- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The commerce clause negates the argument. The academic pedgiree means that TD is aware that he is making a false argument.
Not in the slightest. Look, just because liberals give more weight to a clause in the document rather than the document itself, only goes to show that liberals are intent on destroying the document under its own weight, and have NO intent on following it.
For all constitutional questions under the rule of law the first and last place to stop is the U.S. Constitution, which does include the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 – [Congress shall have power] to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. This clause is often paired with the Necessary and Proper Clause; the grouping since Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) has been used increasingly to seize broader and more tyrannical powers by the president, Congress and the courts over We the People. However, many conservative jurists, like Justices Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and Alito, who are strict constructionists deny that this is the proper application of the Commerce Clause because those limitless powers aren’t specifically mentioned in the 18 enumerated powers under Article I, Section 8.
However, Progressive, imperial presidents like Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09), Woodrow Wilson (1913-21) and FDR (1933-45) hated these constitutionally restrictive measures, seeing them as needless barriers to their revolutionary progressive agendas, so they appointed socialist judges to the Supreme Court who would uphold nakedly fascist laws when Congress began to engage in economic regulation on a national scale. This came to a showdown between constitutionalists and fascists under FDR’s Court Packing Plan in 1937, when the Supreme Court, in fear of losing its power and independence, cowardly gave up its power and independence by caving in to FDR’s liberal fascist demands to use the Commerce Clause to pass his unconstitutional “New Deal” programs, like Social Security, the National Labor Relation Board, Agricultural Adjustment Act, Securities and Exchange Commission and the welfare state. This treachery continued in Congress and the courts unabated for 60 years until the U.S. v. Lopez decision of 1995 when the Rehnquist Court resurrected the dormant Commerce Clause decisions to return a measure of power back to the states and to the people while limiting Congress’ regulation monopoly power over all economic activity.
Liberal fascists for over 100 years have corrupted the 16 simple words of the Commerce Clause the framers used to help define the balance of power between the federal government and the states and the balance of power between the two elected branches of the federal government and the Judiciary. If Obamacare passes constitutional scrutiny in all 50 states under the federal mandate, the federal government will have an illegitimate, unlimited right to have direct control over every aspect of American life from cradle to grave. That’s not freedom, that’s slavery – and the Democratic Party leaders are the slavemasters.
Liberal fascism and the Commerce Clause
j-mac