A
MARCH ON WASHINGTON?
PART 1 of 3
By
Jon Christian Ryter
February 14, 2009
NewsWithViews.com
Maybe it's time to remind the politicians on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC, that they still work for us and not the bankers, industrialists and merchant princes they are endowing with taxpayer money that belongs to us, our children, our grandchildren and their children. Politicians think the taxpayer-voter-citizens are so dumb that we forget the money they throw around like it was worthless paper actually belongs to us, "the People." Clearly, the far left that now controls both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue is apparently arrogant enough to think that once they arm wrestle it from the middle class it belongs to them.
Their philosophy is, "to the victors go the spoils." That is, after all, the philosophy very seriously bantered by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-CA] who told the House GOP (when she shut them out of negotiations on the latest support the rich and the loyal socialists Stimulus Bill) that the leadership has a right to exclude the Republicans from participating in the legislating process during the 111th Congress because "they won the election." Since the far left does not need the votes of Republicans to enact any piece of legislation, why give them a voice in what that legislation looks like?
America has not had a "Caterpillar Congress" since the 89th Congress' super majority in both Houses in 1965. The House and Senate leadership could bulldoze any piece of legislation they wanted through Congress without worrying about placating either the Republicans or Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson. With 68 Senators in the super majority in the Senate, the GOP lacked the ability to filibuster bad legislation or social activist judicial appointments. It was the same in the House. The Democrats controlled 295 seats. The GOP had 140. The 89th Congress could override any threatened veto by Johnson. (The 111th Congress is close to a super majority, but it is not veto-proof. New Hampshire governor John Lynch [D-NH] honored his word to Sen. Judd Gregg [R-NH] and appointed J. Bonnie Newman to Gregg's Senate seat. Newman, 63, a liberal Republican that the liberal media prefers to call "moderate," is a former Assistant Secretary of Commerce under Ronald Reagan. She also served as Gregg's chief-of-staff when he was the Congressman from New Hampshire in from 1981-1988.) Newman, it turns out, has been a Lynch supporter for quite some time.
In the end, on Feb. 12, Gregg recanted his acceptance of the job as Commerce Secretary, noting "irresolvable conflicts" with the Obama Administration's decision to move control of the 2010 census from the Commerce Department to the office of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. This move on the part of Obama shows the clear intent of the President to play with the census numbers in order to reconfigure both the State legislatures and the US House of Representatives to benefit Democrats.
If Democrats win the back-and-forth seesaw battle to unseat Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota, they will be only one seat from a filibuster-proof Congress. That means Obama will be one vote away from being able to do what Franklin D. Roosevelt was unable to do in 1937—expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 15 Justices, giving the far left an 11-to-4 majority over the conservative right. With the current configuration of the governorships across the nation, and the membership roster of the US Senate, the Democrats have five possibilities of replacing a GOP seat with a liberal—before the next election.
There are five GOP septuagenarian senators—at least one of whom is in poor health—in States led by Democrat governors. Each of those chief executives—four men and one woman—have the power to appoint interim senators should one of the sitting senators in his or her State die or become so incapacitated that he is unable to serve. Arlen Specter [R-PA] is the eldest. At 79, Specter is battling cancer. The governor of Pennsylvania, Ed Rendell, is a liberal Democrat. Seventy-eight year old former Detroit Tiger pitcher, Sen. Jim Bunning [R-KY] would be replaced by someone chosen by Democratic Gov. Steven Beshear. Should 75-year old GOP Sen. Charles Grassley decide to call it quits, or succumb, his replacement would be named by Democratic Iowa Gov. Chet Culver.
Republican Sen. George Voinovich, 72, of Ohio has already announced his intention of stepping down at the end of this term in 2010. Should he leave even more prematurely, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, would name his replacement. And, finally, should 72-year old GOP Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas decide to prematurely leave the seat he just won for the third time, it would be incumbent on Gov. Kathleen Scbelius, a Democrat, to pick his replacement. None of them are likely to appoint Republicans who would caucus with the Senate GOP. If Coleman loses his Minnesota Supreme Court challenge that 4,800 of the 11,000 absentee ballots were wrongly rejected by Democrat-controlled voting precincts, and far left liberal comic Al Franken is seated, Democrats will need only one additional seat to radically alter the the philosophical makeup of the United States of America by simply erasing the concept of the rule of law, replacing it with the far left's communist concepts of social justice for all time.
