Articles tagged as

Constitution

Introduction to the Constitution (Updated Video Link)

Hillsdale College LogoAs a followup to Skip’s post on the Hillsdale College Constitution 101 class, I wanted to make you aware of some excellent video-lectures called an “Introduction to the Constitution,”  that you may want to watch before you proceed to ‘Constitution 101.’   You’ll have access to these if you register for the free Constitution 101 course, (a well as PDF’s of all the related founding documents, and study guides)  but I wanted to post them over the next few days to give you a taste of what you can look forward to in Constitution 101.

Besides, like many of you, we plan to do a lot of things at the Grok that we never end up doing because there are only so many hours in the day.  By posting these here we encourage ourselves, and hopefully others, to take advantage of these excellent opportunities–opportunities that arm us all with knowledge our progressive friends would rather you not have.

What better motivation is there than that?

Read more

Data Point – Importance: First Amendment Right or Free Contraceptives?

Gallup has the latest on the views concerning those who believe that the enumerated First Amendment Right to Religious Freedom should reign supreme, or Obamacare forcing religious institutions to provide “free” contraceptives, abortifacients, sterilization, or abortion services to those they cover.  First chart is broken out by sex:

Gallup: American Sympathies In Contraception Healthcare - Religious Freedom DebateNext is support shown by the religious vs non-religious:

Read more

And if you think that I am misquoting Senator Jeanne Shaheen and saying she cherishes abortion over Liberty, read her own words

“…a power grab as Government is reaching into yet another part of our private lives to force us to fulfill the selfishness of Progressive politicians such as yourself, putting your ideology ahead of our freedoms”.

From her own official US Senator website and the transcript of her Senate floor address from Feb 7.  Read through it – how often do you read the words “freedom” or “liberty”?  Does she quote one of the Founders?  Does she reference the Constitution?  Does she talk about Government overreach?  Does she talk about freedom of choice for all people, regardless of any special identity group?

What is her highest value?

…I also commend the President for standing up for women’s health and reaffirming the recommendation of the Institute of Medicine to protect access to affordable birth control for all women.  The decision to require health plans’ coverage of contraception with no copays or deductibles will change the lives of millions of women and their families for the better.

Ah yes, the Institute of Medicine – this batch of unelected bureaucrats have decided, in all of their fantabulous wisdom, that their pronouncement of a “want” (or even a “maybe should have”).  Look, in terms of actual medical advice, they certainly should give it.  But the United States is neither a hospital or an academic Ivory Tower.  Instead, this is a political matter, a cultural matter, and one that should be rightly measured against the timeless principles of the Constitution.

What Jeanne has shown us, however, the game plan is plain from a Progressive’s standpoint: consult “the experts”, do not question them, and immediately put their expert recommendations into policy.  After all, they know better what we need than we do.

My questions is,  how long do the Progressives think that they can play King Canute and believe they can tell the Laws of Economics to suspend themselves (“with no copays or deductibles”).

Read more

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptions: Use a better Constitution than ours

I could not believe my ears and eyes when I watched this video of her giving advice to the Egyptians as their “Arab Spring” moment moves onward and they begin the process of creating a their new Mubarek-less State (will that be a great tradeoff for the US with the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists controlling 75% of the new Parliament?  Does anyone disagree that the operative phrase is going to be “Shar’iah Law”?).  Given Bader Ginsburg’s status as one of THE defenders of the US Constitution, I could only shake my head. I expected more – much more.  Sure, if one is a law lecturer, a legal scholar (which the Justices are, no doubt), I would not have been as surprised (slightly annoyed, but not surprised).  But not only did I (and I would posit most Americans as well), expect her to be that scholar and more, and one that would have been championing the checks and balances, the simplicity of our Constitution.

From MEMRI, the short form:

Here is a longer version that was posted by the US Embassy in Cairo of the interview:

Read more

TEA Party and the Presidential Election – the view should be “and a cherry on top”

I just discovered that a reporter from the Dallas Morning News, with whom I had an phone interview last week, actually used a quote from me in his piece “Front-runner Romney hardly a tea party favorite“:

“Was the tea party movement, if we don’t nominate a conservative tea party candidate, much of a success?” said Skip Murphy, a tea party activist in New Hampshire. “My main goal is to beat Obama. If we stop the progressive administration and start to move toward more conservative values in this government, that’s something. It’s taken years to get where we are, and it’s going to take years to turn this around.”

