shutdown winds to a close. I have learned today that some of my friends have been affected by it in different ways and they are having to make do. But that's the problem with a partial shutdown and, let's face it, that's all this is. Until everyone - that means me, you, our parents, your kids - feels some of the pain, there will always be people calling for more cuts and an end to the "rampant socialism" in Washington DC. Parting with nearly all in my Party, I supported "going over the Fiscal Cliff" back in December and supported the Sequestration, both of which were mere baby steps in addressing a number of spending problems. But addressing spending isn't enough - not at all. And if we are going to "shutdown" then let's really shutdown. Start with the air-controllers thus closing the airports. Shut down Amtrak, especially on the east coast [although have it open by November 10 when I take my train ride to Seattle]. And close the Federal Reserve Banks' overnight borrowing and lending. Next, cease Medicare and Medicaid payments, sending all those parents and grandparents in nursing homes back to their middle aged children's suburban streets. Then de-guarantee the federal student loans of all the college kids and watch the universities send them home as well to share the bedrooms with their grandparents. There's lots more I'd do if I were the American god, but I'm not and we don't have one. Again, let's be honest. We're 17 Trillion dollars in debt, 68% of which was on the books when Obama took office, and a great deal of it is owed to Americans, not to China as some would have you think although we owe them as well. All of these clowns in legislative leadership on both sides are responsible for it - they all voted on it, including the 68% of it amassed before Obama was elected. No amount of cutting "waste, fraud, and abuse" will get us out of that debt - $17,000,000,000,000.00. Our annual budget is about 3.5 Trillion. Do the math - 17 divided by 3.5. It would take almost 5 years of a complete shutdown - ZERO spending on ANYTHING for FIVE YEARS - just to get us to ZERO. That's the problem with the "waste, fraud, and abuse" cry. It's rhetoric and nothing more. While there is no doubt it takes place, eliminating all of it doesn't begin to address the problem. In fact, it does little other than offer a few photo ops like some in the Congress did today at the WW2 Memorial. And if you are truly interested in addressing the problem - our collective problem, then you need to shout something more than "waste, fraud, and abuse" or you're just a part of the problem and not the solution. The only way out is cutting spending and raising taxes. It has taken us 35 years of tax cutting to get into this situation. It might take that long to get out. But, if you want America to continuing being America, then pay for it. Either be willing to pay for it, maybe for 35 years, or shut up and get out of the way as you are part of the problem. The other way is anarchy and anti-American, and perhaps even treasonous.

763. Swabbing the Fourth Amendment

I've been searching, tongueswab-in-cheek, for any Fourth Amendment comments on Facebook or Twitter. There are surprisingly few. Anyone secure enough in their persons willing to submit? Between my liberal friends and my Libertarian friends, am I the only one thinking Scalia warrants an oath of affirmation?

761. Legislative Unease

(The following are remarks I made at today's Quarterly Meeting of the Kentucky Democratic Party.  The meeting was held at the Hilton Hotel in Lexington).

Mr. Chair and members of the Committee --

Last week the Kentucky Senate passed a bill which would allow Kentuckians to disobey certain Federal laws and certain Federal Executive Orders.  Such laws are known as Nullification Laws.  They aren’t new and most have been struck down over the years by what is known as the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.

Nullification isn’t a new idea for Kentucky.  We were the second state to offer such laws, the Kentucky Resolutions, back in 1799.  Virginia, our mother-state, beat us to it in 1798.  And over time many states in all parts of the country have passed laws which have come to be known as Nullification Laws.  We’re not paving the way with any new ideas, but we are jumping on the bandwagon of many states which are, for their own reasons, unhappy about the administration of Barack Obama, our recently re-elected Democratic president.  The current national leader of the nullification movement is our own United States Senator Rand Paul. 

That our Senate has followed the direction of Rand Paul is not a surprise – we all know the Senate is controlled by the Republicans and, unfortunately, is likely to remain so for some time.  My greater concern is that with the exception of my senator Gerald Neal, my favorite senator from Lexington Kathy Stein, and my favorite newest Democratic senator, Morgan McGarvey, every other Democratic senator has followed Rand Paul’s lead on this matter.

It is my belief that when our state and the other 49 joined the union, by their participation in the Federal government, they agreed to participate in all of it.  As a Louisvillian, there have been times when I have accepted the fact that Louisville sends considerably more money to Frankfort than we receive in return.  This is part of the compact we as Louisvillians have with our fellow Kentuckians.  It is a good thing.  In the reverse manner, we as Kentuckians should be grateful to the Federal government, with all its warts and shortcomings, as we receive in return much more than we send to Washington, DC.  I’ve expressed my concerns about this vote to two senators who were yes votes in whose campaigns I have played a part - and wanted to extend knowledge of my dissatisfaction to this body.

