When troops SHOULDN’T follow their “leaders”

NO TO UNLAWFUL ORDERS1. THE MILITARY:

Under Leftist regimes, such as today’s under Mr Obama (and please notice, significantly, since 2008, I have never successively linked in my blog the words “Obama” and “President”), the military is nothing but a useful mule or tool for various forms of societal change.

The Left, frankly, despises and disdains the militaryall its members, its leaders, its troops — unless and until it can be corrupted for use regarding a societal, global — and not a national DEFENSE — issue.

There is a reason that a greater number of military officers have voluntarily left or been forced to leave under this administration than most any other.

There is a reason that military chaplains — save those of Islam — have been under attack under this administration than any other.

As Jeff Fuller writes at TheWashingtonTimes.com:

Why troops avoid a fight

Soldiers won’t follow clueless leaders into battles they can’t win

by Jeff Fuller

What does this experience (as delineated in the article if you click it above) offer to those clever, young staffers crafting military tactics and rules of engagement in the White House National Security Council (NSC) for our military units in Iraq and Syria?

Do not expect any military unit, especially a bunch of Iraqi Sunni soldiers led by corrupt Shiite officers, to risk their lives in a fight against ISIS fighters. They will not. And neither would many American troops without effective leaders, adequate weapons, communications, Medevac and close air support, and a fighting chance to win.

A more important paragraph:

But at some point up the chain of command, they have general officers who risked their lives in combat in the past but will not speak truth to the young NSC staffers who set the currently amateurish rules of engagement, define the limits of military power and craft empty speeches in which President Obama declares with a straight face that our goal is to degrade and defeat ISIS.

In other words: our troops are beginning to discriminate and separate the lies from the truths, the wheat from the chaff.  Because their most intimate posteriors are now “on the line.”  A further lesson from history:

As someone who cares deeply for our country and still carries grenade fragments from battle, I can only hope that at some point, our troops will be able to say that their senior military leaders choose the truth over political and career expediency. In Vietnam, much of the foolishness was generated by military officers who either never understood battle or had forgotten its lessons. Now this Peter Principle tendency has been exacerbated by the youngsters who rule the NSC.

To the military: for whom will you die and when, if ever, will you draw the line?

Having written that, there is a serious lesson to be learned — also — by the LE Sheepdogs of this nation:

2. CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT:

I learned quite a number of things in my 41 years of service to civilian law enforcement.  As a Sergeant for a major LE agency on the Left Coast, and having served as my department’s Rangemaster and EVOC Supervisor (and a number of other specialized positions, with another separate three state and federal agencies), I learned that there is a vast chasm between what one says and what one does.  I learned to respect a few ranks but not to respect the persons wearing those ranks because altogether too many of them were corrupt and violated their own oaths — yet were promoted still because of nepotism or melanin or their ability to don the requisite knee pads required for a sundry of appointments and coronations.  They too often spoke one line and physically violated another.  And trust me: cops can sense the stinking bullshit of hypocrites from miles away.  Verbal detritus does not a leader make.

I learned from my SBSLI class that dissent is a good thing.  Dissent was certainly required in this circumstance.

And dissent will become a major, a huge issue in the future of the military and civilian law enforcement.  That is to say: the Sheepdogs.

Just what is a Sheepdog?  I am a long-time Sheepdog, far beyond the years where most average Sheepdogs quit.  I am also a Silverback, far beyond the years where most others with less stamina (or more sense) quit.

That said, what might be a common denominator between military and civilian LE “leaders”?

I say this: there are way too many “test takers” and “test passers.”  There are “managers” who can sort out widgets and beans and push paper, but there is a dearth of true “leaders of men.”  Managers are good with paper and bits and bytes.  Leaders are good with people.  Actual humans.

I am convinced of the incontrovertible: leaders are born.  They cannot be “made.”  Persons either possess “leadership skills” or they do not.  You can see and acknowledge a true “leader” from elementary school right up through college and beyond.  One cannot “teach” what is truly the unteachable: leadership.  True leadership.