And he also quoted fellow TEA Party activists Jerry DeLemus, Jane Aitken, Ken Eyring, and Brad Winslow.  In fact, the quote from Brad reinforced what I had been trying to emphasize with the reporter, Wayne Slater :

Brad Winslow, a software designer from Salem, agreed that while the tea party might fall short in putting a staunchly conservative budget hawk in the White House, its impact would be felt in local and state politics.

“We’re changing school boards and we’re getting local officials elected. Certainly at the state level of New Hampshire, we’ve made gains,” he said. “Have we solved our problems with RINOs [Republicans in name only]? … It’s going to take a while to weed that out.”

Get that last part?  About “We’re changing school boards and we’re getting local officials elected.  So true.

The knock on the Presidential Primary campaign is “oh, the TEA Party is broken and old news” because there is no clearly identifiable TEA Party candidate in the running (a la Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL).  The Republican Establishment is happy, the Left is saying ‘whew!” and the media is supporting both.  Yet, all three are missing the point of what the TEA Party is and what it is all about.

Read more

How else will Obama ignore the Constitution?

Yeah, replacing it with “himself” would be one way

(H/T: Nat Beeler)

Update: A friend of mine from Ohio sent me this email:

Skip – while I enjoy the cartoons, I think today’s cartoon misses the mark:  we have a Congress and Republican mindset that refuses to vote on appointments.   Its really too bad the President can’t fire Congress for failing to work.  On the plus side – at least when they’re on recess they’re not spending money 🙂

I really like this guy – have worked with him, collaborated with him, and have known him for years.  But this, I needed to respond to:

>> Its really too bad the President can’t fire Congress for failing to work

Think about it – this really is a feature and not a bug.  A DELIBERATE feature!

Read more

Facebook Doodlings – Why is it the job of the Feds to rehab 35,000 schools?

Yet another instance of spending time writing somewhere else instead of writing here, so, am double purposing yet again.  This thread from FB was from Sept (yeah, catching up as always) when Obama wanted to spend $25 Billion (more of what we don’t have) to rehab up to 35,000.  Once again the question must be asked (yes, edited to be more bloggish):

Why is it the Federal Govt’s job to “rehab 35,000 schools”?

If the local communities have so bungled their OWN infrastructure so badly, why is it that the rest of us have responsibility to fund it just because Obama says so? Where’s the accountability in that?

And the last part of that is couched in those terms because education has generally been a local activity and not a federal one.  Here in NH, it IS local – every year for the last six years, I have reviewed my town’s school budget as part of my hamlet’s Budget Committee (which actually prepares the budgets that all of the town’s voters vote up or down).  As part of doing that, I have learned the hardware that tax monies get sucked out of the local scene, filter through the DC bureaucracy, get strings attached, and then a relatively small percentage comes back to the folks that forked it out in the first place.   You can be sure that this “free money” as everyone else is kowtowing to get (under the rubric of blatant greed of “if we don’t take it, someone else will” – just like kindergarteners who are afraid they won’t get their Twinkie snack).

Well, it seemed to one commenter that the right answer was “Sure!”;  after all “because nobody else wants to do it”?  In other words, if the locals decide to do nothing, then his implicit answer is the Feds must do it by default.  My retort was:

You think the Feds should because the locals won’t? Shouldn’t the Feds be smart enough not to fall for that Tom Sawyer fence whitewash trick?

Yes, I started to get a bit hot under the collar as I have with others – it seems with folks like the commenter, their expectation is that the Feds are supposed to right all ills – when the locals are judged to have not done the job, it has to be made right by spending other folks money.  Wrong answer, as it penalizes those communities that ARE doing the right things.

Read more

Email Doodlings – The wars may be ending, but will this wrong headed perception?

Obama has unilaterally ended the Iraq war (hmmm, didn’t he rail against that “Cowboy Unilateralist” Bush for making decisions on his own?) and is on his way in doing the same in Afghanistan.  And while I had some words about it here, this is not the thrust of this post.  Instead, it is this:

Neo-cons have no problem sacrificing their own children to the war machine. That sounds harsh, but it’s the truth

It brought back a memory of something very similar – it ignited my ire by effective saying the same thing:

Finally, if you believe in this mission, whatever it really is, are you willing to die or send your children to die for it?