On a different matter, and in the other house of the General Assembly, I am also concerned and dissatisfied.  Two days ago, the Kentucky House, in the name of religious freedom, passed a law which subverts the gains Kentucky and a few - very few - of its local communities have made with regard to civil rights protections for lesbians, gays, and others.  In the name of religious freedom, which I would call religious preference, something forbidden by the United States Constitution, our House passed a law by an overwhelming vote – seven Democrats voting no and the balance of the Chamber in favor – which could strip away discrimination protections in the name of religious freedom.

Two attempts were made by my representative in the House, Darryl Owens, to amend the bill, one passed and one was not called for a vote - both in the name of protecting the gains made in civil rights over the years, and especially in the cities of Vicco, Covington, Lexington, and Louisville.

Each of these bills now head to the other Chamber where both will likely be passed. Each bill needs work and if passed as written I would hope Governor Beshear would give the General Assembly more time to think through their votes by vetoing these horrible pieces of legislation.

Thank You.

JEFF NOBLE, 3^rd CD Committeeman

753. A Constitutional discussion on Facebook

 What follows is a discussion copied from my Facebook page, one which followed a post I made about the silence of certain folks in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

 First, some identification of those involved in the discussion, in order of appearance, other than me.

Thomas A. "Tony" McAdam is an attorney in downtown Louisville.  Tony and I have been friends many years.  We also disagree in large degrees as to the administration of the Republic and other issues of national concern.

Bob Layton is an attorney and Democratic Party activist in Fayette County.

Tyler Hess is in his young 20s and is an environmental activist and student of sustainable agriculture.

Dorothy Howard is a Facebook friend, the older sister of a women with whom I attended elementary and high school, and a Democrat.

Jeremy Tyler is a 25 year old libertarian/Republican supporter of Ron Paul.  He is an Econ/PoliSci graduate of the University of Louisville.

Will Cox is an attorney in Madisonville where he recently served a term as Mayor and before that as Councilman.

 Ken Stammerman is a retired State Department official, a 1965 graduate of Bellarmine College who has recently undertaken lay studies at nearby Saint Meinrad School of Theology.

Read through the arguments and comment if you wish.

  -- Jeff

My original post -- 

The small government and anti-government libertarian and Tea Party folks are noticeably quiet today. The only person we've heard from was, all of people, Bush's FEMA Director Mike "Helluva Job" Brown, who criticized President Obama for responding too quickly to Sandy, something no one accused Bush or Brown of doing with Katrina. An interesting quietude of their part.

Thomas A. McAdam James Madison is the acknowledged father of the constitution. In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia. James Madison wrote disapprovingly, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." I will gladly contribute from my meager treasure to aid the sufferers of this storm, but I think it is clear that the constitution does not allow the federal government to coerce citizens into paying for disaster relief. It is not a question of compassion. It is a question of the rule of law. Either we support and defend our constitution, or we don't. And if we don't, God help us.

Jeff Noble Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 - The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

Bob Layton Now, Jeff. If you're going to actually quote the Constitution to those who say they're defenders of the Constitution, it's just going to cause all kinds of problems. Next you'll be expecting them to actually read the Constitution they're defending!

Tyler Hess I'm definitely fine with not supporting the Constitution Tom. I don't support it on its unacknowledgement of the rights of more than half of this country. Written by elitist white men, it is a document that is old and putrid for use in the 21st century. I am for a society based on moral interdependence of social human beings, rather than an abstract wrinkly racist piece of paper.

Dorothy Howard Yep! Jeff, I wish more folks would read the whole constitution. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I am so sick and tired of people who claim they love their country and all the time go around hating on the best aspects of our country...

Thomas A. McAdam James Madison advocated for the ratification of the Constitution in The Federalist and at the Virginia ratifying convention upon a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax.

Thomas A. McAdam In fairness, I should add that in the last 70 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has tended to agree with Jeff's broad interpretation of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1. More's the pity.

Jeff Noble Hat tip.

Dorothy Howard Well....Thomas, when you are mugged don't call those tax funded police, when your house is on fire don't call those tax funded firemen, when you fly on an airplane don't expect the tax funded air traffic controllers to keep you out of harms way, etc.

Thomas A. McAdam And, I am sorry Tyler does not support our constitution. That is his right, but I'm not sure he can call himself a loyal American if he refuses to protect and defend the constitution.

Thomas A. McAdam Dorothy unwittingly confabulates the police powers of the states (health, welfare, safety & morals) with those limited and enumerated powers of the federal government. My argument is that the national government does not have the constitutional authority to provide disaster relief. Clearly, the states have that authority.

Jeff Noble Tyler, while I agree with you that the document was written by the hands and minds of privileged white men in the 18th Century, by design it is a flexible instrument. It is why, as Mr. McAdam points out above, recent interpretations are different from what may have been acceptable in the 1780s. That judicial review is not implicit in the Constitution left open the question of how to defend the Constitution. That was answered by the Court itself in 1803 in Marbury v. Madison. Since that day, the Constitution has been a breathing, living document able to be interpreted by the women and men serving on the Court in contemporary times, whenever those times may be. What is acceptable and Constitutional today may be overturned in 1, 5, or 30 years. The design works, albeit sometimes too slow and at other times too fast. The Republic has not lasted 237 years by clinging to an inoperable and unchangeable Constitution. It has survived by being changeable.