And true leadership is this: if I asked my troops to do “X,” would they do it for me?  If another Sergeant asked, would they do it for them?  A true leader gets things done not when he or she demands, but when he or she “suggests” or asks.  Or even by a mere presence, subsumed.  But in the crucible of extremis, would my troops do what I asked?  Frankly, I’d like to think they would if, for no other reason, than how I treated them under “normal.”  They would know that I readily recognize the difference between “standard” and “critical.”

3. THE LOGICAL EXTENSION:

My point being:

In the not too terribly distant future, military troops and civilian LE troops are going to have to make a terrible and critical decision.

Will they follow their so-called “leaders”?

At this point, I would suggest: you should weigh that decision very carefully because many of your “superiors” and “leaders” are neither superior nor leaders.

I suspect and submit that you already know who it is that you would follow, and who it is that you would not.  Those who are — in the colloquial — “full of shit” and those who are not.  Those who treated you with inherent respect, did not take advantage of you, did not make you the butt of jokes, did not rule their rank over you, those who were firm, fair and consistent.  You knew you would encounter the same person over any number of days, and not Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde.

The person who said, if they were “disappointed” in you, you would have a serious internal speech with yourself to the point of questioning your entire ethos.

I was once told, by an ancient and doddering Sergeant in my department many years ago, that one must only do three things to have a successful career: 1) Do you job, 2) Tell the truth, and 3) Don’t be malicious.

It would seem that too many of our so-called “leaders” violate one or more of those aspects on a continuing basis.  Some seem to get promoted for it.

If you think — after all of this — that I’m leading up to something, you would be correct.

A country that allows political hacks to set military operations policy has lost its way. And we are lost, for sure.”  — Lt. Col. Jeff Fuller

“God bless America, the finest experimental nation ever created at the hands of Mortal Men.”— BZ

So I said back in 2006.

The point is this.  At some time, there will be upheaval in the US.  It’s just going to occur, plain and simple.  America cannot keep on its current path of unsustainable spending and philosophy.  There is only so much cash and good will to be found in the American Taxpayer — who foots the bill for not only the United States but much of the rest of the planet as well, in terms of largesse to other countries.

When that crash comes — and I do not know when or how it will manifest itself — there must be in the military and civilian LE spheres those who will truly honor their oaths.  They must truly be Oathkeepers.  They must respect the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

Bottom line: there will come a time when soldiers in the military and law enforcement officers must follow their conscience and their oaths, because their leaders are going to order them to abrogate law.

It’s coming.

They must be prepared.

BZ

 

Wisconsin DA Chisholm’s Political Gestapo

Chisholm's Political Gestapo[And shame — MASSIVE SHAME — upon those “law enforcement officers” (you deserve to be in quotes) who took part in those raids.

You know who you are and you know you conducted yourselves improperly, no matter what you say or how you attempt to justify your actions publicly.  You still cannot sleep well at night.  As well you shouldn’t.  You violated your fundamental Constitutional oaths.]

If you donated to or voted for Scott Walker in Wisconsin, you were brought under the gunsights of Democrat District Attorney John Chisholm and Leftist Democrat Judge Judge Barbara KlukaBarbara Kluka, who signed off on every piece of paper proffered before her by Chisholm.

This was nothing more than criminalizing Conservatism.

Something of which all my consistently loyal readers could be accused: being Conservative.  Not even Republican, but at their base: Conservative.

Like myself.  I am no longer a Republican, I am an Independent voter.  I tossed the GOP to the curb over five years ago.

I am an Independent Conservative.  And I’m a law enforcement officer.

That said, police SWAT teams were, literally, utilized by Leftist, Demorat forces in order to frighten, harass and intimidate loyal American taxpayers who did nothing more than exercise their rights as guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

This article at the NationalReview.com reveals all.

Wisconsin’s Shame: ‘I Thought It Was a Home Invasion’

by David French

Cindy Archer, one of the lead architects of Wisconsin’s Act 10 — also called the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill,” it limited public-employee benefits and altered collective-bargaining rules for public-employee unions — was jolted awake by yelling, loud pounding at the door, and her dogs’ frantic barking. The entire house — the windows and walls — was shaking. She looked outside to see up to a dozen police officers, yelling to open the door. They were carrying a battering ram.

What had she done?

She had been a Conservative.  That is all.

Then they left, carrying with them only a cellphone and a laptop.

