Most tea partiers view the Constitution as a secular covenant whose terms the citizens and institutions in our republic are bound to honor. As Professor Randy Barnett argued in his 2004 classic, Restoring the Lost Constitution, we observe the meaning of the words in that document, as they were written. We are “originalists” and consider proponents of “a living constitution” to be usurpers of that original intent.
A more modern variation of the “living constitution” school was presented in a 2009 New Republic article by Damon Linker, who argued that “moralistic therapeutic deism,” which he called “theologically insipid,” is perfectly suited to become our new civil religion. In effect, Linker called for this philosophy to replace the Constitutionalism to which the Tea Party movement and the rest of America adheres.
You can read the rest of the article at Broadside Books here.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Friday, April 22, 2011
Donald Trump and the Little Pink House
As one of many tea party activists who find the current crop of 2012 Republican Presidential contenders uninspiring, I’ve followed Donald Trump’s recent statements about a potential Presidential run as a Republican with great interest.
Last week, he spoke before a tea party group in Florida and claimed that he supports tea party values.
But, does he really?
As a developer, Trump is certainly familiar with the legal principle known as eminent domain, a notorious violation of individual liberty, which allows the state to seize the property of a private individual (usually at below market prices) in order to use that property for what the state determines to be a “public purpose.” Though the “Takings Clause” of the Fifth Amendment was intended to prevent the possibility that “ private property be taken for public use, without just compensation,” the state in 20th and 21st century America often uses its overwhelming power to define “just compensation” quite differently than the owner of the private property being taken.
You can read the rest of this article at Broadside Books here.
Last week, he spoke before a tea party group in Florida and claimed that he supports tea party values.
But, does he really?
As a developer, Trump is certainly familiar with the legal principle known as eminent domain, a notorious violation of individual liberty, which allows the state to seize the property of a private individual (usually at below market prices) in order to use that property for what the state determines to be a “public purpose.” Though the “Takings Clause” of the Fifth Amendment was intended to prevent the possibility that “ private property be taken for public use, without just compensation,” the state in 20th and 21st century America often uses its overwhelming power to define “just compensation” quite differently than the owner of the private property being taken.
You can read the rest of this article at Broadside Books here.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
What Tim Geithner Should Know About Alexander Hamilton
Dartmouth-educated Tim Geithner, our current Secretary of Treasury, has either forgotten or never learned the lessons from Alexander Hamilton’s first year as our inaugural Secretary of Treasury.
Hamilton is no favorite of the Tea Party movement. Indeed, it can be argued that no figure in the early years of the Republic did more to usurp the Constitution than Hamilton. He was, after all, the man who persuaded the First Congress to pass and Washington to sign the National Bank Bill that both Jefferson and Madison considered unconstitutional. He followed that up with a vainglorious show of force in the Whiskey Rebellion, and, while out of office, vigorously supported the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. And did I mention his notorious speech at the Constitutional Convention where he argued in favor of a life time appointment for the head of the Executive Branch and the members of the Senate? If ever there was an American champion of centralized federal power, it was Hamilton.
You can read the rest of this column at Broadside Books Voices of the Tea Party blog here.
Hamilton is no favorite of the Tea Party movement. Indeed, it can be argued that no figure in the early years of the Republic did more to usurp the Constitution than Hamilton. He was, after all, the man who persuaded the First Congress to pass and Washington to sign the National Bank Bill that both Jefferson and Madison considered unconstitutional. He followed that up with a vainglorious show of force in the Whiskey Rebellion, and, while out of office, vigorously supported the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. And did I mention his notorious speech at the Constitutional Convention where he argued in favor of a life time appointment for the head of the Executive Branch and the members of the Senate? If ever there was an American champion of centralized federal power, it was Hamilton.
You can read the rest of this column at Broadside Books Voices of the Tea Party blog here.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Former Commander, USS Cole, Embraces the Tea Party, Set to Challenge Angle
Kirk Lippold, who served as the commander of the USS Cole until his retirement, announced today that he intends to run for Congress in Nevada. He will be challenging Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle in the Republican primary. Here’s what he had to say about the Tea Party movement in the Daily Caller today:
“I embrace the Tea Party. I think that the organization, when you really stop and look at it, the tea party and what they stand for is a wonderful organization. I, quite frankly, am an independent proponent of limited government and citizen sovereignty. I’m very supportive of any citizen that takes up the charge to make the government more responsive to the people, and also I believe we need to begin to limit the amount of government intrusion into our lives. And that’s what the Tea Party stands for.”