Dorothy Howard  Perhaps....but one could also argue that providing disaster releif is providing for the common defense.

Jeremy Tyler I'm never sure when I say that something is not constitutional, why it is that people resort to bringing up police and fireman, as if that has anything to do with the constitution other than it being something that the state handles. 

Democratic President Grover Cleveland vetoed a bill in 1887 that would have provided seed for farmers in drought-stricken Texas. In his veto message he stated: 

"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people." 

He also said that aid from Washington only "encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character." He then offered money from himself personally to help the farmers.  

Jeff Noble . . . or the general welfare.

Dorothy Howard So shall we do away with the FBI, Secret Service, ATF, Border Patrol, etc?

Jeff Noble It can be safely assumed, based on their statements in this thread, that McAdam and Jeremy differ with the Court's 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison.

Thomas A. McAdam Not everything we may want the government to provide for us is authorized by our constitution. We can alter it, of course (and have done so many times), but if we abandon it, we do so at our peril. The constitution not only insures our rights and freedom, but it protects us from a tyrannical and oppressive government. If we destroy its limitations, we also lose its protections. We are either a nation of laws, or a nation of men. Which would you prefer?

Jeff Noble That's from the Jaycee creed. I remember it. The answer is a hybrid. We are a nation of laws written and agreed to by men and women.

Will Cox So "Brownie" is criticizing the President for moving TOO quickly??? Really?? You can't make that stuff up ...

Thomas A. McAdam I respect Jeff's view of constitutional history, but I must warn against the "living and breathing" metaphor. The framers had recent experience with tyranny, and intended the constitution to be amendable, but otherwise immutable. In my lifetime, the courts have stretched the constitution to discover a "right of privacy" that allows a woman to kill her unborn child ("emanations from a penumbra"), and have allowed governments to seize private property for private (not public) use. Stretched to the point of breaking. As Thomas Moore said, in A Man For All Seasons: "And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

Jeremy Tyler If you look at many of the constitutional conventions when the constitution was going through to process to be ratified, many of the people that were skeptical were assured over and over again by the federalists that the necessary clause, interstate commerce clause, and general welfare clause was not to be broadly interpreted and were only to be applied by the specific powers that were enumerated to the Federal government. Even then the skeptics demanded the Bill of rights to be passed for further security. 

Jeff, yes you're right. I never cared much for John Marshall. 

Dorothy, some of those departments could be argued for defense. But I also think some of those cause more insecurity than security. I also could see a argument where those would not be allowed when following the constitution, especially considering some of the trouble some departments have caused.

Jeremy Tyler Jeff and Thomas on the comment about being governed by men. “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” James Madison, Federalist Paper 51.

Ken Stammerman We are a community, living under a living Constitution that means what the Supreme Court says it means, taking the broad principles written into it by the founders and reinterpreting them in a world the founders could never have imagined. With wise judges named to the bench, the Executive can both be empowered to innovate on matters unthought of centuries ago, and limited in its ability to intrude on citizens' rights in ways unimaginable in those days. The Legislature should have the wisdom to consent or reject justices who will respect personal freedoms while not tying the executive in a straitjacket of limitations on government action suitable to a nation of a landed aristocracy and yeomen farmers. The Constitution has been amended to remove provisions in the original, which saw a nation, for example, allowing human bondage and limiting suffrage by wealth and gender. As well, it expanded the power of the Executive to tax via the income tax. But in a fast-paced modern world, the ambiguities written into the Constitution by, for example, the 14th Amendment and the commerce clause, allow the flexibility for the Court to move faster than the amendment process would ever have allowed in outlawing Jim Crow or permitting the economic policies of the New Deal. And that is as it should be.

Thomas A. McAdam How fortunate Jeff is, to have so many clever and articulate friends. A seeker of wisdom and truth could ask for nothing more.

Thomas A. McAdam Actually, I find myself in agreement with Ken's summary of constitutional evolution. Must check my meds.

Jeff Noble True. I was just thinking the same thing as to our clever and articulate friends. And, importantly, the two Tyler's in this discussion, Jeremy Tyler and Tyler Hess, are young men, among the next generation of women and men to whom our collective futures are entrusted. We are fortunate for their concern and interest, irrespective of whether we agree with their positions. While I am throwing accolades at Tyler's and our future, I'd be remiss not to include another one, Tyler Montell.

Thomas A. McAdam I find a certain amount of comfort in Jeff's observation that the future of our republic, after all, just might be in good hands. My generation has not been so successful. Good luck, guys!