Certainly that required a SWAT response, dogs, gearing up, a SWAT call-up, overtime, call-up time, backup units, a tactical plan, did it not?

It was indeed a home invasion, but the people who were pouring in were Wisconsin law-enforcement officers. Armed, uniformed police swarmed into the house. Plainclothes investigators cornered her and her newly awakened family. Soon, state officials were seizing the family’s personal property, including each person’s computer and smartphone, filled with the most intimate family information.

And what were the Archer’s told? They were told to shut up.

Why were the police at Anne’s home? She had no answers. The police were treating them the way they’d seen police treat drug dealers on television. In fact, TV or movies were their only points of reference, because they weren’t criminals. They were law-abiding. They didn’t buy or sell drugs. They weren’t violent. They weren’t a danger to anyone. Yet there were cops — surrounding their house on the outside, swarming the house on the inside. They even taunted the family as if they were mere “perps.”

Shut up.

As if the home invasion, the appropriation of private property, and the verbal abuse weren’t enough, next came ominous warnings. Don’t call your lawyer. Don’t tell anyone about this raid. Not even your mother, your father, or your closest friends.

What triggered these horrendous CIVILIAN raids?

For dozens of conservatives, the years since Scott Walker’s first election as governor of Wisconsin transformed the state — known for pro-football championships, good cheese, and a population with a reputation for being unfailingly polite — into a place where conservatives have faced early-morning raids, multi-year secretive criminal investigations, slanderous and selective leaks to sympathetic media, and intrusive electronic snooping.
 

Yes, Wisconsin, the cradle of the progressive movement and home of the “Wisconsin idea” — the marriage of state governments and state universities to govern through technocratic reform — was giving birth to a new progressive idea, the use of law enforcement as a political instrument, as a weapon to attempt to undo election results, shame opponents, and ruin lives. Most Americans have never heard of these raids, or of the lengthy criminal investigations of Wisconsin conservatives. For good reason. Bound by comprehensive secrecy orders, conservatives were left to suffer in silence as leaks ruined their reputations, as neighbors, looking through windows and dismayed at the massive police presence, the lights shining down on targets’ homes, wondered, no doubt, What on earth did that family do?

Except for now.  Americans have heard now, the reason for this post.

Our First Amendment, our very freedom is threatened.

But there’s more about DA John Chisholm and his Socialist Shop:

At the same time that the public protests were raging, so were private — but important — protests in the Chisholm home and workplace. As a former prosecutor told journalist Stuart Taylor, Chisholm’s wife was a teachers’-union shop steward who was distraught over Act 10’s union reforms. He said Chisholm “felt it was his personal duty” to stop them.

Meanwhile, according to this whistleblower, the district attorney’s offices were festooned with the “blue fist” poster of the labor-union movement, indicating that Chisholm’s employees were very much invested in the political fight

So it would appear Chisholm staged his own personal vendetta — because he could — as his wife, a union shop steward, hated Scott Walker’s union stance.  Perfect: wielding the office of District Attorney as a political sledgehammer against Conservatives.

Much like Lois Lerner and the IRS.  Much like Operation Choke Point.  All ideas of Leftists.  All aimed at reducing freedoms, not increasing them.

Of course, DA Chisholm had Leftist help in the local court:

But with another election looming — this time Walker’s campaign for reelection — Chisholm wasn’t finished. He launched yet another John Doe investigation, “supervised” by Judge Barbara Kluka. Kluka proved to be capable of superhuman efficiency — approving “every petition, subpoena, and search warrant in the case” in a total of one day’s work.

Here is where Chisholm’s Gestapo went to work:

Empowered by a rubber-stamp judge, partisan investigators ran amok. They subpoenaed and obtained (without the conservative targets’ knowledge) massive amounts of electronic data, including virtually all the targets’ personal e-mails and other electronic messages from outside e-mail vendors and communications companies.

The investigations exploded into the open with a coordinated series of raids on October 3, 2013. These were home invasions, including those described above. Chisholm’s office refused to comment on the raid tactics (or any other aspect of the John Doe investigations), but witness accounts regarding the two John Doe investigations are remarkably similar: early-morning intrusions, police rushing through the house, and stern commands to remain silent and tell no one about what had occurred.