You can read the rest of this blogpost at Broadside Books "Voices of the Tea Party."
“I embrace the Tea Party. I think that the organization, when you really stop and look at it, the tea party and what they stand for is a wonderful organization. I, quite frankly, am an independent proponent of limited government and citizen sovereignty. I’m very supportive of any citizen that takes up the charge to make the government more responsive to the people, and also I believe we need to begin to limit the amount of government intrusion into our lives. And that’s what the Tea Party stands for.”
You can read the rest of this blogpost at Broadside Books "Voices of the Tea Party."
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
What Wisconsin Democrats Forget: Collective Bargaining Violates the Rights of Teachers Who Don't Want to Join the Union
The 14 Wisconsin Democratic State Senators who have fled the state in order to prevent the State Senate from acting on Governor Walker's proposal to have state workers contribute to their health and retirement benefits the way private sector employees do keep hitting the disingenuine talking point that their actions about protecting individual rights.
The unions, they say, are willing to concede some financial points, but insist on preserving collective bargaining. It's a sacred individual right, they say.
This is Orwellian double-speak, 21st century version.
For decades, collective bargaining, which forces every teacher in the state and every state employee in the state to pay union dues and join the union, has been one of the most egregious violations of individual liberties allowed in American history.
There are many teachers in Wisconsin--and the rest of the country for that matter--whose individual rights to choose whether or not they will join a union have been violated by this union forced law.
Individual rights mean freedom of choice. Teachers, state workers, any worker for that matter, should be free to choose whether or not they will join a union.
If the 14 Wisconsin Democratic State Senators really believed in individual rights, they would support Governor Walker's legislation.
Don't hold your breath, because the truth is, they have long opposed individual rights. Collective bargaining is the ultimate weapon for the enforcement of collective rights. And, collective rights, by definition, can not co-exist with individual rights.
The unions, they say, are willing to concede some financial points, but insist on preserving collective bargaining. It's a sacred individual right, they say.
This is Orwellian double-speak, 21st century version.
For decades, collective bargaining, which forces every teacher in the state and every state employee in the state to pay union dues and join the union, has been one of the most egregious violations of individual liberties allowed in American history.
There are many teachers in Wisconsin--and the rest of the country for that matter--whose individual rights to choose whether or not they will join a union have been violated by this union forced law.
Individual rights mean freedom of choice. Teachers, state workers, any worker for that matter, should be free to choose whether or not they will join a union.
If the 14 Wisconsin Democratic State Senators really believed in individual rights, they would support Governor Walker's legislation.
Don't hold your breath, because the truth is, they have long opposed individual rights. Collective bargaining is the ultimate weapon for the enforcement of collective rights. And, collective rights, by definition, can not co-exist with individual rights.
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Obama Says Mubarak Should Listen to a Million Egyptian Protesters While He Ignored a Million American Protesters
What's wrong with this picture?
The Obama Administration is advising Egyptian President Mubarak to prepare for a transition from power because, among other things, a million Egyptians are expressing their dissatisfaction in public demonstrations today.
It's worth noting that President Obama isn't following this advice when it comes to his own policies.
On April 15, 2009, more than a million Americans in nine hundred cities protested the irresponsible spending of the Obama Administration's $800 billion "Stimulus" package. Obama ignored these protesters.
Then a majority of Americans around the country protested their opposition to Obamacare, and in March 2010, Obama ignored them by signing this unconstitutional intrusion into the individual liberties of American.
Selective enforcement of his own advice, however, is nothing new for Obama.
Apparently, Egyptian protesters merit attention, while Iranian and American protesters do not.
The Obama Administration is advising Egyptian President Mubarak to prepare for a transition from power because, among other things, a million Egyptians are expressing their dissatisfaction in public demonstrations today.
It's worth noting that President Obama isn't following this advice when it comes to his own policies.
On April 15, 2009, more than a million Americans in nine hundred cities protested the irresponsible spending of the Obama Administration's $800 billion "Stimulus" package. Obama ignored these protesters.
Then a majority of Americans around the country protested their opposition to Obamacare, and in March 2010, Obama ignored them by signing this unconstitutional intrusion into the individual liberties of American.
Selective enforcement of his own advice, however, is nothing new for Obama.
Apparently, Egyptian protesters merit attention, while Iranian and American protesters do not.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
A Baker's Dozen of Republican Senators Headed for Tea Party Trouble with START Vote
The Senate passed the START treaty today by a 71-26 vote.
