WATCH LIVE: Google+ Hangout – Government Shutdown – today, 2pm Central!

event_theme[1]Watch live panel discussion here: Government Shutdown, An Economic and Policy Analysis

With political media strategist James Kotecki moderating a discussion with policy & economic experts about the shutdown. Kotecki will be joined by Stan Veuger (American Enterprise Institute), Pradheep Shanker (Conservative Union Community on Google+), and CJ Guest (Sensible Politics Community on Google+).

Our very own Pradheep Shanker will be participating LIVE in this Hangout!

 


Google+ Hangout – Government Shutdown – today, 2pm Central!

Today, Wednesday Oct 16, 3pm Eastern, 2pm Central

Google+ Community Partnerships Representative Mackenzie Thomas has set up a Hangout on Air to discuss the current Government Shutdown.

The conversation is expected to cover the implications of the shutdown, potential affected areas that the general public is not really thinking about, the debt ceiling, and strong solutions on the table. Of course, the talk can touch some more topics, so really….anything can happen – live on YouTube!!

The cast:

ModeratorJames Kotecki, a political media strategist with a very strong political YouTube presence

Participants:

Go to the Conservative Union Community for the link, we’ll also try to post it here, if we can

This post will be updated with links and further information as the day progresses.

UPDATE: The event can be found here: https://plus.google.com/events/c2ea1i3f6k5ebiu6rhgcohrlo7g

On the Government Shutdown vs the Supreme Court

So in the fury of the Government Shutdown, the left has become apoplectic about the “Affordable Care Act”.  You’ll more likely recognize it as “Obamacare”. They consider it to be Constitutionally tested by the Supreme Court, therefore it’s the “law of the land”.

This logic is fundamentally unsound, let’s debunk it.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

1) The Constitution does not grant “kingly” powers to the Supreme Court.  Their job is to rule on the law brought before them, and to clear up controversies between states.

2) Nowhere in article III of the Constitution or in the Federalist papers, Thomas Jefferson’s letters, etc do you see that the Supreme Court was supposed to be the “final say”.  Jefferson in fact believed their power should be limited even further, than the Constitution did already.

3) We know for a fact the left doesn’t actually believe their own words. Let’s go through their history of fighting against the Constitution itself :

3.A) The Progressive Income tax was tried several times before the amendment was brought up and each time it was found unconstitutional.  Did that stop the Progressives from trying to trash the Constitution and implement their marxist utopian tax?  NOPE.  They kept fighting and eventually (and illegally) amended the Constitution to add the Progressive Income tax.

3.B) The recent rulings declaring corporations have free speech and that every citizen has a right to defend themselves with a firearm.  Has the left stopped fighting against Corporate speech?  Have they stopped fighting for gun control?  HELL NO.  They never give up on those things, even though, in their own words, “The Supreme Court is the law of the land.”

4) The Supreme Court only ruled on one part of the law, the individual mandate.  But as this site states;

Feel free to examine the entire text of Article III to assure yourself that no power of Judicial Review is granted by the Constitution.

“Well,” you might say, “someone has to review laws for constitutionality. Why not the Supreme Court?” Some possible answers:

  • First and foremost, it is not a power granted to the Supreme Court by the Constitution. When the Supreme Court exercises Judicial Review, it is acting unconstitutionally.
  • It is a huge conflict of interest. The Federal Government is judging the constitutionality of its own laws. It is a classic case of “the fox guarding the hen house.”
  • The Constitution’s “checks and balances” were designed to prevent any one branch of government (legislative, executive or judicial) from becoming too powerful and running roughshod over the other branches. There is no such system of checks and balances to protect the states and the people when multiple branches of government, acting in concert, erode and destroy the rights and powers of the states and the people.
  • Even if the Supreme Court could be counted on to keep the Executive and Legislative branches from violating the Constitution, who is watching the Supreme Court and will prevent the Judicial branch from acting unconstitutionally? Unless you believe that the Supreme Court is infallible (and, demonstrably, it is not), then allowing the Supreme Court to be the sole arbiter of Constitutionality issues is obviously flawed.
  • Justices are appointed, not elected and may only be removed for bad behavior (which has happened in the distant past but these days, appointment to the Supreme Court is like a lifetime appointment). If the court upholds unconstitutional laws, there is no recourse available. We the People cannot simply vote them out to correct the situation. Thomas Jefferson wrote, in 1823:”At the establishment of our constitution, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.

Therefore, it doesn’t matter if the individual mandate was ruled constitutional by the Government.  They are exercising an authority that doesn’t belong to them.  It certainly was never meant to be the *final* verdict on constitutionality.  As http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html – so poignantly points out;

“It is the Constitution, not the Supreme Court, which is the Supreme Law of the Land. Even the Supreme Court should be accountable for overstepping Constitutional limits on federal power.

Conclusion:

Obamacare is bad and unconstitutional law, just like the Alcohol Prohibition, which was upheld by the Supreme Court, and Slavery, which was also upheld in the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court is not the final say in our Country, we are not a country ruled by Justices.  The Constitution is the final say, and it’s up to EACH body and Representative to uphold and fight for that document.  The Government Shutdown MUST continue until we defund/delay the implementation of this HORRIBLE law, that none of the proponents bothered to read before voting YES.

