Tuesday, June 3, 2014

THE AMERICAN WAY


The liberal/progressive ideology is not new in America. It has been a scourge in this country for well over 150 years. In the middle of the 19th century there was Horace Mann, followed by John Dewey in the early part of the 20th century, progressive socialists both, that gave us the train wreck known as public education. Woodrow Wilson was a big time progressive and of course FDR with his New Deal and LBJ with his Great Society have inflicted deep generational damage to the country.


During my lifetime, liberalism has continued to spread like an aggressive cancer. The cesspool of academia has provided a fertile breeding ground and facilitated liberal dominance in the media, our culture and the body politic. We are, in my opinion, now heading toward the ultimate manifestation of this depraved ideology.    



After the Constitutional Convention, a lady asked Benjamin Franklin what form of government had been established. “A republic,” replied Franklin, “if you can keep it.”

We are not a strict democracy where majority rules. We get to elect our leadership but they are bound by the constraints of the Constitution. It was intended that we be, in the words of John Adams, “A government of laws and not of men.” Considering what is going on in this country today, Franklin's cautionary response appears prescient. Every day now, it seems, we see the president or someone in his administration break the law, ignore the law or, without bothering to get the consent of the legislature, change the law. That so many American citizens, along with a complicit media, not only tolerate such lawlessness but actually endorse it is scary and terribly sad. In a rare moment of honesty, Obama said that he wants to “fundamentally transform” America. This is revealing. One would not want to “fundamentally transform” something they love. It is clear to me that Obama and the liberal elites have a deep- rooted animus toward this country and they are doing their best to change what it means to be an American.



The idea of America, I think, includes two aspects. Individual sovereignty and the law. Our culture was once predicated on freedom and individual sovereignty, conditions proclaimed as man's unalienable right in the Declaration of Independence and codified as law by the Constitution. Liberals, in general, and Obama in particular are able to corrupt the culture because the Constitution is not self-enforcing. It requires politicians of high moral character who respect their oath to uphold it. Today most Democrats are quite willing to subvert the Constitution and most Republicans are too scared and weak to hold them accountable. The American Way is in serious jeopardy.



By means of examining current events and legislative issues, I will attempt to illustrate how the Liberal Way is antithetical to freedom and individual sovereignty and, hopefully, provide a reasoned and compelling argument in support of our founding principles, which will convince readers to embrace “The American Way!”



This review is not intended to be a rigorous examination of every Supreme Court decision. I want people to read this without dying of boredom. Besides, on any particular issue, I could site Court decisions both in support and in opposition to my position. Supreme Court rulings have the force of law but that does not mean my interpretations are illegitimate.


Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.” Thomas Jefferson



As a man of ordinary understanding and common sense, I believe the Constitution needs to be interpreted within the context of the Founder's original intent. Fortunately, the Founders were prolific writers, bold and clear in stating their positions. From the Federalist Papers, Common Sense and countless personal letters, to the recorded history of the Constitutional Convention, their intentions were clear. They had recently won a war against a king and they were terrified of reimposing a strong centralized government on themselves. But they also recognized the need for a federal government strong enough to protect individual rights and freedom from enemies, both foreign and domestic and to “form a more perfect Union.” My Constitutional philosophy leans heavily on those parts of the document that, in my opinion, best illustrate their brilliance in achieving both these competing goals. The Ninth Amendment- “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” and the Tenth Amendment-”The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” make it very clear that only certain powers were delegated to the federal government. The Ninth Amendment refers to Article I, Section 8 where very limited and concise powers are enumerated. And no, taxing hard working Americans so the government can pay for the birth control for some graduate school skank did not make the list.



Liberals, armed with neither ordinary understanding or common sense, prefer to search for interpretations in “metaphysical subtleties” which leads to inconsistent and ridiculous positions. To Wit:



MINIMUM WAGE



The Liberal Way: Barack Obama says, ”It's time to give America a raise.” He is promoting legislation that would raise the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour. “As Americans, we believe that honest work should be rewarded with honest wages. That certainly means that no one who works full time should ever have to raise a family in poverty....most workers who would get a raise when Congress passes this bill aren't teenagers taking on their first job. They average 35 years old,” he says. He lauds those few states that have already passed laws raising their minimum wage. He shows his business acumen when he explains, “Profitable businesses...pay higher wages too, not out of charity but because it reduces employee turnover, boosts productivity and improves the bottom line.”



The American Way: Article I, section 10 of the Constitution prohibits States from “impairing the obligations of contracts...” Through the years courts have seen fit to diminish the potential of this clause but they have also ruled that a right to enter into contracts free from unreasonable government regulations is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Sometimes whacky and often inconsistent jurisprudence aside, there can be no disputing the Founder's view that private property is considered sacred and a man's labor is his property. To quote Madison, workers have “free use of their faculties, and free choice of their occupations, which...constitute their property in the general sense of the word.”



I know to challenge Obama is considered racist but I wish someone would ask him a simple question. If $10.10 an hour is good, wouldn't $20 an hour be better? How about $50? Heck, why not just sign an executive order making it $100 and we can all party like rock stars! It's ridiculous. Even an economic midget like Obama knows there is a point where an artificially high cost of labor will result in reduced job opportunities. He just doesn't know what that number is. Neither do I but I know a great economic system that will find it. It's called the Free Market. A minimum wage that is higher than the competitive market wage level will result in an increase in unemployment and the greater the difference between the artificial wage and the competitive market wage, the higher the unemployment rate. The cost of labor, just like the cost of material goods, is subject to the law of supply and demand. Wages will rise as the demand for labor increases. If Obama really wanted to help low-wage workers, he would stop punishing those that actually create jobs.



In 1995, the congressional Joint Economic Committee published a review of 50 years of academic research on the minimum wage. The study concluded that effects of increasing the minimum wage included:



*Increasing the likelihood and duration of unemployment for low-wage workers;



*Encouraging employers to cut worker training;



*Increasing inflationary pressure;



*Encouraging employers to cut back on fringe benefits;



*Increasing teenage crime rates; and



*Encouraging employees to hire illegal aliens.



More specific to Obama's plan, the Congressional Budget Office recently released a report showing that an increase in the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour could help lift 900,000 workers out of poverty but would cost approximately 500,000 jobs! Gee, thanks comrade!



Once again, dipshit politicians commission a survey, paid for by us, with the hope that it will validate their idiotic schemes, then ignore it when it concludes that their ideas are idiotic. It would make more sense for Obama to promise low-wage workers magic beans and fairy dust. It would do them every bit as good as raising the minimum wage and in fact would do them much less harm.