Section. 7.

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

The Constitution of the United States

I’d say I was surprised by this, but that would be a lie:

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest confirmed Monday that President Obama is “very interested” in the idea of raising taxes through unitlateral executive action.

“The president certainly has not indicated any reticence in using his executive authority to try and advance an agenda that benefits middle class Americans,” Earnest said in response to a question about Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) calling on Obama to raise more than $100 billion in taxes through IRS executive action.

When you have an administration willing to ignore the bill of rights why would anyone be the slightest bit shocked that such an administration would ignore the explicit language of the constitution.

But while this administrations actions don’t surprise me, that people on the left would be willing to go along, excuse or defend this both surprises & disappoints me.

I would remind them that if one president can toss out one section of the constitution at his convenience another president can eliminate another.

May the nation be happy in the choices it has made.

************************

Our March Premium for tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Stacy McCain’s book:  Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature

Subscribe at $50 or more in March and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

 

All Tip Jar hits in March of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’

Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass 1871

Justice John Paul Stevens upcoming book Six Amendments How and Why We Should Change the Constitution has produced plenty of pieces from the Washington Post’s The five extra words that can fix the Second Amendment to Steve Eggleston’s Six reasons why I’m glad John Paul Stevens is no longer an active judge.

While opinions on the retired Justice’s Democrat wish list generally follow one’s political allegiance,  I think folks are missing the real significance of Justice Stevens’ work.

By declaring the constitution needs phrases allowing the restriction of money as a form of speech, limiting the reach of the 10th & 11th amendments, specifying the death penalty as cruel & unusual punishment and explicitly stating the right to bear arms exists only for the purpose of a militia he is in effect declaring, in a very public way, that no matter how much he might wish it did,  the constitution as written doesn’t do any of these things.

Whatever Justice Stevens purpose in writing his book, the essential effect of this volume is to give all those who wish to advance conservative jurisprudence a powerful argument against the left’s quest to substitute liberal opinion for the Constitution’s carefully chosen words and highly debated words.

I’m simply delighted and I thank the Justice, he has unwittingly done conservatism a great service.

Update: Hogewash links and points to a Clayton Cramer at PJ Media that is worth your time.

******************************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

The time has come to ditch the weekly goal to focus on the monthly figure, that’s where the real action is at.

In order for this to be a viable full-time business this blog has to take in enough to make the mortgage/tax payment for the house (Currently $1210 monthly) and cover the costs of the writers writing here (another $255)

As of this writing 7 AM EST we need $1305 to meet this goal by April 30th.

That comes out 52 people kicking in $25 over the rest of the month or basically three people a day.

I think the site and the work done here is worth it, if you do too then please consider hitting DaTipJar below .

Naturally once our monthly goal is made these solicitations will disappear till the next month but once we get 61 more subscribers  at $20 a month the goal will be covered for a full year and this pitch will disappear until 2015.

Consider the lineup you get for this price, in addition to my own work seven days a week you get John Ruberry (Marathon Pundit) and Pat Austin (And so it goes in Shreveport)  on Sunday  Linda Szugyi (No one of any import) on Monday  Tim Imholt on Tuesday,  AP Dillon (Lady Liberty1885) Thursdays, Pastor George Kelly fridays,   Steve Eggleston on Saturdays with  Baldilocks (Tue & Sat)  and   Fausta  (Wed & Fri) of (Fausta Blog) twice a week.

If that’s not worth $20 a month I’d like to know what is?

 

steve eggBy Steve Eggleston

Semi-retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has a new book coming out later this month titled Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution. Assistant Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law Josh Blackman received a review copy and revealed Stevens’ proposed amendments (H/T – Jazz Shaw). Let’s review them (non-typographical changes to existing sections are in italics, descriptions are in bold):

The “Anti-Commandeering Rule” (amend the Supremacy Clause of Article VI) – This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges and other public officials in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

Why bother having states at all when every diktat from the District of Columbia is the unchallengable end-all/be-all?

Political Gerrymandering (new amendment) – Districts represented by members of Congress, or by members of any state legislative body, shall be compact and composed of contiguous territory. The state shall have the burden of justifying any departures from this requirement by reference to neutral criteria such as natural, political, or historical boundaries or demographic changes. The interest in enhancing or preserving the political power of the party in control of the state government is not such a neutral criterion.

Unless, of course, the concept of “majority-minority” districts survives. Indeed, the whole purpose of a majority-minority district is to ensure the election of a number of Democrats (preferably of the minority) as it is assumed that virtually every minority votes for Democrats and only Democrats.

Further, like Jazz, I don’t trust judges, which will inevitably be the arbiter, to be “fair”. After all, the state Senate district I live in had Oak Creek and Milwaukee’s East Side joined by the Jones Island sewage plant by a three-federal judge panel in 2002, with the unspoken explanation being the white liberal East Siders didn’t want to be part of a “minority-influence” district. The net effect is that, even though the Assembly district has since become reliably Republican (likely unintended as it flipped from 80 years of Democrat dominance in a special election held right in the middle of a voter revolt against the excesses of the Milwaukee County government), the Senate seat is now held by the most-radical elected Democrat in Wisconsin.

Campaign Finance (new amendment) – Neither the First Amendment nor any other provision of this Constitution shall be construed to prohibit the Congress or any state from imposing reasonable limits on the amount of money that candidates for public office, or their supporters, may spend in election campaigns.

Translation – “Shut up, conservatives and Republicans, and let the Rat Presstitute Organs and unionistas do all the campaigning.” My answer to that is an unprintable quote from Elwood Blues in “Blues Brothers”, but the last three words are “…this noise, man”.

Sovereign Immunity (new amendment) – Neither the Tenth Amendment, the Eleventh Amendment, nor any other provision of this Constitution, shall be construed to provide any state, state agency, or state officer with an immunity from liability for violating any act of Congress, or any provision of this Constitution.

Jazz thinks it’s an unnecessary rehash of the “anti-commandering rule”. It is not – rather, it is absolutely necessary if the goal is to cow states into subservience by every means available.

Death Penalty (amend the 8th Amendment) – Excessive Bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments such as the death penalty inflicted.

Sorry, Stevens, but some crimes do justify the application of the death penalty.

The Second Amendment (amend the 2nd Amendment) – A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.

Where to begin with this one? “Cold, dead fingers” comes to mind. The fact that, up through and past the Civil War, private citizens with the means to procure or produce weaponry had absolutely everything the military had also comes to mind.

Update (DTG) I think Justice Stevens’ book is a gift to conservatives .

who are out in the trenches every day.

Catherine works full-time AND speaks to tea party groups on the Constitution Rand Paul and men like him are important but it’s the Catherine Whites of the world that make the difference in the long-term.