Knee Deep in the Hooah!

The one good thing this Administration has done is reconnecting voters with their elected officials. I have never had so many reasons to write my elected officials as I have in just the past few months. The stuff this POTUS (or his teleprompter) is proposing is not just marginally questionable. He is constantly proposing things that are diametrically opposed to the Constitution. Since he’s a lawyer we can only assume that he has actually had to read it, or at least the Cliff Notes version. Anyone who has ever watched Schoolhouse Rock knows that the programs coming from this Administration are hugely unconstitutional.

As a matter of fact I am seriously considering having a contest so I can give a prize to the first person who can name one Constitutionally supported action this POTUS has done. Nothing he does in Iraq and Afghanistan counts because we all know he hates the wars and he was forced to inherit those from the previous POTUS.

After hearing about the new forced servitude he is trying to implement I wasn’t sure if I should laugh, cry, or scream. Now I understand why the Pentagon is doing away with Stop-Loss. After all we can force citizens into “volunteerism” so why do we need a separate program for soldiers? Basically we could all wind up “stop-lossed” under this Administration.

Just a forewarning… if this bill is passed I will not serve a second of time under this Administration. I absolutely, positively refuse to hand my freedom and liberty over to this Constitution hating man. I will submit to authority when that authority is within the alignment of our Constitution and when a President is upholding his oath.

I have spent many years of my life in a profession that is focused on giving back to populations that need help. I have documented thousands of unpaid hours in a prison for women, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, supporting our troops, supporting public education programs, and visiting the elderly. I did not need my government to force me to go where my conscience already led me. I filled those hours with joy because I know I was filling them out of a personal conviction. To do otherwise would have robbed me greatly out of my own personal reward.

Do I feel more righteous than people who have not done much if any volunteering in their communities? No, I don’t. Working in these kinds of programs and with populations that can be very needy is a calling. We are all called to have mercy on those around us, but that directive is from God — the One who also made us free. That does not mean that every person has the same calling in life. I was not called to be a soldier, for example, and I know there are many who are not called to serve soup in a local homeless shelter.

I have to sit here and wonder how many thousands of hours of volunteer work the President and his wife have given over the years. I hate to the be the one to break this to them, but this is something that millions of Americans ALREADY do every week. It’s not a new concept.

So, once again, I encourage you… I implore you to please write your elected officials and tell them that if this program is implemented there will be hell to pay and the one handing the bill over will be the citizens of this Country who are sick and tired of seeing their Constitutional rights chucked out the window by the very man who promised to uphold said document when he spoke the following words, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

In reality he is working overtime to debase the Constitution. Actions speak louder than words.

If you get a chance, please read the article “David Crockett, Charity and Congress.” Here’s a snippet of an answer a farmer gave to him when Colonel Crockett asked him for his vote. The man’s answer was based on the knowledge that Crockett had voted in favor of appropriating $20,000 tax dollars to aid in relief efforts after a huge fire in Georgetown.

“It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the Government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the Government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right: to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive, what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.”

“I have given you,” continued Crockett, “an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:

“So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.”

The entire story is worth the time it takes to read. You can find it HERE.