Are We Serious? Yes, Some Of Us Are.

The quote of the subtitle here was made by one Jeremiah Wright, Obama's old America hating pastor. Our document of law in this nation is still the US Constitution, as badly trampled as it is. Obama and the left in this nation see it as irrelevant but it has never been more relevant than it is today and the coming days. People confuse themselves at times by calling our nation a democracy which it is not and never has been. It is a Republic of independent states who should be self-governing states with a limited federal government whose powers are enumerated in the US Constitution. It is my opinion that push is about to come to shove. It may almost have to be that way if our Republic is to survive. What I am about to point out is history, some distant and some very recent about the progressive movement and our Republic. You see progressives see the solution to our problems as a matter of controlling the people through an all powerful federal government. That flies directly in the face of the US Constitution.

Let me tune this up a bit by taking a brief visit back a few years concerning what then Speaker-of- the-House said when asked if Obamacare was crafted in accordance with the US Constitution. Bear in mind this is the same woman who said "we have to pass the bill to find out what is in it." Here's what she said and is part of the headline here and where this article leads.

She ultimately answered "yes" that she was sure. Since she didn't really know what was in the bill I just attribute her reply to the source - her. I've heard that ignorance is bliss and for three years now Obama and his progressive minions have ignored that very question. But that's not to say that they shouldn't have known that the issue was going to end up exactly where it belongs in the United States Supreme Court. That is the final arbiter of what is, or isn't, constitutional according to the law of this land. The founder's intended that there be a separation of powers to insure against tyranny, not to invite it.

When the question arrived before the Supreme Court, the administration's advocate seemed bewildered at times that the individual mandate was being questioned as it was. Why I'm uncertain of because up until Obama the federal government had never made it a requirement to buy anything under penalty of a fine, imprisonment or both. That's way too much power to bestow upon any federal government. But put Obama's lamentations before he was elected about the US Constitution in perspective. It seems to bewilder him why the document says what the federal government "cannot" do to its citizens, not what it can do for us. The founders were specific about the wording. They lived under a tyrant and knew perfectly well what the misuse of power is all about. There is nothing more that the progressive mentality wants than for the citizens of this nation to not do for themselves what the government can do for them. That is until the money runs out and bottom goes with it.

There are now two important cases before the court. Obamacare and Arizona's immigration law. I'm not sure why the Department of Justice pushed that last one in there other than for purely political reasons. From oral arguments, again presented by an incompetent government solicitor, the vote on that one might be 8-0 since Kagan decided to recuse herself. She should also have done so with Obamacare but that's a whole different story.

Why did the founders create the Supreme Court? It is the guardian of law and acts in that capacity if, and when, we end up with an out of control Congress or Executive Branch who disregards what the Constitution says. The founders understood the danger of brutal force that can be wrought by an out of control federal government upon the citizenry. They had lived it. Along the course of history we have witnessed it happen in other nations and tried to assist in righting that wrong. So why are we now so complacent as we watch the pieces fall into place headed by Barak Hussein Obama who has no regard for the separation of powers that are there for a very specific reason?

The question up begs itself. What will happen if the high court rules against Obama and his progressive minions who passed a bill without ever having read it? What if they say that the federal government cannot require the citizens of this country to buy anything, as is the case of the individual mandate? And/or they determine that a state has the right to make the distinction between being a "citizen" or a "non-citizen" which the Arizona bill was carefully crafted to address to protect itself and the citizens of that state. They read the bill before they passed it. It is a relief at this point that Obama hasn't been able to stack the court. We need to make sure he doesn't ever have that opportuniuty I might add. Back to the question because if you don't see it coming you should.

Observe Obama's divide and conquer style of the present campaign. He has the War On Women, The War On The Rich, The Dog Wars, The War On Religion and no telling where he'll go next. I see The War On The Separation Of Powers looming over the horizon myself. Pelsoi has already proposed amending the First Amendment to better suit her purposes. He has already, on several occasions, publicly condemned the court for doing their job under the US Constitution. Franklin D. Roosevelt was the last progressive to take up that banner. He didn't have much regard for the separation of powers himself. But the checks and balances system prevailed and the US Congress halted FDR in his tracks in that case.

Just set the stage after what we have recently seen or are presently seeing. Obama is intent on dividing our nation along class warfare lines. He has become The Great Divider in his effort to be reelected. He hasn't much of a record to run on, the economy is still gasping for air and gas prices are making the people very uncomfortable. What will surely happen if the Supreme Court rules on constitutional issues when Obama has such total disregard for that document?

What he will initiate is The War On The Supreme Court. It will be well financed let there be no doubt about that. Obama is good at currying favor with segments of the electorate. I call it what it is - vote buying. His policies are intended to curry favor. It's all about maintaining power in order to push his hidden agenda, or even those not so hidden. All those little factions will line up behind his bashing. The AFL-CIO, the SEIU, the public sector unions, the Occupy Wall Street crowd and the entire progressive movement that has infiltrated the halls of Congress will jump on the band wagon. They'll be lining up to oppose the very thing the founders intended - the separation of powers.

Put them all in a pot, stir them up and what do you have? "Stuff people" is what you end up with. They could care less about the US Constitution and the separation of powers. They will crow for that free health care. They see it as their right. They will demand that we just let Lottie, Dottie and Everybody cross our borders at their discretion and not according to the laws on the books. How inhumane of us to call them "illegals" which is exactly what they are.

Power is an aphrodisiac. Power also corrupts and absolute power absolutely corrupts. There are those who walk among us who don't care how much power is given to our "limited" federal government. They just clamor for everything to be provided free of charge.

Pelosi already alluded to changing the US Constitution to better fit her view of the world. Since Obama can't campaign on his record of failures expect to see the Democrats. starting in June if the high court strikes down Obamacare and the Arizona case, to campaign hard and heavy and damned the torpedoes full speed ahead for "Constitutional and Judicial" reform.

The problem isn't the US Constitution stupid. It's electing people to positions of power who have no regard for it. Instead they build a base of free loaders who just want what they feel is rightfully theirs by virtue of breathing the same air as the rest of us. Harsh? You bet it is but also very true.

So are we serious about remaining a constitutional Republic or not? Yes Nancy, some of us are serious about that issue. The silent majority will once again have to speak as we did in 2010. Straightening out the mess progressives create is always a chore. But like the children on farms, we are very capable of doing the work.

Remember In November!

As Always,

The Frog Prince