This time, it started off with a discussion back aways about Sarah Palin getting into the Primary race but quickly morphed from that to this and I never expected to hear that from a non-Liberal friend.  In essence, the far Left and the far Right / Libertarian movement have met and in a very ugly fashion in accusing parents of willingly sending their kids to die for an ideology.  This is wrong at several different levels and to be clear, made my blood pressure rise – so I started to answer:

Read more

The Mayflower Compact

signing Mayflower Compact

Today, in 1620, (November 11th on the Julian Calendar, November 21st on the Gregorian Calendar) 41 male passengers from the Mayflower agreed to form a civil body for the purpose of self governance.  Years later this would be referred to as the Mayflower Compact.

 

 

In ye name of God Amen· We whose names are vnderwriten,
the loyall subjects of our dread soueraigne Lord King James
by ye grace of God, of great Britaine, franc, & Ireland king,
defender of ye faith, &c

Haueing vndertaken, for ye glorie of God, and aduancemente
of ye christian ^faith and honour of our king & countrie, a voyage to
plant ye first colonie in ye Northerne parts of Virginia· doe
by these presents solemnly & mutualy in ye presence of God, and
one of another, couenant, & combine our selues togeather into a
ciuill body politick; for ye our better ordering, & preseruation & fur=
therance of ye ends aforesaid; and by vertue hearof, to enacte,
constitute, and frame shuch just & equall lawes, ordinances,
Acts, constitutions, & offices, from time to time, as shall be thought
most meete & conuenient for ye generall good of ye colonie:  vnto
which we promise all due submission and obedience.  In witnes
wherof we haue herevnder subscribed our names at Cap=
Codd ye ·11· of Nouember, in ye year of ye raigne of our soueraigne
Lord king James of England, france, & Ireland ye eighteenth
and of Scotland ye fiftie fourth. Ano: Dom ·1620·|

(Modern version on the jump)

Read more

The U.S. Constitutional Right to Self-Defense

From Prof. Glenn Reynolds’ "Second Amendment Penumbras: Some Preliminary Observations," commenting on the Supreme Court’s 2008 Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller: "The core of Heller is a constitutionalization of the right of self-defense. The right of individuals to protect themselves against violence is, in  this analysis, so important that it is, in … Read more

VETO OVERRIDDEN: SENATE BILL 88 NOW GOES TO THE HOUSE!

“Self-defense is the clearest of all laws, and for this reason: lawyers didn’t make it” ~Douglas William Jerrold

Despite the efforts of Governor Lynch, his Attorney General and a hand full of unelected Police Chiefs around the state, The New Hampshire Senate voted this afternoon to self%20defense%20femaile.jpg
override the Governor’s veto on a vote of 17 to 7. The Bill now goes to the House where it will become law upon concurrence with the Senate Veto override.

During his walking parade through some of the meaner streets of Manchester, several demagoguery cards were used falsely implying SB 88’s becoming law would empower gang members…Which I find rather bizarre since Local Law Enforcement here will tell you we don’t have a significant gang problem.

During his many rants, Governor Lynch challenged the need for this law, claiming supporters of the SB88, “have not been able to identify a single case in New Hampshire where someone has been wrongly prosecuted for using deadly force to protect themselves or others. In fact, current law puts the burden on the state to disprove beyond reasonable doubt claims of self-defense.”

Well Thanks to Attorney Penny Dean of Concord, who provided reference and source materials, the challenge is accepted….

STATE V. JOSEPH BROWN
Superior Court, Carroll County No. 05-S-358

Joseph Gleason, an over six-foot tall and 200-pound burley fellow with a criminal record for violence, pursued Brown off of a highway, characterized as a fit of “road rage.” The five-foot, four-inch 140-pound Brown (with no prior criminal record) now found himself trapped at a traffic light behind other vehicles, with no route of escape from Gleason, as the 280-pound Gleason exited his vehicle and began screaming, yelling, swearing and pounding on Brown’s vehicle punching on the windows of Brown’s Buick.

With no way to escape, and fearing for his safety, Joseph Brown produced a handgun, merely showing it, but never pointing it at Gleason. Brown was subsequently arrested, charged and forced to stand trial. After considerable legal expense the case was noll prosequied.

During Joseph Brown’s arrest, N.H. State Trooper Beth Keyes asserted, “Your right to self defense is your right to call 911…”.