13 Republicans voted for the ill advised treaty.
Here's the list, as well as an assessment of their political future:
Alexander, Tenn -- not up for re-election until 2014
Bennett, Utah -- defeated in 2010 primary
Brown, Mass -- the best conservatives can hope for from Massachusetts
Cochran, Miss -- the tea party will find a primary challenger
Collins, Maine -- not up for re-election until 2014
Corker, Tenn -- overconfidently predicted he won't face a tea party challenge in 2012. Sounds like a challenge to me. The Tennessee tea parties may take him up on this.
Gregg, N.H -- retired
Isakson, Ga
Johanns, Neb
Lugar, Ind -- confident he won't face a 2012 challenge. We'll see!
Murkowski, Alaska -- likely re-elected in 2010. Not up again until 2016.
Snowe, Maine -- rumors of tea party challenge in 2012, but no credible challenger in site.
Voinovich, Ohio -- retired
13 Republicans voted for the ill advised treaty.
Here's the list, as well as an assessment of their political future:
Alexander, Tenn -- not up for re-election until 2014
Bennett, Utah -- defeated in 2010 primary
Brown, Mass -- the best conservatives can hope for from Massachusetts
Cochran, Miss -- the tea party will find a primary challenger
Collins, Maine -- not up for re-election until 2014
Corker, Tenn -- overconfidently predicted he won't face a tea party challenge in 2012. Sounds like a challenge to me. The Tennessee tea parties may take him up on this.
Gregg, N.H -- retired
Isakson, Ga
Johanns, Neb
Lugar, Ind -- confident he won't face a 2012 challenge. We'll see!
Murkowski, Alaska -- likely re-elected in 2010. Not up again until 2016.
Snowe, Maine -- rumors of tea party challenge in 2012, but no credible challenger in site.
Voinovich, Ohio -- retired
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Michael Steele Should Declare Victory and Walk Away from the RNC
Michael Steele hasn't called me to ask for advice on his career options, but if he were to place such a call, here's what I would tell him:
Declare victory and walk away from the RNC Chair job.
The electoral results have been outstanding, even though you arguably didn't have a lot do with turning the House back over to Republican control. You're not a bad guy, and you do a decent enough job as a spokesperson ...sometimes.
You're a bit gaffe-prone, but more importantly you've failed to understand one key element of the job of RNC Chair.
It's not about you.
The 2012 cycle is going to be very different than the 2010 cycle. The Republicans don't need a gaffe-prone RNC Chair stepping on the very important dialogue that will be developing very shortly among the two dozen or so 2012 Presidential contenders. The future of the Republican Party should be debated in the dialogue between those candidates. You really ought not to figure in that discussion.
Which is why you really should not be running for a second term.
I'm sure FoxNews or CNN could use your talents as a "contributor." You would make more money and have fewer headaches. And, you will legitimately be able to promote your own books there.
You've apparently committed to trying to be elected to a second term. Too bad you didn't have a chance to watch the classic Clint Eastwood western Unforgiven before you decided. If you had, you might have heeded Clint's advice in that film:
"A man's got to know his limitations."
Friday, September 24, 2010
My BBC Radio interview on the Mid-term Elections
You can listen to my BBC Radio interview yesterday here.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton Partners with Tea Party Group to Launch "Election Day Tea Party"
The Nationwide Tea Party Coalition announced today that it has partnered with former US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton to launch the Election Day Tea Party project.
You can read the full story here at the TCOT Report
Monday, August 30, 2010
Glenn Beck Calls for a New Great Awakening
Depending on which crowd count you rely upon, up to half a million Americans came to Washington D.C. to listen to Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Rally this past Saturday.
Mainstream media pundits appeared to misunderstand what Beck was trying to accomplish.
It seems to me he's trying to encourage a New Great Awakening in America. It makes sense that Beck, who has highlighted the English preacher "rock star" who launched the first American Great Awakening in the 1740's--George Whitefield--in his television program would undertake such a project.
This first Christian spiritual movement emphasized the importance of private virtue in the individual. The importance of private virtue throughout the populace was emphasized by all the Founding Fathers--Benjamin Franklin and John Adams in particular.
Sunday, July 04, 2010
A New Political Age in America: The Era of Grassroots Democracy
There is no better day to make this observation than the 4th of July.
America is in the early stages of a new political age. I call it The Era of Grassroots Democracy.
