by Ron Paul
Last week President Obama made some rather shocking comments at a press conference regarding the Supreme Court’s deliberation on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. His comments belie a grasp of constitutional concepts so lacking that perhaps the University of Chicago Law School should offer a refund to any students “taught” constitutional law by then-Professor Obama!
He said, “Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” It almost sounds as if he believes the test of constitutionally is whether a majority approves of the bill, as opposed to whether the legislation lies within one of the express powers of the federal government. In fact, the very design of the Constitution, with power split amongst two branches of the legislature which write the laws, an executive who administers the laws, and an independent judiciary which resolves disputes regarding meaning of the laws, was designed to thwart popular will and preserve liberty.
President Obama continued in his comments, “For years, what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, there’s a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”
President Obama seems to misunderstand that the criticism of an activist judiciary is not that it is overturning unconstitutional federal laws, but instead that it is usurping the authority to intervene in areas, such as abortion, where the Constitution reserves authority to the states. In fact, upholding clearly unconstitutional laws such as Obamacare because the justices bowed to the “will of the people” or believed the individual mandate was good social policy could be considered an example of judicial activism.
The founders never intended the judiciary to have the last word on whether or not a law is constitutional. The judiciary is equal to the Congress and the President, not superior. Representatives, senators, presidents, and judges all have an independent duty to determine a law’s constitutionality. The founders would be horrified by the attitude of many lawmakers that they can pass whatever laws they want and federal judges will then determine whether or not the law is constitutional.
Additionally, state governments have the authority to protect their citizens from federal laws that threaten liberty. If the Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional, I hope state legislators will exercise their powers to pass legislation allowing their citizens to opt-out of the national health care plan.
Unfortunately, even many of my colleagues who correctly argue Obamacare’s unconstitutionality support the President when he asserts the power to send troops into battle without a declaration of war, or have citizens indefinitely detained and even assassinated on little more than his own authority. Other of my colleagues not only cheer the unconstitutional monstrosity of Obamacare, but support the President’s actions to defy the Senate’s appointment powers, and legislate by executive order.
Even worse, some members will only challenge a President’s unconstitutional actions if the President is from a different political party. The defeat of Obamacare in the courts would provide a stark reminder that the limits of government are set by the Constitution, not the will of the President, Congress, or even the Supreme Court. However, the victory would be short lived as long as the legislative branch refuses to do its duty to abide by the Constitutional limits and exercises its powers to ensure the other two branches do likewise.
Processing your request, Please wait....
ROOKIE
STUDIES PREDICT THAT THE BLOW BACK THREAT TO RON PAUL 1 WORLD CURRENCY LEADS TO A PERNICIOUS GLOBALIZATION, FOLLOWED BY A POST POLAR WORLD of WARS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001
Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give? us a SINGLE WORLD CURRENCY requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.” —
Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Even worse, some members will only challenge a president’s unconstitutional actions if the president is from a different political party.” Well said.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Corporatism = Capitalism. Anybody who denies the rather obvious observation of real world data is playing a bullshit game of “No True Scotsman.”
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Your the war monger. No me. I want peace and prosperity.
You want war, death, starvation, famine, and big ass governments declaring military action all over the world against each other. No thanks. Criminal. Vote for your spaghetti dinner buddy Obama. He likes meatballs I hear
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wrong. He’s a corporatist working for the corporatist. Big difference. If your working for a capitalist you’re an employee. If you’re working for a corporatist you’re a government bureaucrat.
Barack & Bush had dinner at your house last night. I wouldn’t feed either one of those two traitors. They are you’re good friends anyway. They like taking money and property from the People who produced it, and give it to you – whose done nothing but expect a handout from government for survival.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wrong. He’s a corporatist working for the corporatist. Big difference. If your working for a capitalist you’re an employee. If you’re working for a corporatist you’re a government bureaucrat.
