Saturday, July 4, 2015

L.A. Is Not Designed to Work

The City of Los Angeles is a sprawling enterprise with 32,000 employees and an annual budget of $8.6 billion. But according to Rick Cole, the City’s former Deputy Mayor for Budget and Innovation, LA is not designed to work.
Our City’s operations are relatively simple compared to Los Angeles County and other large cities such as New York and Chicago.  City Hall is not responsible for education, healthcare and hospitals, social services and welfare, and criminal justice and jails, all open ended services that are burdened by rivers of red ink, adverse court decisions, and controversial political and social issues that do not have simple solutions.
City Hall is responsible for every day services such as public safety (police and fire); our streets and sidewalks; our parks and libraries; and trash collection, wastewater, sewers, and stormwater.  It is also responsible for planning, zoning, building and safety, and the enforcement of the related rules and regulations.
But Angelenos are not happy campers.
Our streets are a mess, but there is no well thought out plan to repair and maintain our roadways.  Our sidewalks are subject to a $1.4 billion consent decree, but residential sidewalks are last in line to receive funds.  Recreation and Parks’ programs for our youth and seniors have been eviscerated while its putrid public restrooms are a constant source of ridicule.  And our neighborhoods are under siege by real estate developers and traffic congestion.
The City’s finances are also in shambles.  This year, the budget was balanced by diverting $150 million from the Reserve Fund despite the fact that revenues increased by $150 million more than projected.  The City has long term obligations of over $25 billion for its unfunded pension liabilities, deferred maintenance on its infrastructure, and existing long term debt.  But there is no long term plan to balance the budget, fund our pension plans, and repair our streets and sidewalks.
Underlying the chaos at City Hall is the reality that it is impossible to hold any of our elected officials accountable for the failure of City Hall to balance its books and provide adequate services to its constituents.  According to the well respected and occasionally controversial Cole (photo right), the City charter was designed to prevent corruption and the abuse of power.  But today, this has resulted in an inefficient government because we are unable to hold our individual elected officials accountable for their collective failures.

Unfortunately, our City is dominated by special interests, whether they are the campaign funding union leaders that represent our City’s workers or the generous real estate developers who have complete disregard for our residential neighborhoods.
If Los Angeles wants to be a “world class” city, it cannot continue with the status quo.  It cannot continue to kick the budget can down the road and ignore the Structural Deficit, inefficient operations, our infrastructure, and the underfunded pension plans.  It can no longer afford to thumb its nose at investors and employers if it wants its economy to flourish through the creation of good jobs.  It can no longer allow unfettered development that impinges on our quality of life.
Change and reform that are designed to make our City work are politically risky with the real possibility of failure.  It may also alienate the special interests who finance political campaigns.  But this is the challenge that our leaders must face if they want to win the hearts, minds, and wallets of the voters.
Is Back to Basics Mayor Eric Garcetti willing to be that leader?

TANCREDO: INDEPENDENCE DAY, TIME TO THINK RADICAL THOUGHTS

Independence Day is traditionally a time for celebration, relaxation and gratitude for the liberties declared to be universal rights on July 4, 1776. Maybe it’s time to also remember — and celebrate — that while our liberties and our independence may have been declared in 1776, they were secured for posterity by the blood of patriots, not the pens and inkblots of judges and politicians.

As a poet of the ’60s once said, the times they are a-changing. Indeed.
It is not a happy thought, but when in the course of human events, dependence not independence becomes the defining feature of our national character, maybe our Independence Day celebrations and speeches should take note of this “transformative” turning point—and make plans accordingly.
Shall we celebrate that we are not yet as corrupt as Greece? That we have not yet repudiated our national debts? Or should we put down the bottle and admit how fast we are approaching that day of reckoning?
Can anyone remember a week that has seen so many disappointments, betrayals and storm warnings as the one we have lived through since the Supreme Court’s shameless abandonment of the Constitution on June 26? We got more than revitalized Obamacare on that day, we got a cold shower: it is now impossible to ignore the naked truth that our elites are laughing at the idea of “limited government.”
True, there have been other decisions of the nation’s top court that have disappointed, even shocked conservatives. But has there ever been a ruling that said in giant letters written across the marquee in Times Square, “the Constitution be damned, separation of powers be damned, we will help Congress write laws we like and reject laws we don’t like.”
On Independence Day 2015, conservatives and patriots need to understand what has happened. By edict signed by our new lawgiver– the Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush– the Founders’ principal legacy, the idea of a written Constitution, is now officially dead. The letter of the law is meaningless – and thus no longer a restraint on government — when replaced by the good intentions of our elite rulers.
Thomas Jefferson’s proposition that rights precede government and to protect these rights, governments are instituted among men—that proposition is now discarded in the dustbin of history. The Bill of Rights? Freedom of religion and free speech will mean what enlightened judges want them to mean.
The Republican Party’s white flag of surrender, deployed so often and so readily on Supreme Court nominees and Cabinet appointments, has become the Constitution’s white burial shroud.
Our Founders were not na├»ve simpletons. They understood that human freedom is a fragile thing, that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” The Founders understood, with Benjamin Franklin, that “you have a Republic, madam, if you can keep it.” Have we?

