OBAMA CARE NOT CONSTITUTIONAL (Part Two)
Introduction:
Before I even begin writing about why the American Affordable Care Act (Obama Care) is unconstitutional, I would first like you to think about these following questions that must be answered personally by each individual citizen of this nation.
Question #1:
Do you believe in freedom? (By Definition: that each individual has the right to live life in the pursuit of happiness. That no individual nor groups of individuals or government entities have the right to violate your freedom, even if it is in the name of the greater good of society (General Welfare). Meaning: no system by private entities or public entities have the right to willfully deny your natural rights founded upon the establishment of the supreme law of this country, the United States Constitution by forcible actions)…
Question #2:
Or would you rather have a nanny state government that provided all of your necessities of life and selfish desires? (By Definition: could you willingly sacrifice some liberty to be governed by bureaucrats rather then to willingly take responsibility of one’s own actions and misfortunes. (Meaning: would you care more about receiving handout benefits and entitlement programs from our government, then taking your own risk of being successful and well maintained on your own account)…
Question #3:
Will you take the risk of trusting the governed to take care of you by providing all of your necessities and selfish desires by sacrificing those sacred freedoms the founding fathers of this Republic fought for? (By: Definition: sacrificing the entire philosophy (principles) this nation was founded on, by slapping the men and women throughout our existence of this country in the face, by entrusting our elected officials to be able to fund economically our general welfare state that has been heavily establish since the F.D.R. administration and current elected officials since then. (Meaning: could you willfully give up not just the American Affordable Care Act (Obama Care), but all of the other various unconstitutional socialist programs our Federal government has created since the dawn of the great depression. Is this the New America that you seek, an America that believes the government’s sole responsibility is to take care of the general welfare of our people’s education, food, healthcare, retirement, housing, electricity, water, daycare assistance, cell phones, and many other socialist programs that steal from the productive man to give by force to those who do not have, by entrusting a Robing Hood style government to become a legalized legitimate thieving system? In which in the name of this type of society citizens deem a moral role (responsibility) from our government?
The following questions above should indeed truly be examined by each American citizen before even considering reading this news article. The following questions were attended to open each individuals eyes to what they really seek out of a Caesar’s government. If you agreed to Question #1. Then I will assume you are a true constitutionalist American patriot. If you answered either Question #2 or #3., Obama Care in your world of reality shouldn’t morally be a problem with you. If you believe in national socialism but don’t necessarily agree with all of Obama Care’s policies, then you deserve such policies that might contradict some of your own beliefs. Why? Because you have willfully accepted at least some notion that you do not personally want to govern yourself totally relating to your own general wellbeing, thusly the government should be your master and you should thank such a system given to you. You have willfully relinquished the idealism of freedom and have absolutely no right to cry when your master you have entrusted rapes you and puts you in a Nazi style concentration camp, if that day ever happens and such a reality could be birthed!
THE GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
CHAPTER ONE
The general Welfare clause of our U.S. Constitution was not intended to bring forth national socialism. This clause did not grant the power to our national Congress to violate State sovereignty within this country. The tenth amendment to our Bill of Rights clearly dictates that all powers outside of the Federal Constitution belongs to the States or its people directly. This amendment was a very important amendment when it was ratified in our Constitution. This amendment guaranteed the protection of the State’s government and its local community governments from being violated by tyrannical legislation from our central powers to be. Our forefathers understood the need to separate the powers of governments into three branches. Those branches would have delegated powers that “We the People” granted to them. Those powers could only be extended by amending the United States Constitution by the several States. This philosophy would limit the role of government power from intruding upon individual, and State governments, liberty. That is why we are called a nation governed by the rule of law. That law is our Constitution. All State Constitutions must comply to the national Constitution. This protected individual freedoms within all of the various States being formed in our Union. This also gave assurance that the central government would not try to nationalize our governing body-States into ultimate submission to a Big Brother takeover. Thusly all authority from the Federal branches of powers to State branches and our local governing bodies were created under checks and balances throughout its appropriate functions given to them by the citizens of the nation.
“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.” (Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution).
Please also take note that “General Welfare” is only worded twice in our entire U.S. Constitution. Many liberals of today claim this authority gives Congress the absolute power to pass socialist legislation in the name of general welfare. This propagated viewpoint had lead this country into moral depravity. We have lost the meaning of self reliance and individualism. We now rely on our Big Brother to fund many projects and social reforms that should belong to the States or its local governing bodies under the tenth amendment. The clause of ‘general welfare’ is mentioned once in the U.S. Constitution’s Introduction. (The Preamble). The second and last time it is mentioned is in Article 1. Section 8..
The Preamble of our Constitution is not powers enumerated to Congress. It is the sole introduction towards the writings of our supreme law. Article 1. Section 8. grants Congress few powers. Those powers given to our Congress is intended to help establish its legal role of limited authoritative functions.
In Article One of Section Eight, one will notice immediately thereafter, follows an enumeration of specific powers which are “DELEGATED” to Congress. Those powers of enumerations are limited and defined. That is why our system is known for enumerated powers.
