The Most Important Question Asked in Sunday’s Debate!

By: Richard H. Frank

The entire media, mainstream and others, seemed to miss the candidate’s answer to the question that will have the most long-lasting impact on every American, our children and grandchildren. At least they are neglecting to talk about it and prefer to focus on the personal attacks and scandals that occupy the headlines.

The question was, “What sort of people would each candidate appoint to open positions on the Supreme Court?”

Hillery Clinton droned on in her usual fashion about how the Republican controlled Senate refused to give Obama’s latest nominee a hearing before embarking upon a diatribe of issues including how Trump would appoint Judges that would overturn “Roe vs Wade” and Gay marriage and how her selections would overturn the “Citizens United” decision on campaign finance. She was quick to add that the Second Amendment would be tampered with to make mandatory background checks the law of the land.

Her priority was to appoint Justices having the same view as she holds with regard to “social justice” issues. She implied that her nominations would represent the diversity in America and not necessarily be confined to Federal Judges. Could this be she is referring to people like Obama or Elizabeth Warren?

Never once in her answer did she mention upholding the “Bill of Rights” nor did she use the word “Constitution”.

Donald Trump, on the other hand stated that he had put forth a list of 20 candidates all of which held beliefs in the vein of the late Justice Antonin Scalia that would faithfully discharge their oath to uphold the Constitution and not legislate from the bench.

Hillery Clinton has publicly stated her intention to continue the policies of Barack Obama. His strategy and policies were revealed in a book entitled “Obama’s Blueprint for America” and specifically pointed to his intention to make appointments to the Supreme Court with Judges holding “secular progressive” leanings. He stated in his run for the Presidency in 2008 that the Constitution was a “basically flawed document.” Thank God that the court has seen differently and reversed many of his executive orders as being unconstitutional.

Without the checks and balances enumerated in our Constitution this nation will wake one day to find we have achieved the status of becoming a “Banana Republic” under the thumb of a corrupt and oppressive dictator. Only “WE the People” can stop this from happening by exercising our “Constitutional” right to vote and elect representatives that believe in our “Constitution” as written.

Put Your Pen Down, Mr. President and Get to Work!

by Jayne D. Frank

I thought Barack Obama’s State of the Union address was contrived and full of grandiose rhetoric in 2013; however, that will pale in comparison to what we hear in this month’s SOTU address. Why? Quite simply, nothing the President ever says or promises becomes a reality. He had now prefaced his upcoming speech with “I have a pen and I have a phone” in which to get things done [because Congress is the problem].

Here are your words and promises from 2013:

1) “Together we have cleared away the rubble of crisis and … the state of our union is stronger.” Really! We have the highest level of poverty, higher number of people out of the job market, and highest number of people on food stamps than ever before. Is this your idea of a strong economy?

2) You said “We should ask ourselves as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores.” One answer would be to resolve the problem of the millions of good-paying jobs that have been lost during your Administration. Your have used your pen, your failed Obamacare law and your thousands of EPA regulations to completely eviscerate any gains that might have come about as a result of spending billions of dollars on “stimulating” the economy. If you truly meant what you said, you would use your pen and the power of your office to approve the XL pipeline from Canada, which has the approval of 69% of our Senators and every Governor along its proposed path, putting thousands of people to work in good-paying energy jobs and you would lift the strangehold of those EPA regulations which are keeping companies cash-strapped and unable to produce any new jobs in their industry. Get your foot off the throats of energy companies!

3) You were going to create three more urban manufacturing hubs and ask Congress to create a network of 15 of these hubs for the “next revolution in manufacturing right here in America.” How’s that working out for you since more and more urban cities in America are in or approaching bankruptcy? We have the highest corporate tax rate at present and coupled with these regulations I’ve mentioned, there will be no additional manufacturing until you stop your insanity.

4) How do we equip our people with the skills to get… jobs?” One method might be to stop “giving” welfare and other entitlements to people in exchange for staying home and not looking for work. Require drug tests and require completing additional schooling as a requirement of getting entitlements.