With Gestapo tactics comes fear.

O’Keefe, who has been in contact with multiple targeted families, says, “Every family I know of that endured a home raid has been shaken to its core, and the fate of marriages and families still hangs in the balance in some cases.”

Anne also describes a new fear of the police: “I used to support the police, to believe they were here to protect us. Now, when I see an officer, I’ll cross the street. I’m afraid of them. I know what they’re capable of.”

Cindy says, “I lock my doors and I close my shades. I don’t answer the door unless I am expecting someone. My heart races when I see a police car sitting in front of my house or following me in the car. The raid was so public. I’ve been harassed. My house has been vandalized. [She did not identify suspects.] I no longer feel safe, and I don’t think I ever will.”

Rachel talks about the effect on her children. “I tried to create a home where the kids always feel safe. Now they know they’re not. They know men with guns can come in their house, and there’s nothing we can do.” Every knock on the door brings anxiety. Every call to the house is screened. In the back of her mind is a single, unsettling thought: These people will never stop.

I urge you, please read the full article here.

Read Sheriff David Clarke’s issues with Chisholm’s stances here.

CHISHOLMSheriff David Clarke, for those of you who don’t know, is a true American patriot.

Rush’s take is here.

This is one reason, among many, that I am an Oathkeeper.  Just as I have feared, law enforcement is being utilized as a gross political tool for Leftists.  I repeat:

Shame — MASSIVE SHAME — upon those “law enforcement officers” (you deserve to be in quotes) who took part in those raids.

You know who you are and you know you conducted yourselves improperly, no matter what you say or how you attempt to justify your actions publicly.  You still cannot sleep well at night.  As well you shouldn’t.  You violated your fundamental Constitutional oaths.

You make me sick to my heart, you alleged “police officers” who took part in those raids of lawful citizens.  You wound me, and all other LEOs who seek nothing more than to conduct their business professionally and within the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Have you no soul?  Have you no conscience?  Moreover, have you no intellect, no sense of questioning, no grasp of our foundational documents?  Are you truly that filled with fear of your supervisors?

How could you not at least ask questions?

Is this actually my country?  Is this truly the United States of America?

How can this occur in my country?

BZ

Lies and more lies about Jonathan Gruber: the US government’s $6 million dollar man

Pelosi's LIES Regarding Jon GruberJonathan Gruber was paid, by the US government, over a number of years, by various US departments, $6 million dollars for his consultation services.

If they didn’t value him, they wouldn’t have paid him again and again and again.  He must have provided a valuable service or he wouldn’t have been hired multiple times by your federal government.  Meaning: his fees were paid by your tax dollars.

When they wanted him, Leftists and the Demorats loved him.  When he broke ranks and actually told the truth, they hated him.

The problem: Gruber dared to reveal the truth.  And the Demorats lied again and again.

Here is GruberGate in a mere two minutes:

It does matter.  And Gruber is the gift that keeps on giving.  I say: thank God for YouTube.

I also say: thank God for immured videos regarding Mr Obama and ObamaCare.

Obama’s Car Czar Steve Rattner says Gruber was the “go to” guy on ObamaCare.

Mr Obama, in an attempt to distance himself from the scandal, said Jon Gruber was never on the ObamaCare staff and that Jon Gruber lies.

Then, back in 2006, thanks to YouTube once again, Mr Obama speaks about his admiration for Mr Gruber:

Obama, in my opinion, lies because he’s done so all his life and so few have called him on it.  As a matter of fact, lying has gotten him to the presidency.  He cannot not lie.  He hasn’t the capability.

Not precisely so Nancy Pelosi who, I believe, is physically laboring under the onset of dementia.  She adamantly insists she has no idea who Jon Gruber is.  “Let’s put him aside.”  Right.  No lies to be seen here at all.  Move on.  I’m, as Dennis Miller says, “bat shit crazy.”

Except that she does know him, and she is lying.  This video proves it:

“I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber’s analysis.”

And now, amnesty for millions of illegal invaders by Executive Fiat, via the stroke of Mr Obama’s Imperial Pen.

Just who’s alternate reality is this?

BZ

P.S.