Barack & Bush had dinner at your house last night. I wouldn’t feed either one of those two traitors. They are you’re good friends anyway. They like taking money and property from the People who produced it, and give it to you – whose done nothing but expect a handout from government for survival.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yeah, so you say. Communists say they’re all for joyful sharing.
Don’t you think people can’t see past your Marxist/LOLbertarian bullshit?
You’re the one who professes government aggression is necessary for your way of life, if it would just do it your way. Communists say the same shit.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Your good friend Barak Obama is working for the Capitalists, as middle management to get more money into “higher, tighter, and righter hands” (as your buddy Bush said) exactly the way capitalism works.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Libertarianism believes in non-violence
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh, it’s you who send our sons to war, lover of city-STATISM (civilization.)
“War is a staple of Civilization.”
~John Zerzan
On the Origins of War
scribd (dot) com/doc/20298938/Zerzan-The-Origins-of-War
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It just came out. And the only way to see it is to buy the DVD online and have it shipped. And when Bush and Clinton were closing down farmers with your good friend Barrack Obama, and destroying private property in direct violation of the Constitution, and detaining farmers who resisted the USDA – were you still blaming that on Capitalism?
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It just came out. And the only way to see it is to buy the DVD online and have it shipped. And when Bush and Clinton were closing down farmers with your good friend Barrack Obama, and destroying private property in direct violation of the Constitution, and detaining farmers who resisted the USDA – were you still blaming that on Capitalism?
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Me glorifying this soulless corrupt cesspool of a government is like saying that you endorse the principles of logic and sound thinking. It’s just simply not there. I don’t think that this government is worth saving, it needs to be reformed. It needs a complete overhaul. A good 80% of your friends who want to steal our money, lie to us, send our sons to war without authority, all need to go find work somewhere other then Washington DC.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Me glorifying this soulless corrupt cesspool of a government is like saying that you endorse the principles of logic and sound thinking. It’s just simply not there. I don’t think that this government is worth saving, it needs to be reformed. It needs a complete overhaul. A good 80% of your friends who want to steal our money, lie to us, send our sons to war without authority, all need to go find work somewhere other then Washington DC.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve seen Farmageddon. I didn’t notice Bush or Clinton opposing agriculture. Did you?
I did see Bush and Clinton operating as middle management for the big capitalists. Did you?
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You are the one who wants and glorifies government and all the good it will do for you.
Not me. Government is for agricultural city-STATISTS like you.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well they’re all criminals – your type of friends. You would know.
Watch Farmageddon and tell me if Obama and Bush haven’t declared an all out assault on American farmers.
CRIMINALS.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Preach it, bro, cuz it works (in fantasy land.)
By the way, clinton, bush, obama, and FDR are yours, ya’ll being agricultural city-STATISTS.
At least I never heard of any of them speaking out against agriculture. Did you happen to? LOL
“Agriculture creates government.” ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p. 73
Read and learn, if’n it ain’t too much bother.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re the fraud and the criminal. You want government to take from the people so it can give your property to someone else.
You’re the degenerate. Your the crook. Not me. I want you to keep the money you make so you can take care of your family. I don’t want it. nor do I want government to take it from you to spend it on things you find morally repugnant.
Get your head out of your ass
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Limited government. 3 functions. Protect the liberties of the people, provide for a national defense (not offense), and enforce contract & property rights.
Not endless war like you want, or unlimited welfare programs like you adore, or the evisceration of our God given freedoms that you encourage, or the destruction of our purchasing power that you embrace.
No thanks. You can have your Clintons, your Bush’s, your Obama’s, Your FDR’s, your LBJ’s and put them on the front lines in Afghanistan.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Keep preaching it, bro, but in the end, both are just slightly different manifestations of aggressively invasive and occupational Agricultural City-Statism (civilization.) About as much difference as between a ford and a chevy.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve heard the preaching from the Market Fundamentalist scriptures. It’s bullshit. Just like Marx said communism is all about sharing right?
You’re as much of a fraud as Marx.