5) We need to “reinvigorate the middle class.” Well, Mr. President, the middle class HAS lost 40% of its wealth under your Presidency and I think that your “words” remain another promise unfulfilled. You cannot invigorate the middle class if Obamacare remains the law of the land and takes more wealth out of the middle class. You cannot invigorate the middle class if you keep “giving” their tax money to others that don’t want to work. And you can’t invigorate the middle class if your message is not one of hope and declaration that America is one of the greatest producing countries in the world. You cannot invigorate the middle class when you have declared your intentions time and time again to “redistribute the wealth.”

Missing from the 2013 State of the Union and most assuredly the 2014 SOTU speech will be any mention of the many failures of this Administration in the foreign policy arena that have put America’s state of the union in jeopardy. The reason is quite simple. You do not have a record of accomplishment in this area and in fact your apologetic and appeasement policies concerning America’s power and standing in the world have made you look like a bafoon in this area. You are also afraid that should you mention foreign policy, Americans will continue to bring up the fact that you and the Secretary of State were directly responsible for the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi because you failed to provide security to them as requested. Your positions on defending Israel, taking away Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon and helping the millions of people suffering in Syria, are also deplorable.

Frankly, millions of Americans are poised to watch the 2014 State of the Union not to hear “hope” from you any longer. They will be watching you make a fool out of yourself once more. They will be counting and pronouncing your failures and lies once again. They will be hoping that the Supreme Court Justices and military commanders that usually witness this speech don’t come this year and bear witness to your criticisms, lies and disdain for them. You are a failure as a President and a Commander-in-Chief and it would behoove you to be humble, contrite and truthful to the America people in the 2014 State of the Union, but you won’t–you can’t help yourself!

The Poison Pill within Obamacare

by Richard H. Frank

To quote the words of Nancy Pelosi “We will have to pass the Bill to find out what’s in it.”  The more we learn the more sinister and onerous the truth about the “Affordable Health Care Act” becomes.

Unfortunately, political double speak and the noise created by debating the minutia throughout this monstrous document, tend to hide the basic unconstitutional premise upon which the law is founded.  The Government cannot force individuals to purchase something they do not want.  Moreover, the latest mandate placed upon private insurance providers to pay for contraceptive and abortion services they do not cover is a direct infringement upon the freedom of every American.

If Government can mandate contraceptive and abortion services where will it all end?  Remember, what Government gives, Government can also take away as Thomas Jefferson warned.  Under any form of socialized medicine, or Obamacare, the bureaucracy decides what treatment and for whom a treatment will be provided.

In answer to a question as to “If a woman’s 80-year-old mother could receive a life-saving procedure under Obamacare,” President Obama answered that in some instances taking a pill might be the appropriate treatment.  Bureaucrats making decisions about medical treatment is just one step closer to euthanasia for the elderly and infirmed. Just what pill might they think is appropriate?

What we have already learned about Obamacare is that a premium is placed on the life of those considered “contributors.”  Individuals between 20 and 55 years of age will take preference in receiving scarce or costly procedures over the unborn, the very young and the elderly.

The moral compass of many in our state legislatures and Congress has been lost.  The value placed on human life has been diminished to a point where “The Great American Holocaust” has taken 10 times the number of lives through abortion than  did the Nazi’s attempt at genocide against the Jews during WWII.

What has this great nation become when Government defines “rights” that favor political ideology over those unalienable rights bestowed upon every human being by our Creator.

I fear for this nation should we continue along a path that places economic value upon life and diminishes and excludes the very mention of God in the public arena.

Elena Kagan Unfit for a Seat on the Supreme Court!

by Richard H. Frank

After enduring hours of political theatre with the unending statements of praise for Obama’s latest nominee for the vacancy on the Supreme Court, we finally got an insight on what drives Elena Kagan.  I am sure Ms. Kagan is an exceptionally smart individual and by all accounts relatively easy to get along with.