Feds Get Serious Over Computer Hacking: Charges Pending In OPM Baseball Team’s Data Breach

Federal investigators are recommending charges against at least one St. Louis Cardinals employee for allegedly intruding on a rival baseball team’s database, a report says.
 
The investigation accuses one or more Cardinals employees of accessing a Houston Astros database tracking player development, according to CNN.
 
It is also probing whether senior Cardinals management was aware of the spying.

Federal investigators are recommending charges against at least one St. Louis Cardinals employee for allegedly intruding on a rival baseball team’s database, a report says.
 
The investigation accuses one or more Cardinals employees of accessing a Houston Astros database tracking player development, according to CNN.
 
It is also probing whether senior Cardinals management was aware of the spying.

CNN said one or more Cardinals front-office staffers might have violated federal law by accessing the Astros’ database, known as Ground Control.
 
The potential breach came after former Cardinals employee Jeff Luhnow left to be Houston’s general manager.
 
The investigation accuses the Cardinals of then unfairly prying into the Astros’ database amid concerns Luhnow had taken the Cardinals’ proprietary information to his new employer.
 
Luhnow has told investigators the Astros generated their own database system independently of his previous work in St. Louis.
 
Friday’s report follows the Cardinals’ announcement earlier this week that it had fired Chris Correa, the team’s director of scouting.
 
Correa was one of the investigation’s targets, CNN reported.
 
Cardinals General Manager John Mozeliak refused comment on his former employee’s release Thursday.
 
“I can confirm he was on administrative leave and was terminated yesterday,” he said Friday.
 
“I think, at this time, it’s just best to understand that it’s an open investigation and any other comments are not in anybody’s best interest,” Mozeliak added.
 
CNN said the FBI’s Houston office has completed its inquiry and is now awaiting action from the U.S. Attorney’s office.
 
The FBI’s Houston branch declined additional insight on its efforts.
 
“The FBI aggressively investigates all potential threats to public and private sector systems,” said FBI spokeswoman Shauna Dunlap.
 
“Once our investigations are complete, we pursue all appropriate avenues to hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” she added.


[COMMENTARY]'All Men...Are Endowed by Their Creator With Certain Unalienable Rights'


[Editor's Note: With these words--239 years ago--our Founding Fathers declared the independence of the United States of America.]
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. 
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.




Dinesh D’Souza: My Rap Sheet Is Nothing Compared To The Clintons’

Conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza remarked on the Hellish nature of a potential Hillary Clinton presidency and said his own criminal rap sheet is nothing compared to the one compiled by Bill and Hillary Clinton.
In a candid interview in the New York Times magazine July 2, D’Souza talks at length about his experience in the American penal system, from which he was recently released after serving time for a campaign finance violation. (RELATED: My Interview With D’Souza After He Was Charged).
“If you put my rap sheet alongside the Clinton rap sheet, I think that would be almost a prima facie case that they have gotten away with far more than I have. My crime consisted of giving away too much money. I didn’t benefit from it in any way,” D’Souza said.
“When I think of a Hillary administration, I’m reminded of the sign on the outer gates of hell [in Dante’s ‘Inferno’]: ‘Abandon all hope, ye who enter here,'” D’Souza said.
D’Souza would know about Hell, having served eight months in a California confinement center after being prosecuted by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, a top candidate to become attorney general in a Hillary Clinton administration.
“I thought of myself as an anthropologist with a rare opportunity to, you might say, study the natives,” D’Souza said of his fellow prisoners.
“They all acknowledged their guilt but argued that they were the small fry. They believe that the real criminals are not only part of the system, they are running the system, and, in fact, that they are the system and that, at its highest level, America is a crime syndicate,” D’Souza added.