Communism is an observable disaster, and so is Capitalism. Not surprising, since both are just slight variations on city-STATISM.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Communism levies a tax against the people, centrally plans and produces everything at the government level, and demands the worship of the state.
the two are polar opposites. Where you get this comparison…comes from planet Zeynon
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Quit your lying like Marx. You bullshit us that the Indians were doing agricultural civilization, but don’t mention it was only in a few areas that had collapsed. Which will happen to this particular style of agricultural city-Statism too.
And yeah, you’re a BIG GOVERMENT LOVER. Look at your adoring words, basically admitting you love Government aggression to keep stuff you want.
LOLbertarianism is “Government for me, but not for thee.”
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Capitalism works on the simple premise that to me, the money I have is less valuable then the item that you’re selling. To you, the money I have is more valuable then the item that you’re selling.
Capitalism works on voluntary exchange and voluntary association where both participants win. I get the TV I want at the price I want, you get the amount of money that allows you to continue business operations.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re messed up dude. I never said a thing about “non-State Indian tribes in the eastern woodlands” – whatever, insert your own assumptions there, just like Marx.
Government sweet talk? You didn’t score very high in reading comprehension did you? Limited government – that is the solution.
Your last sentence makes absolutely no sense. None. It’s not “liberal book learnin’” as you project. It’s an aversion to historical redaction that is most infuriating.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cronyism = Hierarchy, that is, how both Capitalism and Communism work.
You are in denial, and trot out the “No True Scotsman” argument every time anybody has a valid critique of capitalism. Basically, all good things are “capitalist,” all bad things are “cronyism.”
As church lady said, “how conveeeenient!”
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m not ignoring anything except your uninformed creationist level bullshit about anthropology. You’re totally lying your caricatures of non-State Indian tribes in the eastern woodlands.
And you’re full of shit with your government sweet talk. Government force is needed to kill off native non-State families to occupy land for agriculture. It’s happened the world over for the last 10,000yrs, but then you have a creationist strength aversion to any of that damn liberal book larnin’.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re off the deep end.
Aint a damn thing wrong with Capitalism. You’re pissed at cronyism. The two are not the same. cronyism partners with government to squeeze out competition. Capitalism performs on it’s own without incestuous government no-bid contracts.
Massive distinction.
You’re a fraud and you’re wrong wrong wrong.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Simply because you *say* that there was no agriculture without government does not mean that you’re correct. I just gave you 2 examples that you conveniently ignored right off the top of my head. It’s bullshit dude. The theory is wrong.
Again the only government force that capitalism needs to survive is for government to have honest money, enforce contracts, and uphold property rights. Thats not against the people, thats for the people because it allows folks to retain what is rightfully theirs
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Keep believing the LIE, Tex. There is no Agriculture, Market, City, or Capitalism without government Force. 10,000 years of history prove me right. All the volumes of LOLbertaian bullshit can’t beat reality.
And you’re fucking stupid enough to not understand that government is merely the middle management for capitalists, totally pwned.
Enjoy your delusions of religio-economic salvationism; they might be a comfort to you.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Statism is not a consequence of Capitalism. Statism is a result of the unchecked growth of government.
You have two choices Deep: You either embrace the form of Federalism that wew have, fall in love with it, have let government run your life and own your property (statism) – or you try to change it. If you change it there are two ways to go. Either more government leading to Communism running absolutely everything – or less and returning to the market for solutions. I choose the latter.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ever see Capitalist City-Statism (civilization) without government? No? Then don’t fucking lie.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re a full of shit Texas Fundie boy who hates any of that book learning. Creationist too?
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As for your Communism & Capitalism comparison – one is a function of government the other is a function of the market buying as selling goods.
It’s like trying to compare a broken down busted Pinto to the guy who goes and works in the factory that builds…I don’t know…wooden desks. It’s two entirely different things – and the comparison is weak, stupid, and demagoguery.
You need to vote for Obama you criminal.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0