Very interesting article here about Jon Gruber and HillaryCare, courtesy of MPT.

 

Demorats say: this is “an election about nothing” — when instead it’s an election about EVERYTHING

[Transparency, no more secrecy. Just the beginning of the lies. Ask our AMM journalists about Mr Obama’s transparency and that of the Spite House.]

The Demorats do in fact say this midterm is “an election about nothing.”

There is nothing more insulting and arrogant than that phrase.

I’d say this election is, oh yes, about everything.  Everything “progressive” and Leftist and Democrat-oriented in nature.

Dan Balz says:

Today, Obama looks more like Bush of 2006, when Democrats took back the House: The numbers for Obama are almost identical overall, and the breakdowns by party are as well.

Demorats insist all is well; Obama is in power, the federal government needs to take care of you, you poor ignorant and unwashed masses. All is well, the economy has never been stronger, our social structure has never been more tolerant and forgiving, we are more adored and respected internationally than ever, because we support our friends and eschew our enemies.

Pay no attention to Benghazi, to Fast and Furious, to the IRS, to the NSA, to the CIA, to the cultural crafting and sculpting of our nation, and abuse of our military and our veterans.  Pay no attention to the actions of Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, Napolitano, Blum, Lerner.

Pay no attention to the IRS auditing of Dr Ben Carson and various TEA Party organizations.  The lies of John Koskines and Lois Lerner.

Pay no attention to the devastating impact of ObamaKare and the fact that Mr Obama nakedly LIED about its affects on your own doctor and your health:

But that was only one of many lies from Mr Obama and his minions.  We have CIA Director John Brennan who LIED time and again — but who only became an issue when the CIA began tapping the computers of DC politicians:  Things were bad only when their ox was gored.

Pay no attention to the initial LIES of Hillary Clinton involving the assault on the Benghazi consulate — being the result of a lame video created by a federal parolee — that in fact had NO bearing on the killing of four United States citizens.  Pay no attention to the callous and arrogant disregard that Hillary Clinton had for said killings:

Pay no attention to the US Debt Clock, and the fact that Mr Obama has racked up more debt than all prior presidents combined, to the tune of $17,906,300,000,000.  With a population of 320 million persons, that puts each individual’s unfunded liability at $385,579.49 — for a few minutes.  Then it goes up again.

Pay no attention to the fact the Mr Obama was responsible for “Cash for Clunkers” which failed (costing much more than it purported to save), millions to Solyndra (which failed), millions to so-called “green energy” which failed.  Pay no attention to the fact that Mr Obama himself decided which automakers would succeed or fail, was responsible for the untold number of car dealerships closing and the laying-off of employees who worked (past tense) there.

People forget that Obama sent actual armed agents to raid the factory of Gibson Guitars, because of limp-wristed and specious allegations about the wood they were using in their instruments.  Obama’s NLRB didn’t want Boeing to open a factory in South Carolina because it was a “right to work” state and didn’t mandate employees to be unionized, so they refused to allow Boeing to move.  The UAW made off like — literally — bandits when Obama rigged the bankruptcy hearings of Chrysler and GM when bondholders and creditors were kicked aside.  Ford, you recall, didn’t take government bailout cash.

The BP oil spill occurred because EPA and environmental regulations mandate that drilling rigs be located so far from our shores; the further from shore, the deeper the drilling and the more unstable and difficult the drilling and the platform.  Don’t forget, Obama sent millions of dollars to Brazil in order for them to drill off their shores.  Drill of our own shores, closer? No way.

Let’s continue to talk about oil.  Mr Obama clearly embraces Blood Oil and Conflict Oil, just as he eschews Conflict Diamonds or Blood Diamonds.  No matter that untold persons are killed in the Middle East because of the issue of oil.  We could be well on our way to energy independence in an agreement with Canada involving the Keystone XL pipeline but, no, Mr Obama prefers to limit our own drilling and fracking so that we are dependent on external oil sources.  This makes no sense whatsoever.

Obama Media LapdogAll during this time, however, according to the American Media Maggot lapdogs, Mr Obama can do little if anything wrong.  The AMM continue to wear their Official Obaka Blinders gift set.