Enumerated Powers Defined: Wiki Reference Link
The enumerated powers are a list of items found in Article I, section 8 of the US Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of the United States Congress. In summary, Congress may exercise the powers that the Constitution grants it, subject to explicit restrictions in the Bill of Rights and other protections in the Constitutional text. The 10th Amendment states that all prerogatives not vested in the federal government nor prohibited of the states are reserved to the States and to the people, which mean that only prerogatives of the Congress (as well as the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch) are limited to those granted by the Constitution of the United States… (wiki reference)
We must also come to the logical educated conclusion that words in societies change over the years. To understand the context of our United States Constitution, we must first acknowledge this factor. Since words change over the ages, the interpretation of such wordings (meanings) can have mis-defined definitions if we don’t seek historical definitions from those writings. This is a key importance to understanding what the signers of our Constitution were saying in such historical writings. Now since this has been established into discussion, let’s now look at two different dictionary definitions of such key wording (‘welfare’).
1828 – Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language:
WEL’FARE, n. [well and fare, a good going; G. wohlfahrt; D. welvaard; Sw. valfart; Dan. velfaerd.]
1. Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.
2. Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applies to states.
1969 – The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
“Public relief – on welfare. Dependent on public relief.”
From the following above definition, you should have noticed two different meanings. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language of (1969), gave a entire new meaning then the (1828) definition. This twist of meanings is backed by a society who either A: doesn’t realize it’s historical meaning, or B: those who willfully try to distort such true historical backings for such political purposes. This is how our Constitutional rights and the functions of proper government is being easily reconstructed to a nationalist socialist society ran by our governed.
During prohibition, the Federal government, “Constitutionally” ratified the 18th amendment to outlaw alcoholic beverages. Congress new that without amending the Constitution, this would be an illegal authoritative power not granted to them. This primary example should indeed help clarify the constitutional restraints that our central powers had during the era of prohibition. Thusly we should now understand more about the General Welfare clause of our Constitutional Republic. The enumerated powers before the established Eighteenth Amendment did not authorize such policy to stop the distribution of intoxicating liquors. Congress failed at the time to recognize human natural behavior. Congress tried to instill particular morals upon its people by criminalizing liquor. The demand for liquor continued, and the result to criminalizing individual drink was a failure to understanding freedom. The courts and prisons were overwhelmed with new cases, organized crime increased in power and corruption, which extended heavily among law enforcement officials. Congress then took its responsibility by introducing the 21st Amendment by repealing the 18th Amendment in 1933.
You see, Congress was only granted “LIMITED” authority under the U.S. Constitution. If a power is not specifically granted to the national government branches, the power is “illegal” (unconstitutional). That is why our founding fathers created an enumerated power of government. We the People must grant our nationalist officials the authority to lawfully execute powers they wish to instill upon our populace. We the People must hold them responsible to this restraint. If we forget the importance of restraining our elected bodies, then freedom will assuredly be lost forever ultimately.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt (F.D.R.) helped instilled a newer interpretation of our Constitution during the Great Depression. His administration established Social Security and many other new programs that would reorganize the role of our Federal government. The people willingly gave into the theory that socialist programs were a key importance of maintaining our freedom. This viewpoint contradicts what the founding fathers intended the national government to be. Constitutionally all powers reside to the States Constitutions and/or its individual people locally, unless “We the People”, grant the Federal government extra enumerated powers. This insured that proper authority would be executed fairly. The founders envisioned a small role of an authoritative Federal government. Throughout history the forefathers understood the need to restrain national powers. Tyranny always creeps up into a free society slowly, and that is why the fathers of this grand nation tried to stop fascism by writing the most radical Constitution that insured ultimately all authority was entrusted upon its citizens to be enforced.
You see, the General Welfare clause was not an extra side enumerated power granted to Congress. This interpretation could not co-exist with the 10th Amendment. Why? Simply put…our leaders would be able to use this clause to enact any form of legislation as long as they claimed it was in the interest of promoting the General Welfare of our society. This interpretation would give Congress complete total power over all State and local affairs (issues) that could destroy the sovereignty of the States of our Union. This radical interpretation has birthed a society into thinking the Federal Government can supersede all affairs upon the populace of the various States. This hellish viewpoint has lead the national government to force minimum wage laws, public education funding and regulations, college student loans, more communist work rights, and have violated many other key principles of individual freedoms. We now currently are threatened by laws to restrict free Internet (SOPA, PIPPA, and etc), and adopt a more communist Chinese based government sponsored Internet to stop its people from receiving “alternative” daily information online.
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
CHAPTER TWO
James Madison and Hamilton warned the American public about our so called liberal interpretation of the wording of our General Welfare clause in our U.S. Constitution.