We're in the latter stages of the 20 month gestation period, which began on February 20, 2009 when about 50 online conservative activists organized and planned the very simultaneous nationwide tea parties, which were held on February 27, 2009 in 51 cities and attended by 30,000 activists.
The new Era of Grassroots Democracy will arrive on Election Day, November 2, 2010 when voters tell Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues that she will not be Speaker of the House of Representatives in January of 2011. But the Republican Establishment need not celebrate that victory, nor should they claim much credit for it. The loss of Congress by the Democrats will be powered by the energy and organization of the millions of grassroots conservative activists who comprise the Tea Party Movement.
The grand pooh-bahs at the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee, those champions of Big Government statism and the personal acquisition of power, are on their way out. They are relics of an era gone by, and are too dense to comprehend that reality yet.
No one likes them.
No one respects them.
No one trusts them.
No one believes they act on principle.
No one thinks they are thought leaders with any original ideas to address our country's problems.
This new Era of Grassroots Democracy will have three defining characteristics:
1. It will be Post-Partisan.
2. It will be Ideologically Competitive.
3. It will signal a revival of citizen activism within a new type of intensely engaged, participative grassroots democracy, enabled and accelerated by dramatic advances in technology.
America is in the early stages of a new political age. I call it The Era of Grassroots Democracy.
We're in the latter stages of the 20 month gestation period, which began on February 20, 2009 when about 50 online conservative activists organized and planned the very simultaneous nationwide tea parties, which were held on February 27, 2009 in 51 cities and attended by 30,000 activists.
The new Era of Grassroots Democracy will arrive on Election Day, November 2, 2010 when voters tell Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues that she will not be Speaker of the House of Representatives in January of 2011. But the Republican Establishment need not celebrate that victory, nor should they claim much credit for it. The loss of Congress by the Democrats will be powered by the energy and organization of the millions of grassroots conservative activists who comprise the Tea Party Movement.
The grand pooh-bahs at the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee, those champions of Big Government statism and the personal acquisition of power, are on their way out. They are relics of an era gone by, and are too dense to comprehend that reality yet.
No one likes them.
No one respects them.
No one trusts them.
No one believes they act on principle.
No one thinks they are thought leaders with any original ideas to address our country's problems.
This new Era of Grassroots Democracy will have three defining characteristics:
1. It will be Post-Partisan.
2. It will be Ideologically Competitive.
3. It will signal a revival of citizen activism within a new type of intensely engaged, participative grassroots democracy, enabled and accelerated by dramatic advances in technology.
Friday, May 28, 2010
A tale of two Joe Sestak versions of the truth
Sestak Version 1:
February 18, 2010
Larry Kane: “Were you ever offered a job to get out of this race?" (The contest against Arlen Specter)
Joe Sestak “Yes.”
Larry Kane: “Was it Navy Secretary?”
Joe Sestak: “No comment.”
Larry Kane: “So you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”
Joe Sestak: “Yes.”
February 19, 2010
White House Deputy Press Secretary: “You can say the White House says it’s not true.”
You can read the full dialogue here.
Sestak Version 2:
May 28, 2010
Joe Sestak: "Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background."
Joe Sestak: "He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no."
You can read the full statement here.
February 18, 2010
Larry Kane: “Were you ever offered a job to get out of this race?" (The contest against Arlen Specter)
Joe Sestak “Yes.”
Larry Kane: “Was it Navy Secretary?”
Joe Sestak: “No comment.”
Larry Kane: “So you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”
Joe Sestak: “Yes.”
February 19, 2010
White House Deputy Press Secretary: “You can say the White House says it’s not true.”
You can read the full dialogue here.
Sestak Version 2:
May 28, 2010
Joe Sestak: "Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background."
Joe Sestak: "He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no."
You can read the full statement here.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
SEIU Thugs Trespass on Private Residential Property
You can read Nina Easton's account of 500 SEIU thugs who trespassed onto the property of her neighbor here.
Thursday, May 06, 2010
The Manchurian Citizen: Faisal Shahzad
Faisal Shahzad is a confessed Muslim terrorist who was born in Pakistan, moved to the United States as a young adult, and became a naturalized citizen in April, 2009. A few months later he flew to Pakistan where he was apparently trained by the Taliban on how to be a terrorist.
Last week, he allegedly tried to blow up Times Square in New York City with a bomb planted in an SUV. He was captured on board a Pakistan-bound flight on the runway ready to take off at JFK Airport, and, according to press reports, has confessed that, yes, he is the Times Square bomber.