Mr Obama has set some remarkable precedent by writing a host of Executive Orders that purposely have bypassed the US Congress because he perceives they are not lining up appropriately for his wishes.  His has become an Imperial Presidency that minds not ruling by fiat.

Obama Imperial Congress Won't ActIn that vein, His Imperial Highness has deigned that illegal immigrants will be granted roughly blanket amnesty, moving this country from a “nation of laws” into the “nation of the lawless” category.  Numerous border Sheriffs and Chiefs have said that, if amnesty is granted, the floodgates will be opened and there will be no turning off the spigot.

My department, one week ago, was impacted directly by our porous borders, when an illegal Mexican working for the Sinaloa Cartel killed Deputy Danny Oliver and, a short time later, Placer County Detective Michael Davis.

Pay no attention to the thousands and thousands of illegal immigrant South American children imported into this country carrying diseases that — oh no! — brought disease to our own children, to include the enterovirus, according to the CDC.  Thank you kindly, Mr Obama, for ensuring our borders continue to be porous.  We need more Mexican criminals and imported diseases we haven’t seen for years.

Let us not forget Mr Obama’s smooth tactical move in releasing five Guantanamo terrorist leaders in exchange for the absconding traitor Bowe Bergdahl.  Brilliant, that.

The VA absolutely fell apart under Mr Obama, resulting in the forced resignation of General John Shinseki.  Nicely monitored, sir; you continue to show you couldn’t care less about our military personnel on duty, and their care after service.

Let’s not forget about the truthful, honest and humble Kathleen Sebelius, whose selling of ObakaKare was in conflict with her simultaneously tasked with enforcing it.  An abomination of arrogance and incompetency.  Goodbye, bitch.  Write when you find work.

At this point, do we begin to see some running memes yet, to include rampant arrogance, incompetence, unchecked conceit, unbridled egos, and the NPDNarcissist Personality Disorder — of Barack Hussein Obama?

Who listened to the private phone calls of Fox News reporter James Rosen under Obama?  Some Republican?

The EPA under Director Lisa Jackson harassed businesses.  Anyone remember or care?

Let us not forget: most everything done under Obama simply fails.  Despite Mr Obama being in control of the Spite House Bully Pulpit, the American Media Maggots and the US Senate.  How is this possible?

Let us not forget: Mr Obama believed that the Fort Hood Shooting was nothing more than an itty-bitty bit of occasional workplace violence.  “Allahu Akhbar” just doesn’t factor, as exclaimed by Nidal.  Likewise the Oklahoma beheading of a female employee by an Islamist trying to convert fellow employees is simply another untidy bit of workplace violence.  Vaughn, CEO of the business, according to Obama, was out-of-order in shooting at the Muslim.  Clearly, Vaughn was a Religionist and hates Muslims.

Healthcare.gov?  The million-dollar website that never worked?  Fabulous, that.

Let’s not forget Obama’s sotto voce to Russia’s Medvedev:

Further, “you didn’t build that.”

At least Hillary Clinton is in keeping with Barack Hussein Obama.  Businesses and corporations don’t create jobs.

Lets examine, photographically, some of the other so-called “highlights” of Demorat control these past years under Mr Obama.  Be warned: the truth isn’t pretty.

US Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Benghazi, LibyaChristopher Stevens.

Illegal InvadersGrateful Mexicans.

Mex Cartels 2What Mr Obama wants to actively import into the United States: Mexican Cartel activity.

Muslim Nurse in the UKAnd, of course, women in full BeeKeeper costumes.

Yes, this election isn’t about nothing.  It’s about everything.

Mr Obama recently said of these elections: “Now, I am not on the ballot this fall . . . but make no mistake, these policies are on the ballot — every single one of them.”

And in this case, he is precisely correct.

Get out, vote, and make that precisely so.

BZ

 

Harry Reid wants to REMOVE our First Amendment from the Bill of Rights

Harry Reid LG

Harry Reid = short eyes.

I never thought I’d see this in my lifetime.

I never envisioned having to actually write about the topic.

I never thought that there would be even one American politician that would want, in any way, to reduce Our American Freedoms.

Until now.  Until today.

Someone in American politics actually wants to amend the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights.  The actual United States of America Bill of Rights.