REBUILDING AMERICAN CIVIC TRADITIONS ON THE 4TH OF JULY

Americans celebrate the 4th of July with fireworks, barbecues, picnics and all other kinds of enjoyable festivities. It’s wonderful that we live in a free country and are able to enjoy the fruits of our prosperity and freedom. However, merely wearing red,white, and blue, shirts with bald eagles on them, and other patriotic symbols is only a superficial way to celebrate America’s hard-fought for independence.

On top of the enjoyable celebrations of America’s birth, some time should be dedicated each Independence Day to recognizing and coming to a better understanding of the noble traditions that we have inherited from the founders. The sacred torch of liberty is a precious gift that has been passed down by generations of Americans, it is our duty to keep it alive and pass it on to the next.
On July 5, 1926, the 150th anniversary of the birth of our country, President Calvin Coolidge delivered an address at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Coolidge spoke about the causes of the Revolution and the curtailment of rights that occurred at the hands of the British government. He explained how in separating from the British, America created a new government, with new principles; a far more profound act than than simply creating a new country out of the ashes of the old.
“It was not because it was proposed to establish a new nation, but because it was proposed to establish a nation on new principles, that July 4, 1776, has come to be regarded as one of the greatest days in history,” Coolidge said. He described the origins of American institutions as grounded in Western philosophy and in the American colonial experience. He spoke about how the timeless truths and rights “endowed by our creator,” articulated so eloquently in the Declaration, became cemented by the wise construction of the Constitution.
Coolidge said that the Constitution was created, “to establish a free government, which must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few,” he continued. “They undertook to balance these interests against each other and provide the three separate independent branches, the executive, the legislative, and the judicial departments of the Government, with checks against each other in order that neither one might encroach upon the other. These are our guarantees of liberty.”
Finally, Coolidge stressed how America must not fall into the trap of pure materialism, how the grand Declaration came from the “influence of a great spiritual development.”
Coolidge concluded:
No other theory is adequate to explain or comprehend the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity, overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp.If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we must be like-minded as the fathers who created it. We must not sink into a pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which they had for the things that are holy. We must follow the spiritual and moral leadership which they showed. We must keep replenished, that they may glow with a more compelling flame, the altar fires before which they worshiped.
Many Americans may have lost sight of the timeless truths and great principles that Coolidge described, but those who still believe that the American heritage of liberty should endure and be passed on must create conventions to keep their country’s founding ideals alive in the modern era.
Radio host Dennis Prager has written about how “America Needs a July Fourth Seder.” Much like how Jews pass down their religion and history through annual reflection and discussion during Passover, Americans who believe in the country created by the founders should read foundational texts to their friends and family while discussing the ideas that made it exceptional. Even a brief, 10-minute exercise looking back on where we came from as a people prevents the pure trivialization of an extraordinarily important holiday.
But there are other ways of honoring America on the 4th as well. I personally make a pilgrimage to George Washington’s home at Mount Vernon to place flowers by the Father of Our Country’s grave. Every year, I reflect on Washington’s virtue and fundamental belief in the cause of the Revolution; I find that my annual tradition deepens my appreciation of the man and the founding generation’s greatness, and enhances the meaning of the holiday for me.
Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 3.15.40 PM
Historian Richard Brookhiser wrote in Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington, “When Washington lived he had the ability to give strength to debaters and to dying men. His life still has the power to inspire anyone who studies it.” In dark times, such as the circumstances American find themselves in today, it is a comfort and inspiration to reflect on the life of a man who endured through some of the darkest in our country’s history and triumphed.
American civic institutions, cultural heritage, and principles are under attack. If they continue to muddle in perpetual decline, and if we fail to pass them on to the next generation, then a more secure border, temporary policy victories, and better elected representatives will amount to very little. The American republic was built on principles and ideas, not ethnicity, and it will not survive unless there are future generations ready to forcefully articulate what those ideas are and what the purpose is of our grand experiment in liberty. That is why on the anniversary of American independence, it is so important to spend some time reminding ourselves of the great task before us: to honor, preserve, and perpetuate the great American tradition.

John Adams Wanted Independence Day On July 2, Not July 4

Founding Father John Adams thought that America's independence day celebration should be on July 2, not July 4. July 2, 1776 was day the Continental Congress voted for independence. (Karsun Designs Photography/Flickr)

Founding Father John Adams thought that America’s independence day celebration should be on July 2, not July 4. July 2, 1776 was day the Continental Congress voted for independence. (Karsun Designs Photography/Flickr)
As the Founding Fathers established the United States of America, they had their eyes on the future and they knew they were making history. But not everyone had the same opinion of the timeline of that history.
Most thought the big day was July 4, when then Continental Congress approved the text of the Declaration of Independence and sent it to the printer. But John Adams believed July 2, 1776, was the really the big day.
In one of the two letters he wrote to his wife Abigail from Philadelphia on July 3, 1776, John Adams said: “I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival.”
July 2 was the day the Continental Congress voted for independence. It approved a resolution that said: “these united Colonies, are, and of right ought to be free and independent States, and as such, they have, and of Right ought to have, full Power to make War, conclude Peace, establish Commerce, and to do all the other Acts and Things, which other States may rightfully do.”
On the day they took that vote, John wrote to Abigail: “It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by Solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.”
That is, of course, exactly what happens now on the Fourth of July, not the second.
John Adams, who was right about so much, was also right about the way we would celebrate independence. Just not the date.

[VIDEO] Get in the July 4th Spirit with This Epic Independence Day Speech


While you gear up for July 4th, remember what this holiday is all about: patriotism, independence from Great Britain and kicking some alien butt. 

Or at least that's the lesson we got from 1996's Independence Day, which features one of the most inspirational speeches of all time. 

"We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore," President Thomas J. Whitmore (Bill Pullman) tells a crowd of soldiers preparing to launch a worldwide attack against intergalactic intruders. 

"We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the 4th of July and you will once again be fighting for our freedom – not from tyranny, oppression or persecution – but from annihilation." 


"We're fighting for our right to live, to exist," he continues. "And should we win the day, the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday but as the day when the world declared in one voice: 'We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!' 


4TH OF JULY: FIVE PATRIOTIC MOVIES THAT PISS OFF THE LEFT

With the fascist left on a fascist rampage, why not add a little defiance to your 4th of July by watching five patriotic movies that piss off The Man. The Man of course being the dominant Left-wing political culture that is currently banning “The Dukes of Hazzard” and hoping to get its tyrannical hands on “Gone With the Wind.”

  1. The Green Berets (1968)
Because he loved America and freedom and didn’t want to see either lose a vitally important war, John Wayne spent a lot of his movie star capital directing and starring in “The Green Berets” for Warner Brothers. Critics blistered him in ways unseen until Mel Gibson dared bring the Gospels to life in “The Passion of the Christ.” Audiences, however, showed up in droves, and were treated to a marginal but entertaining movie, and most importantly, a prophetic one.
Edward-Faulkner-John-Wayn-009
In the film, Wayne predicts that if the Left wins and America abandons Vietnam, other countries will fall to communist tyranny, and our Vietnamese allies will be murdered and tortured.
And that is exactly what happened.
John Wayne was 100% correct, he had their number, and that makes the Left angrier than anything.
BONUS: Watch racist George Takei sell his left-wing soul for a small role in a right-wing propaganda film.

  1. The Alamo (1960)
John Wayne’s epic passion project nearly bankrupted him. Not because the film couldn’t attract an audience, it did (and a Best Picture Oscar nomination); the problem was that it cost too much.
3133
Duke felt that the events at the Alamo personified what America was about, and all the way back in 1960, he believed his beloved country could use a reminder that liberty sometimes requires sacrifice.
Although he had three Hispanic wives, Wayne was frequently accused of being a racist , so pay special attention to the way in which he portrays Santa Ana’s Mexican army. The caricature of greasy, drunken Mexicans would not appear in an Alamo picture until 2004— you know, when Leftists were firmly in charge of Hollywood.

  1. American Sniper (2014)
The Left really bared their anti-American, anti-troop backsides with this one. Clint Eastwood’s masterpiece respectfully and artistically tells the true story of Chris Kyle, the most decorated sniper in American history — a man whose bravery and multiple tours saved more American and innocent Iraqi lives than we can begin to count. Eastwood also had the courage to show the terrorist barbarians we were fighting in Iraq as exactly what they are — terrorist barbarians.
bradley-cooper-800-640x480
For seeing terrorists for what they are — savages — and calling them by name, the Left relentlessly smeared Kyle as a racist; a lowlife scumbag NBC reporter named Ayman Mohyeldin went so far as to smear Kyle as a racist serial killer.
Who knew America still made men like Chris Kyle? Well, there are plenty of them. Unfortunately, in order to hide their own shame in themselves, our media and popular culture either ignore or defame them.  Not Eastwood, though, and God bless him for it.

  1. Team America: World Police (2004)
The left only pretends to laugh.
1118574600alec_baldwin
While watching “Team America,”in order to keep a smile on their bitter faces, Leftists go to their inner-happy place where Christians are thrown alive off of tall buildings, Obama’s face has replaced that of Jesus on the Christian cross, and everyone in America gathers at 6 a.m. for calisthenics and a gay wedding.
BONUS: Matt Damon F.A.G.

  1. Gone With the Wind (1939)
Although I’ve adopted the South as my home, I’m not a fan of the Confederacy, am relieved the North won the Civil War, and have never considered “Gone With the Wind” patriotic.
I still don’t.
Picture-1
But now that the fascist left wants to ban this 1939 masterpiece, the act of watching “Gone With the Wind” is now a patriotic.
Remember when dissent was patriotic — you know, before Barack?

Inside The Fight To Save A Beloved World War I Memorial From Demolition

Editor’s Note: Freelance war reporter Alex Quade, who usually covers U.S. Special Forces on combat missions down-range, uncovers this story of a political battle on the home front.
HONOLULU — As America celebrates the 4th of July, and the world commemorates the centennial of World War I, one U.S. state is in danger of losing a memorial to its veterans killed in action.
The city of Honolulu is considering demolishing its official memorial to the fallen of World War I and moving a portion of the memorial across the street to the site of a separate remembrance plaque. Ten thousand service members from the then-Hawaiian territories fought in the Great War; 101 were killed.
Descendants of those killed are fighting the city over the fate of the Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium. First opened in 1927, the salt water swimming pool fell into disrepair after years of neglect and was closed in 1979.
Naomi Weight Honolulu Roll Of Honor
World War I veteran descendant Naomi Weight (Photo: Screenshot/Alex Quade/The Daily Caller)
Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium Arch
Waikiki War Memorial Natatorium arch (Photo: Screenshot/Alex Quade/The Daily Caller)
Despite being listed as a “national treasure” by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and recognized by the World War I Centennial Commission and American Battle Monuments Commission as unique among our national war memorials, it is under threat by interests who want to tear it down to make way for a beach and who cite the high cost of repairing it.
Before passing away, Senator and Medal of Honor recipient Daniel Inouye even weighed in on this situation, saying: “I am fully supportive [of] current efforts to preserve, restore, and improve this historic landmark.”
This is the story behind the fight to save the memorial and honor those who served.

TIME FOR THE STATES TO DECLARE INDEPENDENCE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

“Take this Supreme Court decision and shove it.”

new Rasmussen Poll indicates that a growing number of Americans want state governments to tell the Supreme Court to get out of the business of rewriting laws and telling American citizens how to live their lives.
In a new poll, Rasmussen reported the percentage of Americans who want states to tell the Supreme Court it does not have the power to rewrite the Affordable Care Act or force sovereign states to authorize gay marriages has increased from 24 percent to 33 percent after last week’s Constitution-defying decisions by the court.
A closer look at the poll results indicates that popular sentiment for state defiance of the federal government extends beyond just the Supreme Court’s latest decisions.
“Only 20% [of likely voters] now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty,” the Rasmussen Poll finds. “Sixty percent (60 %) see the government as a threat to individual liberty instead,” it adds.
“Take this regulation and shove it,” and “take this grant and shove it,” are two additional battle cries which appear to resonate with a growing popular sentiment, especially in “flyover country,” those 38 states outside the dozen in which President Obama won more than 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012.
(In descending order of support for Obama, those twelve states are: Hawaii, Vermont, New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts, California, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, and Maine. Arguably, three additional states where President Obama won between 54 percent and 56.2 percent of the vote in 2012 could be added to this list: Washington, Oregon, and Michigan.)
One hundred and fifty years after the end of the Civil War, it is becoming increasingly clear that there are two Americas—one where the principles of constitutionally limited government and individual liberty are still revered, the other where statism and the trampling of individual rights are on the rise.
The Tea Party movement arose in 2009 to restore those principles of constitutionally-limited government. But despite electoral victories that placed Republicans in control of the House of Representatives in 2010, and the Senate in 2014, it is undeniable that the Republican establishment those elections empowered is instead aligned with the forces of statism.
The majority of the members of the Supreme Court itself are also clearly part of the “elitist” camp of anti-constitutionalists. As Breitbart’s Thomas Williams noted, and Justice Scalia himself pointed out in his scathing dissent in the gay marriage decision, not a single member of the nine member court is of the Protestant faith. Not a single member has graduated from a law school other than Harvard, Yale, or Columbia. Nor has a single member done anything other than practice some version of corporate law with “big law” firms, sit on a federal court, work for the federal government, or work in left-wing academia.
With the entire apparatus of the federal government now aligned against constitutionally limited government, some traditionalists have given themselves over to despair and defeatism. That negative view, however, fails to understand the solution provided to usurpations of power by the central government found within the Constitution itself, with origins in the Declaration of Independence, whose signing on July 4, 1776 we celebrate today.
As Rasmussen Reports noted, “The Declaration of Independence, the foundational document that Americans honor on the Fourth of July, says that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, but just 25% believe that to be true of the federal government today.”
Even more significantly, however, the recent Supreme Court decisions are a complete rejection of the concepts of state sovereignty articulated in the 10th amendment, the last element of the Bill of Rights, the promise of whose passage by the First Congress was key to the ratification of the Constitution.
The 10th amendment, ratified along with the other nine amendments of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791, reads as follows:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The concept of popular resistance to the unconstitutional encroachment of the federal government on the rights of individuals and states has been gaining momentum over the past several years.
Conservative radio host Mark Levin, for instance, has advocated on behalf of an Article V Convention of the States to propose new amendments to the Constitution for ratification by the states that would limit federal powers.
Conservative author and intellectual leader Charles Murray has also advocated for a type of civil disobedience to resist unlawful federal regulations through the use of well funded legal challenges to the most egregious of those regulations.
Both concepts have merit, but ultimately lack the power and effective counter-attack available through the simple mechanism offered by the 10th amendment—widespread resistance to federal overreaches by the state governments themselves.
Bolder, constitutionally based resistance at the state level, is a practical and viable remedy, one that already has broad popular support among conservatives.
As Rasmussen Reports noted:
[T]he voters who feel strongest about overriding the federal courts – Republicans and conservatives – are those who traditionally have been the most supportive of the Constitution and separation of powers. During the Obama years, however, these voters have become increasingly suspicious and even hostile toward the federal government.
Fifty percent (50%) of GOP voters now believe states should have the right to ignore federal court rulings, compared to just 22% of Democrats and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Interestingly, this represents a noticeable rise in support among all three groups.
Fifty percent (50%) of conservative voters share this view, but just 27% of moderates and 15% of liberals agree.
Widespread resistance at the state level, however, will require two elements: strong governors and strong state legislatures willing to vigorously assert their 10th amendment rights.
At the local level, we’ve already seen the first indications that a movement may be afoot. In Tennessee, for example, the entire Decatur County Clerk’s Office resigned rather than enforce the recent gay marriage decision announced by the Supreme Court.
Isolated pockets of resistance are springing up around the country.
And yet, even among “The Great 38 States”—flyover country where President Obama either lost or won less than 56.2 percent of the vote in the 2012 election—leadership at the executive level is lacking.
The next electoral battle for the preservation of the constitutional republic will be fought not only for the highest office of the executive branch in 2016—it will also be fought in the gubernatorial races of those “Great 38 States” where the vast majority of voters still believe in America, and still believe in constitutionally limited government.
Freedom of the individual states from the usurpations of the federal government does not mean secession from the constitutional republic. It is, instead, the surest realistic mechanism that remains to preserve the constitutional republic.
By limiting the role of the federal government to the exercise of that very narrow set of specifically “enumerated powers” ascribed to it in the Constitution, state governments can guarantee that our constitutional republic will continue to flourish for generations to come.
The alternative is a constitutional republic in name only, a dystopian oligarchy where words have no meaning, right is wrong, good is bad, truth is deception, and the rule of law is invented anew each day by the ruling class of federal royalty.
As for that dirty dozen of liberal blue states, like California, New York, and Massachusetts? Let them continue on their path of reckless spending and experience the fate of modern Greece.
Meanwhile, the rest of us can continue to choose liberty.

Popular Posts