Close to a Con-con

27 states sued the federal government to NOT have Obamcare imposed upon them on the precept that it was unconstitutional.  The Supreme Court took it upon themselves to rewrite both Obamacare AND the Constitution in order to not declare it so and then had the unmitigated gall to then state that it was not the duty of the Supreme Court to protect us from the consequences of making bad decisions.  In that sense, they were saying that it not their job to protect us from elected officials who vote for unconstitutional laws.

Yes it is.

That is one of the built-in checks on the usurpation of power by the federal government that is part of the way our government was set up. The Supreme Court IS supposed to reign in both Congress AND the President when either of them try to do things that were not allowed as one of their restricted 17 duties in the Constitution.  Otherwise, why bother having a Supreme Court at all?  We would be as well served by a large robot with a rubber stamp that always stamps “approved” on everything it is fed.

27 states whose legislatures were stirred enough to join in a lawsuit to try to get back some of the usurped power. Only need 7 more to initiate a Constitutional Convention and then shut that black hole of DC down.  Seven short of stopping the spendathon of Washington.

Might even be enough to just come close with the threat of it to make Congress actually fix their own activities and our problems.  And then we actually COULD grow ourselves out of this economic cliff that we are being impelled towards.  It would only take capping the spending to a small increase every year to be out of the woods in a decade.  If we could cap the spending and cut taxes both, we would have to endure the inconvenience of a fall in unemployment, government dependence, and government power and would have a booming economy.  Rather than an exploding one.

About drrik

3rd career and 2nd childhood. Spends spare time repairing old things. Aspires to burn more gasoline, gunpowder, and ink in pursuit of slowing down. Child of the 60s and aspiring student of history. No desire to see us repeat the failed social experiments that keep failing for lack of human beings that meet the left wing standards and have to be killed off. Did engineering long enough to realize that very little is new and the wheel does not need to be reinvented.
This entry was posted in constitutional, Obama, Obamacare, socialism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Close to a Con-con

  1. bullright says:

    Well attractive scenario. Like you, I have always been suspicious…skeptical of the prospects (agenda) of a con-con especially these days. Or the outcome. The posisibility is there though.

  2. drrik says:

    Folks argue about the superiority of front wheel versus rear wheel drive. When you are going around a corner too fast, a front wheel drive care will go off the road front end first. A rear whell drive car will swap ends and go off rear end first. And if you brake in the rear whell drive, it happens even faster. At least with the front wheel drive, you can be slowing down. Less damage. Washington has turned us into rear wheel drive and they have the pedal to the metal. We are not only going to crash, but we are picking up speed, just as Alinski advised in Rules for Radicals. I prefer going back to the original driving configuration and slowing down so that there will be something left worth salvaging after the crash, instead of the best we can do being able to build a chopped up Road Warrior buggy out of the red states.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s