In Federalist No. 83 (7th para), Hamilton said:
…The plan of the [constitutional] convention declares that the power of Congress…shall extend to certain enumerated cases. This specification of particulars evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd, as well as useless, if a general authority was intended…
In Federalist No. 39 (3rd para from end), Madison also warned the people of this issue:
…the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignity over all other objects….” [emphasis added]
Here is another example of Madison warning us of the following again: Federalist No. 14. (8th para),
… the general (federal) government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects… [emphasis added]
Now we all should be able to understand that the Federal government authority was granted powers only authorized by a limited enumerated system of government. We must understand the historical interpretation if one’s society is going to maintain its true constitutional rulling of its legislation correctly.
Reference Source of Federalist Papers: (For more detailed information – visit the following)
http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/does-the-general-welfare-clause-of-the-u-s-constitution-authorize-congress-to-force-us-to-buy-health-insurance/
The problem we face today in our society is we overall willingly believe that our national government’s job is to provide all of our living necessities to its people. We overall do not truly seek a free constitutional Republic. We have been raised from birth to believe and trust in our Nanny State. We feed ourselves from the breast mil of our government’s institution and we love the toxic milk we are given to taste. Thusly individualism has been destroyed and the birth of national socialism is now our god who we serve to worship.
THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF OUR U.S. CONSTITUTION
CHAPTER THREE
The current Obama administration is trying to also push Obama’s Death Care down our throats by misusing the Commerce Clause of our Constitution. Their claim is to bring forth their supposed constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause to enforce the fascist mandated healthcare exchange program passed by our democratic party leaders.
Many judges have already ruled in lower courts that this clause did not grant Congress the authority to dorcibly mandate individuals to buy health insurance from the exchange programs ser by our national government. Here is one primary link of a judge who ruled the Obama Care mandate unconstitutional.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/31/judges-ruling-health-care-lawsuit-shift-momentum-coverage-debate/
The Commerce Clause is also manipulated by our political neo-con fascists just like the so-called General Welfare wording of our U.S. Constitution. The main liberal ideology is to support the idea that the Constitution is a “living document”. Thusly the Constitution can be redefined at any political moment of debates without needing a constitutional amendment. The Commerce Clause is heavily viewed by many, the power for Congress to regulate any aspects of our markets (economy) indirectly or directly upon State affairs. This once again hellish interpretation creates a Big Brother atmosphere that has total superiority among its brothering States of our Union. This philosophy once again will destroy the entire tenth amendment rights of our States. The separation of States powers and the Federal branches could no longer co-exist with another potentiality.
Here is a article link below that describes many of our so called judges and politicians today who preach the Constitution is a “living breathing” document.
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/daley/050324
The U.S. Commerce Clause of the Constitution:
TO REGULATE COMMERCE WITH FOREIGN NATIONS, AND AMONG THE SEVERAL STATES, AND WITH THE INDIAN TRIBES;
This power was historically intended to limit the power of the States but di not grant “ultimate” power to regulate our economy and personal liberty to our national government. Many liberals believe that this clause gave Congress the power to regulate all powers of the economy. However, if one understood the Commerce at the founding of our nation meant “TRADE”, this liberal interpretation would assuredly fail if the majority of our society understood this pretext from its historical definition. Manufacturing, Agriculture, retails sales were not defined as commerce during those times. The courts have however ruled in many cases a new broader definition to redefine our system to become a socialist society instead.
At the time of our formation of the U.S. Republic, the Federal Government was given the power to regulate “trade” among the States, Internationally, and the Indian Tribes. This proper definition would stop trade embargo’s (trade wars) amongst the Union of our country. This power given to Congress would help stop wars against the colonized States at that time. Thusly we should understand that the Commerce Clause only helped keep the States from fighting against each other relating to trade issues (economics). Within the first 100 YEARS of our newly birthed Republic, this historical viewpoint was practiced in this manner only. Until after many more liberal interpretations by our Courts were adopted and thus redefined slowly within our Constitutional Republic.
The video below is a highly recommended 10:00 minute documentary that explains this interpretation more clearly. This video presents a liberal argument and a historical constitutional argument.
CONCLUSION:
The time is now. The time for America to wakeup to its coming reality of a fascist takeover is upon us and our children’s future. Are we going to be a society that cares more about football and many other intertwined entertainments our culture has entangled themselves with? Do we let the nationalist neo-con tyrannical eugenics officials takeover our bodies? Will you submit to poisonous vaccinations in the name of our general ‘welfare’ state? Will you submit your rights over to our government? Do you not care about your freewill and the right to pursue your own happiness? Is liberty worth dying for anymore? Or would you rather be told what to eat, think, believe, worship, educate, raise your children, and etc…from our government? THE CHOICE IS REALLY THAT SIMPLE. Live free or die. Live in freedom or die to your own willfulness of accepting Hitler’s of the future. I at least hope you love your children enough not to let them “willingly” walk into such a tyrannical society.
Or am I indeed wrong to think this? Are you truly a coward selfish individual that loves one’s own pleasures than to save the soon dying Republic. FOLKS…Obama Care is the final destination to the FALL OF OUR REPUBLIC.