Which states, beautifully and succinctly:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I don’t suspect that there could be a more plain directive than that.

Who is the person who wishes to amend such a simple and beautiful foundational precept?

Demorat Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.

In my opinion, the Wall Street Journal nails the problem and the issue:

Harry Reid Rewrites the First Amendment

When politicians seek to restrict speech, they are invariably trying to protect their own incumbency.

by Theodore B. Olson

Liberals often deplore efforts to amend the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights and especially when the outcome would narrow individual liberties. Well, now we know they don’t really mean it.

Forty-six Senate Democrats have concluded that the First Amendment is an impediment to re-election that a little tinkering can cure.

Yes.  Tinkering can cure that aged and so-“yesterday’s news” tragic document.

Because, after all, the US Constitution and its concomitant Bill of Rights need to be “living documents.”  Read: documents that need to be changed when it is convenient to the purpose and agenda of Leftists.

They are proposing a constitutional amendment that would give Congress and state legislatures the authority to regulate the degree to which citizens can devote their resources to advocating the election or defeat of candidates. Voters, whatever their political views, should rise up against politicians who want to dilute the Bill of Rights to perpetuate their tenure in office.

And oh yes, oh they should.  And that rising up should include black powder and brass and torches and pitchforks.

Led by Majority Leader Harry Reid, these Senate Democrats claim that they are merely interested in good government to “restore democracy to the American people” by reducing the amount of money in politics. Do not believe it. When politicians seek to restrict political speech, it is invariably to protect their own incumbency and avoid having to defend their policies in the marketplace of ideas.

And let us examine, fundamentally, the foundational precepts of the Constitution and what it protects and what it doesn’t.

This scheme is doomed to fail when it comes to a vote in the Senate, perhaps as soon as Monday. The Constitution’s Framers had the wisdom to make amending the Constitution difficult, and Mr. Reid’s gambit won’t survive a filibuster. But Senate Democrats know their proposal is a loser. They merely want another excuse to rail against “money in politics” and Supreme Court justices they don’t like.

But there’s a point here.  What’s the point?

The rhetoric of these would-be constitutional reformers is focused on two Supreme Court decisions: Citizens United v. FEC (2010) and McCutcheon v. FEC (2014). In Citizens United, the court struck down a law prohibiting unions and corporations from using their resources to speak for or against a candidate within a certain time period before an election.

In other words, money can find itself supporting what it will, and — with teeth-gritting enamel flecks populating the various keyboards of Leftists — corporations are still considered as “people.”

The Obama administration conceded during oral argument that the law would permit the government to ban the publication of political books or pamphlets. Pamphlets and books ignited the revolution that created this country and the Bill of Rights. In pushing to overturn the court’s decision, Mr. Reid and his Democratic colleagues apparently wish they had the power to stop books, pamphlets—as well as broadcasting—that threaten their hold on their government jobs. 

Ban the publication of books and pamphlets.  That translates, these days, to BANNING MY BLOG and blogs of a like mind.

Under this proposal, I would have to face jail if I continued writing.

Let me quote a so-called “lion” of the Demorat Left:

“In the entire history of the Constitution,” the late Ted Kennedy once stated on the Senate floor, “we have never amended the Bill of Rights, and now is not the time to start. It would be wrong to carve an exception in the First Amendment. Campaign finance reform is a serious problem, but it does not require that we twist the meaning of the Constitution.”

One important notation: Saturday Night Live, look out.

You’d best not poke fun ever again.

And let me quite plainly make — as I wrote earlier — the argument regarding Positive vs Negative Rights.

Our current Constitution frames much of what we value in terms of what we cannot do.

The government cannot engage in unreasonable searches and seizures.

It cannot inflict cruel and unusual punishment.

By our current Constitution, it does NOT “guarantee” so-called “rights” to such things as housing, clothing, food, jobs — rights that place upon the state to obtain the resources from other citizens to pay for them.

Let me make this abundantly clear: “RIGHTS THAT PLACE UPON THE STATE TO OBTAIN THE RESOURCES FROM OTHER CITIZENS TO PAY FOR THEM.”

The First Amendment should NEVER be touched.  EVER.

Have I made myself sufficiently plain?

BZ