Only a fool or a co-conspirator would claim that Shahzad is the only "Manchurian Citizen" among us. How many Muslim terrorists have become naturalized American citizens, solely for the purpose of evading detection and being better positioned to launch terrorist attacks on the United States?
My guess is hundreds, if not thousands.
But if you listen to Barack Obama (or New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, for that matter), you would get the impression that it is somehow seditious to even articulate this obvious likelihood.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
General Motors and CEO Whitacre Violate FTC "Truth in Advertising Laws" With Debt Repayment Claims
General Motors CEO Ed Whitacre seems to have told a big bold lie in order to deceive consumers and potential future investors in the car maker now owned by the Federal Government as to the financial stability of the company.
In television ads and billboards posted in General Motors show rooms around the country, Whitacre has deceptively given the impression that General Motors has paid back all the money invested in it by taxpayers in full, early and with interest.
The clear implication is that the repayment was made from operational income generated by the successful and profitabl sale of GM autos. Senator Grassley and the TARP Fund Inspector General claim that the repayment wasn't made from operating profits but by shuffling funds from one TARP loan to another.
And the $6 to 8 billion or so paid off in this loan represent barely 10% of the total $60 billion or so of bailout money given to prop up General Motors over the past two years.
What does the Federal Trade Communication, which enforces the "Truth in Advertising" laws have to say about Whitacre's deceptive claim? Here's what the FTC web site has to say:
What makes an advertisement deceptive?
According to the FTC's Deception Policy Statement, an ad is deceptive if it contains a statement - or omits information - that:
(1) Is likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances; and
(2) Is "material" - that is, important to a consumer's decision to buy or use the product. I wonder what citizen or company will be the first to file a complaint that Whitacre and General Motors have just engaged in deceptive advertising?
Toyota, which the Federal Government does NOT own, certainly would have reason to claim it has been damaged.
Or perhaps one of the readers of this blog will be the first to file the complaint.
What are the odds that the Federal Trade Commission--which obviously has a conflict of interest because it, like General Motors, is part of the Federal Government bureaucracy--will actually pursue this legitimate complaint against General Motors?
So many opportunities to go after illegal and unethical acts by the Obama Big Government Corporatist Regime. So little time.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
I Will Be Attending the Richmond Virginia Tea Party Tonight
I will be attending the Richmond, Virginia Tax Day Tea Party this evening, where I will have a chance to meet Jamie Radtke, who's heading up the Northern Virginia Tea Party Federation. I will also be talking with the folks behind the Richmond Tea Party TV project.
News reports estimate up to 2,000 tea parties will be held across the country today, almost double the number that were held last year on the very first Tax Day Tea Party.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Obama National Socialism
One year and three months in to the Obama Administration, it's clear that Barack Obama's idea of bringing transformational change to America is about redistributing income from the majority of hard working Americans to special privileged classes. Obama's unique brand of socialism combines the worst of Marxist ideology with the crony capitalism and corruption of Chicago style machine politics.
Obama National Socialism will redistribute income and wealth in America to certain privileged classes from independent groups without political connections. The privileged classes represent about 20% to 30% of the population and include:
· Union leaders and union members, such as members of SEIU and the UAW
· Federal employees
· Non-tax paying recipients of federal transfer payments
· Democratic politicians at the state and national level
· Executives and employees of Main Stream Media companies
· Executives and employees of large corporations who are the beneficiaries of special economic privileges legislated on their behalf by Democratic politicians and administered by Federal bureaucrats.
The independent groups that are not favored, who comprise about 70% to 80% of the population include:
· Small business owners
· Tax paying middle class and upper-middle class workers
Obama National Socialism will redistribute income and wealth in America to certain privileged classes from independent groups without political connections. The privileged classes represent about 20% to 30% of the population and include:
· Union leaders and union members, such as members of SEIU and the UAW
· Federal employees
· Non-tax paying recipients of federal transfer payments
· Democratic politicians at the state and national level
· Executives and employees of Main Stream Media companies
· Executives and employees of large corporations who are the beneficiaries of special economic privileges legislated on their behalf by Democratic politicians and administered by Federal bureaucrats.
The independent groups that are not favored, who comprise about 70% to 80% of the population include:
· Small business owners
· Tax paying middle class and upper-middle class workers
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Jon Voight, National Treasure
That's Jon Voight with me on the West Lawn of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. at the "Code Red" Rally opposing Obamacare on Saturday, March 20, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)