What should raise suspicion and generate questions by the Senate Judiciary Committee are the words used in her opening statement that seem to shed some light on her judicial philosophy.  She described the Supreme Court as a “wondrous institution that also must be a modest one – properly deferential to the decisions of the American people and their elected representatives.” Somewhere along the way, she seems to have missed the principle that members of the Court are deferential to the  Constitution of the United States of America.

Her remarks concerning her White House experience are of equal concern when she stated in part “The Supreme Court, of course, has the responsibility of ensuring that our  Government never oversteps its proper bounds or violates the rights of individuals.  But the Court must also recognize the limits on itself and respect the choices made by the American People.”

The American people do not make law – their elected representatives do – and those laws must conform to the “Constitution” which is the ultimate law of the land.  Further, the Constitution is explicit with regard to the powers delegated to the various branches of Government.  She was remiss in not enumerating those limits on Government during her opening statement.  This fact leads one to believe she holds a Progressive view of a living Constitution contrary to that of the Founding Fathers.

Her reference to “lessons learned” while at Harvard is quite revealing.  She said “…and what I’ve learned most is that no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom and I’ve learned that we make progress by listening to each other, across every apparent political or ideological divide.  I’ve learned that we can come close to getting things right when we approach every person and every issue with an open mind.  And I’ve learned the value of a habit that Justice Stevens wrote about more than 50 years ago … of “understanding before disagreeing.”

These are statements we might expect from an academic,  not a Supreme Court Justice!

Lastly, she stated “I will make no pledge this week other  than this one… that if confirmed, I will remember and abide by all of these lessens.”

The pledge every American should hear from Elena Kagan is that she will “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.  Anything less should disqualify her from consideration.

Putting Congress to the Test Again

by Richard H. Frank

In the 234 year history of America no administration has ever been as much out of touch with the citizenry as is the Obama Administration.  The Carter Administration was inept at governance.  The Obama Administration, on the other hand, is intentionally forcing their statist political ideology and agenda in a calculated plan to destroy our Representative Republic.  Each and every initiative taken by this Administration is opposed by the majority of the electorate.  The statistics don’t lie:

  • Obamacare opposed by 60% of the people.
  • Cap and Trade opposed by 70% of the people
  • The Stimulus Legislation viewed by 94% of the people as a failure
  • Immigration Reform opposed by 65% of the people instead of the alternative of enforcement of the current laws
  • Most recently, signing of the START Treaty for nuclear arms reduction opposed by 55% of the people.

Now we are facing the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice to replace John Paul Stevens.  Obama has publicly stated he will appoint a candidate that supports the law and  will reflect the “Will of the People” when making decisions.  Notice he failed to mention “upholding, protecting and defending the Constitution.”

Certainly Obama has not walked the talk when it comes to supporting  the Will of the People.  The Senate must exercise their power of advice and consent carefully as they debate any and all nominations made to fill vacancies to the Supreme Court.

Obama’s pledge to “fundamentally change America” is a pledge for European-style socialism and eventually Marxism.  If the vision of the Founders is to be maintained, a balance for equal powers within our Government is essential.  The chains of the Constitution were broken with adoption of the 17th Amendment where the states’ influence on the Senate was virtually abolished.  Now we rely upon the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution in a manner that sustains the balance of power intended as enumerated in our Constitution.

“We the People” must make our voices heard with regard to letting the Senate know our concerns and support for upholding the principles and values enumerated in the Constitution and not political ideology of any party or special interest.  We also must remind them that this is a lifetime appointment and not a mistake that can be correct in the next election.  Remember “We the People” are the ultimate authority and sovereigns in our Representative Republic.  If the Senate violates their oath to uphold the Constitution by either ratifying this new START Treaty without analyzing the full consequences or by confirming a Supreme Court replacement that does not represent the will of the “People”, vote them out of office.  Our memories must not be short.  We must hold our elected representatives responsible at the ballot box.