STATE V. PHILLIP TUFANO
Superior Court, Merrimack County 2008

Tufano of Londonderry was charged with threatening Paul DeFilippo with a handgun in August of 2008 following a road rage incident on Route 93. Tufano charged after he held up his “still-holstered” gun in an effort to diffuse the situation when DeFilippo ran him off the roadway, causing him to fear for his life.

Read more

IGNORING THE U.S CONSTITUTION

 “Congress seems to want to cure every ill known to man except unconstitutional government and high taxes.” ~Charley Reese

      President_Naturalization.jpg

 BillofRightsVOid.jpgFriday, August 19, The Federal Election Commission released two draft advisory opinions indicating that it might allow a naturalized, Guyana-born American citizen to file papers and raise funds for run a Presidential run in 2012.

New York City lawyer Abdul Hassan, under this ruling, could conceivably be permitted to go through the initial steps to run for president. Hassan was born in the South American country of Guyana in 1974, and asked the FEC in July whether he could legally raise funds for his presidential candidacy.

Faced with the possibility of deciding a substantial question of a constitutional nature, one would think the FEC would simply tell him to, “get lost” and petition the judicial branch for such a substantial pivotal answer. Do you think they did that? No. . The hacks at FEC readily and willingly stepped up and responded, “although the Commission can respond to the questions asked in [his] advisory opinion, the Commission cannot make any determination as to whether [Hassan] can, as a naturalized citizen, serve as President.”

FEC told Hassan in a July 18 e-mail response that he could be a candidate, may solicit funds and would be required to file disclosure reports. But opinions differ on whether he may receive federal matching funds.  In the FEC’s first draft opinion, they advise Hassan that he would not be able to receive matching funds citing the constitutional provision. Yet, in the second draft opinion, they dodge the question entirely, characterizing it as a, “hypothetical question.”

Read more

The First Circuit Videotape Opinion and House BIll 145

“In the Halls of Justice the only justice is in the halls.” ~Lenny Bruce 

little_brother_is_watching_back_GROK.jpg

On one October 2007 evening, Boston attorney Simon Glik, was walking past Boston Common where Boston police officers John Cunniffe, Peter Savalis and Jerome Brewster were effecting an arrest. Hearing a nearby person state, “Stop! You’re hurting him!” Glik began video recording the incident from approximately ten feet away, using his cell phone. Shortly thereafter, Glik was arrested and his cell phone confiscated.

Charged with violation of the Massachusetts wiretap statute(Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99(C)(1)), In February, 2008, the Boston Municipal Court summarily disposed of the wiretap charge, noting,  “the fact that the officers were unhappy they were being recorded during an arrest . . . does not make a lawful exercise of a First Amendment right a crime.” 

Glik filed a civil rights action against the officers and the City of Boston in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts when his internal affairs complaints were ignored. Summarily, The People’s Republik moved to dismiss Glik’s complaint asserting that his allegations failed to adequately support his claims and that officers were entitled to qualified immunity “because it is not well-settled that he had a constitutional right to record the officers.” The court denied the motion and the commonwealth’s interlocutory appeal followed in which they did not prevail.

In its opinion, the court stated, “Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting ‘the free discussion of governmental affairs.’” And the court ruled “a citizen’s right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public place is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment…”

In the wake of this opinion are the countless arrests in the Granite State for the very same activities, as detailed numerous times in the New Hampshire Union Leader.  The one incident that comes to mind is a Sheriff’s Deputy attempting to thwart Representative Gary Hopper from video-recording in the Legislative Office building back in 2010.  Finally, House Bill 145 , presently languishes in the Senate and has met with a great deal of resistance from Law Enforcement.  

Police are concerned that the bill fails to protect both their privacy and that of the public they serve. Privacy? What privacy? they are Public servants subject to the accountability to that same public they serve!

Read more

Ya think, maybe, they shoulda said this, like, in an American city?

Seattle PI: ABA debates birthright US citizenship TORONTO (AP) — The American Bar Association will vote next week on a resolution urging the U.S. Congress to reject any changes to the Constitution that would eliminate the automatic grant of citizenship to anyone born in the United States. The association, which is holding its annual meeting … Read more

The Boehner Debt Ceiling Bill: compare the Pressers

First, from Congressman Frank Guinta (R-NH) who was supported, in large measure, by NH TEA Party and 9/12 Project leaning folks: “By voting to cut spending at a deeper level than we raised the debt ceiling, the House has taken an important step toward fiscal responsibility.  Our best opportunity for doing that was the Cut, … Read more

The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which … Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXing