Judge Andrew Napolitano: 14th Amendment Option Rejected for Debt Resolution

One word you will not find in the 14th amendment? "President." End of story:

UPDATE:White House: ‘If We Have No Other Alternative We Have to Take Action’

UPDATE #2:Via Hot Air:

A liberal on Twitter warned me last night not to make too much of the lefty chatter about Obama’s supposed Fourteenth Amendment option since the White House itself has rejected it several times. Makes sense — except that Clyburn, who’s number three in the caucus, was rapturous about it yesterday. And now here’s none other than Steny Hoyer rattling the constitutional saber:

“It’s arguably his power to do so,” Hoyer told MSNBC.

“Very frankly, if it came down to his looking default in the eye on Tuesday or taking this action, as President Clinton said, better to take the action and find out later that perhaps he went beyond his authority but at least protected the credibility of the United States of America,” he said.

The remarks align Hoyer with a number of other House Democratic leaders, who are urging Obama to invoke the Constitution to prevent a government default if Congress fails to raise the debt limit before an Aug. 2 deadline.

Is that what Carney was alluding to in the clip I posted up top? Because let me tell you: If you think this standoff can’t become any more of a clusterfark, let the Democrats try to raise the debt ceiling on their own. Bedlam.

So Hoyer wants Obama to exceed his constitutional authority and says so explicitly. The Democratic Party is an oxymoron.

I disagree: Rick Perry: Abortion is a states’ rights issue. “You either have to believe in the 10th Amendment or you don’t” Yo Rick - how about 5th amendment? And the 14th?

I like Rick Perry but I totally disagree with him on this one. Via HotAir: Rick Perry: Abortion is a states’ rights issue

Despite holding personal pro-life beliefs, Texas Gov. Rick Perry categorized abortion as a states’ rights issue today, saying that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it should be up to the states to decide the legality of the procedure.

“You either have to believe in the 10th Amendment or you don’t,” Perry told reporters after a bill signing in Houston. “You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then [for] something that doesn’t suit you say, ‘We’d rather not have states decide that.’”…

So here's where I disagree. According to the 5th amendment to the US Constitution:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Yeah - shall not be deprived of life without due process. Um - what due process is afforded babies prior to their being dismembered while conscious? Furthermore, the 14th amendment bans states from usurping that fundamental, unalienable right:

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Is that not clear? The 10th amendment cannot trump the right to life nor does it. Perry's looking at it wrong from a constitutional perspective. Don't get me wrong - Roe v Wade was and is one of the all-time most terrible decisions in SCOTUS history, and that's saying a whole lot. But the unalienable right to life is just that - unalienable.

Jessie Jackson Jr: All States Rights Are Slavery Or Something

If you want to know what statist thinking is all about, look no further than Jesse Jackson Jr - the apple that landed on the trunk of the tree and never hit the ground: All States Rights Are Slavery 'Allow The Negro to Fight' Jessie Jackson Jr. Big Gov Love 

The US Constitution was predicated on states rights and a limited federal government. For instance:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." - Federalist #45

Apparently James Madison was a racist slave master. That was the intent of the US Constitution, and it lasted for the better part of 2 centuries. Until about the 1930s when the federal government went about unconstitutionally exceeding its boundaries. Which brings us to today. What, pray tell, does the federal government do? That question was actually asked, and answered. Actually, most of what the government does today is cut checks to other people: Pic of the day: Federal government spends most of its money (65%) cutting checks to beneficiaries

In the world of reality, we call this redistribution. It's a money transfer punishing those that actually produce and rewarding those that do not.That is the slavery - indenturing producers to provide for non-producers, not states rights.

Video of Judge Andrew Napolitano: Do We Still Have A Constitution?

Yes, but barely:

Freedom Fest 2011: The Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst and host of Freedom Watch joins James Poulos at Freedom Fest. The Constitution is under assault from all sides ... can it be saved? Judge Napolitano thinks our best hope may be with Congress. Yes, Congress.

We Knew That: FOIA Documents Show Obama WH Declared Jihad On Fox News, Trashed 1st Amendment Right To Free Press

That 1st amendment to the US Constitution that enshrines freedom of the press in law? It means as much to our community organizer-in-chief as the rest of the US Constitution - not worth the paper it's printed on. Via memeorandum: Documents Show Obama White House Attacked, Excluded Fox News Channel. I'll cut to the money quote at the end of the piece:

“The Obama administration seems to have lied about its attempt to exclude Fox News Channel from access to an interview with the ‘pay czar.’ These documents show there is a pervasive anti-Fox bias in the Obama White House,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The juvenile Mafioso-talk in these emails has no place in any White House. For the Obama administration to purposely exclude a major news organization from access to information has troubling First Amendment implications.”

A picture is worth 1,000 words:

Just one example of Obama's jihad against the news org: Emails reveal White House calling Fox News host Baier ‘a lunatic’

Back in 2009, the feud between the Fox News Channel and President Barack Obama’s administration reached its height. Then-White House Communications Director Anita Dunn publicly attacked the network on CNN, and former Fox News host Glenn Beck spearheaded an effort that resulted in the resignation of White House “green jobs czar” Van Jones.

That dust-up led to White House rumblings about excluding Fox News from the official press pool, a notion from which the Obama administration promptly backed away.

But in the lead-up, White House officials had some choice words for “Special Report” host Bret Baier. According to a press release, emails obtained by the the watchdog group Judicial Watch reveal that then-Deputy White House Communications Director Jennifer Psaki threatened to put dead fish in “the fox cubby,” and also called Baier a “lunatic”: ...

This is how a regime operates, not an administration. More from Sister Toldjah, Hot Air, Mediaite, Doug Ross, YID With LID, Weasel Zippers, Verum Serum, Big Journalism, Gateway Pundit, Pajamas Media and The Lonely Conservative 

Palin Decides She Doesn’t Like McConnell Plan, Immediately Invents A Reason For Why It Is Unconstitutional

By Ian Millhiser/think progressEarlier this week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) proposed an odd way to end the debt ceiling crisis: Republicans will stop holding the economy hostage and effectively allow the debt ceiling to be raised without requiring any budget cuts, if Obama gives them 12 opportunities to bash his fiscal policies.McConnell’s plan to accept political theater as

Palin Decides She Doesn’t Like McConnell Plan, Immediately Invents A Reason For Why It Is Unconstitutional

By Ian Millhiser/think progressEarlier this week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) proposed an odd way to end the debt ceiling crisis: Republicans will stop holding the economy hostage and effectively allow the debt ceiling to be raised without requiring any budget cuts, if Obama gives them 12 opportunities to bash his fiscal policies.McConnell’s plan to accept political theater as

Video: Obama Says NO To Balanced Budget Amendment

When you ever hear a liberal say "we don't need the Constitution," it doesn't really matter what came before or comes after that phrase. Just know that they mean it:

The biggest roadblock to liberalism is the US Constitution that was written specifically to restrict a central government. Liberalism has been pissing on that document ever since, washing away the words by redefinition via judicial fiat one character at a time. Why would Obama, or any other Democrat for that reason, agree to put yet another explicit roablock against their communist agenda?

Culture of corruption: Queens Democratic Party boss lives in northern Virginia

Article 1, Section 2 of the US Constitution:

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

As with the ruling class, the US Constitution doesn't apply. From the New York Post:

He may be the king of Queens, but the borough's Democratic Party boss has his castle in Virginia.

Rep. Joe Crowley, who has the power to remake the political landscape in the borough -- as when he handpicked a candidate yesterday to replace Anthony Weiner -- actually lives 250 miles away with his family in Virginia, The Post has learned.

The Crowleys live in an expansive home in the leafy Washington suburb of Arlington, Va., where his three kids attend the community's nationally renowned public schools -- shunning New York City's educational system, property records show.

Crowley was spied yesterday in his driveway, keying into his Ford Fiesta, which bears a Virginia license plate and a bumper sticker that proclaims one of his kids is an honor student at a nearby middle school. ...

The more liberal they are, the less the rules apply to them whether implicit or explicit. Speaking of, from a prior post: Video: Ed Markey (D-MA) doesn't live in his own state in violation of US Constitution Article 1 Section 2

Irony: Pro-abort Leonard Pitts Jr: "A great nation has a moral obligation to... care for the most... vulnerable of its people"

I have quoted Pitts before stating quite plainly that America is "a nation where human rights are given." Human rights are not given, and especially not by the government. If Pitts would quote from that Declaration of Independence, he will find to his horror that our unalienable rights are endowed to us by... GOD! Not by man. Indeed the Declaration of Independence identifies the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", which is interesting since Leonard Pitts Jr is rabidly pro-abortion. That's right - he is pro-abortion but anti-death penalty, yet falsely blasted Republicans for not helping babies in Haiti after the earthquake last year, illustrating quite vividly that although he has no qualms about tearing babies to pieces, he will use those same babies to hit conservatives over the head on false notions if the opportunity presents itself. If Pitts can't stand up for the first and most important of those three unalienable rights (you can't pursue happiness without liberty, and have no liberty without life), then his abstract arguments for the 3rd in regards to universal healthcare and such aren't moving whatsoever. And so we have another Pitts column full of moonbattery over in The Detroit Free Press: Paying taxes -- a duty to your fellow Americans. Unless it's a typo, Pitts stats off by going iCarly:

Ipay my taxes.

And then he goes on to conflate the paying of taxes for legitimate purpose (public safety for instance) with paying taxes for illegitimate ones (ObamaCare, welfare, etc). The former is largely on the local level, the latter at the federal one which is increasingly disconnected from reality. But then Pitts gets all we we'd up:

I pay my taxes. I consider it a patriotic obligation -- a sacrifice for the greater we.

And that due to Tea Party Derangement Syndrome:

But that is not how the anti-government forces that have dominated political debate in recent years see it. To hear them tell it, to pay taxes is to be robbed. And every federal program our taxes support is wasteful and unnecessary, except, of course, those that directly benefit the complainer.

No Leonard, not "every federal program." Just the ones that are not in the US Constitution. The US Constitution after all was not written to give out rights but rather to limit the power of the federal government, a limit that has been breached by a metastasizing federal government looking to control the lives of every man, woman and child in the US all the way down to what's on our plate for dinner. And the Tea Party is not "anti-government," but rather for the proper place of government as per said US Constitution. Anti-government types are anarchists, of which I don't know a single one that is a tea partier. But back to healthcare, the most ironic quote in the whole piece:

...A great nation has a moral obligation to provide a safety net, to care for the most broken and vulnerable of its people.

Um - would those not be UNBORN CHILDREN? Can you think of any human being in a more vulnerable state than that? And Pitts condones literally breaking them into pieces. How sad that Pitts can't see beyond his liberalism-tinted glasses.

UPDATE: Since Pitts insists that paying taxes is patriotic, how then does he square that with the fact that not only does bottom 47% of taxpayers pay no federal income tax, but the bottom 40% GET MONEY BACK!