Advertisement
The first supermajority occurred in 1933 when the election of the 73rd Congress. That allowed what became known as the New Deal Congress, led by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to pass any piece of legislation they wanted—without debate or change. (Of course, to debate the bill, or change it, Congress would have first had to read it. No member of Congress was allowed to read the measure. The same is currently true of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. A synopsis of the legislation exists for Congressmen and Senators to review, but the entire bill is not available for them to read.)
On Monday, March 9, 1933, three days after FDR was sworn in as the 32nd President of the United States, Congress found the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 on the docket for passage that day. The only problem was, no member of Congress had previously seen the bill (which was written by the Federal Reserve bankers, their lawyers and FDR's "brain trust" headed by Raymond Moley).
Without ever reading a single word of a bill that expanded the power of the Fed, classified the people of the United States as enemies of its government, and seized 100% of the real wealth of the American people, Congress enacted the Emergency Banking Relief Act before the end-of-business that day. Before he retired for the night on March 9, 1933, Roosevelt signed the worst piece of legislation ever written into law and converted Herbert Hoover's Recession into FDR's Great Depression. Liberal historians blamed the Depression on Hoover, who carried the stigma into the history books. By 1939, scores of New Deal laws would be enacted. Most of the content in those bills was communist. All of them were rammed through the Democratically-controlled Congress with lightning speed to prevent the public from understanding what the legislation would do. All of them diluted the Bill of Rights and stole liberty from the American people. The New Deal socialists on Capitol Hill knew that as long as the legislation promised the people some grand gratuity, the people would not look beyond the feeding trough on Pennsylvania Avenue at the impact the legislation would ultimately have on the Bill of Rights.
With a Democratic supermajority in 1965 that could not be checked by the Republican Party, Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society was able to loot the Social Security Trust Fund and steal the retirement savings of the American taxpayers to fund the startup of the Welfare Society. By the time Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America" returned the GOP to power, the Social Security Trust Fund was bankrupt.
Today, President Barack Obama begins the redistribution of wealth in America through the regulation-writing authority of the bureaucracy. He will begin by mandating how the funds of massive stimulus bills like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 are distributed. By specifying that such funds are used to transform the social infrastructure of the nation's black communities, the far left will literally force generations of white middle class taxpayers to fund the redistribution of wealth in America. Obama senior economic advisor, Robert Reich, referred to this as "investing in the social infrastructure." Plain and simple, by directing the bulk of the funds from societal bailout programs like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to one group or segment of the population while forcing another segment of the population to foot the bill, it can't be called anything else—it's the forced redistribution of wealth regardless who gets the goodies in their stockings and who gets the lump of coal.
The Senate version of the bill just passed is nothing more than a socialist, enlarge government, $885 billion "stimulus waste" boondoggle (reduced to $789.5 billion in Joint Conference) that promises something for just about everyone. One provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (which should have been named the Democratic Socialist Campaign Contributor Special Interest Reinvestment Act of 2009) seems to have been specifically inserted into the legislation to benefit the American Civil Liberties Union. The provision, Section 803(d)(2)(c), prohibits any form of religious activity—Christian religious activity, that is—from taking place in any college or university that accepts stimulus dollars. Clearly the provision is unconstitutional since it mandates religious discrimination and violates the 1st Amendment's prohibition from creating laws that restrict the free exercise of religion.
|
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts! |
When Sen. Jim DeMint [R-SC] found the prohibition in Section 803(d)(2)(c) that was added by Senators Daniel Inouye [D-HI] and Max Baucus [D-MT], DeMint and Congressman Jim Bunning [R-KY] proffered an amendment (Sec. 807) to strip that language from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. What is interesting is that the discriminatory language against Christian activity on college campuses or even in student dorms that is found in Sec. 803(d)(2)(c) has already been adjudicated in federal court. The courts decided in favor of the students of faith and against the anti-Christian advocacy groups like the American Civil Liberties. Section 803(d)(2)(c)'s anti-religious provision is an attempt by Democrats to legislate discrimination they could not achieve in the federal courts. For part two click below.