ObamaCare-Totally-Safe

Obamacare is killing jobs, Obamacare is killing privacy, Obamacare will kill people.

The goal of Obamacare, is not to increase Health Care access.

It’s goal is to decrease the amount of money we’re spending on Health Care.  That’s all the left talks about.  How much more we spend on Healthcare than countries with “wonderful” universal Healthcare.

I hate to burst their bubble, but life is not all sunshine and lollipops with Universal Healthcare.  ObamaCare AKA the Affordable Care Act, is a step towards Universal Healthcare and will destroy the wonderful Health Care this nation enjoys.

It is completely appropriate to compare it to Slavery, as the Government will judge your worth, and determine if you are worthy of being helped.  You belong to the state. 

That is why Republicans need to keep the Government Shutdown! We CANNOT stop fighting hard enough against this bill, it is bondage.

Shackled to ObamaCare

A Happy Conservative’s Thoughts On The Shutdown

kermit waving arms

A few random pontifications on the government shutdown.

  • I for one think politically speaking, this is going much better than I could have predicted. I was supportive of the defund strategy, but thought it would all fall  apart in the first few minutes of a actual shutdown.  Give credit where credit is due:  Ted Cruz et al may have started this, but John Boehner is the one keeping the caucus together, against moderate threats like Peter King.
  • Where do we go from here?  I think it is pretty clear it will take another cliff to get both sides together, for a simple reason:  the government shutdown has not been very painful.  There is no motivation for either side to compromise right now.  Sure, the polls show a slightly larger portion of the population blames the GOP, but nowhere near the numbers of the 1995 shutdown. That is bad news for Obama. However, Obama is still under the illusion that this is a repeat of 1995, as are his West Wing advisors.  Until that view changes, we are on lockdown.
  • The next bump in the road:  the debt ceiling.  I think for all sides, that is far more important than this shutdown.  Default clearly would cause more repercussions than anything occurring today.
  • Be prepared for an unsatisfying end to this.  There is no way the GOP wins on all its points.  However, even a partial win by the GOP should be considered an achievement, considering the make up of D.C. today.  If we can get the medical device tax repealed, or something along the lines of the Vitter amendment, along with some other cost savings, I would be content.
  • The one negative of the shutdown?  The diluted news coverage of the debacle that has been the Obamacare startup.  The Feds are searching frantically for good news, and the best they can come up with is web hits.  Sorry, but that is about as useless a barometer as I can imagine.  Now, show me number of people who actually signed up for insurance, and then we can talk.  The most successful exchanges have signed up a few thousand customers; some have not signed up a single person yet, two days into this process.
  • So far, the Obama people have failed in finding any victims to point to in order to villify Republicans, but they did a pretty good job in creating victims to villify Obama.  The silliness at the World War II Memorial was about as stupid a political move as one can imagine.  And don’t doubt for a second that some political appointee reading Alinsky Rules didn’t make this decision.  No such barricades were placed during the Clinton-Gingrich shutdown, for example.  No, this was calculated, and it blew up in their collective faces.
  • Harry Reid compounded the Democrat debacle yesterday, when asked why the Senate wouldn’t try to help “one child who has cancer” by approving a mini-spending bill, he shot back: “Why would we want to do that?”  Reid spent the rest of the day trying to explain why this didn’t imply he wanted kids to die.  The House has twice passed funding bills to keep NIH and other essential services open.  If the media was actually nonpartisan, this would have a political impact.  We will see how much this story plays out.
  • As for tactics:  First, understand thy enemy.  Liberals are basically in the ‘Kermit the Frog hand flailing’ mode now.  Why?  I have had many conservatives ask this, and I thought it was blatantly obvious:  for liberals, shutdown of the Federal government is like taking away their oxygen.  You must understand that for many of them, their core ideological belief is that the government is the end all, be all of human existence. Life without a large, bureaucratic government overseeing their daily lives is unthinkable.
  • I suggest conservatives try to show sympathy for the furloughed government workers and others suffering from the shutdown.  I understand the hatred for big government, but many of these people are simply caught up in this, and are paying a price for the stupidity of our political leadership.  Be neighborly; help out any friends that are struggling. I have had friends that are Veterans, and some of their benefits have been cut.  Conservatives care about these things, and we should be the first to help and aid these people, and not revel in any of their misery.  This sympathy for fellow Americans does not mean inherently mean we should change our strategy; short term pain is one thing, long term good of the country is another.
  • Conservatives on the other hand need to react to these angry liberals in one, simple fashion:  Don’t worry, be happy.  Look, this is our ideal!  We have a government that is funding defense, and little other extraneous spending.  Doesn’t mean we support the level of spending that is occurring right now, but we can’t complain much about it either.  Be the happy warriors that Reagan used to talk about. We have little to lose, and a lot to win.  And unfortunately, many of these spending programs will be starting up sooner than we would like anyway.